I am a longtime watcher of another modernized Sherlock Holmes television series, although this one is American and is more Holmes in spirit than in actual execution. The medical drama House plays off the personalities of both Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson in the characters House and Dr. Wilson respectively although they are solving medical mysteries instead of criminal ones. I entered Sherlock having watched literally over one hundred episodes of the other TV show, and so it was impossible for me to not measure every move Sherlock made against House.
Considering that all I can really measure between the two is the dynamic between two men and that in Sherlock they are just meeting for the first time whereas on House they have been in a relationship of sorts for years, it is probably easier to contrast the two rather than compare them. That said, I was surprised at how tonally similar these two shows were, even in the musical score and opening credits. If I go back to the pilot of House, which I admit I haven’t seen in years, this is how the creators originally presented the relationship:
What’s missing from that clip is the witty banter that House and Wilson are so well known for. But it does cut into the deeper heart of their relationship, which is Wilson as House’s moral compass and the only one he will truly listen to. That element is not really included in the first episode of Sherlock because Holmes and Watson are new to one another, although in the very last scene when Watson begins to calls Holmes on his psychological issues you can begin to see it forming.
Sherlock is also a lot more modern than House. The text messages appearing in the air beside the phone carrier, the textual explanations of what Holmes is seeing as he sees it, and the mental map of the cab driving are all things you don’t see that often on television. House sort of employs something like that with graphic journeys into the body to show what is wrong with someone, but nothing to the level of Sherlock.
There is finally the obvious difference in that House has a team of young and frankly good looking associates to bounce ideas off of, which is not Holmes at all. This seems to me an American idea–having the sex appeal and the romantic intrigue among supporting characters to keep an audience’s interest with side stories if they lose the interest in the Sherlock Holmes plotlines. Sherlock does seem concerned with being a very “British” show, as it is constantly identifying itself with London and making a lot of itself clearly referential to the original Sherlock Holmes.
Lastly, what I found truly astonishing about Sherlock was how the episode was essentially the length of a movie but still felt episodic. It blows my mind that there are more Harry Potter movies than episodes of this show. How does releasing this kind of show go? How could you really get addicted to something that only has six installments? That might be a very American mentality, but I can’t imagine how something with only six episodes over two seasons (or series) could inspire a massive following. The excitement level would seem more like a movie than a show to me, even though this watches like a show.
I think comparing the two Sherlocks on tv to each other was a really intriguing idea. It’s interesting to see what each has done to cater to its respective audience.
As far as the whole “getting addicted to a show with only six installments” thing goes, I think it’s a personal thing: are you the person who gets addicted to a show from the pilot or are you a wait-and-see-after-a-couple-of-episodes person? I am generally the former, especially when it comes to British TV shows. With those, I know I will likely only get 6ish chances to get hooked before it’s gone again. The fact that the pilot of Sherlock was so much like a movie was extremely compelling and gives the audience the kind of details and information that it needs. Why did Alcatraz (and why do a lot of other shows nowadays) air special 2 hour premieres here in the states? Because they realized that the longer the introduction, the more time there is to make the audience fall in love. Shows like Sherlock drive their audiences crazy waiting for the next season (I may or may not have somehow seen the next series online over break), but you know that they’ll be worth the wait. Often British TV dramas are so well-crafted, the “you’ll get it when you get it” mentality really pays off.
I have to admit, I too was constantly thinking about the concept of this episode of Sherlock. It absolutely felt like it could have been a movie to me, and, I have to admit, I think I actually was more entertained by this episode than by the Robert Downey Jr. full length feature. I think a major factor of this is not merely the fact that the BBC Sherlock/Watson team was more consistent with the original Sherlock Holmes, but also that there was a high degree of character development that is surprising for the relatively small length of a single television episode.
Normally, I would consider myself someone who needs a few episodes to truly be hooked on a show, but I am in agreement with Brenna here–I really would like to see all of the episodes of Sherlock after watching just the first. I think this really is a testament to those who constructed this show and to the success of British TV as a whole, but also raises my doubts again as to whether the BBC system, which does not allow for longer seasons (or “series”), should be modified to some degree to allow for the extended production of quality popular programming.
My question is – would a show with episodes as long as the “Sherlock” episodes hold the attention of an American audience? We talked about this a lot with “Doctor Who”, but does the same thing apply here? American shows have done one-hour episodes and even back-to-back episodes work well, but what about a feature-length (two hours with commercials?!?) chunk of show?