A Study in Sherlock (with SPOILERS) - the stories (and celebrating Sir Arthur Conan Doyle)

edited November 2019 in General Movies & TV Posts: 669
Warner Bros. has already announced a third installment in their Sherlock Holmes series and the first draft is being produced with screenwriter Drew Pearce writing the script. Presumably, the film will be coming in 2014, not much else is known if Robert Downey Jr. will be returning to portray the character of Holmes or not.

http://www.deadline.com/2011/10/warner-bros-ready-for-sherlock-holmes-3/
«13456723

Comments

  • Posts: 5,767
    Seems inevitable.

    Although I don´t really catch on to the first two films. I find them a bit bloated.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 18,191
    I'm really into the SH films but I can honestly say I lack SH "experience". I never read any of the ACD novels and the only film I ever watched besides Guy Richie's is the Hammer production starring Peter Cushing and Chris Lee. As far as I can judge though, these RD Jr versions are quite the fun to watch. I welcome a third film as long as they keep the quality up.
  • Posts: 7,809
    so now 2 Films I am looking forward to in 2014 Sherlock Holmes 3 and Bond 24.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,251
    It will all depend on the box office of the second film though, which looks like it will gross less than the original but with a higher budget.
  • Posts: 406
    haven't seen the second one yet, but hopefully it'll be as good as the first so bring on the 3rd installment!!
  • Posts: 11,425
    these new films are fun. cant beat basil rathbone and nigel bruce tho.
  • tqbtqb
    Posts: 986
    DarthDimi wrote:
    I'm really into the SH films but I can honestly say I lack SH "experience". I never read any of the ACD novels and the only film I ever watched besides Guy Richie's is the Hammer production starring Peter Cushing and Chris Lee. As far as I can judge though, these RD Jr versions are quite the fun to watch. I welcome a third film as long as they keep the quality up.

    novels are quite different but good. The movies are good too. The novels portray (in my opinion) Sherlock as less charismatic than how Robert Downey Plays him. http://www-deadline-com.vimg.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/sherlockholmes110914000424.jpg
  • Posts: 1,856
    Yay a belated Christmas Preasent
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 It was this or the priesthood.
    Posts: 28,231
    I can't wait. This film series is brilliant fun and very entertaining. They make Holmes fans proud!
    DarthDimi wrote:
    I'm really into the SH films but I can honestly say I lack SH "experience". I never read any of the ACD novels and the only film I ever watched besides Guy Richie's is the Hammer production starring Peter Cushing and Chris Lee. As far as I can judge though, these RD Jr versions are quite the fun to watch. I welcome a third film as long as they keep the quality up.

    :O WHAT?! :-O @Dimi you need to get a Conan Doyle collection of Holmes short stories and get reading. You are missing out on such a brilliant body of work. Also watch some Jeremy Brett and the Sherlock BBC series. The best part of watching all the Sherlock Holmes adaptions is that they sneak in little details from the short stories that fans smirk at, while nobody else knows what they are raving about. I highly recommend the short stories and novels to everyone.
  • Posts: 12,009
    i have not seen the first two yet but i do like the SH series. i own all the Rathbone and Bruce adventures! Very enjoyable. Will take a look at these two as RDJ and JL look like they have a good chemistry going on.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded Dancing at midnight under the BeBop Moon
    Posts: 11,736
    I love Holmes - read all the books when I was a kid, and I still enjoy re-reading them from time to time. I do like Robert Downey Jr's Holmes, no matter that his is quite different from the classic Rathbone or Brett versions (I do love Jeremy's best!). I am quite happy there will be a 3rd installment in this fun series.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 18,191
    I can't wait. This film series is brilliant fun and very entertaining. They make Holmes fans proud!
    DarthDimi wrote:
    I'm really into the SH films but I can honestly say I lack SH "experience". I never read any of the ACD novels and the only film I ever watched besides Guy Richie's is the Hammer production starring Peter Cushing and Chris Lee. As far as I can judge though, these RD Jr versions are quite the fun to watch. I welcome a third film as long as they keep the quality up.

    :O WHAT?! :-O @Dimi you need to get a Conan Doyle collection of Holmes short stories and get reading. You are missing out on such a brilliant body of work. Also watch some Jeremy Brett and the Sherlock BBC series. The best part of watching all the Sherlock Holmes adaptions is that they sneak in little details from the short stories that fans smirk at, while nobody else knows what they are raving about. I highly recommend the short stories and novels to everyone.

    So much to do, so little time. ;-) But thanks for the advice, friend. :)
  • We've still got a Sherlock Holmes DVD featuring Ronald Howard in the role of Doyle's creation from Christmas about seven years ago we haven't watched yet, gathering dust etc, not really a fan of Holmes, but I'm guessing Hound of the Baskervilles is one of his most famous works, certainly one most would instantly recognize with
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 It was this or the priesthood.
    Posts: 28,231
    DarthDimi wrote:
    I can't wait. This film series is brilliant fun and very entertaining. They make Holmes fans proud!
    DarthDimi wrote:
    I'm really into the SH films but I can honestly say I lack SH "experience". I never read any of the ACD novels and the only film I ever watched besides Guy Richie's is the Hammer production starring Peter Cushing and Chris Lee. As far as I can judge though, these RD Jr versions are quite the fun to watch. I welcome a third film as long as they keep the quality up.

    :O WHAT?! :-O @Dimi you need to get a Conan Doyle collection of Holmes short stories and get reading. You are missing out on such a brilliant body of work. Also watch some Jeremy Brett and the Sherlock BBC series. The best part of watching all the Sherlock Holmes adaptions is that they sneak in little details from the short stories that fans smirk at, while nobody else knows what they are raving about. I highly recommend the short stories and novels to everyone.

    So much to do, so little time. ;-) But thanks for the advice, friend. :)

    No problem. I know what you mean. I have a stack of books encompassing several Fleming Bond novels, John Le Carré Smiley novels, and two classics from Edgar Rice Burroughs I have stacked and collecting dust.
  • Posts: 645
    Love the films, can't wait for more!
  • Posts: 289
    Jared Harris and RDJR where awesome and the ending is awesome...loved the sniper/sharpshooter.
  • I saw the first one and had no interest in returning to this rubbish for a second time around.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 3,963
    I'm not really interested any more, I saw both of the previous films at the cinema but I think it will be the last one I pay for. They were both entertaining but since Moffat & Gattis have come along I can't see Richie's & RDJ version the same way.

    I agree they can exist together but on the strength of Sherlock Series 1 & 2 for me I'm not really bothered with another film, whereas a 3rd series of Cumberbatch & Freeman is something I eagerly await.
  • Before I saw the 2nd film I hadn't ever seen or read anything to do with sherlock holmes, but I really enjoyed it. So I went out and bought the 1st one, I thought it was just as great, so I'm really glad that a 3rd one is happening. I also saw some of the modern TV series, it was good but I didn't like it as much as the films.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Basil Rathbone's Holmes is still the most enjoyable in my opinion. Brett might have been definitive but Rathbone was a charmer, an action man and you got the sense might have been not a total stranger to the ladies. Rathbone anticipates the pumped-up Downey Jnr reimagining in some ways, although I wouldn't want to take away from what RDJ has done with the role, which I think is excellent. Interestingly, the Rathbone Holmes is also given a contemporary (at the time) 1940s setting - something they've done again with the enjoyable Cumberbatch 'Sherlock'.
  • Posts: 7,593
    There is NO such thing as TOO MUCH Sherlock Holmes, I am pleased that there are currently two different productions about this hero doing very well. And I do enjoy them both.
    I would worry more about the idea by some American broadcaster to update SH and put him in a modern New York.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 It was this or the priesthood.
    Posts: 28,231
    Getafix wrote:
    Basil Rathbone's Holmes is still the most enjoyable in my opinion. Brett might have been definitive but Rathbone was a charmer, an action man and you got the sense might have been not a total stranger to the ladies. Rathbone anticipates the pumped-up Downey Jnr reimagining in some ways, although I wouldn't want to take away from what RDJ has done with the role, which I think is excellent. Interestingly, the Rathbone Holmes is also given a contemporary (at the time) 1940s setting - something they've done again with the enjoyable Cumberbatch 'Sherlock'.

    I'm sorry, but those reasons are just why Rathbone pails in comparison to Brett. No Sherlock actor taking on the character should appear like they are "not a total stranger to the ladies". Holmes simply didn't do that. He could appreciate women of course, but never understood the nonsensical practice of love. He thought love got in the way of his expansive methods of deduction, clouding his mind and halting his unattached actions. He was more interested in people or women who could match him, who posed a challenge, a-la Irene Adler. Neither should he be such an action man. All things considered, Holmes was a great bare knuckle boxer, and formidable in baritsu(the whole reason he is able to beat Moriarty nonetheless), but he shouldn't be the crazy action man that RDJ's Sherlock is being, though I love the new interpretation. Some aspects of the RDJ Holmes is just not what I want in a Sherlock interpretation. The RDJ Holmes acts too crazed and somewhat inane at times than I've seen him in recent times. The love interest with Irene, the explosions and all the loaded on action are a little too much for a truly Sherlockian interpretation. But, by far I love RDJ and his take on Sherlock. The fighting is a great addition, and the films actually use baritsu in the fight scenes. I appreciate that as a huge fan, and the way Moriarty and Sherlock are set up in a mental chess game in Sherlock Homes 2 was brilliant to watch, both characters acted so well off each other. The 2nd was supreme, with great moments full of Sherlock punch. Can't wait for RDJ's 3rd. But Watson, in affect, is just as crucial as Sherlock in the great partnership. Getting back to the Rathbone interpretation, I see a weak point in the Watson side of the duo. The relationship is founded on the fact that Sherlock is all about brains over brawn, where Watson was the brawn so to speak. But in the Rathbone Holmes Watson was a dolt, a complete laughing stock. I don't appreciate that. Watson is by far no idiot, but an intellectual and formidable mental match with his knowledge of his physician profession to Holmes and his knowledge of botany, chemistry, London crime and all his other vast mental faculties. Watson has seen terrible things from his tour in Afghanistan before A Study in Scarlet, and the Watson of the Rathbone Holmes is a Watson who seems to have never been there in the action because the character of Watson was treated so much like a comedy show. In the RDJ Holmes Watson is brilliant, and even in early Brett we seen David Burke's Watson use deduction he learned from watching Holmes, much like Jude Law's Watson. Martin Freeman from Sherlock is another strong contender in this area, where we again see a Watson using his vast medical knowledge to aid Sherlock in the things he isn't as brushed up on simply because he finds no interest in the anatomy of the human body or what have you. All in all upon reflection, the Rathbone Holmes just isn't as good to me when taking everything into consideration. The closest thing to Brett thus far in my opinion is Benedict Cumberbatch's modern interpretation. His Holmes is spot on, and he knows all the movements of Holmes down to holding his hands together full length when in deep thought. I can't wait to see more from his, because he does such justice to the character, and in his Holmes we see a slightly caring side that is more apparent there than in past interpretations alongside Martin's Watson. The two have brilliant chemistry, and the second series of BBC's Sherlock showed us just that in a very strong, emotional fashion. In closing, Brett is the utter epitome of the character that is Sherlock Holmes. In Brett, we see a theatre like presence, a real strong portrayal. He has all the Holmes mannerisms down to a tee, and when we see him solving his cases, we think that Brett really IS Holmes. We see Brett himself thinking deeply like Holmes, right on the screen. He just had a way of making every action, every word as the character a masterpiece of acting, and that is why he is undoubtedly and so very deservedly, the unequivocal best.
  • The team must not stop making the series..sherlock homes movies are the best thriller now a days with complete entertainment ,Robert Downey Jr. is the perfect in the role of holmes , I have seen booth the part at more than 30 times and still watching, eagerly waiting for the 3rd one
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 3,963
    The team must not stop making the series..sherlock homes movies are the best thriller now a days with complete entertainment ,Robert Downey Jr. is the perfect in the role of holmes , I have seen booth the part at more than 30 times and still watching, eagerly waiting for the 3rd one

    Are you saying that Moffat & Gattis should stop so these lacklustre hollywood films can continue?

    If any stops it should be the films, the series leave them looking shallow and dumb!
    Both can exist I'm just not interested in seeing RDJ or Law when Cumberbatch & Freeman own the parts so much better.

  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded Dancing at midnight under the BeBop Moon
    edited September 2012 Posts: 11,736
    Both can and should exist in my opinion, and I am a lifelong Holmes fan. I really love both series!
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    I'm sorry, but those reasons are just why Rathbone pails in comparison to Brett. No Sherlock actor taking on the character should appear like they are "not a total stranger to the ladies". Holmes simply didn't do that. He could appreciate women of course, but never understood the nonsensical practice of love. He thought love got in the way of his expansive methods of deduction, clouding his mind and halting his unattached actions. He was more interested in people or women who could match him, who posed a challenge, a-la Irene Adler. Neither should he be such an action man. All things considered, Holmes was a great bare knuckle boxer, and formidable in baritsu(the whole reason he is able to beat Moriarty nonetheless), but he shouldn't be the crazy action man that RDJ's Sherlock is being, though I love the new interpretation. Some aspects of the RDJ Holmes is just not what I want in a Sherlock interpretation. The RDJ Holmes acts too crazed and somewhat inane at times than I've seen him in recent times. The love interest with Irene, the explosions and all the loaded on action are a little too much for a truly Sherlockian interpretation. But, by far I love RDJ and his take on Sherlock. The fighting is a great addition, and the films actually use baritsu in the fight scenes. I appreciate that as a huge fan, and the way Moriarty and Sherlock are set up in a mental chess game in Sherlock Homes 2 was brilliant to watch, both characters acted so well off each other. The 2nd was supreme, with great moments full of Sherlock punch. Can't wait for RDJ's 3rd. But Watson, in affect, is just as crucial as Sherlock in the great partnership. Getting back to the Rathbone interpretation, I see a weak point in the Watson side of the duo. The relationship is founded on the fact that Sherlock is all about brains over brawn, where Watson was the brawn so to speak. But in the Rathbone Holmes Watson was a dolt, a complete laughing stock. I don't appreciate that. Watson is by far no idiot, but an intellectual and formidable mental match with his knowledge of his physician profession to Holmes and his knowledge of botany, chemistry, London crime and all his other vast mental faculties. Watson has seen terrible things from his tour in Afghanistan before A Study in Scarlet, and the Watson of the Rathbone Holmes is a Watson who seems to have never been there in the action because the character of Watson was treated so much like a comedy show. In the RDJ Holmes Watson is brilliant, and even in early Brett we seen David Burke's Watson use deduction he learned from watching Holmes, much like Jude Law's Watson. Martin Freeman from Sherlock is another strong contender in this area, where we again see a Watson using his vast medical knowledge to aid Sherlock in the things he isn't as brushed up on simply because he finds no interest in the anatomy of the human body or what have you. All in all upon reflection, the Rathbone Holmes just isn't as good to me when taking everything into consideration. The closest thing to Brett thus far in my opinion is Benedict Cumberbatch's modern interpretation. His Holmes is spot on, and he knows all the movements of Holmes down to holding his hands together full length when in deep thought. I can't wait to see more from his, because he does such justice to the character, and in his Holmes we see a slightly caring side that is more apparent there than in past interpretations alongside Martin's Watson. The two have brilliant chemistry, and the second series of BBC's Sherlock showed us just that in a very strong, emotional fashion. In closing, Brett is the utter epitome of the character that is Sherlock Holmes. In Brett, we see a theatre like presence, a real strong portrayal. He has all the Holmes mannerisms down to a tee, and when we see him solving his cases, we think that Brett really IS Holmes. We see Brett himself thinking deeply like Holmes, right on the screen. He just had a way of making every action, every word as the character a masterpiece of acting, and that is why he is undoubtedly and so very deservedly, the unequivocal best.

    Cant really argue with that.
    Shardlake wrote:
    Are you saying that Moffat & Gattis should stop so these lacklustre hollywood films can continue?

    If any stops it should be the films, the series leave them looking shallow and dumb!
    Both can exist I'm just not interested in seeing RDJ or Law when Cumberbatch & Freeman own the parts so much better.

    Or that. Excellent posts Sirs.

    If the next series of Sherlock is as good as the last then EON have to finally fire those two clowns and give Moffat and Gattis a crack at Bond.
  • I'm sorry, but those reasons are just why Rathbone pails in comparison to Brett. No Sherlock actor taking on the character should appear like they are "not a total stranger to the ladies". Holmes simply didn't do that. He could appreciate women of course, but never understood the nonsensical practice of love. He thought love got in the way of his expansive methods of deduction, clouding his mind and halting his unattached actions. He was more interested in people or women who could match him, who posed a challenge, a-la Irene Adler. Neither should he be such an action man. All things considered, Holmes was a great bare knuckle boxer, and formidable in baritsu(the whole reason he is able to beat Moriarty nonetheless), but he shouldn't be the crazy action man that RDJ's Sherlock is being, though I love the new interpretation. Some aspects of the RDJ Holmes is just not what I want in a Sherlock interpretation. The RDJ Holmes acts too crazed and somewhat inane at times than I've seen him in recent times. The love interest with Irene, the explosions and all the loaded on action are a little too much for a truly Sherlockian interpretation. But, by far I love RDJ and his take on Sherlock. The fighting is a great addition, and the films actually use baritsu in the fight scenes. I appreciate that as a huge fan, and the way Moriarty and Sherlock are set up in a mental chess game in Sherlock Homes 2 was brilliant to watch, both characters acted so well off each other. The 2nd was supreme, with great moments full of Sherlock punch. Can't wait for RDJ's 3rd. But Watson, in affect, is just as crucial as Sherlock in the great partnership. Getting back to the Rathbone interpretation, I see a weak point in the Watson side of the duo. The relationship is founded on the fact that Sherlock is all about brains over brawn, where Watson was the brawn so to speak. But in the Rathbone Holmes Watson was a dolt, a complete laughing stock. I don't appreciate that. Watson is by far no idiot, but an intellectual and formidable mental match with his knowledge of his physician profession to Holmes and his knowledge of botany, chemistry, London crime and all his other vast mental faculties. Watson has seen terrible things from his tour in Afghanistan before A Study in Scarlet, and the Watson of the Rathbone Holmes is a Watson who seems to have never been there in the action because the character of Watson was treated so much like a comedy show. In the RDJ Holmes Watson is brilliant, and even in early Brett we seen David Burke's Watson use deduction he learned from watching Holmes, much like Jude Law's Watson. Martin Freeman from Sherlock is another strong contender in this area, where we again see a Watson using his vast medical knowledge to aid Sherlock in the things he isn't as brushed up on simply because he finds no interest in the anatomy of the human body or what have you. All in all upon reflection, the Rathbone Holmes just isn't as good to me when taking everything into consideration. The closest thing to Brett thus far in my opinion is Benedict Cumberbatch's modern interpretation. His Holmes is spot on, and he knows all the movements of Holmes down to holding his hands together full length when in deep thought. I can't wait to see more from his, because he does such justice to the character, and in his Holmes we see a slightly caring side that is more apparent there than in past interpretations alongside Martin's Watson. The two have brilliant chemistry, and the second series of BBC's Sherlock showed us just that in a very strong, emotional fashion. In closing, Brett is the utter epitome of the character that is Sherlock Holmes. In Brett, we see a theatre like presence, a real strong portrayal. He has all the Holmes mannerisms down to a tee, and when we see him solving his cases, we think that Brett really IS Holmes. We see Brett himself thinking deeply like Holmes, right on the screen. He just had a way of making every action, every word as the character a masterpiece of acting, and that is why he is undoubtedly and so very deservedly, the unequivocal best.

    Cant really argue with that.
    Shardlake wrote:
    Are you saying that Moffat & Gattis should stop so these lacklustre hollywood films can continue?

    If any stops it should be the films, the series leave them looking shallow and dumb!
    Both can exist I'm just not interested in seeing RDJ or Law when Cumberbatch & Freeman own the parts so much better.

    Or that. Excellent posts Sirs.

    If the next series of Sherlock is as good as the last then EON have to finally fire those two clowns and give Moffat and Gattis a crack at Bond.

    I would agree quite strongly with everything said above. The one thing that the RDJ films did well was cast Jude Law as Watson. He's actually the Watson who I find the most true to the books - handsome, a man of action, gets irritated at Holmes and isn't afraid to say so, and a man possessing his own intelligence.

    The first RDJ film really had nothing at all to do with Sherlock Holmes other than character names, basic setup, and location/time period. It was an entertaining movie but as someone who has read all of the Sherlock Holmes stories (the short stories are a great starting place as many are only about 20 pages long) I was really surprised at how unrecognizable it was as "Holmesian". Still, there's room for many different interpretations. I agree with many fans that the Jeremy Brett series is "definitive" but I also rate Moffat's Sherlock as a quite honestly brilliant updating of the character - although set in the modern day many of the aspects of the Holmes stories are faithfully represented (and others tweaked in interesting ways, such as a "three patch problem").

    I had never thought of Moffat working on Bond but as soon as someone mentioned it here a while back I thought it a very interesting idea. Pretty much everything the guy has done has turned to gold and he's shown himself adept at everything from 1930's screwball style reparte (Press Gang) to dirty humour (Coupling) to exquisitely complex sci-fi (Doctor Who).

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 It was this or the priesthood.
    Posts: 28,231
    I have always had it in my mind since I saw the Granada series that Brett was simply unbeatable. Then one day my friend told me that there was a present day Sherlock Holmes BBC series that did three episodes. I knew that the series would be no good. Sherlock belongs in Victorian England, and an updating would never work. But then I got a call from said friend, who wanted me to see the first episode. I reluctantly went to his house, watched it, and my Sherlock fandom has never been the same. I have never been more impressed by something I thought would sink terribly. The series is so utterly Holmesian even without the time period and conventions of Victorian time. Benedict is quickly becoming my favorite Holmes with his staggeringly brilliant interpretation, and Martin is by far my top favorite Watson. He is both measures the intelligent doctor and war vet, yet also the hurt and lonely man who feels that spark of excitement again when Sherlock billows into his life. Benedict and Martin have the best chemistry of any Sherlock adaption, hands down, and some of their exchanges (you know the big one I'm talking about) have put me in tears. The BBC version has made a modern day Sherlock thrive like never before, made a dominatrix Irene Adler (you heard right) a brilliant adaption and stellar addition to an already exceptional resume, and have finally given Holmes a heart. The short stories have very little outward heartfelt reaction from Holmes, and the Brett series lack it as well. But some of the greatest moments of the BBC series is when Sherlock shows how much he cares for those around him:
    He apologizes to Molly for hurting her feelings.
    He puts his neck out to save Irene.
    He drops a CIA agent who hurt Mrs. Hudson out the window.
    In the Baskerville episode, when he says to John "I don't have friends. I just have one", my heart leaps out of my chest with happiness.
    He comes to tears when calling John from the hospital when his death seems inevitable.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 33,381
    I would love to view that spoiler, @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, but I still haven't had a chance to watch the second season. Unless, of course, that spoiler is in the first season, and I'm totally overlooking it? I haven't watched the first few episodes in months, so my memory is a little foggy. I'm really looking forward to seeing the new episodes, though.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 It was this or the priesthood.
    edited September 2012 Posts: 28,231
    Creasy47 wrote:
    I would love to view that spoiler, @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, but I still haven't had a chance to watch the second season. Unless, of course, that spoiler is in the first season, and I'm totally overlooking it? I haven't watched the first few episodes in months, so my memory is a little foggy. I'm really looking forward to seeing the new episodes, though.

    They are all from the super-duper-spectacular second series. Sorry. :)

    P.S. You need to see them, and we must talk!
Sign In or Register to comment.