The Sherlockians! discussion

Just saw it today. Where to start.... Simply, it’s atrocious as the critics have said. The ones who will be most offended are Holmes purists, Republicans and conservatives mainly in the US (I’m not a conservative and didn’t mind), and those easily offended by tasteless humor (I didn’t mind this).

It looks as though the writer/director also had little knowledge of the Holmes stories, judging from the script. Only barely enough to get by. He knew the basic characters, Holmes, Watson, Lestrade, Mrs Hudson, and Mycroft (appearing for the first time in a Holmes spoof), a few details, and a very few lines from the stories that he just randomly threw in.

Yes. There is gross humor as well, including bodily functions, and corpse humor. I don’t remember the Peter Cook/Dudley Moore Hound of the Baskervilles too well, but this was on a similar level. Some of it was funny in Holmes and Watson more so than the Hound of the Baskervilles, actually.

There were A LOT of current day cultural references. Some were funny, but some turned into major historical anachronisms, which were among other weak points. Also, where some will most offended is the mocking of a historical tragedy (not the Holocaust though). They did push the line a bit far.

If other things don’t wreck it, the denouement and solution will.

Honestly, as bad as it was, it was more funny than I expected, which made it bearable. From the reviews, I expected it to not be funny at all.

Holmes comedies are very tricky to do, and I think one reason they don’t work is because he’s a genius, and much of comedy revolves around stupidity.

There’s five Holmesedies I can think of that I’ve seen, and out of them three were funny, two honored the stories, and maybe three didn’t involve as much of a suspension of disbelief.

Adventure of Sherlock Holmes’ Smarter Brother and Without a Clue honored the stories halfway decently (Without a Clue had a twist). Gene Wilder, who wrote and directed Smarter Brother, was apparently a major Sherlockian from what I heard. I didn’t find the film too funny though. It didn’t live up to Young Frankenstein from the previous year, which he co wrote.

Without a Clue and Strange Case of the End of Civilization as we Know It, a tv film starring John Cleese, and Holmes and Watson (to an extent and depending on the viewer) were funny.

Smarter Brother, Strange Case (to an extent, as it had some sci fi elements), and Without a Clue didn’t involve as much of a suspension of disbelief.

Really, Without a Clue was the only one so far that succeeded on all counts. It also didn’t involve campiness or sight gags like Holmes and Watson and Hound of the Baskervilles did.

I’d only recommend watching Holmes and Watson if you’re like me and have to see every adaptation at least once. I would still rate Holmes and Watson barely higher than Hound of the Baskervilles, emphasis on the barely.

Anyone else see it?

So do you think it’s worth seeing just to past some time? I’m doing nothing the next few days and I thought of going but some of the reviews put me off a bit.

Yeah. It would pass the time.

I’m going to see it but I have to see all adaptations at least once, and I like to judge things for myself. I hope it is at least a little bit better then it’s said to be.