Q&A with Martin Freeman - Times LIVE
December 21, 2010

In an exclusive interview for The Times, Freeman of Love Actually and The Office fame chats about his new role as Dr John Watson in Sherlock, which premieres tonight on BBC Entertainment.

Q: How would you describe the modern version of Dr Watson and Sherlock, compared to the original?

A: As far as I can see, our view is a very faithful take on the spirit of their initial relationship in the Conan Doyle book. We have got away from the idea that Dr Watson is a bumbling sidekick and more in to the fact that he is a very capable colleague, really, of Sherlock's.

Q: Sherlock has been a big success. Why do you think it worked so well?

A: I think it worked well because the concept was good, it was very well written and thought out by Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat. The direction, I think, is brilliant. I think there is innovation in the direction and it does not feel like a programme that I have seen a million times before. The fact that it went down as well as it did in Britain was a very pleasant surprise. We expected it to be liked, but it was a real surprise it was liked as much as it was.

Q: Do you think Sherlock is a freak, as one of the police officers in the show refers to him?

A: I suppose he is a kind of freak. If someone was able to take a look at you for three seconds and tell you lots of stuff about your life, it would be pretty unnerving, to say the least. You don't know whether he is doing a kind of David Blaine on you or a Derren Brown.

Q: Have you noticed that you become more observant after each show?

A: That is a good question. I think in a way you do. If I applied those powers of observation then maybe I could. and, of course, that doesn't last very long. I have often wondered about what the real police think; I think they think it is bluff.

Sherlock - Season 1 Review
By Gord Lacey
TVShowsOnDVD.com
December 17, 2010

The game is on!

Sherlock Holmes is on the case again in a thrilling contemporary version of Arthur Conan Doyle's classic! Co-created by Doctor Who scribes Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss, Sherlock stars Benedict Cumberbatch (Atonement, The Last Enemy) as 21st Century London's go-to consulting detective, Sherlock Holmes, with Martin Freeman (The Office, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy) as his loyal friend, Dr. John Watson, and Rupert Graves (God on Trial, The Forsyte Saga) as the long suffering Inspector Lestrade.

True to the spirit of the original books, this series plunges viewers into a fast-paced world where Holmes and Watson must navigate a maze of cryptic clues and lethal killers to solve three thrilling, action-packed, modern-day mysteries.

From executive producer Stephen Moffat, probably best known as a writer on Press Gang... kidding! He's best known for the re-vamped Doctor Who (which he took over recently), and for the hilarious Coupling, Moffat has decided to update the classic Sir Arthur Conan Doyle character, Sherlock Holmes, bringing him into the 21st century.

I was a big fan of "Sherlock Holmes" as a kid, and though it's been years since I've read a "Sherlock" story, I still love the character. I had already heard good things (very good things) about the show before the discs arrived, so my expectations were high.

This 2-disc set includes all 3 episode from the first season of the show:

Disc 1 (2:56:39)
A Study in Pink (1:28:10)
The Blind Banker (1:28:29)

Disc 2 (1:29:23)
The Great Game (1:29:23)

Video:

The HD, 1080i video on Sherlock looks very nice, and the show lends itself to an HD presentation. I found some scenes had noise in the picture;it's not horrible, but can be noticeable at times. The quality of the pilot (the original, nearly 60 min episode) looked worse than the series, so I'm glad they did a reshoot. I really, really like the visual style of the show. The tilt-shift opening is cool, and the text that pops up on screen looks great. There isn't a chapter set after the opening of the show, something typical of BBC releases, but the first disc has a "play all" option.

Audio:

I get really sad when BBC releases a show on Blu-ray with a stereo audio track; it's a bit like a shoddy stereo system in a Ferrari. Well, I'm not sad with this release, as they've included a Dolby Digital 5.1 track. It sounds great, with lots of nice ambient effects, and good, deep bass effects (which reminds me, I have to see what rattles around in my ceiling when the bass kicks in...). Thumbs up for the audio track. English subtitles are also included if you need them.

Commentary Tracks:

A Study in Pink - Sue Virtue, Mark Gatiss and Stephen Moffat provide a wonderful commentary track for the first episode. It's very, very good, with tons of information on the production, the actors and the characters. Definitely worth listening to.

The Great Game - Mark Gatiss, Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman provide a track on the season finale. I enjoyed listening to this, but not as much as the other track.

Unlocking Sherlock (32:37):

It's a standard behind-the-scenes piece. Talk to the actors, talk to the producers, show them shooting some stuff. The piece isn't bad, it's just the same as 95% of the other "making of" featurettes produced.

Pilot: A Study in Pink (55:17)

The original pilot, which contains a number of differences from the version that aired, besides simply being shorter. This version has some different scenes, yet features a lot of the same dialog. Definitely check it out, just so you can compare it to the episode that aired.

Summary:

I really, really enjoyed this show, and I was sad that it was only 3 episodes long, even if they were double-length. Actually, the double-length episodes really threw me off, as I'm so used to watching 43 minute episodes, I found myself glancing at the time 55-57 mins into all three episodes. It's not that I was bored, my body just knew that something was strange with the longer time (clearly a sign that I watch lots of TV - not too much, as there's no such thing).

I enjoyed the twist that the writers and producers put on the classic tales because it gives fans of the character something new, instead of simply retelling the stories that have been done so many times before. The cast is perfect in their roles, though I have to wonder what will come of the show when Martin Freeman plays "Bilbo Baggins" in The Hobbit. Of course, being a British show, there's nothing wrong with taking a year or two off, as they've done with many shows over the years.

Definitely give this show a shot, it's a solid show, and a good BD release. The bonus material is very good, and it's especially nice to see the original pilot, and how many things they changed with the show by adding another half hour.

Sherlock (Blu-Ray) DVD Review
WhatDVD.Net
December 6, 2010

Sherlock Holmes? Transposed to modern day London, with computers, mobile phones and the Internet? Surely this will never work?

The idea that London’s most famous Victorian detective, as penned by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, could work in a modern setting must have seemed crazy to all but the most visionary of people – thankfully Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat (two of the men behind the regeneration of Doctor Who) were two such visionaries. Sherlock Holmes, in modern day London, is both inspired and intriguing – and is an unquestionable success; one which apparently took a few people by surprise, including the BBC and star Martin Freeman (Doctor Watson).

Freeman may be better known as playing ‘Tim’ in the Office (or as the naked male porn star in Love Actually), but his role as Watson in Sherlock threatens to give the comedy actor a new shot at being typecast all over again. He is a youthful Watson, a man of action and a perfect foil for the brilliant, irrational and slightly unstable Sherlock (Benedict Cumberbatch) – a man who could quite easily fill the role of The Doctor (Who, not Watson) himself without too much of a stretch.

Just like previous incarnations of Holmes before him, Cumberbatch plays Holmes with a degree of insanity – plagued by the fact that nobody is able to even keep up with him, let alone challenge him. Holmes is so bored in fact that he resorts to taking pot shots at his own living room wall with a gun, and keeping severed body parts in the fridge for ‘study’ – yes, this Holmes is only a slight nudge away from being one of the madmen he often catches. It’s this unpredictability – the sort of instability that followed David Tenant in his final few episodes of Doctor Who – that make this series so watchable.

Sherlock was only intended for a short run by the BBC, filming just three feature length episodes, but its runaway success ensured it was granted another series almost instantly – one which Freeman must fit in around his work on The Hobbit, where he plays Bilbo Baggins. Sherlock is edgy, it’s unpredictable and it’s brilliant. It displays writing at its very best and brings the legend that is Sherlock Holmes screaming into the 21st century for the Doctor Who generation.

I’ve mentioned Who a number of times in this review, but the parallels are there to be seen by all. The complex and in-depth style of writing, the cinematic shooting and the casting show very strong influences – as does the huge success of the show.

If you’ve ever thought of Sherlock Holmes as being a little stuffy, maybe even boring, think again. Sherlock, while staying true to the original’s intricacy and detail, is an action packed powerhouse of a series, and one that I’ll personally be following with glee.

Sherlock success 'lovely surprise'
December 4, 2010

(UKPA) - Martin Freeman has said the success of the BBC1 drama Sherlock was "a lovely surprise".

The actor, who played Dr Watson in the updated version of the classic detective stories, starts filming the second series next year.

He said: "I always thought it was good and I always think we believed in it but the extent of its success was a lovely surprise."

He went on: "I don't think any of us banked on it being so across the board successful."

The series, which updated Arthur Conan Doyle's stories to 21st century London, was a ratings hit, pulling in more than seven million viewers.

Martin will film the new episodes with co-star Benedict Cumberbatch, who plays Holmes, in between stints in New Zealand where he is filming Peter Jackson's two-part Lord of the Rings prequel The Hobbit.

He said: "January I go out and I'm out there until May then I come back and do Sherlock and then I go back until December and make the second part of the Hobbit."

DVD Review: SHERLOCK Season One
By Blair Marnell
CraveOnline.com
December 2, 2010

The game is on as the master detective gets a modern day reboot.

Sherlock Holmes is one of the greatest characters ever created, but the detective has sometimes had difficulties reaching a broader audience on film. The latest attempt featuring Robert Downey Jr. was well received despite depicting Holmes as almost an action hero version of himself. But there are still some people who can't seem to get past the Victorian era settings of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's original stories. For those fans, "Doctor Who" veterans Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss have developed a new take in "Sherlock;" which firmly takes place in a contemporary setting while at the same time remaining true to the spirit of the character.

Over the course of three TV movies, Moffat and Gatiss introduce us to a Sherlock Holmes who is very much a man of our times. Benedict Cumberbatch plays Sherlock as someone who is so brilliant that it verges on mental illness. When one of the police detectives dismisses him as a psychopath he proudly states that he's a "high functioning sociopath." Sherlock also demonstrates a love for modern technology that's unexpected, although Moffat and others have pointed out that the original Sherlock Holmes was supposed to be on the cutting edge for his time.

While Cumberbatch is mesmerizing as Sherlock, the real heart of this series is Martin Freeman's Dr. John Watson, a wounded war veteran who initially stays with Sherlock out of necessity rather than friendship. One of the more interesting changes made is that Watson doesn't actually seem to like Sherlock very much after getting to know him. However, he is one of the few characters who truly appreciates Sherlock's genius, which is probably why Sherlock wants to keep him around. The partnership between these two characters is still young and yet there are enough echoes of the past to show us that the Sherlock Holmes and John Watson of this century may have a long run ahead of them.

The story of "Sherlock" plays out over three 90 minute movies. In "A Study in Pink," Watson gets his first exposure to Sherlock during an investigation of identical suicides that baffles local police. In "The Blind Baker," Sherlock and Watson investigate a break-in at a high end financial institution that leads them to discover a deadly Chinese smuggling ring. And finally, "The Great Game" pushes Sherlock and Watson to their limits as a criminal mastermind challenges Sherlock to solve several crimes in a limited amount of time before innocent people are killed.

Of the three, "A Study in Pink" is the strongest story, with a self-contained introduction the characters and their world. "The Blind Baker" is entertaining, but feels padded and about a half-hour too long. "The Great Game" may be the most exciting of the three, as events come to a head and Sherlock realizes that an unseen adversary has been manipulating events for years. But the best moment comes when Watson realizes that Sherlock doesn't care about the people he's trying to save, only the challenge. Which led to Sherlock's most human reaction when he sees that he's disappointed the closest friend he may ever have.

For a two disk set, the extras are annoyingly sparse. There's a 25 minute documentary about how "Sherlock" was re-envisioned for our times, which is entertaining. But each of these films deserved featurettes of their own. The commentaries are also interesting, but only two of the episodes feature them. The best special feature was the unaired "Sherlock" pilot, which is almost completely different from the first episode on this set. Most of the cast remains intact and the basic story is the same as "A Study in Pink," but it feels like a dress rehearsal for the real thing. It's very good, but the producers clearly fixed several things before making the final version for TV.

The grand tragedy of this show in America is that it is stuck on PBS instead of BBC America, where it would have a better chance to draw an audience. "Sherlock" could easily be a TV series if Moffat and Gatiss weren't so busy with "Doctor Who" and it's annoying that there isn't a better solution than just doing three TV movies a year.

But in the end, "Sherlock" remains one of the strongest new shows to debut this year. If you ever liked Sherlock Holmes, you'll love "Sherlock."

Review: BBC's Sherlock on DVD
SnitchSeeker.com
December 1, 2010

While die-hard fans of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes mysteries may have been sceptical of a twenty-first century retelling of the earlier stories, BBC's Sherlock takes a brave attempt of infusing the clever mind and crime-solving savvy of the titular character, and give him a technological flare that fans of today can easily relate to. Benedict Cumberbatch plays Holmes with such arrogance - borderline annoying - brilliance, eccentricity, and bravado, that it doesn't matter if he's running around with a cell phone and finding clues on his laptop - he is the same Holmes book fanatics grew up with. That quick-thinking mind is there, as is the disdain of the police department over his rather original methods of crime-solving. Along the way, of course, is the narrator of the series, Dr. James Watson, who, in this instance, blogs online about his misadventures with Holmes, with whom he resides in 221b Baker St.

Watson is played by Martin Freeman, who is eager, and the rare person who looks up to Holmes with utter awe and amazement, the complete opposite of everyone else who knows the rather sloth sleuth. They use their state-of-the-art cameras, phones, and computers to assist in figuring out the mystery, and it adds more to the nuance of the characters rather than taking away because of the technology. It's a tool of the crime scene, not necessarily a character.

Holmes, in the first three stories of the first series, is haunted by a mysterious Moriarty, the adversary of the sleuth. Unfortunately, all the hype building up to the big reveal of who Moriarty is by the third episode doesn't quite work out, as the actor portraying him is no where near as sinister or clever as Holmes. Perhaps he may just be reading his lines, and therefore is supposed to be the one with the upper-hand, but the actor playing him, in The Great Game, comes off a bit immature and petulant. Here's hoping he either steps up his game to be a worthy opponent to Cumberbatch's Holmes, or gets recast.

DVD Review: Sherlock: Season One
Author: Blake Matthews
Blogcritics Video
November 29, 2010

Sherlock is the latest incarnation of the world’s most famous super sleuth. The three-part series which aired on the BBC is a modern update of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s dynamic duo starring Benedict Cumberbatch as Holmes and Martin Freeman as Dr. Watson.

Re-imaginings aren’t always successful; for every Battlestar Galactica, there’s a Knight Rider or Bionic Woman. However, with Stephen Moffat (Jekyl, Doctor Who) as executive producer/co-creator of this version, I thought it would be in capable hands. I was correct; Benedict Cumberbatch was excellent as the great detective. Holmes can seem a bit arrogant as one detective said, but he uses everything around him to deduce what happened and find the answer. I wasn’t familiar with Cumberbatch before Holmes, but I will be on the lookout for his past and future endeavors.

I was familiar with Martin Freeman. The newly cast Bilbo Baggins in the upcoming Hobbit films has been seen in Love Actually, the original UK Office and Hitchhiker’s Guide to The Galaxy. Freeman plays Watson, Holmes' partner very well. In this adaptation, Watson is still a military man; however, in a more modern take, he’s returning from Afghanistan.

Watson is having trouble adapting to a non-combat life when a mutual friend introduces the two men. Holmes offers him the action he’s missing, and in turn Watson smoothes out Holmes impersonal way of dealing with people while also providing commentary to the viewer. The series also shows how clues are seen through Sherlock’s eyes; the use of modern technology is incorporated (like texting) into solving the crimes.

The first Sherlock Holmes story was “A Study in Scarlet,” so it’s very fitting that the first story of the new adapation is a variation of that story entitled “A Study in Pink.” Over the course of the three stories we see great interaction between Holmes and Watson, and are shown that there is a method to Holmes behavior. We learn that he probably is as smart as he thinks he is, even if his interactions with other people can be seen as rude or standoffish. Towards the end of the series we finally meet Moriarty (Holmes' nemesis), and the series ends on quite a cliffhanger: something rarely seen on UK TV.

Sherlock comes with a number of extras, including two commentaries. The first episode has commentary with Moffat, Gatiss, and producer Sue Vertue. This commentary focuses on the production and all the challenges of making the series. The second commentary is for the third episode with Gatiss again, but this time he’s joined by Benedict Cumperpatch and Martin Freeman. This commentary sees things from the actor’s point of view with Gatiss adding his perspective. Both are informative and provide a good balance between the producers point-of-view as well as the actors.

“Unlocking Sherlock” is a short documentary about the making of the series. There’s also the unaired pilot which clocks in at about 60 minutes (each episode runs about 90 minutes) and is what got the series greenlit for the initial three episodes. The pilot is a bit rough, it’s a shorter version of A Study in Pink" with sets and some of the updates to modern times still being worked out, but it’s cool to see the differences between this version and the version that aired.

Sherlock is a fun update of the world’s greatest detective. The BBC has greenlit a second series of three more episodes to air in 2011; hopefully the stories will be good as the first round and there’ll be many more series to enjoy.

The success of Sherlock
By Lois Cameron
The Yorker
November 28, 2010

I think it’s pretty fair to say that the big TV hit of summer 2010 was Sherlock. This modern take on the classic Arthur Conan Doyle stories had a lot of potential on paper, but I don’t think anyone could have predicted just how good it was going to be, or just how much it would capture the viewing public’s imagination. Ahead of the series being repeated on BBC3 from tonight at 7.30pm, here is why I think everyone should seek it out.

Even though Sherlock had a lot going for it in theory, there was always going to be one major hurdle that the writers had to get over: just how to modernise it. Take it too far from the originals, and fans will complain that it’s just using the names to attract viewers; don’t go far enough, and it’ll just seem a bit pointless. But creators Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss had one major trick up their sleeve. They’re fans themselves. They wanted to take Holmes and Watson into the twenty-first century for a great reason, so the trimmings of Victorian London didn’t get in the way of what they thought was the key to the success of the books: the relationship between the two main characters. It wasn’t a gimmick to attract viewers, but two fans who genuinely wanted to add something new and interesting to the already impressive canon and history of these stories.

The other key thing they brought to the table was wit. They clearly know the stories inside out, which allowed them to use little elements from the originals to enrich their stories, without sticking slavishly to them. When watching Sherlock, the passion for Conan Doyle’s tales is clear, but they’re not afraid to have fun with it at the same time, with some cheeky references and laugh-out-loud moments. It was telling that the weakest episode was the middle one, which wasn’t written by either Gatiss or Moffat, while their episodes sparkled like beautiful little gems.

Of course, none of this would have mattered a jot if the casting hadn’t been so spot on. Benedict Cumberbatch – he of the amazing name and cheekbones – balances Holmes’s arrogance, brilliance and charisma perfectly, always on the edge of being awful but staying just on the right side of genius. And at his side was Martin Freeman as John Watson, the man who acts as Holmes’s conscience, aid and friend. Their odd, co-dependent relationship is at the heart of the original stories, and it’s beautifully played here. You implicitly understand why they’re drawn together without ever having to be told why. The supporting cast is fantastic, particularly Zoe Telford as Watson’s love interest, and even more particularly Gatiss himself in a small role, eating up the scenery like he hasn’t had a good meal in months, and clearly having the time of his life doing it. But, ultimately, it’s Cumberbatch and Freeman at the centre of the series that make it work so beautifully.

I honestly can’t recommend Sherlock highly enough. The second episode is a bit of a dip in quality (it’s only very good rather than outstandingly excellent) but they’re all worth checking out, especially the final episode, if only for its brilliant, audacious cliff-hanger. Until it returns next year, I doubt there’ll be much on our TV screens to beat Sherlock for sheer intelligence, excitement, wit, entertainment and downright charm.

SHERLOCK DVD Review
By Laura Kelley
Collider.com
November 24, 2010

When I first heard that Doctor Who showrunner Steven Moffatt and writer Mark Gatiss were coming out with a Sherlock Holmes TV miniseries, I was extremely excited. When I finally saw it, I was blown away by how incredibly good it is. Sherlock is a modern take on the Holmes stories, and it doesn’t disappoint. Holmes and Watson translate very well into contemporary characters with a dynamic relationship that’s brilliantly played by stars Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman, who will play Bilbo Baggins in The Hobbit. Sherlock is sharp, funny, and so suspenseful by the end that waiting until 2011 for more seems unfathomable. Hit the jump for my review.

Sherlock kicks off with “A Study in Pink,” probably the best take on A Study in Scarlet I’ve seen yet, and as Holmes and Watson are introduced (or Sherlock and John as they call one another here), the instant chemistry between Cumberbatch and Freeman is palpable. Their performances compliment each other so well from the beginning and their interplay is one of the things that makes the series so unique. Here, Holmes is a well-dressed, coolly aloof figure who beats corpses with a riding crop and is oblivious to the amorous attention of poor Molly from the lab, and Watson is a veteran recently returned from Afghanistan who’s troubled by flashbacks, a psychosomatic limp, and a therapist who makes him take up blogging. Sherlock and John are quickly drawn into a mystery involving serial suicides that’s actually very good, and so I won’t spoil that. The supporting cast here is great, from Rupert Graves’ Lestrade to Mrs. Hudson, who’s absolutely wonderful. We even got to see Mycroft Holmes in the first episode, and Mark Gatiss plays him with such relish that it’s impossible not to like him. My favorite scenes in this episode were the drug bust, when Lestrade punishes Sherlock for withholding evidence and we find out that this Sherlock thinks he’s a sociopath, and the scene in the restaurant, where Sherlock and John have a very, um, interesting moment.

The second episode, “The Blind Banker,” is the weakest of the three, but it’s still pretty awesome. The mystery in this one is less interesting until it nears the end and we get more information about Moriarty, who until this point is just a looming figure in the background. Where this episode shines is the John/Sherlock dynamic. John decides to go on a date with Sarah, a coworker who hopefully won’t become the series’ version of Mary, because things didn’t end well for poor Mary in the books. Sherlock doesn’t understand at all, and John has to explain to him that a date is when two people who like each other go out and have fun. Sherlock responds that he thought that’s what they were doing, and looks confused. He also shoots the wall when he’s bored, another nod to the original stories that I loved.

Episode 3, “The Great Game,” is awesome from beginning to end. A bomb goes off on Baker Street and Sherlock is nearly killed, which doesn’t faze him so much as it interests him. Mycroft asks for Sherlock’s help in retrieving the Bruce-Partington plans (yay), and John spends much of the episode trying to stall Mycroft while they get involved in a series of puzzles that Sherlock has to solve or an innocent person will be blown up. This episode features several different cases that John and Sherlock have to solve, each seeming like a distraction, but of course they all come together by the end. The main thread involving the bombings is wonderfully suspenseful and builds to an incredible climax with a crucial reveal: the appearance of Moriarty in the flesh, and as villains go, Andrew Scott is just so disarmingly creepy in his few minutes of screen time that this brief glimpse of an unhinged, brilliant, Sherlock-obsessed Moriarty makes a big impression. He’s unlike many interpretations of the stories’ overarching villain because he comes off as both immediately threatening and obsessively deranged, willing to “burn the heart” out of Sherlock by using Watson as a pawn.

The final episode ends with a cliffhanger that will leave you guessing, and it’s a fitting end to the best new show of the past season. Cumberbatch and Freeman are fantastic, as is the rest of the cast. Even the costume design deserves props, because this show’s just that damn good. The DVD doesn’t come with much in the way of bonus features besides commentary and an alternate, shorter first episode, but it’s worth checking out if you’re interested in the immense attention to detail paid in making these episodes. The only thing that sucks about this show is that we’ll have to wait a year for more.

Sherlock: Season One Blu-ray Review
By Peter Suciu
BigPictureBigSound
November 21, 2010

The Series:

It has been done with Shakespeare many times; classic tales transformed to a different period. So why not rework Arthur Conan Doyle's most famous character and set the tales in the modern day? It would simply... well, we're not going to say. What we will say is that creators Steven Moffat (Doctor Who) and Mark Gatiss have taken the Victorian detective and brought it to life anew in the BBC series Sherlock.

This first season, which consists of just three one a half hour episodes introduces the characters of consulting detective Sherlock Holmes (Benedict Cumberbatch) and his partner in crime solving Dr. John Watson (Martin Freeman) - the latter home from a tour of duty in Afghanistan. The stories play on classic tales - notably the original Holmesian A Study in Scarlet becomes "A Study in Pink" - but there is almost too much of a reveal early on, notably with the arch villain Moriarty.

Likewise, Moffat brings a bit too much of his Doctor Who style to the show. Whereas the Doctor has often been compared to Holmes, in this new take on the detective it is almost hard not to see a bit of Time Lord in him. If you can get past that minor complaint, this is great fun. Holmes relies not just on pure deduction, but is a bit more reliant on gadgets, notably a mobile phone and even a bit of GPS. He's updated in other ways, notably a nicotine patch for his pipe and thank god there is no deerstalker hat - even the most ironic hipster wouldn't be caught dead in such a cap. Let's hope the BBC returns with more Sherlock for many seasons to come.

The Picture:

Sherlock Holmes' London is always dreary, so much so that you might ask whether it is actually ever summertime. Part of this was that the fog described in the books was really the dark smoke from the industrial revolution. Regardless of the reason this new version keeps the same style yet it looks really sharp on the 1.85:1 1080i Blu-ray. The picture is clear and detailed, which can help keen eyes try to outdo the deductive mind of Holmes as well, but the colors are rather muted at times - but again that could be the dreary weather.

The Sound:

The production makes good use of the Dolby Digital 5.1 soundtrack, which provides the crackle of a fire in a couple of scenes as well as pounding explosions in the second story The Blind Banker. The dialog is clear as it comes through the central channel allowing Holmes to show his powers of deduction, while there are the expected audio cues in the discrete channels. The music has that mystery-esque quality to it, and while a little redundant provides a timeless quality.

The Extras:

There are about 88 minutes of extras, including a reworked pilot episode of "A Study in Pink," plus a featurette: "Unlocking Sherlock: The Making of." What is missing interestingly enough are the PBS Mystery introductions with Allan Cumming. If you had seen these on the broadcast version you might be disappointed as these offered some interesting tidbits and anecdotes about Holmes as well as Conan Doyle. There is commentary with Gatiss and Moffat along with Sue Vertue for episode one, and commentary with Cumberbatch, Freeman and Gatiss for episode three and from the sound of it, even they didn't see everything Homles was able to deduce.

Final Thoughts:

While the idea of taking Holmes to the 21st century might seem like sacrilege, this series pulls it off very well. Cumberbatch manages to step into the role reasonably well, although it would be easy to see that he could just as easily be playing the man known only as the Doctor thanks to Moffat's writing. But the stories are original enough and offer a lot of twists, while the Blu-ray makes it all the easier to try to see what Holmes sees.

Product Details:

Actors: Benedict Cumberbatch, Martin Freeman
Director: Paul McGuigan, Euros Lyn
Audio Languages: English 5.1 Dolby Digital
Subtitles: English
Aspect Ratio: 1.85:1
Number of Discs: 2
Rating: Not Rated
Studio: BBC
Release Date: November 9, 2010
Run Time: 461 minutes
List Price: $39.90

Extras:

Episode 1 Commentary with Market Gatiss, Steven Moffat and Sue Vertue
Episode 2 Commentary with Benedict Cumberbatch, Martin Freeman and Mark Gatiss
Exclusive Pilot Episode: "A Study in Pink"
Unlocking Sherlock - the Making of

Overall: Excellent
Video: Very Good
Audio: Very Good
Movie: Excellent
Extras: Very Good

Sherlock Arrives On DVD
By Joseph Dilworth Jr.
Pop Culture Zoo
November 20, 2010

Upon first hearing that there is a TV series that re-imagines Sherlock Holmes in the 21st Century, you would be excused for instantly rolling your eyes and saying no thanks. After all, what is the world’s greatest literary detective without his Victorian Era trappings and mannerisms? How dare they, you would rightfully declare! Ah, but this new iteration is the mastermind of Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss, possibly the two greatest writers working in television today. That alone should make this DVD set enticing, but then you must also consider Martin Freeman as Watson to Benedict Cumberbatch’s Holmes and you have a fantastic series waiting to be watched again and again.

There are plenty of re-imaginings and remakes that take the title of the original and little else, basically resulting in more of an homage. Not so with Sherlock. As the first episode unfolds it is readily apparent that the entire cast and crew understands implicitly who and what Sherlock Holmes and his world are. The series literally looks, feels and sounds as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle were alive today and had just created the stories for television. I think even the most ardent Sherlock Holmes fan as well as someone who has never read any of the original stories will absolutely love this series. There is one thing you will absolutely hate, however, and that’s when you finish the final episode and realize you are done with the series. Thanks to DVD, you can watch them as many times as you want and you will want to quite a lot.

The writing on each episode is superb, as would be expected from Moffat and Gatiss, who write the first and last episodes, respectively. Granted, the second episode, written by Stephen Thompson, is the weakest of the the three, but it is still a nicely compelling drama. Cumberbatch is almost supernaturally good as Holmes and he plays him in a detached, timeless way that such an immortal character deserves. Freeman is the perfect counter-balance as Watson, sublimely using his comedic talents, but giving us the character that is the viewers’ point of view. Freeman will soon be spending many months filming as a certain famous Hobbit soon and the range he shows here will serve hi well there.

All three 90-minute episodes are presented here across two discs and they look and sound amazing. Thankfully there is the trusty pause button so that you can take time to relish all the details of 221 B Baker Street in crystal clarity. The series is presented in 16:9 widescreen and Dolby Digital so your home theater system will have as much fun playing this as you do watching it. Episodes 1 and 3 each feature a commentary track and if you doubt the devotion to the source material or how much joy the cast and crew had making these, then listening in to their thoughts about those two episodes should dispel it completely.

There is a terrific “Making Of” documentary that is worth watching to witness Steven Moffat’s enthusiasm, if nothing else. The coolest feature on this set is the original 60-minute pilot episode. Unlike normal pilots, this was shot with every intention for it to be the first episode in the series. When the BBC picked up the show they commissioned it as three 90-minute shows. Instead of filming new scenes to add to the existing episode the production team made the decision to completely re-shoot the first episode from scratch. Including the pilot here gives a rare opportunity to see what happens when a TV production team has the chance to re-do an episode with the same story and same actors. The original pilot is every bit as good as the completed episodes so it is very fascinating to see a first impression, if you will, of what was intended.

Pick up this series as soon as possible and prepare to watch some of the best produced TV drama of the year. Apparently, a second series is being worked out and, after finishing this DVD set, you will join me in eagerly anticipating more adventures of Holmes and Watson in the modern day. The game is on!

About the Author:

Joseph Dilworth Jr. has been writing since he could hold a pencil (back then it was one of those big, fat red pencils, the Faber-Castell GOLIATH. Remember those? Now that was a pencil!). As editor-in-chief and instigator of this here website he takes full responsibility for any wacky hi-jinks that ensue. He appreciates you taking the time to read his articles and asks that you direct any feedback, criticisms, questions about life directly to him by eic@popculturezoo.com

Mr. Holmes and Dr. Watson solving mysteries in modern London
By Kayla Dos Santos
The Brandeis Hoot
November 19, 2010

The writers of Doctor Who’s version of Sherlock Holmes paint him as sexy, intelligent and a quasi-sociopath. In the BBC’s television series, a modernized re-imagining of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s famous detective series, Holmes and Dr. John Watson solve a string of mysteries in contemporary London. The series is smart, compelling and fun, both a tribute to Doyle’s works and a creative mini-series (there are unfortunately only three episodes) on its own.

The main reason to watch this show is for the chemistry between Dr. Watson, played wonderfully by Martin Freeman, and Sherlock Holmes, performed by the marvelous Benedict Cumberbatch. Freeman plays straight man against Cumberbatch’s eccentric detective. Holmes is intelligent and arrogant; he knows he’s smarter than everyone else and he makes no effort in participating in any social etiquette to make other people feel comfortable. When he encounters a mystery, his brain latches onto it; he’s oblivious to the world around him.

Watson represents one of the few people that manages to call Holmes back to earth. He’s the emotional center of the series, while Holmes is its brain. Watson, an Afghanistan war veteran, is struggling for a way to connect with the world again. He feels out-of-place in the workplace and in his own skin. He needs Holmes’ rationality as much as Holmes needs Watson’s empathy. They necessarily balance each other out. Whenever they are in a scene together, it’s impossible to look away.

At first, I was skeptical about how Sherlock Holmes would work in a modern day setting. What’s Holmes without Victorian London? Isn’t the setting a key part of the novels and short stories? The London setting is just as important in the television series as in the books. Holmes still walks the London streets, through Trafalgar Square, in the East End, in China town. The city is shot in vivid detail, the colors are harsh, heavily contrasted, almost reminiscent of film noir. Holmes is still London’s detective.

Producers Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss also clearly made an effort to transform the detective into a product of today’s world. In an interview they stated that Holmes is “not meant to be a relic, he’s supposed to be ahead.” Sherlock is tech-savvy. He knows how to break into a password-protected computer and how to send mass texts to the press and the police. However, they wisely don’t allow the technology to overshadow what makes Holmes’ unique—his deductive reasoning.

They portray his reasoning, in part, through a variety of shooting techniques. When Holmes in “A Study in Pink” tries to catch up to a fleeing taxi cab, the viewers are shown a map, which is supposed to represent Holmes coming up with the right route to take. In “The Blind Banker” images of fragments appear and disappear on the screen as Holmes attempts to crack a smuggler ring’s code. The camera also focuses on objects that Holmes recognizes as important clues in solving the cases. These techniques are flashy and entertaining to watch, but Cumberbatch’s rapid-speed talk, his look of concentration and his ability to convey his thoughts in a glance, is what really makes me believe in this series’ portrayal of Holmesian deduction.

The mysteries are clever and tightly plotted. When all of the strands come together, it’s both satisfying and exciting to watch. Each of the three episodes could stand alone with each focused on a mystery, and each running more than an hour, but for the presence of Holmes’ arch rival Professor Moriarty. The character’s relationships are also addressed in each episode, evolving a little with each addition to the series.

If you have a chance delve into the series during Thanksgiving break, they are available online at pbs.org for free until Dec. 9. They’ll leave you wanting more. More mysteries and more Dr. Watson and Mr. Holmes.

"Sherlock" miniseries a fresh take on classic favorite
By Shea Frazier
The Lamron - Arts & Entertainment
November 18, 2010

Here's a mystery: Why would anyone want to go to PBS's website?

The answer, my dear readers, is elementary: PBS is where "Sherlock" resides.

In this BBC miniseries (episodes of which are available online, on DVD and will be cycling through once more on PBS), "Doctor Who" writers Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss bring one of the world's most famous duos, Sherlock Holmes and John Watson, into 21st century London. Gone are the cape and deerskin cap, the telegrams and the pipe: this Holmes is a stylish, eccentric, text messaging, self-admitted sociopath just out for the thrill of a good game.

Inspired by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's books, "Sherlock" draws from the Holmesian tradition to produce plots that are tense and exciting as well as fresh and inventive. Though Holmes is known for his verbosity, the show never gets tedious; healthy doses of action and a staging that are somewhat reminiscent of "CSI" add constant visual interest. The result is a series with a sleek, dark, rich look accompanied by fast pacing that, thanks to spot-on writing and some old-fashioned deduction, still appeals to viewers' more intelligent sides. Not a second of the 39-minute episodes is ever boring, which is something even the show's snarky title character can appreciate.

Even with an updated appearance and mysteries galore, no Sherlock adaptation would be worthwhile without the characters that made the series legendary. Played by Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman respectively, socially-deficient Holmes and loyal, sharp-shooting Watson are charismatic, entertaining and completely convincing as two very different men whose shared love for adventure leads to the friendship of a lifetime.

Besides, there's nothing quite like watching the generally calm Watson deal with a flatmate who whips corpses and keeps severed heads in the refrigerator.

"Sherlock" is quick, referential and exceedingly brilliant, and its title character is even more so. The show, recently renewed for a second season, feels genuine and clever; though it borrows from an oft-used source, this "Sherlock" is new in every way that counts. It's Holmes and Watson, now simply Sherlock and John, for a modern audience.

BBC's new SHERLOCK Annotations: Episode 1, A Study in Pink
By Alan Kistler, Newsarama Contributor
November 18, 2010

This summer, many TV viewers were riveted by the new program “Sherlock”, a modern-day adaptation of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s crime-fighting duo of Sherlock Holmes and John H. Watson. Created by Mark Gatiss (actor and “Doctor Who” writer) and Steven Moffat (lead writer and executive producer of “Doctor Who”), this series aired on the BBC, then came to BBC America, and now it’s all available on DVD and Blu-Ray. So for those of you who have enjoyed this new take on the Great Detective of London but are curious about just how closely it ties to Doyle’s original tales, here are some in-depth annotations. Be warned though, these are full of spoilers so it’s important that you see the show before you read these.

SHERLOCK EPISODE 1 - A STUDY IN PINK

Benedict Cumberbatch plays Sherlock Holmes and was the first choice of this show’s creators. Though some folks may think he’s a bit young for the role, Sherlock was only about 27 years old when Watson met him in “A Study in Scarlet” (although author Laurie R. King has constructed her own theory, based on evidence from multiple stories, that Sherlock was as young as 20 when he and Watson first met).

Martin Freeman plays John Watson and was chosen because in his audition he portrayed the doctor as someone who would follow Holmes but also criticize him and show that he considered himself an equal friend. Several of the others who auditioned had made Watson seem like a subordinate. Interestingly, the first person to audition for John Watson was Matt Smith who later auditioned and won the role of the Eleventh Doctor on Moffat's Doctor Who.

The title is taken from “A Study in Scarlet”, the very first Sherlock Holmes story written by his creator Sir Arthur Conan Doyle which introduced the character and Dr. John H. Watson. The story opened up with Watson returning from Afghanistan where he served as an Assistant Surgeon of the Army Medical Department after having suffered shoulder injury on the battlefield that shattered the bone and grazed the subclavian artery. Watson said he recovered largely from the wound but then came down with enteric fever and was forced to be sent back to England. He had fought in the Second Anglo-Afghan War, which lasted from 1878-1880 and was the second time that British controlled India had invaded Afghanistan. Watson mentioned that he fought in the Battle of Maiwand (July 27th, 1880), which was one of the war’s final major battles.

The episode displays a group of people who all vanished and then apparently committed suicide. One of these victims is named James Phillimore, who goes home to get his umbrella and then vanishes, only to be found dead later. In the original Sherlock Holmes story “The Problem of Thor Bridge”, Watson revealed to readers that he kept a tin dispatch box full of files on the cases that Holmes was never able to really solve. He said, “among these unfinished tales is that of Mr. James Phillimore, who, stepping back into his own house to get his umbrella, was never more seen in this world.”

Before we meet Holmes, we meet Detective Inspector (DI) Lestrade. In the original Doyle stories, Holmes was often annoyed by Inspector Lestrade, who half the time dismissed the consulting detective’s skills as mere luck at guesswork and if he ever asked Holmes for help it was with obvious reluctance. However, Holmes himself admitted that Lestrade was a skilled inspector (referring to him as the best “of a bad lot”) who was “quick and energetic, but conventional - shockingly so.” On occasion, such as in the story “The Six Napoleons”, Lestrade admitted genuine admiration for Sherlock’s abilities and simply wished he had joined the official police force. Moffat and Gatiss decided to focus on that aspect of their relationship and so this series gives us a Lestrade who is much more open to asking Holmes for help and fully admits his talents, even if he does criticize his behavior.

In the original “A Study in Scarlet”, Watson ran into his old friend Stamford at the Criterion Bar. In this episode, Watson runs into Stamford during a walk and then they grab a cup of coffee together. Notice the name on the coffee cup? It says Criterion.

In “A Study in Scarlet”, Watson tells Stamford he’s looking for a roommate to share “comfortable rooms at a reasonable price,” and Stamford remarks that earlier that same day, he heard Sherlock Holmes use the exact same phrase. In this episode, Watson instead asks, “Who would want me as a flatmate?” and Stamford says, “You’re the second person to say that to me today.”

Sherlock’s test of beating a corpse is another direct reference to “A Study in Scarlet.” When Stanford is taking Watson to meet Sherlock Holmes in that story, he warns that Holmes is rather eccentric and took part in strange experiments such as beating up corpses to see how bruises formed differently after death.

Sherlock is apparently unaware or doesn’t care about Molly Hooper’s advances towards him. He later tells Watson that women are not his area of expertise. In the original stories by Doyle, it was clear on several occasions that Holmes did not focus any energy on romance at all. In Doyle’s story “The Lion’s Mane”, Holmes himself says, “Women have seldom been an attraction to me, for my brain has always governed my heart...” Watson remarked that when he first was working with Holmes, the detective considered romance to be “abhorrent to his cold, precise but admirably balanced mind... a distracting factor which might throw a doubt upon all his mental results.” Iin Doyle’s story “The Second Stain”, Holmes remarks how annoyingly difficult it is for him to read women sometimes since “their most trivial action may mean volumes, or their most extraordinary conduct may depend upon a hairpin...”

Holmes did, however, seem to change his mind about women. The first thing to soften his opinion was when the actress Irene Adler proved successful in outsmarting and escaping the detective, which Holmes admired so much that he always referring to her afterward reverently as “The Woman.” And he seemed to have greater compassion towards women in later adventures, even showing signs of an attraction to a woman in “The Adventure of the Copper Beeches” and later again “The Lion’s Mane.” In Doyle’s story “The Devil’s Foot”, Holmes says he understands what love for a woman could make a person do, even though he admits, “I have never loved...”

In the original “A Study in Scarlet”, Holmes immediately concludes that Watson spent time in Afghanistan since he sees that he is a military man only recently returned from the battlefield and at that time the Second Anglo-Afghan War was just ending. In this episode, since modern-day English troops could be in different parts of the middle east, Holmes is forced to ask, “Afghanistan or Iraq?”

Holmes quickly shows he is constantly using a smart phone. In the original stories, Holmes was very much a modern man who constantly sent out telegrams to contact people for basic information so he wouldn’t have to waste time physically visiting and speaking with them (he, of course, visited people when he required serious interrogation). He was also constantly searching through his own files, guide books, collected newspaper clippings, and saved tabloids when he needed to research information. Hence, it makes sense that he would constantly check his phone to send texts and do internet searches.

Sherlock concludes that Watson’s leg injury is psychosomatic, but later learns that he did receive an injury in the shoulder. In the original Sherlock Holmes stories, Doyle initially said the injury that forced Watson to come home was in Watson’s shoulder but a later story had him complain about an injury in his leg. Many fans came up with theories to explain this. Some have suggested that his leg was injured in a less serious way in a previous skirmish, before the shoulder wound happened that forced him to leave Afghanistan. Some have suggested that one or both injuries were entirely psychosomatic. Some have even suggested that Watson was actually injured in a very embarrassing place and lied about the placement of his wound rather than admit it.

The address 221 B Baker street did not actually exist in London when Doyle published his stories, though it often received fan letters from children addressed to Sherlock Holmes himself. The address of 221B Baker Street was assigned to the Sherlock Holmes Museum in 1990, a museum that has been made to be a replica of the apartment that Holmes and Watson shared and is situated in a building that stands on Baker Street between 237 and 241.

Sherlock’s explanation of how he and Mrs. Hudson met is a new idea created for this show. In the original stories, nothing was said of Mrs. Hudson’s past or if she and Sherlock had met before he and John had moved into the upper floor of her building. In the original stories, Watson described Mrs. Hudson as “a long-suffering woman... [Holmes’s] incredible untidiness, his addiction to music at strange hours, his occasional revolver practice within doors, his weird and often malodorous scientific experiments, and the atmosphere of violence and danger which hung around him made him the very worst tenant in London. On the other hand, his payments were princely... She was fond of him, too, for he had a remarkable gentleness and courtesy in his dealing with women.” In the story “A Scandal in Bohemia”, Holmes (or Doyle) mistakenly refers to Mrs. Hudson as Mrs. Turner.

Upon entering the main apartment, we see that Holmes has already left if a cluttered mess. In the original stories, Watson at first found Holmes very easy to live with, but then later often complained about the detective’s habit for making a mess with his files and his chemical experiments and that he would do strange, untidy things such as keeping tobacco in one of his slippers.

Sherlock shows Watson his website where he has posted up articles about the science of deduction. In “A Study in Scarlet”, he showed Watson an article he’d published about the science of detection called “The Book of Life” which had been published in a local magazine.

We see that John is practically dying of boredom and is eager to join Sherlock on an adventure. In “A Study in Scarlet”, Watson remarked “how objectless was my life, and how little there was to engage my attention... I had no friends who would call upon me and break the monotony of my daily existence. Under these circumstances, I eagerly hailed the little mystery which hung around my companion...”

Mrs. Hudson’s complaint that she is a landlady and not a house maid is a reference to the original stories by Doyle, where she often did the cooking and cleaning for the two men without question, despite the fact that she owned the place.

Sherlock jumps for joy at the thought of a serious murder investigation he can get his hands on. Similar behavior happened a few times in the original stories, such as in “The Sign of Four.”

In this episode, Sherlock is eager to run off to the murder scene of Jennifer Wilson. In “A Study in Scarlet”, Watson was eager that Sherlock head to the murder scene but the detective said there was no point, having gotten into the habit of rarely leaving his apartment to solve cases since police and clients came to him instead and would often take the credit for his work anyway. It was Watson who pushed him to go to the scene of the crime and actually investigate the case directly. Taking Watson with him to the murder scene, Holmes later remarks, “There is nothing like first hand evidence... I must thank you for it all. I might not have gone but for you...” Thus, in the original stories, Watson is very much the catalyst that moves Holmes from being a strange, hermetic consultant to a world-famous detective.

Sherlock is called to investigate the death of Jennifer Wilson at Lauriston Gardens. In “A Study in Scarlet”, he investigated the death of Enoch J. Drebber at an inn at #3 Lauriston Gardens.

Sherlock tells Mrs. Hudson that the game is on. This is a take on Holmes’s famous battle cry “The game is afoot!” The phrase has been used in many adaptations and was first exclaimed by the Great Detective in the story “The Adventure of the Abbey Grange.”

On the way to the crime scene, Sherlock explains how he figured out that John has a brother named Harry thanks to an inscription on the back of the doctor’s cell phone. From the scratches around the port where you plug in the charger, he realizes that Harry is a drunk. In the Doyle story “The Sign of the Four”, Holmes sees that Watson’s pocket watch has the letters “H.W.” inscribed on the back and concludes that this watch had belonged to Watson’s father and was originally given to John’s elder brother. Holmes notices damage on the watch and infers that John’s older brother is careless and that the scratches on the key-hole mean that he is a drunk, adding, “You never see a drunkard’s watch without them. He winds it at night, and he leaves these traces of his unsteady hand.”

Sherlock sees the word “Rache” on the floor, written by the victim, and considers that it might be the German word for revenge but then immediately dismisses this. In “A Study in Scarlet”, that is exactly what the word meant and it was a vital clue left by the killer, not the victim, to explain his motive.

The wedding ring informs Sherlock about several things that help him in solving the case. Similarly, a wedding ring found on the scene was a vital clue in the original story “A Study in Scarlet.” In the original story, Holmes later used this ring to lure the killer to his home but in this episode he uses a text message as the lure.

Sherlock asks John and Lestrade what it’s like to live inside such tiny minds. In the Doctor Who episode “The Doctor Dances”, also written by Steven Moffar, the Doctor asked almost the exact same question to his friends Rose Tyler and Jack Harkness.

The man Watson meets is implied to be Moriarty to anyone familiar with the Holmes stories but we find out later that this is actually Mycroft Holmes. Mycroft was first introduced in a story called “The Greek Interpreter”, where he was described as Sherlock’s older, fatter and smarter brother. According to Sherlock, Mycroft’s detective reasoning was far superior and he could have been the greatest crime-fighter in the world but he detested physical activity and legwork, preferring to spend as much time as possible in the Diogenes Club, an anti-social club for people who wished to be left alone by the rest of London and whose members were not permitted to speak to each other unless they were in a specially designated room. Originally said to have a minor government job due to a talent with numbers, Holmes later told Watson that in reality, Mycroft was the nerve center of the British government, acting as a walking data base for many of its greatest secrets and using his incredible mind to manipulate events through secret operations. We can certainly see his influence and powers in the British government by the fact that he is able to control street cameras and has access to John’s therapy files. This version of Mycroft is not quite as physically lazy as Doyle’s original version and is more hands on with his operations.

Mycroft Holmes is played by series creator Mark Gatiss, who also wrote the third episode “The Great Game.” Mark Gatiss, like Steven Moffat, is a famous author of Doctor Who novels, short stories and penned multiple episodes of the new television series that started in 2005. He also played the role of a Doctor Who villain in the episode “The Lazarus Experiment.”

Sherlock is seen wearing three nicotine patches and explains that this is a “three patch problem.” In the original stories, when he knew he had to think and consider things for some time, he would sometimes call it a “three pipe problem” and take a pipe down to begin smoking. Here he uses patches because, as he explains, it’s “impossible” to maintain a smoking habit in modern-day London when its restricted in so many places.

John laughs off the idea that drugs might be find amongst Sherlock’s possessions but Sherlock then gives him a look that he either does or has had a drug habit in the past. In the original stories, Sherlock occasionally injected himself with a 7 % solution of cocaine. Although some media adaptations would show him doing this whenever a desire took him, the original stories by Doyle made it clear that Sherlock only did this if at least several weeks had passed without an interesting case to pass his time, telling Watson (who was appalled by the habit) that his brain suffered from stagnation and that if he had no problems to solve then he desperately needing the drug to keep his mind stimulated. In later stories by Doyle, the drug use vanished entirely, and many fans took this to mean that Watson’s warnings to Holmes about the damage he was risking to his mind eventually convinced him to stop.

On the commentary for this episode, producers Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat also note that they didn’t want to focus on Holmes’s drug use because it didn’t fit in with the mentality of modern times. During the time of Doyle’s original stories, a man using a 7% solution of cocaine to keep his mind stimulated could seem exotic and Watson was very progressive to suggest it was dangerous and should be stopped. But Gatiss and Moffat felt that a modern-day detective doing this would too easily come off as a weak-willed man with an addiction. They did, however, concede that it was easy for them to imagine that Holmes would have developed a drug habit or done something equally dangerous to keep his mind stimulated before eventually realizing he could work as a detective.

Sherlock snaps that he is a “high-functioning sociopath.” He certainly shows some characteristics of this, given his lack of empathy most of the time, seemingly solving crimes for the enjoyment of solving a puzzle rather than a true desire to help people. And he certainly does have a grandiose sense of himself. But he doesn’t have behavioral control problems. He may compulsively fire off a gun when he’s bored, but not if there’s a chance that someone could be injured by the act. His biting remarks are insensitive but usually not done to deliberately hurt another’s feelings. And while he may appear unsympathetic in general, in the original stories by Doyle he would occasionally allow a criminal to go free if they had committed a crime to avenge or protect a woman they loved. He also displayed a willingness to sacrifice his life for Watson and to kill for him if his friend were put in danger.

Lestrade comments that Sherlock Holmes could possibly become a good man. In the original stories by Doyle, Holmes does seem to become more altruistic and heroic as the stories go on. Initially, he seems to be purely about the problems and mysteries he solved and the effect it has on victims is an afterthought. Later on, he make remarks that he would gladly die simply to stop Moriarty’s criminal network from victimizing people and he allows crimes to go unpunished if they were done to avenge the innocent. Moffat and Gatiss wanted to show a “raw, unrefined” Sherlock in this initial episode, one who will become less cold as Watson has greater influence on him.

“A Study in Scarlet” involved a man named Jefferson Hope who worked as a cabbie and gave his victims a choice between two pills, one of which was poison, as part of a revenge scheme. In the original story, the victims were not random but had caused the death of the woman Hope had loved. In the original story, Hope didn’t fear choosing the wrong pill because he was suffering from an aortic aneurism that could kill him at any moment.

Sherlock remarks that Watson’s shot was an extremely difficult one to accomplish. In the original Doyle stories, Watson was described as a crackshot and a better marksman than Holmes. Although he brought his gun along with him on many adventures written by Doyle, he never actually fired it in those stories.

The name “Moriarty” is mentioned. We’ll discuss this enemy of Sherlock’s in more detail in our annotations for the episode “The Great Game.”

It’s interesting to note that in this episode, Hope knows he was sponsored by someone named Moriarty, whereas in the original Doyle stories the villain operated through a network of operatives so that those who committed the crimes were unaware of who the true mastermind was. Even a spy within his organization would only refer to him as “he.”

At the end of the episode, the Holmes brothers discuss their mother. I feel it’s necessary to point out that these two must have had a very singular mother indeed to have raised them to be such interesting people and have named her two sons Sherlock and Mycroft. I wonder if there are other siblings with equally unique names.

Watson tries twice in one night to pick up the same woman. In the original Doyle stories, Watson was said to be handsome and that he was known as a ladies man in several countries. In “The Adventure of the Second Stain”, Sherlock deferred to Watson’s experience when he found a woman difficult to understand and in “The Adventure of the Retired Colourman”, Holmes told his friend, “With your natural advantages, Watson, every lady if your helper and accomplice.”

Sherlock / Not Rated but could be PG-13 for crime, a little violence and adult themes
Reviewed by Karl Scott - The Santa Clara Weekly
November 17, 2010

My mom read to me a lot and sealed my fate as a BIG reader. One of my early favorites from about 8 years old on was Sherlock Holmes. I helped ruin my eyesight by continuing to read after "lights out" under the covers via flashlight. Don't recommend it. This was due to my insatiable interest in the Arthur Conan Doyle character, Sherlock Holmes, and his companion Dr. Watson. Jules Verne is also partially to blame for "Mysterious Island" and my inability to stop reading when I was supposed to. I have forgiven him.

Sherlock Holmes, in movies and TV, is one of the most filmed of all characters in fiction. And well he ought to be. A recent restoration of a silent era, first appearance of Sherlock in film was a wonderful addition to the Sherlock Holmes film collection. John Barrymore was the first SH and Roland Young was his sidekick. William Powell was in the 1922 version, who also played a brilliant detective in his own right as Nick Charles in The Thin Man in 1934 and all its sequels. Powell also played the lesser known Philo Vance crime solver during this era. Basil Rathbone created the best known and probably the most popular SH over many decades up to now.

2010 gives us a new look at the old character. There is no charge to see the new incarnation. PBS Mystery! Series has premiered its first 3 episodes of Sherlock. The story has been updated to the 21st Century. British actor, Benedict Cumberbatch is the new SH, with Martin Freeman as the new Dr. W.

The first episode is a refresher of the SH legend with a new story title, "A Study in Pink" which is an updating of the original AC Doyle story, "A Study in Scarlet". ACD is co-credited as a writer but the update belongs to Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat. MG also appears in a very important (un-credited) role in the series. Their writing and update is BRILLIANT. Combining the old elements that have made the series enduring and beloved, it adds all kinds of 21st century twists and turns.

The story in the opener is a good old fashioned murder mystery with an evil serial killer doing bad. A bigger evil looms behind him. It's the manner they have chosen to tell the story which is original and BRILLIANT. The actors are dead on. No pun intended. There is just enough humor to take off the hard crime edge. Without giving away too much, I can tell you that it's all "Elementary".

Find this show on your local PBS station and don't miss it. And, yes, for aficionados, Dr. Watson was recently in Afghanistan.

It's rare to experience anything this good but when it's on free TV it's BRILLIANT.

Rated 4.0 out of 4.0 reasons this review may not be BRILLIANT but it sure is one of personal thanks to the BBC folks and PBS. NOTE: another Robert Downey Jr./Jude Law (Sherlock Holmes 2009) film is also in the works. Since it's not due out till December 2011 this new TV version will hold over the die hard fans like me. And, maybe you. BRILLIANT.

Sherlock Holmes Sleuths On The Small Screen
By Scott Tunstall - FlickSided
November 10, 2010

With the glut of channels available on cable, satellite and FIOS these days, it might be surprising to learn that some of the best programming can still be found on PBS. Yes, the same network that airs Antiques Roadshow and opera. No, I’m not seventy years old, but I do feel a bit strange when I find myself rejecting the offerings on CBS, TNT, ESPN, FX and HBO in favor of public broadcasting.

Nevertheless, I love me a quality whodunit. As such, I’m a huge fan of Masterpiece Mystery!, which normally runs on Sunday nights where I dwell. The long-running PBS staple vacillates between contemporary detective stories and Victorian era puzzlers.

Their latest miniseries plucks the world’s most famous investigator, Sherlock Holmes, from his comfy 19th century confines and drops him into modern day London to solve three separate mysteries using his famous deductive reasoning. Joining him in his adventures is trusted partner Dr. John Watson, an ex-Army medic and Afghanistan war veteran. Together, the disagreeing duo delve into the evidence to aid the police in their crime-solving endeavors.

Holmes, expertly portrayed by Benedict Cumberbatch, is his normal eccentric self. He’s detached from everyday society, annoyingly arrogant, blatantly rude and very rarely wrong. Cumberbatch supplies him with a dry wit and a knowing grin. His tall, wiry and pallid frame is deceptively athletic and coiling with boundless energy. He’s also a whirlwind of words, facts and theories, which makes him a faithful representation of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s beloved creation.

Watson, played by the the would-be Bilbo Baggins, Martin Freeman, is roommate, confidant, servant, sounding board and protector. He’s drawn to Holmes’ idiosyncratic techniques and brutally honest personality. His desire to maintain a normal existence is in direct conflict with his need for action and danger. The reasonable part of him realizes Holmes is a sociopath, but the adrenaline junkie part of him doesn’t care.

Not to be left out, Inspector Lestrade appears in a recurring role as does Holmes’ enigmatic archenemy Moriarty, who actually reveals himself in typical evil fashion in the third movie, The Great Game. There’s also a heavy influx of 21st century conveniences, like Sherlock’s reliance on cell phones and Watson’s blogging, that serve to update Doyle’s classic cloak and dagger plots.

This trio of clever conundrums are fast-paced, deftly written and appropriately moody. The last one aired in the US this past Sunday, but you might be able to catch them in reruns. Or you can purchase the DVD which was released yesterday. Although not confirmed, there are rumors a second season of mysteries will air in Britain at some point in 2011. That means us Yanks will have to wait a long while before seeing new installments of this intricately sublime series. Bummer.

To sum up, if you’re a proponent of intelligent, unpredictable tales of murder, seek out Sherlock on the small screen. The game, as they say, is afoot.

A New Take on Sherlock
By Mark Wilson, Sci-Fi / Fantasy Guide
November 8, 2010

It's not sci-fi/fantasy, but the BBC's latest adaptation of the Sherlock Holmes story is of interest to sci-fi fans for a couple of reasons. First of all, it was developed and written by Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss, who've worked together on Doctor Who (Moffat is the current showrunner and head writer) after having separately created extremely successful projects of their own (Coupling, Jekyll; and The League of Gentlemen, respectively). Both will have recognized that the manic and occasionally unmoored time lord had more than a little Sherlock Holmes in him, and together they were inspired to try resetting the classic pairing of Holmes and Watson in the modern-day London of text messages and memory sticks.

The second reason is the recent announcement that this series's Dr. John Watson, Martin Freeman, will be the next Bilbo Baggins. That makes Sherlock, which comes to DVD and Blu-Ray this week, an ideal opportunity to watch Freeman in action and get a sense of just what he might bring to the role of Bilbo.

Over the years Holmes's appeal has never lessened, in part because of an increasing awareness of his antiheroic nature: as Sherlock makes clear, Holmes's insights hinge in part on a brusque but passive sociopathy that allows him to clear his thought processes of the detritus of everyday connections and useless information (like, say, the workings of the solar system). The more clear this becomes, the more difficult it is to present Holmes appealingly, but Moffat's experience on Who and especially Jekyll has educated him in the formulas necessary to do so.

In the context of the gruff, friendless, and coldly confident Sherlock Holmes, barely perceptible gestures of opening up to his flatmate, John Watson, and moments of crisis in which his ego and reason challenge each other become hugely compelling. Benedict Cumberbatch has Holmes's number, and knows exactly how to hint at chinks no one is meant to see.

What attracts Watson to Holmes is just as central to the essential story. (In a droll recognition of the modern setting, everyone from Mrs. Hudson on happily assumes that Holmes and Watson are a couple, which tends to exasperate both men.) In this version Watson is an army doctor just home from having been wounded in Afghanistan, now limping about London alone. A couple of key moments in the first story deftly reveal the nature of the hole that Holmes fills in Watson's life. Freeman is outstanding, and as much a reason to watch the show or more than Cumberbatch's modernized but still fundamentally alien Holmes.

The supporting cast is good as well: in particular, detective inspector Lestrade--another tricky role, and often made to simply look a fool--is well played by Rupert Graves, who gives us a policeman who wants to solve his own crimes but, faced with the inexplicable, turns to Holmes out of a desperate recognition that the police are out of their depth.

As for signs of Freeman's future in Middle-earth: Sherlock, far more than Freeman's earlier work, makes it abundantly clear that he's brilliant casting for Bilbo. He not only has great presence here, but he communicates both stalwart strength and nervous vulnerability that bodes very well for The Hobbit--and there are even some mannerisms of speech that recall Ian Holm, who played the older Bilbo in Fellowship of the Ring. Freeman's John Watson is, oddly enough, a pleasant appetizer for his Bilbo son of Bungo, of The Hill, Hobbiton.

Sherlock has been airing on PBS Masterpiece Mystery. The two-disc home video set features the three double-length stories, "Unlocking Sherlock", and audio commentaries on two of the stories by Moffat and the two stars.

Reissue, Reboot, Reboot: The Last and Latest "Sherlock"
By Eric Freeman - The Awl
November 7, 2010

Tonight at 9 p.m., PBS will air the third and final installment of the short series “Sherlock," created for the BBC by Steven Moffat and Mark Gatis, both of latest-iteration “Doctor Who" fame. “Sherlock" stars the stereotypically named Benedict Cumberbatch in the role of Sherlock Holmes and “The Office"’s Martin Freeman as trusty sidekick and audience surrogate Dr. John Watson. The mechanics of the show should be familiar to anyone who’s ever encountered Holmes in literature, radio, television or film. A series of murders and crimes confound all authorities and laymen. Enter Sherlock, master of logic and deduction. He knows all, finds clues others can’t, and ties every bit of information together in a nice little bow of a solution. It’s all very entertaining, clever and even emotionally involving, more in line with Kenneth Branagh’s “Wallander" series than the old “Rumpole of the Bailey" mysteries my parents watch religiously. Except now Holmes lives in contemporary London and seems like the kind of borderline-autistic bookworm who wouldn’t be terribly out of place on “The Big Bang Theory." He doesn't get that a date is a two-person enterprise, though at least he still hardly ever tells Watson where he's going. But why update Sherlock and Watson at all?

For one thing, the most essential traits of the character still resonate with audiences. Viewers can't get enough of barely functional detectives with no lives outside of their work. The modern television landscape is populated with all manner of Holmes facsimiles: Dr. House on “House" (yes: house/"homes"), Dr. Cal Lightman on “Lie to Me"; you could even make the case for Bones on “Bones."

But the traditional Holmes differs from most of these characters in one important respect: he is an expert in everything. House knows that every disease isn’t lupus, but put him on the trail of a gang of Chinese smugglers and he’d be useless. Holmes, on the other hand, knows the effects of beating someone senseless in sub-zero temperatures and stands as an authority on intricate cryptographic systems. There is no case which alludes his faculties, because he can think through anything and has the physical abilities to face criminals in hand-to-hand combat. He’s like David Caruso on “CSI: Miami," just with enough wit to not have to rely on one-liners.

Yet for the original Holmes, one aspect of his skillset appears quite antiquated. When A Study in Scarlet, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s first Holmes novel, was published in 1887, this brand of encyclopedic knowledge was indicative of a growing sense of scientific optimism. Coming on the heels of the scientific revolution, Sherlock and other fictional detectives were characters whose gifts depended on both the scientific method and the fruits of scientific discovery. He was in that sense thoroughly modern, a man who trusted and depended on the latest innovation (and all that had come before, as well) to solve cases. What he described as elementary was in fact on the cutting edge. Science and its ever-expanding knowledge base clarifies and explains the world. Through science, Holmes creates a more harmonious and explicable world.

The new Sherlock, however, lives in an information age where encyclopedic knowledge is relatively unexceptional. With global search engines and Wikipedia, even people with poor memorization skills can enlist an army of facts with a few keystrokes. Remember the iPhone commercial where a disembodied pair of hands identifies a bird merely by its chirping? In the Victorian era, only Holmes would have that kind of information. Now anyone with access to the App Store is in good shape.

This leveling of the factual playing field is not necessarily a positive development. We have seen the outcome of the scientific revolution, and it’s unfortunately a bit of a mess. Cue a host of technophobic cliches: there’s no privacy, information is freely revealed with no regard for whom might get hurt, employers can reach workers at any hour in any location, our attention spans are pulled in too many directions by exponentially multiplying points of interest. There is too much informational feedback, and we cannot deal with it all.

The new Holmes is as much a critique of knowledge as his original self was an embodiment of it. And he plays equally important roles in solving London’s crimes and in man’s relationship with this new digitized world. In the first episode of the new series, Holmes visits a murder scene that confounds Scotland Yard. The word “rache" has been scratched into the wooden floor by the dead woman—it becomes instantly clear to all that she has been poisoned and attempted to spell out a final clue, in much the same way as the dead curator at the beginning of “The Da Vinci Code." Police investigators have found that “rache" is German for “revenge" and attempt to parse its meaning. But only Holmes looks deeper and intuits that “rache" is actually an unfinished “Rachel." Within a manner of seconds, Holmes also rifles off a number of personal details about the dead woman—that she is a serial adulterer, that she carried a suitcase, that she was only in London for one night—simply by looking at her ring and the water spots on her stockings.

These are personal details that eluded every other investigator in the room. Apart from showcasing Holmes’s intellect—which has always been a part of the character—they prove that he is especially adept at picking out personal details and turning them into facts that cannot presumably be found just by digging in the deceased’s Facebook profile or Twitter account. To put it another way, he’s refreshingly analog in a world where information has become increasingly digitized. He retrieves information that eludes the technology-reliant investigators.

Sherlock’s elegant solutions to crimes only amplify his human qualities. When information is readily available, it often just exists, sitting in a data bank for everyone to see and not touch.

The animating intelligence of a brilliant detective is therefore necessary to give that information context, to provide a connective meaning that ties every clue together. As in the original stories, Holmes acts as a positive ordering agent. But in an information-rich and disordered world, his skill of clarification takes on greater importance than it could in Victorian England. Holmes has always solved cases by synthesizing as much information as possible, but 19th-century society was ultimately built on familiar associations. In the modern world, the act of synthesis connects increasingly disparate and unrelated worlds. Holmes creates an interrelated network where one did not previously exist.

Conan Doyle’s world is ultimately simple—while Holmes is an ordering agent, the nefarious villain Professor Moriarty creates a criminal underworld that’s ultimately just as organized. But in modern society, everything is so undifferentiated that the true villain of the new series is not the unseen Moriarty—who up to now has not factored into the proceedings for more than a few minutes—but the ever-present state of information overload and a lack of a universal societal fabric. It’s no shock that Sherlock’s brother Mycroft, who in the literature stands as a deductive genius with little care for positive social change, is portrayed in the series as an unfeeling government official who deals in surveillance and desires raw data for its own sake—there is no narrative, only facts. Next to him Holmes is a superhero, not just a detective. In that incarnation, he is the only thing keeping everyone from falling into the abyss.

Our postmodern Holmes is not the person as thinking machine, which he often appears to be in the original stories, but a distinct antisocial personality who also happens to be exceedingly amazing at solving crimes. His brusque manner with people isn’t off-putting to the viewer, but endearing: it proves that he’s a person. As played by Cumberbatch, Holmes is charismatic even as he treats an adoring morgue worker like a speck of dirt. His reluctance to engage in profound emotional relationships with people is positive if only because, unlike a computer, he acknowledges them in the first place.

The creators of “Sherlock" don’t seem to understand that the central conflict of the show is between Holmes and the world around him, not between Holmes and Moriarty. Even if Holmes brings down the Moriarty criminal network tonight and saves the day, he can’t do anything about the fact that Watson was injured in action during a boondoggle of a war in Aghanistan, or that the bankers in the second episode have no scruples, or that the dead woman in the first case can only memorialize an aborted child by setting its would-be name as her email password. Contemporary London is a complicated, difficult information society, with problems that go far beyond having a really effective bad guy as a resident. Holmes can explain the stories of a few select victims. But what good are his efforts when there are an infinite number of infinitely accessible cases to be solved?

'Sherlock' Cast Hopes For U.S. Success
Series already renewed by BBC for a season two
Digital Spy
November 1, 2010

The UK sensation “Sherlock” has arrived in the U.S., airing as a part of the PBS series “Masterpiece Mystery,” and series co-creators Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffatt are hoping that it will strike a chord with American viewers.

Gatiss and Moffatt are best-known for the international hit “Doctor Who” and are self-professed "Holmes" geeks since childhood. “Sherlock” places the iconic characters of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. John Watson in current-day London for a contemporary telling of their mis-adventures.

An exceptional cast is led by Benedict Cumberbatch as Sherlock Holmes and Martin Freeman as Dr. John Watson. Martin Freeman hopes the American audience will react as favorably as the British audience to the modern adaptation.

"It was some of the best writing I had probably ever read for television,” series star Martin Freeman said. “I hope that Americans go with it, because the most important thing about the Sherlock Holmes stories isn't the frock coat. It's the essence of what he is, and the essence of what the [Holmes and Watson] relationship is. And chasing bad guys."

During its debut run in the UK, Sherlock's three 90-minute episodes averaged 7.2 million viewers earning the show a pick-up for a second season to air in 2011.

"We've been overwhelmed by the warmth of response to our new Sherlock Holmes and John Watson and can't wait to take them on three new adventures next year,” Gatiss and Moffatt said, regarding the second season pick-up. “There'll be baffling new puzzles, old friends and new enemies. And we might well be seeing the cold master of logic and reason unexpectedly falling."

Some hints Moffatt revealed about the second season were the words, "Adler, Hound, Reichenbach." Those words are all references to original stories about Sherlock Holmes. Irene Adler is a character from the short story A Scandal in Bohemia, and is considered a love interest for Holmes; The Hound of the Baskervilles was one of the four Sherlock Holmes novels written by Arthur Conan Doyle; and Reichenbach is the location where Holmes and his archenemy, Moriarty, have their final battle.

“Sherlock” airs Sundays at 9 p.m. ET as part of PBS' “Masterpiece Mystery.”

Email: lmr909@hotmail.com