I should be reading Père Goriot/doing an assignment right now, but procrastination has once again talked me into internetting my valuable time away.
Just watched/fell in love with the first episode of the recent BBC miniseries Sherlock. I thought I was going to hate it - but I enjoyed the heck out of myself. Now that I've written this down the other two episodes of it will probably be rubbish. Oh well. At least the first one was filled with exciting faithfulness to the original plot & characterisation, plus being gripping, brilliant and led by an actor whose voice I would eat on toast if I could. (Within the first five minutes I found myself wishing I there were some kind of excuse to listen to his voice all day long. I since discovered he does audio books. I want!)
I adore Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories, as my battered and much abused Penguin Complete edition can attest. And yes, I do love Holmes and his stories more than I love Agatha Christie's Poirot and Marple, in case you're wondering. (Which you weren't. Nobody ever does, I find.) The 2009 movie massively disappointed me, by its irritating way of playing loose and easy with characterisation and plot. Let me say this once: it requires a great deal of skill and creativity to make an adaptation of a classic and make a good one. I keep seeing and hearing reference made to Bridget Jones's Diary as a modern-day adaptation of Pride and Prejudice. No, it isn't. I have read the book and seen the film, and though both are reasonably entertaining (nothing to write home about, I must add) I cannot qualify Helen Fielding's story as an adaptation. She might have made use of archetypes Jane Austen's book portrayed, but she did not do a modern adaptation of Pride and Prejudice. Bollywood did one, albeit a sillified tongue in cheek one, but it was an adaptation. And an amusing one.
But enough rant. No more rant.
Sherlock is awesome.
Adorable mini icons stolen from http://www.redscharlach.co.uk/
No comments:
Post a Comment