Sherlock Holmes - Action Hero
Moore Not Less
Posts: 1,095MI6 Agent
From The Guardian's website.
Sherlock set to buff up
http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,2035726,00.html
Staff and agencies
Friday March 16, 2007
The tumbleweeds that skid across the barren desert of Hollywood creativity showed no sign of letting up yesterday as Warner Bros announced it is reinventing Sherlock Holmes as an action hero.
Neil Marshall, the highly regarded British directo of The Descent, has been hired to orchestrate proceedings and transform the erudite sleuth of 221B Baker Street into something a little more rough-hewn.
The story will be adapted from Lionel Wigram's upcoming graphic novel Sherlock Holmes, with the British Wigram set to produce.
Studio executives are keeping mum about the storyline, although it is understood that Arthur Conan Doyle's legendary creation will rely less on tugging pensively on his pipe and employ instead his little known pugilistic skills and swordsmanship to vanquish Victorian villainy.
Holmes' newfound fighting prowess alone will not be enough to overcome his foes, however. In keeping with the vague truism that behind every superhero lurks an older, often moustachioed aide, the producers are pairing up the crime-fighter with a new-look Dr Watson. Elementary, really.
Marshall is likely to start work on Holmes once he has finished directing the futuristic action thriller Doomsday, about a killer plague that threatens to wipe out Hollywood remakes. We're only joking, that would be proposterous. The plague threatens to eradicate the entire human race.
Sherlock set to buff up
http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,2035726,00.html
Staff and agencies
Friday March 16, 2007
The tumbleweeds that skid across the barren desert of Hollywood creativity showed no sign of letting up yesterday as Warner Bros announced it is reinventing Sherlock Holmes as an action hero.
Neil Marshall, the highly regarded British directo of The Descent, has been hired to orchestrate proceedings and transform the erudite sleuth of 221B Baker Street into something a little more rough-hewn.
The story will be adapted from Lionel Wigram's upcoming graphic novel Sherlock Holmes, with the British Wigram set to produce.
Studio executives are keeping mum about the storyline, although it is understood that Arthur Conan Doyle's legendary creation will rely less on tugging pensively on his pipe and employ instead his little known pugilistic skills and swordsmanship to vanquish Victorian villainy.
Holmes' newfound fighting prowess alone will not be enough to overcome his foes, however. In keeping with the vague truism that behind every superhero lurks an older, often moustachioed aide, the producers are pairing up the crime-fighter with a new-look Dr Watson. Elementary, really.
Marshall is likely to start work on Holmes once he has finished directing the futuristic action thriller Doomsday, about a killer plague that threatens to wipe out Hollywood remakes. We're only joking, that would be proposterous. The plague threatens to eradicate the entire human race.
Comments
And let's not overlook The Great Detective's extensive knowledge of baritsu--the mysterious Oriental fighting art which he used to finally defeat Professor James Moriarty,the notorious "Napoleon of Crime" at Reichenbach Falls.
But will Holmes still play the violin?That's what I'd like to know...
Ah well, this isn't the first time studios have tried "updating" the character - I remember a TV movie where he was cryogenically frozen and defrosted in the late 20th century, by Dr. Watson's great granddaughter no less.
WB can do what they want, I'll always have my Jeremy Brett collection and the wonderful "The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes".
For me Brett is the ultimate Holmes. I also liked Rupert Everett in the BBC TV movie 'The Case of the Silk Stocking,' a couple of years back, although that wasn't based on a Conan Doyle story and showed it by having a lame plot. I'd like to see him play Holmes again though someday.
Saw that. Sucked like a vacuum cleaner.
Love 'The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes.' Whatever happens with this new production I'll go and see it out of interest. Does sound a bit 'Young Sherlock Holmes' to me though.
With apologies to Basil Rathbone, I also think Jeremy Brett is the ultimate Holmes. For me the first season of stories with David Burke as Watson was the highpoint as the dramatizations had a freshness and energy to them that was never really matched. David Burke was also a very entertaining Watson IMHO.
Robert Stephens really fleshed out the character as well and gave him all manner of emotions and failings, while still being very true to Doyle's original depiction. Colin Blakely was also a solid Watson IMHO and showed a lot of the mannerisms Burke would later display (to my eyes at least).
There are many other great interpretations of course (I even liked Roger Moore in Sherlock Holmes in New York - very romanticized but still entertaining and he was a master of disguise) but Brett and Stephens are tops on my list.
There are many other great interpretations of course (I even liked Roger Moore in Sherlock Holmes in New York - very romanticized but still entertaining and he was a master of disguise) but Brett and Stephens are tops on my list.[/quote]
I agree. Holmes has been well served by film and TV. One I haven't seen, but really want to is 'Murder by Decree.'
Have you seen "A Study In Terror"? Well, "Murder By Decree" is basically a remake of that with a bigger budget (having some of the same cast also added to the sense of deva vu when I first saw it on its initial release)and Plummer & Mason are excellent.
No, not seen that either I'm afraid. It was on last week in the early hours, but I missed it. I would like to see them both though.
Yup- me too. I thought he was a great choice; not being cast in the image of Brett, which was a good idea (see also Craig, Daniel!); plus it was set in Edwardian times instead of Victorian which gave a nicely different feel. The plot was rubbish, though. They should have got Bert Coules to write it- he's done some of the best Holmes stories ever for BBC Radio; I even prefer some of them to Doyle's stuff. The epsiode where Holmes deducts an entire crime from nothing more than a corpse on his living room floor is masterful. Seek it out.
Can't disagree of course. Brett is Doyle's Holmes come to life, and Stephens is something even more interesting- a human version of Holmes. Both are excellent.
As for this new actiony Holmes, well- yeah; sounds good. As mentioned above Holmes has always been a man of action: pretty much every Brett episodes ends with him and Watson with pistols in their hands. And just about the most famous Holmes image of them all is him and Moriarty fighting! I look forward to it: I honestly find 'Young Sherlock Holmes' to be a really good fun film, and it's not exactly a million miles away from the spirit of Holmes.
Bond fans may find the next incarnation of Holmes of interest, it's our favourite media mogul Jonathan Pryce playing him on the BBC in next week's 'Sherlock Holmes and the Baker Street Dozen' which is on Sunday the 25th March at 5.45pm. Holmes won't feature in it much and it's for kids mainly, but it should be good fun and Pryce is good casting, although I'm sure he'll play it pretty light.
As maligned as the "Young Sherlock Holmes" movie was that Speilberg had cranked out, I enjoyed the adventure elements of it, and felt that that was something lacking in many Holmesian outings.
I recommend both of these movies.Each of the films deal with Holmes hunting down Jack the Ripper, and Frank Finlay is Lestrade in both movies,but that's really where the resemblance ends.
A Study in Terror features a dynamic John Neville as Sherlock, with Donald Houston as Watson.Most of the Ripper's victims are played by beautiful girls(unlike the homely middle-aged women who really died).Interestingly,The Ripper's actual letters are quoted within the course of the story and are used as clues by Holmes.Overall,this film's very good-- with enough twists to keep you interested to the end.Here's some trivia:this was the first Sherlock Holmes movie to be made in color.And the leading lady is played by a young blonde Judi Dench.
Murder by Decree visits the same territory as A Study in Terror, but the motivations behind The Ripper's killings are unlike those presented in the earlier motion picture.Some famous individuals of that time, who were connected to the Ripper crimes by both inuendo and flagrant attempts at personal publicity,are portrayed in this movie.Christopher Plummer is superb as usual, and James Mason is,as always, memorable.Genvieve Bujold,Susan Clark,Donald Sutherland and David Hemmings are in the supporting cast.Trivia:this one was shot in Canada and directed by Bob Clark of Porky's and Black Christmas fame.Don't hold that against him.
Both movies have terrific atmosphere and recreate the London of 1888 masterfully.Each film is worth a peek.I believe that currently Study is only available on videotape(I could be wrong),while Murder is definitely on DVD.
Hope this is helpful.:)
Anthony Quayle is in both as well, albeit in different roles. Both films are well worth watching; I saw the second one recently, but it's been many years since I saw the first.
Oops!:o Right you are.It's been quite a while since I've seen Terror myself.This one really should come to DVD.
I missed that, JD; who played Watson, and was he any good?
Yeah it was rather good, wasn't it? Only a kid's show, so not exactly deep Holmes, but Pryce was very good. The rest of the cast was pretty movie-standard, frankly: Michael Maloney, Bill Patterson (as Watson), Anna Chancellor... all very good. Nice little idea with Holmes having to solve the mystery from one room... all in all, not the greatest slice of Sherlock ever but far from the worst!
And did anyone miss Sherlock smoking his pipe? Apparently the Holmes fans got a bit hot under the collar about him not doing this in this show, but it doesn't actually make much difference.
Bill Paterson wasn't really given a lot to do. He used his Scots accent though, which I felt was appropriate given that Conan Doyle was a Scot. We might see more of him next week.
I didn't realise until you mentioned it. I guess that Auntie Beeb are worried that large groups of children will start hanging out on street corners smoking baccy from a pipe.
http://www.bakerstreetblog.com/2007/04/there-is-long-row-veil.html
You may be pleased to know that the producers have come to their senses and have instead settled on Nicholas Rowe as their choice. Astute Sherlockians will remember Rowe from the 1985 adventure film Young Sherlock Holmes, directed [sic] by Steven Spielberg, where he played a school-age Holmes who looked remarkably like Joseph Bell, the medical professor who inspired Conan Doyle.
The producers, who originally were going for toughness, have evidently agreed that Rowe, who stands 6 feet 4 inches tall, will undoubtedly be an imposing figure. And they're being mindful of the Canon as he perfectly fits Watson's description of Holmes from A Study in Scarlet:
"In height he was rather over six feet, and so excessively lean that he seemed to be considerably taller. His eyes were sharp and piercing, save during those intervals of torpor to which I have alluded; and his thin, hawk-like nose gave his whole expression an air of alertness and decision."
This is really welcome news, as Hollywood seems to get casting all wrong many times in Holmes films. It's encouraging to see an actor who can really inhabit the character - especially one who proved himself in his previous Holmes outing.
Yes I think you're right- I must say that it seems a bit sick to talk about losing a partner to cancer in an April Fool's gag.
I noticed that too. That didn't strike me as being particularly clever either. Not a great April Fool at all. Especially as it seems like a good idea. Certainly a lot better than casting Russell Crowe as Holmes.
Yeah- Dark Horizons did a gag this year where (As well saying Dalton would be M in the next Bond film) they said John Rhys Davies would be in Indiana Jones 4. Which, as it's hardly an unlikely thing to happen, isn't really a joke at all!