Although, if I miss an opportunity to shout how fantastic, how perfectly cast Benedict Cumberbatch is, my brain may implode. So I will say it. That man has me in utter awe of his portrayal. When I first read canon, with the sole exception of HOUN (which I read first), I basically went through the stories in near chronological order. Or, more accurately, pretty much the order they were written, so that my first impression of Holmes was a young-ish man from the earlier time-line stories I’d started out with. I have a very, very clear mental image of him, so quite literally the first few minutes of ‘A Study In Pink’ had blown my mind just with Cumberbatch’s “look”. Shallow, perhaps, but I am a Canon purist and madly in love with those stories, so it becomes difficult for me to equate an actor as the character if they do not somewhat resemble Watson’s descriptions of him.

Then, Cumberbatch went and beat the devil out of that corpse with all the enthusiasm of Sherlock Holmes. He had me from that point on, and within maybe 20 min of that episode, I was comparing him to Jeremy Brett, who was, up until then, the only one I felt who ever gave SH proper depth. Brett took a bit of getting used to, as I’d seen the later episodes first, and was not impressed. It was probably part way through the Adventure series that I became enamored of him, only to have his performance grow on me each time I watched. But Cumberbatch was an instant favorite, he clicked with me so completely.

Freeman was not at all what I had in mind for Watson, mostly due to his appearance, but this man is literally Dr. John H. Watson plucked straight from the pages. He gives the character such depth, makes him so well rounded and not simply that guy who follows Sherlock Holmes around. He is given as much air time as Holmes, he is shown as a competent doctor, an average, kind hearted man to balance out Holmes’ arrogance, his mercurial temperament. What Freeman’s Watson *isn’t* also speaks volumes about the talent of the writers, their love/understanding of Canon. I will probably be tarred and feathered for saying so, but I HATED Jude Law’s hostile Watson I was surprised how much I liked RDJ’s portrayal (sans scruffy appearance) but Law ruined the movie for me. Moffat & Gatiss proved without a doubt that Watson can be fleshed out, have a background story, be an intelligent, useful friend to Holmes, a man to be relied upon no matter what — without making him hostile or resentful. This is a Watson who loves his Holmes. He gets annoyed with the arrogance (as Watson of Canon occasionally did), they have their disagreements, but the friendship shines through beautifully.

Time will tell, but so far IMHO, this is one of the best, if not the single best adaptation in existence. Updating it to the modern era has made it as fresh & compelling to us as it must have been to the Victorians reading SCAN in The Strand for the first time. The only disappointment is having to wait until this time next year for more episodes *cries*

Cress :

@admin
I don’t like how in the episodes he calls himself a “high-functioning sociopath” because I don’t think it really fits at all…

I completely agree, with everything you’ve said on the subject. There is such a need today to classify, classify, classify (probably the reason such vast numbers of children today have been diagnoses with ADHD and the like). The world isn’t black and white, and just because someone doesn’t fit into the mould doesn’t mean they deserve the stigma of being labelled a sociopath.

Although, in this instance, I also think Sherlock has self-diagnosed. Or else was diagnoses as a teenager, and let’s face it, all teenagers are sociopaths.

Also, I’m sure as they make more episodes, we’ll see non-murder cases and a greater collection of villains. The first arch, it was sort of mandatory that they use Moriarty. Most Sherlockians expect it.

As for the Holmes/Watson relationship, I do understand your point, but at the same time, I think it went too far. Canon!Watson shows signs of irritation at living with Holmes constantly, but there is always an undercurrent of warmth and affection. Even early on, he clearly adores Holmes. Episode 2!Watson showed none of that warmth and affection. Had I not known Canon, I would have assumed he hated Sherlock and was actively looking for a new place to live. That’s what I meant when I said I felt it was out of character.

I do agree that John would be annoyed with Sherlock, and that they would fight, but I still don’t think the animosity from John was warranted. Having John follow Sherlock along on his cases without an underlying friendship rather makes John the asshole (using Sherlock to alleviate boredom). And John makes a careful point to deny any friendship with Sherlock (twice). I don’t see it.

I, too, prefer it when they fight, but not to the point of hating one another –and I was very convinced in episode 2 that John hated Sherlock. That is where my complaint stems from, and I’m sticking to it. But then again, I adore the Watson of Canon, so I prefer my Watson to remain as true to Doyle’s character as possible.

Moriarty should not be so overused, when instead we could have villains like Moran, John Clay (REDH), Dr. Roylott (SPEC), Milverton, Stapleton (HOUN), Hugo Oberstein (SECO) etc. The canon is full of really neat villains that just need some adapting to the modern day. Moriarty does not need to be injected into every case, nor does every case need to be a murder. Why can’t we get any theft or blackmail cases? Or even the wonderful treasure hunt of MUSG?

See this post: http://community.livejournal.com/sherlockbbc/20492.html

I don’t know if there’s any DVD commentary for the Blind Banker, and don’t have any DVDs yet anyway.

You said, “were it not for the way episode 1 ended and episode 3 evolved. It didn’t fit within the confines of the other 2 established episodes, and it didn’t fit at all with Canon.”

In episode 1, John had not even officially moved into the flat yet, so he had not experienced how horrible a roommate Sherlock was yet. That’s why he didn’t argue as much, although he did get irritated at being called to the flat just so Sherlock could use his phone. I’m sure he would get more angry and annoyed if Sherlock continued this behavior on other cases, after they had become partners. Episode 2 takes place after they’ve been together a few months, so that’s where the new tension is coming from (along with Sherlock’s actual poor behavior in the episode). Episode 3 started with them fighting to the point that John decided to spend the night at Sarah’s, so that seems a perfect continuation of episode 2’s relationship. Sherlock and John becoming friends and partners does not mean that they’re never going to be fighting with each other. I’d prefer they fight rather than John just passively putting up with everything. He is amazingly tolerant about many things, but there comes a point where a human being can’t take anymore.

In the canon, Watson writes of their arguments about cocaine, the deductions about Watson’s brother, and Holmes’s scathing opinions about Watson’s stories. They do indeed fight, and I prefer them that way. I actually find certain passages in the canon, such as in EMPT, when Watson doesn’t say a damn thing to interrupt Holmes’s insensitivity and arrogance, to feel quite unreal and false. No human being could possibly be that selfless and patient and forgiving, in my opinion. I want Watson to fight back, or at least vent to his therapist. He can’t just keep it all in.

As for Moriarty - of course he’s over-used, but at the same time, he is Holmes’ only Canon-based nemesis. Kind of makes him important, even if he doesn’t show up often. The Adler heroine thing baffles me, because there’s no justification for it in Canon.

As for my note (re VALL) that was directed more at the media than at you (or anyone else reading this blog). I’ve read several articles which credit DANC but not VALL, and to be honest, there really is very little resemblance to DANC (aside from the symbols, but even that is where the similarities end — I for one felt the Elsie Cubitt/Soo Lin connection was exceedingly weak, and am almost convinced it was unintended. I can understand why you (and others) might want to credit DANC, but I didn’t (and still don’t) make the connection (and I intentionally re-read DANC after the episode aired to check). The VALL cipher/book connection was blindingly obvious (as have all other Canon-based elements) even without the addition of Porlock, so either the episode’s writer was trying for subtle and hitting obscure, or you (and others) are reaching.

But, to each their own. Do you know if there commentary for episode 2? I suspect that may clear up some confusion.

“Hoyay” is short for “Homoeroticism, yay!” It is basically equivalent to “slash.” I definitely agree with you about the overuse of Moriarty and Irene Adler.

You say, “Also, I feel it essential to point out that the book/symbols cipher is not taken, as so many seem to think, from The Dancing Men, but rather, from The Valley of Fear. Does no one recall Porlock? Re-read the story, please.”

No, DANC was involved in the plot. The cipher in VALL was a telegram sent by Porlock and then translated at leisure from a book. There was no such Porlock in the Blind Banker, though there was a book which was the key to the code. In the episode, the ciphers were spray-painted on walls to look like vandalism, which is more like how the codes were featured in DANC. Also, they translated Elsie Cubitt’s history in Chicago to Soo Lin’s backstory with the criminal gang in China. So DANC was indeed a large portion of the plot, even if it was solved by VALL’s solution. What a rubbish plot, though. If only it had been a bank robbery or something. They don’t need serial killers or criminal gangs in every dang episode.

It bothers me the way many adaptations make Moriarty a recurring villain or archenemy of Holmes, because it takes Moriarty’s role way beyond what it was in canon. Just as Sherlockians, and adaptations, have a tendency to build up Irene Adler as “the heroine,” I think Moriarty gets exaggerated as “THE villain.” Even assuming Holmes didn’t make him up, he’s really not in canon that much.