Just finished the latest season of Arrow and, I must say, they're going to struggle, as they did this season, to create a better villain than Adrian Chase in the season prior. He was just so damn good! Easily in my top 3 TV villains of all time, along with Zoom in The Flash and Slade in the animated Teen Titans show.
Zoom, didn`t work so well for me. I mean I liked him as the big bad well enough but the whole reveal didn`t work for me much. Felt kinda one note, since it hit a lot of the same notes as the season before it. Slade and Chase however are very good villains, Zoom was to just immediately following Reverse Flash with that was ehh. The way they did the twist though was pretty good , didn`t expect it much and the man in the mask stuff was good. I still need to catch up on Arrow, only got one or two episodes into the latest season. It seemed interesting at least what they were setting up. Chase is a hard act to follow though, very good foil to Oliver, and the Vigilante stuff was a bit of a troll on the viewers. Brooklyn Nine Nine, has had a big following for a bit now and as a Scrub`s fan I always took note of it. Like Scrubs was with medical shows but with cops, interesting. I never however got around to watching. After all the fuss with Fox cutting it and NBC swooping in, and me wanting something to watch after Iron Fist while I wait for Daredevil in October I started to watch it and I really enjoy it. Up to season three now, probably should take a break since bingeing it has cut into productivity...those end of season cliffhangers though.
Mehhhh. Arrow is kind of mediocre. Especially later on. I find it increasingly more corny, occasionally outright obnoxious (the Oliver/Felicity breakup plot felt so contrived), and I lacked any real investment. I preferred season 1 over the others.
I need help finding an episode of Sherlock Holmes (not from the shitty Cumberbatch series - I mean the good series with Jeremy Brett). Anyway, I've checked the whole series on wiki and it doesn't appear to be there. I've checked the wiki for the Doyle story on which the episode is based (I thought I'd discovered the title, but it seems the story was never adapted for the Brett series, so now I'm wondering if it is that episode). In the episode, Holmes is travelling to some remote countryside cottage with Watson for some rest and recuperation after a bout of illness. Of course Holmes being Holmes he can't refuse investigating a local murder, in which the victim appears to have died of fright. Long story short, it turns out some kind of poison was placed over a candle in the victim's parlour, which was then burnt away by said candle thus destroying the evidence. I remember Holmes, in an attempt to test this, almost ends up killing himself in the same way. I don't remember much more, but could of sworn it was from one of the long-running Jeremy Brett series on ITV, but as I say the wiki for this series offers nothing along these lines. The only reference I can find to a story in which Holmes escapes to the country for recuperation is called The Adventure of the Reigate Squire, but like I say it was never adapted by ITV, making me suspect this isn't the episode at all. [ETA] Boom! The Devil's Foot
So Mrs. A and I started watching Criminal Minds reruns on VOD. "Isn't that Joe Mantegna?" "Nope, Mandy Patinkin." For now, it seems. Do they even change the character name, or is it like Bewitched?
Hey, the Cumberbatch series is fairly good. Also, you have just outraged a legion of furious, murderous fans out there. Flee, flee for your life!
I like to do this. Seriously, though, the Cumbersnatch series isn't Sherlock Holmes - it's as simple as that. Sherlock Holmes was a 19th century detective, not a 21st.
And Batman was invented as a character in the 30's. Yet we still see him in the modern day setting. What's wrong with recontextualising characters? It's a change, yes, but what's wrong with that? Characters get changed between depictions all the time, regardless of the setting.
Because if you don't do it properly you no longer have the same character. Batman can have dead parents and punch bad guys in any time period, but a part of the original Sherlock's identity is specifically Victorian and transplanting that to the modern day is rather tricky to accomplish. For what it's worth, I have my own problems with that series, but that's more to do with the writing than the actors portrayal of the characters.
Just like @The Dapper Hooligan says, because it ceases to be that character. Of course with tv you can take any liberty you like, because given enough hype and money thrown at it, the Game of Thrones fraternity will latch on to it and swear it's the greatest thing since slice bread, and love it more than their own lives.
At a certain point, what defines the character of Sherlock Holmes is a bit arbitrary though. And, maybe it's not the same character. But is that a problem? It's not as if that series really tries to claim they are the same. It just uses material from the originals. Not for everyone, sure. But I don't that really makes it bad.
Not really. His character is pretty thoroughly defined through all of the original serials and throughout the character has a very flat arc. So it's not like we even have to deal with differences between 'start of series' Sherlock and 'final season' Sherlock.
That's not my point. My point is- who is to say how far the character can be changed from the original version before it's not true to the character?
I would say to the point where he's given traits that start to go against or contradict previously established character traits.
In truth no. It's just another in a list of silly, unimportant things that gets on my tits. I have an illogical dislike for this trend towards obsessively following long-running tv shows - you know the kind of thing that gets hyped by the 20-somethings of this world, who think they need to post 'reaction' videos to youtube, showing their horror/delight/shock at the latest plot twists and developments, and who post comments like "omg! season 3 finale, tell me it's not so!" to twatterface and the like.
Just saw the new trailer for Saberin the Teenage Witch. Not a huge fan of the Riverdale show that it's linked to though I find it interesting a CW show is grttget a Netflix spin off. Well idk if it's in the same universe but same team, and darker comic theme. Though there's more foundation here comic wise, than with the Archie stuff. Idk I've honestly seen all episodes of the old show so idk. The trailer doesn't look as tone shift/melodrama as I was expecting it to. I mean it's not the 80s cheese of the old show but still seem more comic tone than what I was expecting.
I'm eager to see if Timewasters in the UK on ITV will ever be picked up again for a second series. Everything else I think has been green lighted from Red Dwarf on Dave to The Simpsons on Fox/Disney and The Orville and I think Fresh Off The Boat too has been green lighted for a new season - and Bob's Burger's have already premiered, and Stan Against Evil is coming this Halloween, so that's already in the can, I think, and I'm not expecting Rick and Morty yet.
RE: Timewasters, I've just googled it, and have been told ITV2 have ordered a new series http://www.denofgeek.com/uk/tv/timewasters/59750/timewasters-series-2-1950s-setting-revealed and this time they're going to the 1950's 'oh? sounds interesting'
I once saw a TV movie I think set in San Francisco, I think, where Holmes travelled to the 1990's and sucked at being a detective mistaking the chief of police's pot noodle as his nickname... before saving the day later on in the story - point is, I think Sherlock Holmes is public domain? IDK.
I've never seen a single episode of the original but the trailer for the Netflix show was interesting enough that I'll definitely check it out when it goes up on the 26th. It's getting pretty good early buzz, too. I've even seen it compared to Buffy, which is my favorite TV show of all time. Obviously we'll have to wait and see if that comparison turns out to be apt.
He certainly seems to be. I was in a charity shop the other day looking at a book called The further Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, needless to say not written by ACD.
Copyright for an artistic work in the UK is life of the author plus 70 years. Doyle died in 1930, so I guess Sherlock Holmes became public domain in 2000. EDIT: So that is true in the UK, but apparently for the US the issue is trickier and it took US courts until 2013 to confirm that the character is public domain. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/27/sherlock-holmes-copyright-ruling-public-domain
The old show`s very enjoyable if you enjoy more campy type stuff. It`s more of a sit com type thing then this one is probably going to be. I was worried about the Riverdale connection mostly since that show for me falls into a trap of "It`s dark Archie." and then not telling that great a story or developing outside of that. Though this seems to not be going in that dierectoin and ha a solid comic it`s being adapted from so I have hope. I loved Buffy to, it does have a later season Buffy feel in the trailer.
Trademark random posting. I'm only finishing watching Season 5 of Breaking Bad now after a few years' pause (don't ask, even yourself). I'll be watching the last two episodes tomorrow, then most probably go on to Better Call Saul.
I liked the trailer so will give it a try. Coming out soon in a plus, compared to all the things I'd still be waiting for (The Favourite, The Mortal Engines, Mary, Queen of Scots).