Sherlock
And where would I be without a new thing to squee over?
Following multiple recommendations from trusted friends, as well as a vague understanding that Stephen Moffat was somehow involved, I decided to watch Sherlock. This, for those who struggle to keep up with all the Sherlock Holmes adaptations floating around the moment, is the BBC modern-day mini-series version starring Benedict Cumberbatch, and my new greatest love of all time, Martin Freeman.
Now, the reason I haven't been jumping up and down to watch this until now is that I somehow managed to skip the whole Sherlock Holmes thing. I never read the books, except "A Study in Scarlet" and the beginning of "The Hounds of Baskerville". What little I know of the mythology comes from a TV series which was shown in Russia when I was a very young child (which I basically can't remember, exscept for what I now know is the ending of "The Final Problem" - presumably, this made an impact on me!) I also watched the recent movies with Robert Downey Jr, though I somehow managed to watch both movies after a sleepless night and I'm pretty sure I fell asleep both times.
The other thing is, crime fiction as a genre has not featured highly in my book, TV or movie consumption until now. It's just not something I've ever been that interested in.
All of which adds up to what I feel is, in many ways, the best possible means of getting into a new show: with no specific expectations whatsoever.
Now, I'm going to try and write down some sensible thoughts without descending into incoherent squee mode. First of all, there's something truly fascinating about characters who ignore or don't understand normal social graces - I suppose a sort of wish fulfilment, because they frequently say and do things we only dare to think. (Annoying in real life: good on television!) Sherlock is almost the archetypal example of this, though I feel his description of himself as a "high-functioning sociopath" is a bit extreme. High-functioning Asperger's is more like it.
Then, of course, there's the "mystery" aspect of it. I imagine the point of most crime fiction is to force the audience to try and guess the solution to the problem before the characters do - but personally, I'm always a bit disappointed if I manage it. And with Sherlock, I don't think I've ever yet managed to predict the ending of an episode, with just one notable, but entirely understandable exception - which I will come to.
But I think what Sherlock does best of all is that it isn't just about solving the mystery, and it isn't just about Sherlock being awesomely clever (though there's plenty of that) - the stories weave together mystery, suspense, character development and a surprising amount of humour to create something truly enjoyable.
The best episode, in my opinion (and from a not-entirely-brief glance around the interwebs, the majority of the fandom's) is The Reichenbach Fall. Somehow, this manages to bring together all the things I love about this show and create 90 minutes of perfection. Ironically, this is the one episode where I actually knew the ending. Okay, if you're not at all familiar with the Sherlock Holmes canon, the next bit contains spoilers and I suggest not looking under the cut. If you've read the books or seen previous adaptations, you'll probably be okay. So yeah, Sherlock Holmes dies. Only, not really. Of course, the thing looked so damn convincing, I almost, almost believed Stephen Moffat has decided to end the series as Conan Doyle intended (fact: he killed off Sherlock Holmes for real, and only brought him back years later after caving in to fan pressure). But here's the thing: it takes a special kind of talent to kill off a beloved character, reveal that he's not really dead two minutes later, but still have your audience in tears and calling the writer a heartless bastard.
Which brings me to my final thoughts: holy crap, how amazing in Martin Freeman? Here's an actor I've seen multiple times in many different roles, and never really appreciated. And yes, there is much squee around Benedict Cumberbatch, and yes, I think he's great, but... Martin Freeman, wow. The really amazing thing? He plays a character who is so thoroughly, Britishly reserved, that you would think there wouldn't be too much for him to do... except that he manages to play trying very hard not to show his emotions so well that it is far, far more devastating than it would've been if he'd just gone to floods of tears at the appropriate moments.
And on that note... I can't wait to see "The Hobbit"!
Following multiple recommendations from trusted friends, as well as a vague understanding that Stephen Moffat was somehow involved, I decided to watch Sherlock. This, for those who struggle to keep up with all the Sherlock Holmes adaptations floating around the moment, is the BBC modern-day mini-series version starring Benedict Cumberbatch, and my new greatest love of all time, Martin Freeman.
Now, the reason I haven't been jumping up and down to watch this until now is that I somehow managed to skip the whole Sherlock Holmes thing. I never read the books, except "A Study in Scarlet" and the beginning of "The Hounds of Baskerville". What little I know of the mythology comes from a TV series which was shown in Russia when I was a very young child (which I basically can't remember, exscept for what I now know is the ending of "The Final Problem" - presumably, this made an impact on me!) I also watched the recent movies with Robert Downey Jr, though I somehow managed to watch both movies after a sleepless night and I'm pretty sure I fell asleep both times.
The other thing is, crime fiction as a genre has not featured highly in my book, TV or movie consumption until now. It's just not something I've ever been that interested in.
All of which adds up to what I feel is, in many ways, the best possible means of getting into a new show: with no specific expectations whatsoever.
Now, I'm going to try and write down some sensible thoughts without descending into incoherent squee mode. First of all, there's something truly fascinating about characters who ignore or don't understand normal social graces - I suppose a sort of wish fulfilment, because they frequently say and do things we only dare to think. (Annoying in real life: good on television!) Sherlock is almost the archetypal example of this, though I feel his description of himself as a "high-functioning sociopath" is a bit extreme. High-functioning Asperger's is more like it.
Then, of course, there's the "mystery" aspect of it. I imagine the point of most crime fiction is to force the audience to try and guess the solution to the problem before the characters do - but personally, I'm always a bit disappointed if I manage it. And with Sherlock, I don't think I've ever yet managed to predict the ending of an episode, with just one notable, but entirely understandable exception - which I will come to.
But I think what Sherlock does best of all is that it isn't just about solving the mystery, and it isn't just about Sherlock being awesomely clever (though there's plenty of that) - the stories weave together mystery, suspense, character development and a surprising amount of humour to create something truly enjoyable.
The best episode, in my opinion (and from a not-entirely-brief glance around the interwebs, the majority of the fandom's) is The Reichenbach Fall. Somehow, this manages to bring together all the things I love about this show and create 90 minutes of perfection. Ironically, this is the one episode where I actually knew the ending. Okay, if you're not at all familiar with the Sherlock Holmes canon, the next bit contains spoilers and I suggest not looking under the cut. If you've read the books or seen previous adaptations, you'll probably be okay. So yeah, Sherlock Holmes dies. Only, not really. Of course, the thing looked so damn convincing, I almost, almost believed Stephen Moffat has decided to end the series as Conan Doyle intended (fact: he killed off Sherlock Holmes for real, and only brought him back years later after caving in to fan pressure). But here's the thing: it takes a special kind of talent to kill off a beloved character, reveal that he's not really dead two minutes later, but still have your audience in tears and calling the writer a heartless bastard.
Which brings me to my final thoughts: holy crap, how amazing in Martin Freeman? Here's an actor I've seen multiple times in many different roles, and never really appreciated. And yes, there is much squee around Benedict Cumberbatch, and yes, I think he's great, but... Martin Freeman, wow. The really amazing thing? He plays a character who is so thoroughly, Britishly reserved, that you would think there wouldn't be too much for him to do... except that he manages to play trying very hard not to show his emotions so well that it is far, far more devastating than it would've been if he'd just gone to floods of tears at the appropriate moments.
And on that note... I can't wait to see "The Hobbit"!