As a consummate fan of The Dark Knight Detective, I am also a fan (even going back to childhood) of his inspirations. One such inspiration is a figure whom many deem the original detective, and a master of deductive reasoning, the fictitious Sherlock Holmes.
Recently I've been enjoying the excellent BBC television series, 'The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes' on Netflix, starring Jeremy Brett. I was first introduced to this remarkable program back in late Jr. High/early High School when my parents would watch 'Mystery' on PBS every Thursday night. Quite a few of the shows on 'Mystery' were of British origin, and none of them impressed me so much as Sherlock Holmes.
I've also read several of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's original stories published in British newspapers, and my respect for Jeremy Brett's portrayal of Holmes, along with this series' recounting of the stories has only been reinforced by this. They are highly accurate and fascinating to watch or read, in my humble opinion.
Which brings me to the trailers and commercials I've seen lately for the new Sherlock Holmes film starring Robert Downey Jr. While I have no doubt this movie will be fun, action-packed, witty and highly enjoyable overall, I am certain of this; it will be no Sherlock Holmes story.
The Holmes depicted in these ads is definitely brilliant, intelligent and clever. He is quick-witted and I'm sure he is also an amazing detective. He is also a womanizer, slob, vagabond and rogue - all qualities that Holmes would never have.
If the writers, director and producers of this film believe that 'artistic license' is a sufficient reason for these alterations to Holmes' character, they are sadly mistaken. Holmes' gentlemanly nature, his nearly OCD level of hygiene and his use of violence only as a last resort are all just as much a part of him as Batman's cape is to The Dark Knight.
In short, I may go and see Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law in this 19th Century action film, but to call it 'Sherlock Holmes' would be an insult.
Posts
