So I watched the most recent Elementary episode (the one where the rapist was blackmailing the fathers of the victims)
The one character I'm starting to like is Sherlocks sponsor, simply because he told Sherlock to get over himself.  Everytime to writers try to develop Sherlock and Joan, it's more self-involved whiny crap.  I have the deepest sympathy for people who have suffered traumatic experiences, but self induldgence is not compelling or fun to watch.  I'd probably be friends with someone like Joan Watson in real life, but I don't find her an entertaining person to watch.  John (on the BBC show) has certainly been through some traumatic experiences (losing friends in the war) but even he wasn't self involved like Elementary's Sherlock, right after he saw his best friend apparently jump to his death.

I've seen people arguing in favor of Elementary that Joan is more equal in Elementary than John is on BBC.  I say "Rubbish"  If she's so useful, why on earth does Sherlock put things together while she's asleep?  In prettymuch every single episode.  John literally saved Sherlock's life in A Study in Pink.  His military experience comes into play more than his medical experience, like in Hounds when he helps Sherlock get into Baskerville.  When Joan's medical experience comes in, it's almost always something anyone who paid attention in their health class could know, like a chick with Kidney trouble eating a bunch of salty foods.

I've also seen people say that Lucy Liu's Joan beats out Martin Freeman's John because she's a woman.  That's it, their entire argument.  because like there's never been a female Watson before, except that there has.  As a woman I find that supeficial argument patronizing and sexist.  I need to find the review, but this guy did a hilarious analysis of why the Phantom menace was so terrible and one thing he said was "describe a character without using their appearance, clothing, or occupation, the more you can say, the stronger the character is."

You can say a lot more about John than Joan.  He had more character development in each episode than she's had in the entire season,

Last edited by josabby (April 27, 2013 11:58 pm)

ancientsgate wrote:

josabby wrote:

...You can say a lot more about John than Joan.  He had more character development in each episode than she's had in the entire season,

It's not Lucy Liu's Joan vs. Martin Freeman's John-- IMO it's all about the writing. The writers of Sherlock know their characters, love their characters from the original work (biiiiig ACD fans), and most of all, they know how to write. Elementary's writers don't have a clue, not about any of that, the characters, ACD's original vision, and most of all how to put a good plot together with good characterizations and good dialogue. So, to me, IMO, it's not that John is better than Joan, etc, it's just that John's writers have given him better dialogue and action and interaction with Sherlock than Elemenatry's writers, who have no idea how to do that.

I agree. Though I don't think I would be able to like Joan more than John, even if she was given a better writing etc.
 

To be honest: I havent't seen much of Elementary but what I saw just didn't impress me.
I genuinely tried to watch it without prejudice but Sherlock just kept saying "BORED!" in my head.
I don't mean to say that it's bad, it's just neither a believable style to do Holmes nor really exciting to me.

True... I just pictured Sherlock shouting at the TV: "No! No no! Of course he's not the murderer! Look at the turn-ups on his sleeves!"

josabby wrote:

Just watched another Elementary Episode where Sherlock pieced things together while to supposedly equal Joan slept and a boring montoned blonde's actions caused someone to commit murder. 
 I also saw JJ Abrams say that his people had him watch Sherlock to convince him to cast Benedict.  Peter Jackson was heavily leaning toward casting Martin in The Hobbit because of The Office and Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, but after watching Sherlock, he rearranged the Shooting schedule so Martin coule play Bilbo.

JLM and Lucy Liu are talented actors, but I don't see any filmmakers just having to cast either of them based on Elementary, maybe their previous work, but not Elementary.

I have to agree whole-heartedly with you.
I loved Martin in The Office and Hitchhiker's so could very easily imagine that seeing him in Sherlock would clinch the deal for Peter Jackson.

josabby wrote:

I watched the Elementary finale and UGH! they managed to screw up Irene and Moriarty in once and a blatant pitiful attempt to be clever and push the envelope.  They also made a great actress like Natalie Dormer seem bland and generic, that shouldn't surprise me as they've been dulling the awesomeness of JLM and Lucy Liu (that they've had in other roles) all season.  They had people say that Sherlock and Joan were impressive, but the final gotcha they pulled was so poorly executed in the story telling, it didn't make them appear to be clever in the least.....The season 1 finale of Elementary was complete crap.  For the next season, they need to fire the current hack writers and directors and star clean with people who can tell a decent story.

It won't happen, so don't hold your breath. Even if they did fire the current hack writers, they would only be replaced by more hacks. To my knowledge, the only American TV writers who know their nether regions from their elbows all work for HBO these days. The networks don't have any good writers, not for their episodic drama series anyway. And the so-called comedy shows are even worse-- good lord, what a mess.

I've been saying this for months now-- the prob with Elementary is not the NYC-ness, the John being Joan, the funny-looking Sherlock with the iffy past and the only thing even slightly British about him is his clearly-enunciated-for-American-audiences Britspeak, etc--- the problem is that the writing sucks. And so it shall ever be, IMO, as long as it stays on network TV.

 

Davina wrote:

HBO do employ good writers but I think it is a bit of an over-generalisation to say that there are no good writers working for other networks. There are very good screenplay working on a variety of programmes/series.

I'm curious (not in an argumentative way, I promise) to know in what programs you're seeing good writing (talking only about American TV here). I suspect I don't watch those shows, lol-- what passes for "good writing" on American episodic dramatic TV is akin to enduring a toothache to me, or a migraine headache. Yeah, toothaches and migraines are relevant, but I don't consider them entertainment. I have lots of friends who love (for instance) Bones, Castle, and Dexter, and I cannot abide any of those shows. So maybe the "good" writers are writing stuff that's not my cuppa; in fact, I wouldn't be surprised!

 

Sherlock Holmes - a tatooed, ex-druggie, who uses prostitutes. Dr. Watson a woman who lost her medical license and is paid by Holmes. Ms. Hudson - a transgender. Now Irene Adler is Moriarty. Why do I keep watching this crap. Oh yeah, I remember, I watch and collection all things in the media world of Sherlock Holmes. If they keep this show on the air much longer I won't be able to say I watch all things soon - I can't take much more of it.

I have been watching it and parts have been quite good but now I know about the Irene/Moriarty think I think I'll be saying 'Ta-ta!'

Watched the episode with Irene/Moriarty. What a botch-up! This isn't innovative. This isn't inventive! This isn't clever! This is tripe!