BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012.


You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



January 23, 2014 5:12 pm  #61


Re: Blood???? Sherlock gets his coat back, and turns and says to Mycroft..

My street cred just upped and went!


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://professorfangirl.tumblr.com/post/105838327464/heres-an-outtake-of-mark-gatiss-on-the
 

February 7, 2014 4:18 am  #62


Re: Blood???? Sherlock gets his coat back, and turns and says to Mycroft..

ancientsgate wrote:

Chalotte wrote:

...So clever, I almost can't believe it. Even without the Slavic part, it is clever. Gatiss is a genius. I admire the heck out of him. And I absolutely love his posh-Eton-boy smug attitude. 

I don't know. IMO, there comes a point when someone can be too clever for the room. If 75%+ of the viewing audience either doesn't get it or thinks it's nonsense, what pray is the sense of writing it in the first place, having the actors act it, or not leaving it on the editing room floor?

 

I believe the writers of Sherlock employ a similar method to Shakespeare. Shakespeare knew he needed both the masses and the educated upper classes to maintain his career and his reputation, so he included both bawdy humour for the masses, and subtle humour, historical references, and clever phrasing for the upper classes.

Likewise, the writers of Sherlock know they need the ratings they can only get from the large numbers of average viewers, but they also insert lots of inside jokes, references, and clever word play that only those who've read the books, are up-to-date on current events, or take the trouble to "do their research" would understand and appreciate. That way, they get rave reviews all round. It also ensures that they'll be remembered long into the future in a way they wouldn't be if it were just entertaining fluff. 

And if any show should be as clever as possible, it would be a show about Sherlock Holmes. Those books are the gargantuan English presence that they are precisely because they were so clever. Sherlock Holmes = brilliance. 

There's enough crap out there for the average person - the vast majority of it is for ordinary people. Why can't the smart people have something with more depth to watch and analyze? I hardly think any average viewer was turned off the show because the word "blud" made no sense to them.


 

Last edited by Chalotte (February 7, 2014 5:12 am)

 

February 22, 2014 2:09 pm  #63


Re: Blood???? Sherlock gets his coat back, and turns and says to Mycroft..

When I watched it again yesterday I suddenly had an idea about the "blud" and why it is there.
Mycroft said at the beginning of the scene that "a small thank you wouldn't go amiss". And Sherlock wondered whether Mycroft had fun just watching him being beaten like a pulp. So no thank you there for Mycroft.
At the end of the scene Sherlock gave thanks to Anthea after she helped him into his coat. Sherlock turned around and after a little pause Mycroft gets the "blud" as in brother.
In a way this is a not-exactly- thank-you, brother.


 

 

February 22, 2014 3:01 pm  #64


Re: Blood???? Sherlock gets his coat back, and turns and says to Mycroft..

Has somebody already posted about this on here?
Benedict said in interview that he ad-libbed the 'blud' and they kept it in!


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://professorfangirl.tumblr.com/post/105838327464/heres-an-outtake-of-mark-gatiss-on-the
 

February 23, 2014 4:26 am  #65


Re: Blood???? Sherlock gets his coat back, and turns and says to Mycroft..

Cool  ! I admit I thought he said "Vlad" and referred to Mycrofts Serbian alias.. But I feel educated now, this thread was fascinating!

 

February 27, 2014 7:40 pm  #66


Re: Blood???? Sherlock gets his coat back, and turns and says to Mycroft..

Chalotte wrote:

Is it actually possible that Gatiss put in the "blud" remark without being aware of the secondary meaning, that of an evil fairy in slavic mythology? The fairy, "blud," means "wanderer" - "an injurious fairy causing disorientation" - and leads people aimlessly round and round.

There is so much attention to detail and so many subtle references/double entendres in the Sherlock series, that I can't imagine Gatiss wasn't aware of the double meaning (or Sherlock, for that matter). In my opinion, it was a portmanteau-sort-of compliment-insult by Sherlock, meaning: 

a) English slang "blud" - meaning "bro," or "mate" - which, as someone pointed out, is in keeping with Sherlock's former use of street slang, "laters," which sounds so tongue-in-cheek coming from him.

b) The alternate sense of the slang word, "blood" - like, blood brother. Sherlock and Mycroft are blood. 

c) The evil slavic fairy causing disorientation and leading a person round and round aimlessly. Mycroft had said shortly before the "blud" comment that he had learnt Serbian, and that it has a Slavic root. Can the fact that there is a slavic fairy of the same name (and spelling) be coincidence? If so, it's a very lucky one. Mycroft is the master puppeteer and has a hand in everything. At the end of "A Study in Pink," Sherlock agrees with Watson's idea that Mycroft was a "criminal mastermind." And Sherlock hates being controlled by his brother (in previous episodes, he stubbornly refuses to help Mycroft). Mycroft hates "leg work," so he demands that Sherlock follow up on cases for him. As soon as he gets him shaved and cleaned up, he sends him off to uncover a terrorist network. Like an evil slavic fairy directing the actions of people around him.

In addition, I think it notable that Mycroft referred to Sherlock twice before as "brother" in the scenes leading up to the "blud." Mycroft had also told Sherlock that a "small thank you wouldn't go amiss." Sherlock refused to thank him. But right before Sherlock says "blud," that girl agent whose name I can't remember (Anthea? Not her real name) said, "welcome back, Mr. Holmes." But Sherlock said "thank you -" and turned to his brother to say, "blud." To me, it seems fairly conclusive that Sherlock was simultaneously thanking Anthea for her comment, and Mycroft for rescuing him; but at the same time as he is thanking him and referencing their blood relation, he can't resist inserting a little Slavic dig that only Mycroft would pick up on, IN ADDITION to the street-slang meaning of "bro."

So clever, I almost can't believe it. Even without the Slavic part, it is clever. Gatiss is a genius. I admire the heck out of him. And I absolutely love his posh-Eton-boy smug attitude. 

That's interesting and all but didnt someone post on page one or 2 Gattiss confirmed blud as a street term? No evil fairies winding through?

I think they really need to do more episodes and or shorten the hiatus because the theories on the most trivial things w en get out of hand when we are all left to our own devices and detoxing from the Sherlock addiction!

I love that Bennedict ad libbed it. So funny and it does sound off the cuff.


http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu240/cmandz09/Mobile%20Uploads/image-16.jpg

How can you even form a sentence to reply when this ^^^ is in your face? 


http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu240/cmandz09/Mobile%20Uploads/image-14.jpg
 

December 7, 2014 5:42 pm  #67


Re: Blood???? Sherlock gets his coat back, and turns and says to Mycroft..

ancientsgate wrote:

TeeJay wrote:

Oh, and to make things even more confusing, the subtitles on the Blu-ray say "blood" and not "blud". Hmmmmmm......

Completely whacked that he meant blood, like blood brothers, to me. Also almost as completely whacked that he meant blood, like the red stuff in his veins. ???  But I guess Gatiss said he meant the blood brothers thing?  Either way, in my American opinion, it should be spelled blood. I've never seen it or heard of it as blud-- that doesn't spell anything, except phoenetically. Very very strange, whichever and however.

Actually the term is American in origin. It originates from the Bloods gang in Los Angeles, who started referring to one another as 'blood' in the 80's, as a play on the fact it meant 'family', 'blood relation', and also 'Blood', i.e. a member of the Bloods. The usage then moved, via film and rap music, into the Black British gang community in the 90s and 00s, and then, popularised by the film Kidulthood, is now used anywhere in the UK where there are large numbers of black people (Manchester, Liverpool, Bristol, etc), and is also used in an ironic fashion by young white people. It is usually spelled 'blud' because that is how most people who write it spell it, since if you are writing it down at all you are probably texting it. 

 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum