Offline
Rainbow!!!
(I am really having trouble shipping those two but I take Johnlock rainbows where ever they come from.;-)
Offline
Same here. I see them more as old husbands than a hot couple but the fact that they left out the Watson marriage is a real bonus.
Offline
Absolutly!
Offline
As a twenty first century feminist, I personally prefer a strong female character and it's also more canonical to include Mary.
Offline
Well, as a 21st century feminist I prefer stories that are centred on strong original female characters. Which does not mean that I like it if a former minor character is turned into a main character, thereby changing the direction of the whole original story. If a story is about two men, it may remain so without myself feeling left out as a woman.
Offline
It can be all sorts of course.
But Mark and Steven presented their vision and I am fully on board with it...just don't want it to end!
Offline
To be honest, I wouldn't have minded Sherlock remaining a male-centric story (in fact, I hated the way The Hobbit was changed for the film to shoe-horn in a lead female character!), but I appreciate what Moftiss did with the female characters, particularly Mary, Molly and Mrs Hudson ... and Eurus as the final villain. I do think it feels more balanced. Mary in canon was much more of a side character, and particularly more of a "client" in that her story was as a client, and was a one-off.
Incidentally, I'm happy to see "subtext" in Granada Holmes. It was a much more faithful adaptation of the original and so is open to interpretation in the same way that the original is, I think. I just don't see it in Sherlock.
Offline
SusiGo wrote:
Well, as a 21st century feminist I feel we no longer need to fulfil the quota system in every TV show out there.
Offline
Not so long ago that people were clamouring for a gay quota.
Offline
besleybean wrote:
Not so long ago that people were clamouring for a gay quota.
And your point is what?
Offline
Well, actually I was clamouring for any kind of quota.
But I am happy to like many strong, female characters.
Offline
besleybean wrote:
Well, actually I was clamouring for any kind of quota.
But I am happy to like many strong, female characters.
See, I think quotas are a nessessary evil and should be abandoned as soon as they are no longer needed. Unfortunately, I think gay couple still need more representation than strong women.
Offline
Might be a close call in some Islamic republics.
Offline
besleybean wrote:
Might be a close call in some Islamic republics.
So what?
Edit: Sorry, this argument seems to be written down just for the sake of argueing, bb. That's why my first answer was so short.
And thinking about a sophisticated answer I realize I still don't think that "argument" needs a proper discussion here. But why don't you open a thread about Media representation and quotas in different cultures?
Last edited by Schmiezi (May 16, 2017 5:43 pm)
Offline
I'm just saying: all humans have rights.
Offline
besleybean wrote:
I'm just saying: all humans have rights.
Absolutely. And I outraged that Mofftiss never included a strong blind transsexual Buddhist in the show. *sigh*
Offline
So we are agreed that it's their vision.
I love it.
Offline
Sorry, I am still scratching my head about your chair of arguments. *giggle*
But we surely can agree on it if you like.
Offline
It is what it is.
Offline
Of one thing I am very, very sure - that there have been very few Sherlock Holmes scholars and fans over the last 130 years who wished for more representation of Mrs Mary Watson. I cannot remember a single one, tbh.