hey guys remember when all those racist/sexist/ableist/classist/anglocentric douchebags said elementary won’t be good and that we should all give up?
hey guess what:
-averaging 11 million viewers an episode
-full season extended to 24 episodes
-great ratings and reviews
-won coveted post superbowl slot
-great cast and production
-isn’t (and never was) a bbc sherlock “rip off”
fuck yeah elementary
Okay I actually liked the first episode of Elementary.
Two comments: 1) the makers of Elementary have said that romance between Joan and Sherlock is totally off the table, so you could not have been seeing any sexual tension between them. I certainly saw none, just the bare beginnings of a close friendship.
2) Sherlock in Elementary was NOT designed “friendlier” to appeal to American audiences (excuse me, but that’s a weird generalization about a country that produced Supernatural, Dexter, the Sopranos, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Grimm and Once Upon A Time, just to mention a few dark & grim American shows) but because Sherlock Holmes in the BOOKS is a friendlier man than depicted on BBC!Sherlock. Holmes deeply cared about his clients, and for the most part, was polite and tactful. He wasn’t a “high-functioning sociopath.”
Reblogging for 2). I have no dog in this fight, but this is the first time I’ve seen someone (on either side of the debate) point out that BBC Sherlock is actually nothing like canon Holmes in terms of emotional empathy. Canon Holmes actually cares about people and truly wants to help them, and he believes in upholding the law. Sherlock is closer to House than Holmes in that regard.
There is a really interesting essay (that’s almost certainly been written) about how Holmes doesn’t necessarily follow the law on the books, but he always, always tries to follow what he sees as the moral, “natural” law of people getting their just (Victorian) deserts. Off the top of my head, I can think of Abbey Grange, Boscombe Valley, Blue Carbuncle, and really, really hilariously flagrantly, Charles Augustus Milverton.
And whenever people say that ACD’s Holmes had no use for other people or sentiment or the man-in-the-street, I always want to make them read this a really, really famous passage from Copper Beeches. I mean, if anything, the problem is that Holmes thinks too much of human decency, right?“Good heavens!” I cried. “Who would associate crime with these dear old homesteads?”
“They always fill me with a certain horror. It is my belief, Watson, founded upon my experience, that the lowest and vilest alleys in London do not present a more dreadful record of sin than does the smiling and beautiful countryside.”
“You horrify me!”
“But the reason is very obvious. The pressure of public opinion can do in the town what the law cannot accomplish. There is no lane so vile that the scream of a tortured child, or the thud of a drunkard’s blow, does not beget sympathy and indignation among the neighbours, and then the whole machinery of justice is ever so close that a word of complaint can set it going, and there is but a step between the crime and the dock. But look at these lonely houses, each in its own fields, filled for the most part with poor ignorant folk who know little of the law. Think of the deeds of hellish cruelty, the hidden wickedness which may go on, year in, year out, in such places, and none the wiser.”