Today's Daily Mail

[CL]

The fact that it's set in the 21st century and often revolves a great deal around modern technology is surely departure enough? If it was a faithful rendering of the original texts they were going for, it would be as per the classic Basil Rathbone versions.

It's been spruced up for a modern audience and to reflect its contemporary setting. To quibble over whether Conan Doyle originally wrote him as an action hero seems to be missing the point.

That said, not disputing views of the story as ridiculous: each to their own. I thought it was entertaining enough in an easy watching kinda way (and sure, the lady may have helped!).

Sherlock Holmes is supposed to be about the genius mind but not even a genius could make the ridiculous deductions made by Sunday's character. It was all hocus pocus fungus mungus.In fact it's becoming like CSI, which after a while gets on one's nerves.

Script writers today-with rare exception-know how to write good series, dramas and films. Instead they just vandalise the achievements of the past. Look at the James Bond films over the past 40 years: most of them were turned into tongue in cheek parodies which reflect nothing of Ian Fleming's original works. Even Casino Royle- which was a better film-has some silly moments that almost mess it up.

Yes forumites I am hard to please.

[Rob Furness]

Converting a book into a film rarely works well in my opinion (at least for fans of the book). best example being the Lord of the rings for me, so much missed out or changed that the story is quite different and not close enough to the book for me to enjoy watching it. Another example would be the Bourne films, which I do love, but are completely (and I mean completely) different to the book. Only the vaguest premise of the story has been followed and the rest is completely made up. That said, I think because I saw the films before reading the book it doesn't seem to be a problem.

The only film I can think of off the top of my head that was a successful rendition of a book is the green mile, that was pretty accurate I think.

[CL]

The conversion doesn't work too well because the film writers substitute the intellectual base of the book for special effects, stunts and crude violence. Most of the best films I've seen - bar 'The Wizard of Oz'-have no special effects (and even that film isn't great solely because of them). Some of them also didn't cost tens of millions to produce but dwarf those films in plot structure.

I also think many of today's actors and actresses know little about what makes a great film. Liam Neeson is a good actor but he goes and spoils it by starring in such trash as the awful 'Taken.' How does he reconcile that with 'Schindlers List?'

[mr brightside]

Since when was Sherlock an action hero?

He was a Bartitsu practitioner, that's action enough for me.

[noel]

He was a Bartitsu practitioner, that's action enough for me.

Bless you!

[southernsoftie]

Film/series makers are heavily constrained by time: squeezing a whole book into an hour show, a two hour film, or even a two part series inevitably leads to some scriptwriting and production shorthand. At it's worst this leads to an over reliance on special effects, or major gaps in plot. This is inevitable. Gotta just go with it...or turn over if you feel it's to the detriment of the show/film.

If you're able to dedicate the time to it you can end up with a fairly faithful portrayal of the book and a classic piece of entertainment. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (series) which I was raving about on here recently is a case in point. Not sure how this will compare to the film, but I'm willing to forgo some aspects of the story given its greater time constraint.

[Dynamo Dan]

Giant ants are coming for us: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ntic-jaws.html

[Grouse]

How can you sit on your arse for an hour and a half?

[millipede]

The fact that it's set in the 21st century and often revolves a great deal around modern technology is surely departure enough? If it was a faithful rendering of the original texts they were going for, it would be as per the classic Basil Rathbone versions.

It's been spruced up for a modern audience and to reflect its contemporary setting. To quibble over whether Conan Doyle originally wrote him as an action hero seems to be missing the point.

That said, not disputing views of the story as ridiculous: each to their own. I thought it was entertaining enough in an easy watching kinda way (and sure, the lady may have helped!).

I decided to catch up on it last night (based on a recommendation by SS ). I was laughing out loud especially at that bit where he was weighing up Watson with the analytical once over. Definitely a different Sherlock Holmes but a refreshing one. I liked it :thumbup:

Sherlock Holmes is supposed to be about the genius mind but not even a genius could make the ridiculous deductions made by Sunday's character. It was all hocus pocus fungus mungus.In fact it's becoming like CSI, which after a while gets on one's nerves.

Script writers today-with rare exception-know how to write good series, dramas and films. Instead they just vandalise the achievements of the past. Look at the James Bond films over the past 40 years: most of them were turned into tongue in cheek parodies which reflect nothing of Ian Fleming's original works. Even Casino Royle- which was a better film-has some silly moments that almost mess it up.

Yes forumites I am hard to please.

Converting a book into a film rarely works well in my opinion (at least for fans of the book). best example being the Lord of the rings for me, so much missed out or changed that the story is quite different and not close enough to the book for me to enjoy watching it. Another example would be the Bourne films, which I do love, but are completely (and I mean completely) different to the book. Only the vaguest premise of the story has been followed and the rest is completely made up. That said, I think because I saw the films before reading the book it doesn't seem to be a problem.

The only film I can think of off the top of my head that was a successful rendition of a book is the green mile, that was pretty accurate I think.

He was a Bartitsu practitioner, that's action enough for me.

How can you sit on your arse for an hour and a half?

and he looks pretty hot if you imagine him with his legs in the air

[stevefoster]

and he looks pretty hot if you imagine him with his legs in the air

Is that a Generalization?