Comments | sussexdowns: texts v textiles.

sussexdowns

texts v textiles.

Jan 08, 2012 12:25

just a little more poking at my issues with 2.1 before 2.2 airs. ngl, i am a little worried about how that's going to play out. but whatever. i've come to terms with the fact that to enjoy television at all, i just need to let go and stop taking any part of it at all seriously.

so. ( let's women's studies 101 this for a hot minute. )

nerdfest 2012, actually not drunk, sherlock (bbc), tl;dr, does not suffice, sherlock holmes, i hold grudges forever okay, this should not even be an issue, what the actual fuck?, all the meta!, public post, why am i on drugs?, illin' like a villain

Comments 2

(The comment has been removed)

sussexdowns January 8 2012, 23:23:38 UTC

it definitely makes sense, and it is a huge part of the problem i have with the ritchie movies. that they're entertaining, certainly, but they're not sherlock holmes. and that is what keeps me from enjoying them as much as other people do. it's like, people see those films and they think they are holmes fans, and no. they like something with the same title, but that's it.

that said, i don't know why they bother me so much while i can let this slide enough to not hate it. i honestly don't. but it feels like sherlock comes from a place of genuinely enjoying the canon and sincerely asking the question 'alright, what changes would these stories have to make to succeed in a modern setting ( ... )

(The comment has been removed)

sussexdowns January 15 2012, 08:06:31 UTC

the thing is though, aside from a bit of expansion, the granada version of a scandal in bohemia was mostly quite a faithful adaptation. i think a better example would be maybe...the adaptation of the musgrave ritual. they really sort of went into left field with that one, but i loved what they did. but i think the difference is that no one really suffered for the changes they made. they weren't at the expense of anyone, if that makes sense ( ... )