Skip to content

Is that you, Holmes?

July 17, 2009
tags: , , ,

Yesterday, I once again saw the trailer for the upcoming Sherlock Holmes movie.

I hate to be that person who complains about movie adaptations, so I try to forget my prejudices and to judge movies on their own merits, separately from their source material. I must admit that I often fail, but I do, at least, try to keep the whining to  a minimum.

But this is Sherlock Holmes. Obviously, it’s totally possible (even probable) that the trailer is not a faithful representation of the movie. But what’s in the preview bears so little resemblance to the original stories of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle that I have to wonder if the writers and director have read any of his work at all.

If your adaptation is going to be this loose, why even put the name of the original franchise on it? I suppose that a familiar name draws people in. But it also gives people a false impression of what they’ll be seeing. No one likes to be misled.

I will, of course, probably end up seeing it anyway. Maybe that’s the real mistake.

2 Comments leave one →
  1. Watson permalink
    July 29, 2009 11:49 pm

    Conan Doyle was a crazy Spiritualist who ignored logic and took advantage of others. You wanna ruin your Sherlock experience? Read about the author. He was making himself and his hack work look pointless and sad long before Hollywood got their hands on his work.


  1. Nitpicking will bring us together « Natalie DeBruin

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: