Anyone else been Sherlocked (BBC Sherlocked)

Post Reply New Topic

Well I am Sherlocked. Cumberbatch is so sexy. I didn't think he could be to me if his Holmes were even an ounce sociopath. Kindness and brainy are sexy, not defenestrating "baddies". Seems I'm wrong. I may even find him sexier that David Tennant's Doctor. The Doctor has a darker side of course, but its not sociopathic. Rather, in order to do good he sometimes has to do bad. I wonder what a buddhist Sherlock or Doctor would look like?

I enjoyed it a lot, whereas I don't like Doctor Who and they have similar megalomania. It'll get annoying if everything is too convenient and he keeps winning. I don't think you can diagnose the character as anything other than a Stephen Moffat power fantasy (like Doctor Who and like the lead character in every other thing he's ever written).

I didn't get why that was the password for her phone before she had even met him.

yes L in Deathnote is definately an aspie! I thought the manga was probably influenced by sherlock holmes as it does have the same feel to it.

I thought sherlock said he was a high functioning sociopath in the first series as they had not heard of aspergers when the original stories were writen and it was based on those. I think it would have looked trite and very modern to say 'I have aspergers', I know it is set in the 'now' but I think it would have looked 'faddish' to put aspergers in the series and just lead to more people saying that 'aspergers is the fashionable diagnosis of the moment' and saying 'im a high functioning sociopath' gives it a more edgy feel and I think is an attempt to make it cool rather than nerdy. Nevertheless I think Holmes does have aspergers.

She sent him the phone in the post after she had met him in the Belgravia house.
She knew his reputation, stripped naked, verbally duelled, shared a dream sequence, whipped him, and watched him work out her vital stats "I've already told you the code". All enough to get utterly Sherlocked.

I was less convinced by his interest in her. She was very good and so was the idea (dominatrix), but they didn't give us enough of her to think she would really have floated his boat.

i have seen about 1/2 of one show in the new sherlock holmes series with the cumberpatch person playing the role.

i did not really like it and i lost interest. there is too much focus on his "image" and there is a sexual undertone to the character. it seems that he is crafted to appeal to women (not specifically though) and there are many scenes where he turns his head and looks at things in a way that reminds me of aftershave commercials. the character is definitely crafted to be sexually appealing, and it is a pity to me that the essence of the sherlock holmes character is modernized to appeal to the current fashionable appetite.

the best characterization of sherlock holmes in my opinion was portrayed by jeremy brett.
i was 12 when the granada series was aired, and i was fascinated by the character portyrayed by jeremy brett. i know i am not an authority on the matter and it is my opinion only, but the new series seems to completely exclude the vices that the original sherlock holmes suffered from (like smoking and drugs).

i was astounded to discover that jeremy brett was in his 50's when he portrayed holmes. he moved so deftly and he seemed to be physically able to convey lightning quick reaction times, and he was very supple and lithe.

his diction was impeccable and he savored every word he said and he was truly a genius with regard to his portrayal of holmes in my mind.

the sets were extremely period authentic, and i never saw anything in that series which disappointed me when i looked for flaws.


before brett, i sort of liked rathbone, but his portrayal was stereotypical (like always and only smoking a pipe) whereas brett's portrayal showed him chain smoking cigarettes on occasions.

also, the cumberbatch person is not old enough to incite my admiration. it seems that the essence of what i once found intriguing, is now re-presented with modern sultry and sexual undertones, and i am not impressed.

as they say, there is no accounting for taste, and maybe my taste is aging and becoming superseded.

when i compare this performance
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFkBOAekmL4&feature=related[/youtube]

with this performance
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UOTIW83oXs[/youtube]
, to me there is no contest.

Ha! I watched it three times but I'm not good with temporal order. Was he interested in her as anything more than a challenge?

There was s suggestion he was, but nah perhaps not. Moffat just wanted us to wonder about it. Perhaps if she returns and we get more of her, we might get to see something more.

You seem to know your onions. I haven't seen any other Sherlock, I'm pretty rubbish at film and TV, and I havent read the books (I was sort of put off by learning Arthur Conan Doyle was into flakey stuff, silly but when there are so many books to read you need some way of deciding which way next).
Anyway, now I really look forward to finding out more.

my post was (as usual) totally ignored, but whatever, who cares what the current style is, and i am a thing of the past with my attitude.

it is good that i am not invited to discussion because it is usually futile and a waste of energy.

if anyone replies to me after i write this, i will see it as an act of charity, and charity is not what i wanted.

B9 - Well I'm gonna reply anyway! I saw on the post that someone had added a comment, saw it was you and decided to watch the Brett video before reading your latest Hitchiker's Marvin post. I'd nothing to say until watch the vids, cos I would not know where you were coming from at all.

Anyway, from the 4mins, I like him a bit and would definately want to watch it now, after the new BBC Sherlock to find out what I really think. I'm sure its not doing the series justice in clips cos, he seemed a bit pompous out of context. You are allowed to be pompous if you are solving all the crimes. Older Who clips would look the same, could look hammy and pompous without the context.

The sexual undertone is only one part of what makes it interesting to me. Surely sexually appealing is not simply a "current fashionable appetite" as its been part of a good story forever. Often without even a kiss portrayed on screen. I'm also not sure how fashionable finding Cumberbatch sexy actually is. I'll try the women at work and see what they say. Usually they completely disagree with me. Also, I'll tell you if Brett is sexy as Holmes after I have watched it.

Regards the drug thing, I just dont think its that interesting now. In Doyle's books perhaps it added to the character, at the time, cos it showed how he craved stimulation. But in one of your clips he says something like if he had more mental challenges he wouldn't want the artificial stimulants.

"the cumberbatch person is not old enough to incite my admiration. it seems that the essence of what i once found intriguing, is now re-presented with modern sultry and sexual undertones, and i am not impressed. "

But you got to be pleased others are getting off on it? Tom Baker will always be my Doctor but I can still really enjoy Matt Smith.

i am very sorry that i caused to to respond in the way you did.

i just think that jeremy brett was the most masterful rendition of sherlock holmes, and i find it difficult to believe in any one else playing the part.

i am the one who has that opinion. just forget what i said, because i can not believe any one except for him (brett) can portray holmes to my satisfaction and i am obviously not an authority. i will say nothing more in this thread.


i understand i am oblivious to many realities.

Absolutely no need to apologise. I enjoyed replying and thinking about it. Maybe I will agree if I ever get to see him. You've got an older Tardis consol as an avatar. I felt exactly the same way about Dr Who with Moffats new Who, to begin with anyway back in 2005, and it took me a couple of episodes to get over the changes and accept it for something new and different, not necessarily to be compared. Like meeting a different person. Who, and now Sherlock are about the only things on TV I can bear (cept documentaries).

He describes himself as a high-functioning sociopath once in the first episode, and he's later shown many times to have been wrong about that description. I don't think it's a matter of him being a sociopath and the show's creators just throwing in some emotion because they're expected to. The character has been shown, again and again, to not be a sociopath at all. He's often an uncaring dick, but not always, and even when he is, he's usually either making an effort not to care or is simply not aware that he's offending someone. He simply cares far too much about his few friends to ever qualify as a sociopath under any definition of the word. Moriarty, on the other hand...



I don't agree with everything you've said about the BBC series, but I'll agree with this part. I can tolerate them dropping Sherlock's cocaine addiction since it's dropped in the vast majority of adaptations, but it felt like a weak concession to political correctness to make him a former smoker who uses nicotine patches. And for the record, I also agree that Brett was the best Holmes.



Doyle didn't write as much Sherlock as you'd think – 56 short stories and four short novels. My introduction to the books was two relatively small paperbacks that collected all of them. You could read them at a leisurely pace and be done with them rather quickly.

He cares about two people closest to him (Watson and Ms. Hudson), but I've not seen much real evidence of him caring about anyone else. I think the sociopath description was quite accurate throughout the first series. This new episode has more emotion than the previous ones, and again, it's because it needs to appeal to the audience.

I'd be willing to concede "partial sociopath" then. I just can't consider anyone a true sociopath if they care as much about their friends as SH does in the series.

That's why he's described as "high functioning".