Also, with the context provided by that article it seems the remark about outdoing the original was not actually in reference to the story change, but in what of the story remained the same. That they outdid Doyle’s version of the fake death. That is certainly correct, so I’m glad to get that clarification.
bookworm wrote:I cannot process the amazingness of this.
Well, you're pretty amazing, so I thought it was fitting. And no, I am not flirting, of which I just know someone is going to accuse me. I am merely speaking the truth that bookworm is quite awesome.
The theories about how Sherlock survived are fascinating; I've seen lots of interesting, plausible ones on tumblr. I also watched the teaser trailer last night and am still not over it. Y U SO SEXY, SHERLOCK.
Last edited by Aeva on Sat Aug 03, 2013 6:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
But break my heart, for I must hold my tongue. --Hamlet. StrongNChrist ~ Remembered Forever Men who kill without reason cannot be reasoned with. --Stoic the Vast Let's go down together for one more chance. The skeletons are screaming for one last dance. --Hawthorne Heights Tell 'em turn it up 'til they can't no more. Let's get this thing shakin' like a disco ball. This is your last warning, a courtesy call. --TFK You have nice manners for a thief and a liar. --Smaug I know you mean well, but leave me be. Yes, I'm alone, but I'm alone and free. --Elsa
Aeva wrote: And no, I am not flirting, of which I just know someone is going to accuse me. I am merely speaking the truth that bookworm is quite awesome.
Aeva wrote: And no, I am not flirting, of which I just know someone is going to accuse me. I am merely speaking the truth that bookworm is quite awesome.
Wow, somebody's being a little defensive there.
I prefer to think of it as a preemptive strike.
But break my heart, for I must hold my tongue. --Hamlet. StrongNChrist ~ Remembered Forever Men who kill without reason cannot be reasoned with. --Stoic the Vast Let's go down together for one more chance. The skeletons are screaming for one last dance. --Hawthorne Heights Tell 'em turn it up 'til they can't no more. Let's get this thing shakin' like a disco ball. This is your last warning, a courtesy call. --TFK You have nice manners for a thief and a liar. --Smaug I know you mean well, but leave me be. Yes, I'm alone, but I'm alone and free. --Elsa
Aeva wrote:Well, you're pretty amazing, so I thought it was fitting. And no, I am not flirting, of which I just know someone is going to accuse me. I am merely speaking the truth that bookworm is quite awesome.
I was actually referring to those websites. I was still overcome by the discovery.
But I welcome your compliment without reading any implications into it.
Shennifer wrote:bookworm, I know you said that the rest of the episodes aren't as important as this one but I'm still curious about your thoughts on them
I’ll omit The Blind Banker and The Great Game from this because neither of those were really reimaginings of original stories, but were their own stories for the show infused with elements of several various Holmes stories.
A Study in Pink was quite good.
Lots of details were changed, but the story was kept the same to a surprising degree. It played out more or less the same way, save the conclusion. (And of course small things like four victims instead of two, stuff like that. Those kinds of deviations aren’t even worth noting because it’s to be expected in this kind of retelling of a story.) Sherlock’s deductions unfolded along pretty much the same route as the book, and he took mostly the same kind of actions. (For example, using the deduction that the killer left behind the suitcase the same way in the book he uses the deduction he left behind a ring, to lure him into revealing himself.) I also caught something that may or may not have been an intentional nod to the original story, I’m not sure because it’s so small. In the book a policeman briefly suspects Sherlock may be involved in the murder because he knew so much about what had happened. (Through his observations.) In the episode, Watson briefly thinks Sherlock may have something to do with the murder because he had the lady’s suitcase. Not sure if that’s an intended parallel, but I thought it was neat. The purpose of ‘Rache’ was different as well, but that was because of the new ending.
The resolution was where all the change really was. Instead of just figuring out who the culprit was and turning him over to the police, Sherlock becomes his final victim. Instead of the murderer acting out of a personal revenge, he’s acting for Moriarty. Which they had to change to accommodate the series’ running underplot. So his reason is different, but his motivation is somewhat the same. He is still dying so he has nothing to lose, and he is still doing what he’s doing for a ‘good’ reason. It’s out of concern for his children this time instead of avenging his former lover is all.
So all in all it was a very well done retelling. Again, different details, as is expected, but most all of the actual story left intact. Except for the Mormon stuff of course. And, as I already said, the reimagining of Sherlock and Watson’s first meeting was excellent. A perfect update to a modern setting.
I thought Scandal in Belgravia was a fine adaptation.
You say this is the one that gets the majority of criticism, I don’t really understand why. It was done very well. The new adaptation of the story keeps entirely in step with the original, except the fact that instead of just blackmailing one royal party by chance she now makes an intentional business of it. But the plot and the way it unfolds are right in line with the book.
There were many additions to the story, if that’s what the critics are referring to, but I don’t see why anyone would take issue with them. They were necessary, for if the story was kept only to what was in the original it would hardly be full enough for this show. This was one of the Holmes short stories after all, not one of the novels. I didn’t mind the additions, they were perfectly in character and fit right into the mood of the story. And the heart of the tale was entirely untouched. Sherlock attempts to thwart a blackmail threat concerning a photograph, uses his cleverness to get very close, but Irene Adler stays one step ahead of him. New to the episode of course is all the stuff concerning what else she was involved in, which was quite a jump but an understandable one in the new direction the story was taken, and that Moriarty was behind it, which once again is a result of the running plot of the show. Also, the after story of her starting a new life while everyone thinks she’s dead. But that part is a perfectly fitting adaptation, considering the new circumstances of the story. In the original she changes her ways and begins a new life as well, it’s just with a husband instead of on her own.
So really, this was a very decent retelling. They took the essence of the story and put some real plot behind it. It was quite different in specific details, but very similar in the actual story. I’m not really sure where the criticism comes from. You shouldn’t expect these shows to be exactly like their source stories. This series is not meant to take Doyle’s mysteries and put them directly on the screen, this is a retelling of the original stories. Based on them, but with some new spins. The stories should not be identical, only familiar.
I’ve already said The Hounds of Baskerville was absolutely fantastic.
It was so incredibly impressive to see how they envisioned a modern version of the story.
There isn’t a need to go over the differences in the stories because they are clearly apparent. So much so that the episode is indeed almost a different story entirely than the book, in plot. Due to the key change that the hound is the result of a hallucination now rather than a real creature. (Though in both stories, the impact the creature has is magnified by the power of suggestion on the target.) The motivation of the culprit is likewise altered, from a straightforward (and common) plot to eliminate descendants in the way of an inheritance, to now being concerned with complex matters of warfare research. But despite all these changes the heart of the story is unchanged. In both the book and the episode, the inherent motivation is a need to get the members of this family out of the way, and the lore of the hound was used in the book and created in the episode to accomplish this task.
This is the absolutely quintessential example of what this series is. Taking the original story, pulling it into the modern age, putting a fresh spin on the details, but keeping the essence of the narrative the same. Every part of it was simply perfect. It was a completely new story, yet somehow entirely familiar.
And I’ll revisit The Reichenbach Fall, since we’re going through particulars here.
I’ll reiterate that as a reimagining of the story itself, at least the main part of it, it was quite good. Extremely clever, very solid, and well laid out. It maintained the general idea and purpose of The Final Problem, being this drawn out struggle between Sherlock and Moriarty finally coming to a face to face confrontation. I appreciated how Moriarty had everything so perfectly planned out, every single detail, so that he was certain things would play out his way up to the climax. It was very fitting. And I already noted that the inescapable deadlock did that aspect of the story justice. So really, as an adaptation of the original story, it was truly quite good - except for the one detail that I can’t accept. I will simply never agree that anyone but Doyle has the right to destroy the reputation of the greatest detective figure in history. If he never did it, no one else should. Sherlock Holmes is an icon, you just don’t do something like that.
In fact, that is the exact opposite of what the story is supposed to be. Sherlock’s death was not the result of the disgrace of his name; it was the culmination of his crowning achievement that would secure his legacy forever. He spent his final weeks building the case against Moriarty and succeeded in breaking his criminal ring and apprehending every one of his accomplices, with the mastermind alone eluding him. But he was able to bring an end to him through sacrificing himself, a trade he was perfectly willing to make as this was the pinnacle accomplishment of his entire career: to finally free London from the Napoleon of Crime.
So while this episode retains the excellent adaptation abilities of the others, it loses the other important half of the equation, the retelling. It’s a different story now, the heart, the purpose, was thrown out.
I haven't read the original story behind The Hounds of Baskerville or The Reichenbach Fall, so I can't say how they compare.
About Scandal in Belgravia
I agree that Irene stays one step ahead of Sherlock and that her being involved with Moriarty was added for this specific adaptation (I didn't always think this, Reading what you wrote puts it into perspective for me. However, in the original story Irene wins fair and square. She isn't beaten and she does not need rescuing. Some fans have strong opinions about how this episode ended, what with Sherlock figuring it out and defeating Irene rather than the other way around. Also, Sherlock saving her life at the end seemed rather implausible. Also some have a problem with how Moffat portrayed Miss Adler, but I won't get into that.
Last edited by Shennifer on Tue Aug 20, 2013 7:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ah, I see. That’s fair, but I think it’s expecting too much to be exactly the same. Yes in this version they’re only nearly equals, since Sherlock does win out in the very end, but remember that this is an entirely different story. She isn’t just in a tricky situation now, she’s fully entangled in a deadly one. There are so many sides wanting to use her for this or that she becomes too involved to handle it alone. It’s perfectly reasonable for things to take that turn, and it doesn’t make her any weaker as a character. She handled herself for as long as she can, things just got too deep at the end.
The ultimate end, with Sherlock, I agree is farfetched. I approve of the idea, like I said it’s a fitting parallel to the original ending for the new story, but it probably could have been done in a more probable way.
what I have come to like about Sherlock and Irene is that they eventually come to respect each others' abilities and brains. an interesting team, at least for a little while
personally I'm a bit torn on whether I wanted her to die or not. Not that I hate her, but it might've made more sense than Sherlock magically rescuing her
That's the way I feel about it. I mean, I sort of assumed he was going to rescue her after Mycroft said, "It would take Sherlock Holmes to fool me..."; but I do think she ought to have faced the consequences of her actions. She played a risky game, and Sherlock beat her in the end. I understand his admiration for her and why the ending was written the way it was, but I still wish it were different lol.
Last edited by Aeva on Thu Aug 22, 2013 7:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
But break my heart, for I must hold my tongue. --Hamlet. StrongNChrist ~ Remembered Forever Men who kill without reason cannot be reasoned with. --Stoic the Vast Let's go down together for one more chance. The skeletons are screaming for one last dance. --Hawthorne Heights Tell 'em turn it up 'til they can't no more. Let's get this thing shakin' like a disco ball. This is your last warning, a courtesy call. --TFK You have nice manners for a thief and a liar. --Smaug I know you mean well, but leave me be. Yes, I'm alone, but I'm alone and free. --Elsa
Okay, I’ve watched The Reichenbach Fall again. It was tough to get through because the second time around it made me even angrier to watch the setup take hold, but I kept with it because I wanted to look for the clue.
I didn’t really want to get involved with the theorizing because I think it’s silly. If you just wait for the next premiere everything will be explained, you don’t need to figure it out now. And if you develop a really complex solution, and it turns out to be wrong, you’ll look silly. But I can’t help it, I’ll go ahead and share my thoughts. I only have a few small ones anyway, nothing elaborate.
Since this time I watched I was specifically looking for some kind of clue, there was one moment that really stuck out to me as interesting. We know Sherlock knew what was going to happen and set up a plan with Molly. So the solution was already in place, he just had to make sure it worked. I noticed that when Sherlock is saying his goodbye to Watson he made absolutely sure that he stayed in one specific spot on the street and was never able to pay attention to anything around him. Remember that when he first exits the cab and starts toward the building Sherlock stops him and backs him up to a certain point. Also, when he attempts to make another start at the building, Sherlock’s exact words were “Stay exactly where you are. Don’t move. Keep your eyes fixed on me.”
That would seem to suggest that whatever he had set up was in the process of being prepared, so he had to ensure Watson didn’t go near it, or notice it. He made sure his attention was always on him up on the roof. This would indicate that something was being done down there on the street to make the fall survivable. Exactly what, I don’t know.
The mattress idea is the most intuitive, but it seems too simple and too complex at the same time. It would take some effort to get it set up and then removed in that short a period, and if that was what had happened everyone down there but Watson would have seen it. That can’t be the case, because everyone has to believe the suicide was real. So it couldn’t have been something that obvious. Also, I believe the outline on the pavement suggested to be an indicator for where to place the mattress is actually just an inconsequential marking for something else. You can see similar marks on the other side of the street in other scenes.
So I may not know exactly what the solution was, but I think I may have found the reference to it.
bookworm wrote:Okay, I’ve watched The Reichenbach Fall again. It was tough to get through because the second time around it made me even angrier to watch the setup take hold, but I kept with it because I wanted to look for the clue.
I didn’t really want to get involved with the theorizing because I think it’s silly. If you just wait for the next premiere everything will be explained, you don’t need to figure it out now. And if you develop a really complex solution, and it turns out to be wrong, you’ll look silly. But I can’t help it, I’ll go ahead and share my thoughts. I only have a few small ones anyway, nothing elaborate.
Since this time I watched I was specifically looking for some kind of clue, there was one moment that really stuck out to me as interesting. We know Sherlock knew what was going to happen and set up a plan with Molly. So the solution was already in place, he just had to make sure it worked. I noticed that when Sherlock is saying his goodbye to Watson he made absolutely sure that he stayed in one specific spot on the street and was never able to pay attention to anything around him. Remember that when he first exits the cab and starts toward the building Sherlock stops him and backs him up to a certain point. Also, when he attempts to make another start at the building, Sherlock’s exact words were “Stay exactly where you are. Don’t move. Keep your eyes fixed on me.”
That would seem to suggest that whatever he had set up was in the process of being prepared, so he had to ensure Watson didn’t go near it, or notice it. He made sure his attention was always on him up on the roof. This would indicate that something was being done down there on the street to make the fall survivable. Exactly what, I don’t know.
The mattress idea is the most intuitive, but it seems too simple and too complex at the same time. It would take some effort to get it set up and then removed in that short a period, and if that was what had happened everyone down there but Watson would have seen it. That can’t be the case, because everyone has to believe the suicide was real. So it couldn’t have been something that obvious. Also, I believe the outline on the pavement suggested to be an indicator for where to place the mattress is actually just an inconsequential marking for something else. You can see similar marks on the other side of the street in other scenes.
So I may not know exactly what the solution was, but I think I may have found the reference to it.
This fandom has waited a long time, bookworm. A year and a half, actually. We've had to maintain our sanity somehow, and coming up with different theories (not only about Sherlock's survival, but about everything else) is something that's helped us along the way.
Off of that, bookworm, which I think is brilliant, is the thought some people had about the drug in Baskerville. Depending on how long the drug can last in one's system, Sherlock might have somehow re-drugged John. That along with being knocked over by the cyclist would have been enough to trigger it... perhaps.
Love you always, SnC "A question that sometimes drives me hazy: am I or are the others crazy?" -Albert Einstein
And no, I am not flirting, of which I just know someone is going to accuse me. 
I am merely speaking the truth that bookworm is quite awesome.
Y U SO SEXY, SHERLOCK.
I was still overcome by the discovery.
Now, I just want the answers. And the next season 
