I Hear of Sherlock Everywhere: Steve Doyle

Showing posts with label Steve Doyle. Show all posts

The Final Problem — Total Fail

<h4 style="text-align: center;">
"Failure, sir; absolute failure." [BLAC]</h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjk_WTrNjqHSInuBbAGrj04Qpg9MQLHC0Z68qQ24SYhIWHsLEMVTsKaf67rXU68jpfrhvLNYZ_v6OEz3ZGPO_VNAoqaMQgdlD0GdfP9i3HRWpAaqyvdyagVqOutKWgij1m1kvOcrxNDFDe/s1600/Sherlock+-+Series+4+fail.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="332" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjk_WTrNjqHSInuBbAGrj04Qpg9MQLHC0Z68qQ24SYhIWHsLEMVTsKaf67rXU68jpfrhvLNYZ_v6OEz3ZGPO_VNAoqaMQgdlD0GdfP9i3HRWpAaqyvdyagVqOutKWgij1m1kvOcrxNDFDe/s640/Sherlock+-+Series+4+fail.PNG" width="640" /></a></div>
 
[Editor's Note: this is the ninth in our series of reviews for Series 4 of Sherlock. There are spoilers below. Do we really need to keep reminding you at this point?] 
<h3>
 Total Fail</h3>
I'm gobsmacked at how bad "The Final Problem" was. No amount of rationalization or excuse-making can redeem “The Final Problem.” I'm embarrassed for them…all of them (well, except perhaps Molly Hooper). 
 
It was not only bad Sherlock Holmes (was it even Sherlock Holmes at all?), it was bad story-telling — preposterous, bloated, tedious, and utterly unbelievable ("She arranged all of this in 5 minutes?"). 
 
I feared that the twist in the ending of "The Lying Detective" would portend something regrettable, but good God, who could have foreseen this? A mash-up of The Bad Seed, Saw, Silence of the Lambs, and James Bond...but no Sherlock Holmes at all. 
<h3>
 "We reach. We grasp. And what is left in our hands at the end? A shadow. Or worse than a shadow - misery." [RETI]</h3>
Perhaps some credit could be given for ambition — something the series has always had. But my goodness…talk about reach exceeding grasp. The eulogy by Mary at the end (and have no doubt that was a eulogy…almost an apology) was quite wonderful, even thrilling, but far too little and far too late to save this complete disaster. 
 
I've already read pathetically hopeful comments on Facebook that this last 5-minute epilogue points to a Season 5 that returns to the glory of Season 1. Don't fool yourself in your shocked, embarrassed grief. That was as clear a goodbye as could be. It's over (despite Moffat's and Gatiss's standard prevaricating), and as it turns out it was one episode too many. 
 
Moffat and Gatiss fell prey to "last episode syndrome," where many a long-running popular series felt it had to end with an over-top-finale (see Seinfeld for a spectacular last episode fail).  It's over, and now I say thank God it's over. Whew. 
 
When it was good it was truly great. But it's going to be a while before we all get the taste of that out of our mouths. 
 
I guess the race really does go to the tortoise. 
 
--

The Final Problem — Total Fail

"Failure, sir; absolute failure." [BLAC] [ Editor's Note: this is the ninth in our series of reviews for Series 4 of She...

+ Read more »

by Steve Doyle

The Six Thatchers — A Critic's Review

<h4 style="text-align: center;">
''He begged me to return" [VALL]  </h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiF1icAq-d7XHBM3irDZlKWhx1HgJTdIh93zPHZTFhhizDCwQ45GZR52F6UM-Hxc8hi7m9x2vvMmuANKvO4ZMs_nx4JacIYcD1IBlGDXH0Ia-EhNklMGBaQSeHoTlM_ltMnSh2St3Kest98/s1600/Sherlock+-+Series+4+group.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="478" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiF1icAq-d7XHBM3irDZlKWhx1HgJTdIh93zPHZTFhhizDCwQ45GZR52F6UM-Hxc8hi7m9x2vvMmuANKvO4ZMs_nx4JacIYcD1IBlGDXH0Ia-EhNklMGBaQSeHoTlM_ltMnSh2St3Kest98/s640/Sherlock+-+Series+4+group.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
 
<div style="text-align: center;">
[Editor's Note: this is the second in a series of reviews we'll be sharing on Series 4 of Sherlock.]</div>
 
<h3>
SPOILERS BELOW</h3>
Finally, after years of waiting, last night we saw the return of Sherlock. I know I've come to be seen as being down on the show, but that perception isn't correct. I am simply honest about it. Once again, for the record, the first two Series were a revelation, and its popularity and reputation were entirely deserved. Just tremendous. 
 
But then came Series 3. 
 
From that point on the show was a train wreck, full of self-conscious awareness of its success and cleverness, corrosive pandering to a frenzied fringe in its fan base, and a departure from modern-day adaptations of the Canon to just riffing on itself. 
 
Other critiques — particularly on Facebook —  have pointed out that the show isn't really an adaptation of the Canon, but is instead its own thing. But this is in direct contradiction of Moffat's and Gatiss's own stated intention for the show. Once its own mythos overwhelmed this intent in Series 3, the show lost its way. Badly. 
 
With Cumberbatch's and Freeman's exploding popularity — perfectly justified — and their clearly and repeatedly stated disenchantment with filming the show, it's been a long three years since we've seen Sherlock on TV (not including "The Abominable Bride"). As "The Six Thatchers" drew near, my attitude was one of "hope for the best, fear the worst." 
 
Having said all that, "The Six Thatchers" was a serious improvement on the series since its heyday. The creators obviously heard the criticism. We know they listen to fans (too much so in the past), but we know Moffat and Gatiss are real Sherlockians, and it appears they took some of the criticism to heart. 
 
<h3>
"The old gentleman corrected the mistake" [REIG]</h3>
Right out of the gate, they set about fixing many of the mistakes of Series 3: the cold-blooded murder of Charles Augustus Magnusson was an abomination, and so utterly wrong that no amount of tortured fan-rationalization could justify it. Within the first five minutes, they simply made it go away, "like it never happened." I'm sure they wish it really did never happen. 
 
They also did away with the disingenuous gay-baiting which fed a lunatic-fringe fan-base that I believe nearly drove the stars (especially Freeman) away from the show. This is no surprise as Gatiss explicitly stated in recent interviews that <a href="http://www.dailydot.com/parsec/sherlock-not-gay-steven-moffat-mark-gatiss/" target="_blank">"Johnlock" is never going to happen</a> and furthermore was never intended to happen — clearly distancing themselves from this fan fetish that undoubtedly helped make this the last season of the show. 
 
Finally Sherlock got back to brilliantly updating Canonical mysteries, and gave Sherlock Holmes real detecting to do. We see him actually having cases and clients again, something that shouldn't be a novelty. 
 
<h3>
"a pretty mess" [REIG]</h3>
This is not to say there weren't problems. They still had another mess from Series 3 to clean up: the Mary Morstan as international ninja assassin. Of course, Mary was always marked to eventually die (after all, in the Canon she did). Moffat and Gatiss certainly could have kept her around until the end of Series 4, but instead thankfully exercised their option to get the show back to basics. 
 
The first 45 minutes of "The Six Thatchers" is brilliant —  as good as anything in the first two seasons. But once it was compelled to deal with the Mary Morstan backstory, with the tortured international intrigue, etc., it bogged down. And then, once back in London, the show found its way again. Even in the novels, whenever the backstory has comes in, pacing and interest go down. 
 
And now, in a way I haven't felt for years, I am excited to see the next episode, and regret that this will undoubtedly be the last set of shows in the series. Having found its way again, will this series have the impact and influence it originally did? 
 
Alas, most of the air has gone out of that balloon, but to know that this series looks to end as well as it began (unlike the Granada series, for instance), my gratitude to Moffat and Gatiss is immense, and Sherlockians everywhere owe them a debt for what they brought to our hobby. 
 
Now, I only hope I get home from <a href="http://bsiweekend.com/" target="_blank">New York next weekend</a> in time to see the next episode! 
 
--

The Six Thatchers — A Critic's Review

''He begged me to return" [VALL] [ Editor's Note: this is the second in a series of reviews we'll be sharing o...

+ Read more »

by Steve Doyle

The Making of Sherlock Holmes vs. The Wolfman

<h4 style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
"the Great Mogul" [SIGN]</h4>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9JxqfaR7GxQ5VNB9U5nSPh4vaJI1BlQTr-Gtkjw7xuw3K1tT8W-S4vqKKaVOaOt-B6q7QreZjDjIhhdJ3dPbRPFPFtyr7a_VCLLXbq6nCWsuUsbzu1YsnGvELPgBZ7emhgfF1JpEyjcQ1/s1600/The+Disappearance+of+Lady+Frances+Carfax+-+Alec+Ball.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="The Hon. Philip Green looks awfully werewolf-like in LADY" border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9JxqfaR7GxQ5VNB9U5nSPh4vaJI1BlQTr-Gtkjw7xuw3K1tT8W-S4vqKKaVOaOt-B6q7QreZjDjIhhdJ3dPbRPFPFtyr7a_VCLLXbq6nCWsuUsbzu1YsnGvELPgBZ7emhgfF1JpEyjcQ1/s1600/The+Disappearance+of+Lady+Frances+Carfax+-+Alec+Ball.jpg" title="The wolfman attacks!" /></a></div>
 
 
Editor's note: Steven Doyle, BSI ("The 'Western Morning News'"), is author of the Edgar-nominated <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Sherlock-Holmes-Dummies-Steven-Doyle/dp/0470484446?ie=UTF8&tag=thebakerstree-20&link_code=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Sherlock Holmes for Dummies</a><img border="0" src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=thebakerstree-20&l=btl&camp=213689&creative=392969&o=1&a=0470484446" /> and co-proprietor of <a href="http://wessexpress.com/" target="_blank">The Wessex Press</a>. He manages the publishing for <a href="http://www.bakerstreetjournal.com/" target="_blank">The Baker Street Journal</a> and works in video production in his day job. 
My Sherlockian Reel-Life - or, I Was a Teenage Movie Mogul. On Blaine Avenue, in South Bend, Indiana, from the years 1972-1977, I had cornered the no-budget Super 8 filmmaking industry. I was the preeminent auteur on my block. 
 
With my small company of actors (my brother Patrick and my pal Larry Bilinski), we cranked out a series of "epics" which perfectly reflected not only our adolescent interests, but our lack of movie making expertise as well. These included, but were not limited to, our critically acclaimed remake of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000EHQTZO/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B000EHQTZO&linkCode=as2&tag=thebakerstree-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">King Kong</a>, the bizarre Professional Wrestling/Game Show amalgam, "Sadist Theater"; our homage to <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00000K3TO/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00000K3TO&linkCode=as2&tag=thebakerstree-20" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Night of the Living Dead</a>, entitled "Dead of the Living Night"; and our science fiction epics "Star Monster," and "Rocketship Zero-G." 
 
My entire movie making career was, however, a mere tune-up for what stands today as the pinnacle of my entire filmography, "Sherlock Holmes vs. The Wolfman." Our most ambitious film, "Wolfman" (as it has come to be known to us insiders) was the third and final installment in what we called our "black and white trilogy" (the first two being the above mentioned Dead of the Living Night; and Star Monster ). Wolfman actually had a budget. 
 
 
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="more"></a>We special-ordered black and white film stock, made or rented costumes, scouted locations, and bought a decent Wolfman mask. All in all, I believe we spent about $45 (<a href="http://www.davemanuel.com/inflation-calculator.php" target="_blank">mid-1970's dollars, however</a>!) And we even had a script, an element that up until this film had seemed a constraint on our otherwise free-flowing artistry. 
 
My friend and fellow filmmaker Larry was Sherlock Holmes. I, in addition to my many behind-the-scenes roles, stood in as Dr. Watson. My saint of a mother made a cameo as Mrs. Hudson (wearing a shawl and a grey "old-woman" wig, which came with an authentic bun!), thus providing me with infinite proof of her love for us. She was a real sport. And the Wolfman...ah, he was played rather enthusiastically by my brother Patrick. 
 
Briefly, the plot is as follows: 
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
A Wolfman is on the loose in London. After a grisly murder in an alley, Holmes begins to monitor the situation. Following a second similar murder of an old man (another rubber mask!) in a cemetary, Holmes and Watson decide to take up the case. After finding a scrap of cloth from the Wolfman at the scene of the crime, they use Toby the bloodhound to track the Wolfman to his lair, where he attacks Holmes and Watson and escapes. As scripted, the Wolfman escapes, only to be dispatched later by Watson, when Holmes uses himself in disguise as a decoy to lure the Wolfman into a trap.</blockquote>
 
Unfortunately, following the shooting of this thrilling climax, everything following the discovering of the Wolfman's lair was lost by the film processor, and so the movie's ending was reworked. Now, following the climactic encounter in the den of the Wolfman, the film ends with the following words on the screen: "Sherlock Holmes never did catch the Wolfman. He still stalks the streets of London to this very day." Ah well, it always gets a laugh. 
 
<center>
<object height="360" width="480"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0Y7cL5hPb70?version=3&hl=en_US"></param>
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param>
<param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param>
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0Y7cL5hPb70?version=3&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" height="360" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object></center>
 
Many of you reading this were present for its public debut a few years ago at a film meeting of the <a href="https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Illustrious-Clients-of-Indianapolis/184841455301">Illustrious Clients of Indianapolis</a>, as I had transferred it to videotape. It pleased me very much to hear, as an adult, the kind words of appreciation. I particularly relished the comments of Pat Ward, our own Sherlockian film expert, who said, "That wasn't nearly as bad as I thought it would be!" 
 
Some of the behind-the-screen tales of the film's shooting (getting kicked out of a cemetery for improper "horseplay," tweed coats and inverness capes in 90-degree heat, etc), will have to wait for another time. I did go on, in my adult life, to have a professional career in film and video production, and have produced countless shows and commercials using equipment and resources unimaginable to the 14 year-old behind the Super 8 movie camera. 
 
But to be honest, no production I have been involved with is as dear to me as "Sherlock Holmes vs. The Wolfman." 
 
 
--