I agree--I found it a nice nod to canon, and something that would bother very, very few people if they didn't know canon because very, very few people would know that the Fifth Northumberland Fusiliers no longer exist, not without looking it up--and if they are looking it up, they can look up the reference to canon just as easily.

I'm pretty sure that quite a lot of soldiers (and other people with military connections) would notice that Moftiss used a regiment that doesn't exist any more (I looked it up when my alarm bells started ringing while reading the beginning of A Study in Scarlet). As I've said elsewhere - either one updates, or one doesn't. And if one decides to update, then please do it properly, all the way. I find the constant mixture of Victorian and modern rather annoying.

Kittyhawk wrote:

I'm pretty sure that quite a lot of soldiers (and other people with military connections) would notice that Moftiss used a regiment that doesn't exist any more (I looked it up when my alarm bells started ringing while reading the beginning of A Study in Scarlet). As I've said elsewhere - either one updates, or one doesn't. And if one decides to update, then please do it properly, all the way. I find the constant mixture of Victorian and modern rather annoying.

But if they were so strict, we would loose some wonderful ACD references in the show. For example, they would never be able to use St. Bart´s (which is a cult place for all Holmesians) as an active hospital the way it´s used in the show, because in real life, St. Bart´s is no longer functioning like that. And that would be a pity!

With John´s regiment it´s similar.... 

nakahara wrote:

Kittyhawk wrote:

I'm pretty sure that quite a lot of soldiers (and other people with military connections) would notice that Moftiss used a regiment that doesn't exist any more (I looked it up when my alarm bells started ringing while reading the beginning of A Study in Scarlet). As I've said elsewhere - either one updates, or one doesn't. And if one decides to update, then please do it properly, all the way. I find the constant mixture of Victorian and modern rather annoying.

But if they were so strict, we would loose some wonderful ACD references in the show. For example, they would never be able to use St. Bart´s (which is a cult place for all Holmesians) as an active hospital the way it´s used in the show, because in real life, St. Bart´s is no longer functioning like that. And that would be a pity!

With John´s regiment it´s similar.... 

I agree, nakahara.
And correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember Mofftiss every saying something like "We'll update each and every sentence, each and every detail from ACD canon". They transferred ACD's Sherlock Holmes into the modern world, but to me it's much more fascinating to combine canon references with updated material.
 

You mean, as in finding anything BUT sucrose in table sugar - and using a microscope to do it!? (Hounds of Baskerville)

 

Microscope screams "science!" immediately to casual viewers and I´m sure it was only used here to that effect. Realistic scientific procedures wouldn´t look so good on screen so they are replaced by scientific-looking gimmicks in most TV shows nowadays.

Still, it´s not like it was better in the original. Arthur Conan Doyle made his Hound of Baskervilles be all smeared with phosphorus.... not the healthiest thing either. (And as a doctor he knew quite well that phosphorus is poisonous - but he too sacrificed the reality for the irresistible effect of a dog glowing with hellish fire.) 

Kittyhawk wrote:

What I can't understand is why Mofitt stick to canon in small things (who cares about the number of steps up to the flat?) but apparantly think nothing about changing the big ones - like the outcome of the scandal. In A Scandal in Bohemia Irene Adler wins! I'm offended on her behalf that she wasn't allowed to do so in A Scandal in Belgravia...

And here I disagree with you. In my opinion Irene DID win over Sherlock in ASIB the same way she did in the original short story.

ASIB clearly consists of two parts:

the first part (based on the Scandal in Bohemia): everything is the same here as it was in the original. Sherlock is asked to retrieve scandalous photographs from Irene, he dresses as a vicar and infiltrates into her home, where with a help of John he makes a fake fire alarm and learns about the whereabouts of the photos. They are even hidden near the fireplace, even that detail was retained here. But Sherlock gets too cocky while doing this and Irene, seeing this as her chance, misuses this against him, gets to (literary) beat him and afterwards she escapes with photographs....

See? Nothing was changed by Moftiss - they followed the original to a T. So Irene DID win here the same as in Doyle´s creation.

The only change was that Doyle´s Irene stopped here, content with the result and avoided Sherlock afterwards. While Moftiss Irene continued to be involved in his life.

here comes second part (based on The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes): and here Irene finally looses but was it because Sherlock brilliantly stepped all over her? No - she lost because in her hubris she forgot herself and gave herself away inadvertedly while stepping all over Sherlock, humiliating him and he was quick to realise it and took his chance to turn the tables on her. She was the victim of her own pride, she orchestrated her own fall. It didn´t make Sherlock some triumphant conqueror over women - Sherlock was just preventing the person, who grew so haughty in her arrogance that she didn´t think twice about hurting others anymore, from slipping into the role of the criminal and from endangering innocent people. It made Sherlock and Irene even rather than reducing both of their characters.

Wow yeah. I've honestly never thought about it like that before. Maybe I'll appreciate the episode more now. The ending has always annoyed me.

CarlPowers, I don't see how Irene could have manipulated Sherlock into saving her and to me she seems resigned to dying when she hands over the phone. Actually, I don't see how Sherlock could have saved her either (and without Mycroft knowing!), but I'm happy he did

nakahara, I'm with you regarding the two stories in Scandal in Belgravia - the original from "Bohemia" and an add-on. But isn't adding on another story - which for me changes the outcome of the "game" - changing canon? In a big rather big way?

I'm saying that Mofitt change canon whenever they feel like it. As is their right. I just wish they did in in such a way that their films would make more sense to people who don't know the original stories - your above-mentioned "casual viewer".

I was one of them when I first watched the episodes - and I went "that's not possible" "how come?" "I don't believe it" "WTF have they done now" every 10 minutes or so... Btw, I'm not a chemist - or any other kind of scientist. If Mofitt use a microscope for a chemical analysis because it "screams science to the casual viewer" then they must believe that their audience consists of people who've forgotten all their highschool chemistry and haven't watched a single relevant documentary or cop show since. I don't mind whether the "scientific-looking gadgets" for example in NCIS or CSI are real or not - they are believable to the non-expert that I am. The "science" in Sherlock is not even half-way believable to me. And I feel that this is very, very wrong for the world's first scientific detective - Sherlock Holmes as written by ACD.

 

Last edited by Kittyhawk (April 12, 2015 5:24 pm)

Let's not forget a milk drinking snake that hears it when you whistle.