Swanpride wrote:

You are right about the hommage, but either the word adaptation has a much broader meaning in English, or they aren't ones in the sense I meant. They are based on the general concept. But I don't see them as adaptations because they don't really work with the source text. Therefore they have much more freedom to change things around than Elementary (though, even if Elementary was named differently, it would still be miles away from both shows). If someone would make a Sherlock Holmes show with a lead character with the backstory of House, I would bitch to no end that this isn't Sherlock Holmes, because the backstory is totally different.

A loose adaptation is still an adaptation.  "House" may not be as faithful of an adaptation as "Sherlock"...but it still is an adaptation.  Just like "Elementary".  Just like the recent RDJ "Sherlock Holmes" movies.  They all appeal to different people, and some people will want the more faithful adaptations, and some won't care.  I don't know what people thought over in Europe, but in the US, everyone was pretty aware that House was a Sherlock Holmes' adaptation.

Last edited by sj4iy (July 26, 2013 7:29 pm)

I've always thought it was so silly for fandoms to fight.  

Everyone is allowed to like what they like.  

And why should you have to pick one?  I've seen people fight over which is better, Star Wars or Star Trek.  I love them both and I make no apologises.

I have no opinion on Elementary because I have had no desire to watch it.  Too totally obsessed with Sherlock to even care.  

Discussing why we like something and having different opinions is one thing, but life is too short to acively hate on a form of entertainment.

Hope some of that made sense.

sj4iy wrote:

tonnaree wrote:

I've seen people fight over which is better, Star Wars or Star Trek 

Jam and marmalade isn't a battle.

Some people like sweet things which can turn revolting and others prefer a tangy self preserving thing which usually always deliver.

Marmalade is clearly the winner if it were a battle.

No contest!?!

-m0r

sj4iy wrote:

I've always preferred jam, myself.  Guess it's a Southern US thing

Not me....cream cheese!

That's something I've always thought.  The people who make the show are too afraid to allow even an ounce of chemstry between the leads because they are afraid people will think it's romantic.  They brag about taking risks, so maybe they should risk it.  If fans ship Sherlock and Joan, so what?  Fans of Bendict and Martin, ship Sherlock and John, but it doesn't mean they'll hook up.  The same can be said about Quinto and Pine's Kirk and Spock, Wesley and Angel, JD and Turk, Harry and Ron, ect.  Bromances make good stories even better.  So what if people ship them?  Good stories inspire all kinds of imagination.  How many people interpreted Harry Potter's friendship with Hermione or Luna as romantic.  It didn't change the fact that Harry ended up with Ginny, and the romantic outcome in the canon did not stop the fanfiction.
But it isn't just Joan and Sherlock who lack chemistry.  It's the whole cast.  I saw an interview of the CBS website where JLM and Aidan Quinn were side by side.  They didn't really look at each other, and gave text book answers about their characters. 
Benedict's Sherlock has very unique ways interacting with John, Mrs. Hudson, Lestrade, Molly, Mycroft, Donovan, Anderson, suspects, various clients, ect.  All the actors play off and react to each other.  The Elementary casts (regulars and guest stars) almost seem bored.

Swanpride wrote:

I guess what bothers me most about Elementary is totally unrelated to Sherlock...it is the fact that so many people believe it being a good Sherlock Holmes adaptation. The thing has nothing to do with Sherlock Holmes. I want to trottle everyone who says that he likes Elementary better because Holmes is more human, and because Watson is just as intelligent as him. I can deal with those who say "It has nothing to do with Sherlock Holmes, but I enjoy it as unrelated show"

 
First of all, it's not like the BBC show makes John unintelligent.  As written, the BBC Watson is very intellegent.  You don't get to be a doctor without having some sort of brain.  And his emotional intelligence at times gets Sherlock out of situations he doesn't fully understand.

Secondly, Watson is NOT suppose to be just as intelligent as Sherlock.  That's what makes Sherlock, Sherlock.  His amazing mind.  No one else can do what he does.

 

I think Sherlock is rather more than an "okay" adaptation...we're on a fan forum after all...

And despite its modern setting, it's still more faithful to the canon than some...

So you're not much of a fan, then? No offense, but...if you're not that into it then how come you joined the forum dedicated to it? Curious...

I've seen the Granada series, and I much prefer this one. 

Last edited by kittykat (November 28, 2013 10:49 pm)

I think the "This is the better show" fans on both sides are wrong. I like Sherlock and I also like Elementary. They are two different shows and have both positives and negatives. Both actors have some characteristics of the fictional detective and both shows play with the characters and situations of canon. 

It's all good. I actually like Elementary because Liu's character is portrayed as a multi-dimensioned person rather than the awful "sexy" River Song/Irene Adler of Sherlock or the mousy Molly. YVMV but there's room enough for two different shows about Holmes.  

As for the real Sherlock as stated above-Granada is almost flawles IMHO.

Last edited by tardislass (November 30, 2013 2:13 pm)

kittykat wrote:

So you're not much of a fan, then? No offense, but...if you're not that into it then how come you joined the forum dedicated to it? Curious...

I've seen the Granada series, and I much prefer this one. 

I said that it was a great show... But I am more a fan of Sherlock Holmes, the literary character, and if I compare Sherlock to the books, there is just way too much change.
 

Last edited by Jacco111 (November 30, 2013 6:06 pm)