Granada Discussion Post: The Sign of Four
Jan. 6th, 2013 12:24 am![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
spacemutineer.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
sherlock60Let's talk telly in the discussion post for Granada's movie-length adaptation of The Sign of Four. If you haven't seen this episode yet, you can find it at YouTube, Netflix, Amazon Video, and DVD. Follow me behind the jump for some of my random thoughts and impressions. Please add your own in the comments!
Canon discussion is available in the canon discussion post.
- It's a funny thing. The more I thought about this episode/movie for these questions, the more I realized I didn't like it very much. It was missing important elements that make SIGN what it is, like truly thrilling adventure, and Watson and Mary's love story. Too bad. Overall, this is a well-made version, and I like the casting of Mary particularly. The Sholtos are bizarre, even more so than I expected, given Thaddeus in the novel. Here he's quite creepy, and not in a good way.
- This adaptation is significantly less exciting than the novel it is based upon. Dark and spooky Pondicherry Lodge is discovered in broad daylight instead of in the pitch darkness. There is no fearful grabbing of hands since the romance between Watson and Mary is missing. The boat chase is slow and endless, and takes place in a dense artificial fog to hide modern London along the shoreline. The whole boat scene is just suspense-less, and the tense music only makes it seem even less thrilling. They chase for an age, what seems like hours as the sun sets and darkness falls. I wrote this in my notes as it continued interminably: "Well, it's hour fourteen of our high speed chase. We still are hundreds of yards away. Anybody want a sandwich?"
- Also missing is the sweet budding romance between Watson and Mary. They decided early in making these adaptations that Granada's versions would have Watson remain a bachelor throughout, probably a wise decision overall. But in this case it becomes quite awkward, as what was once a gentle love story devolves into awkwardly long meaningful glances between Edward Hardwicke's Watson and Jenny Seagrove's Mary, made more awkward by their rather off-putting age difference. Without the love at its center, there seemed to be a hole in the story.
- Holmes' cocaine use is entirely left out. Likely that is for the best, as that element is so dark in the text and would be difficult to pass on modern television. But taking it out does change the atmosphere that the story unfolds in. Instead of being a devolving addict and putting Watson in a very uncomfortable position as doctor and friend, Holmes is just being a general jerk to everyone, Watson included. It's almost all authentic dialogue, but it comes across more cruelly here than I took it reading it.
Canon discussion is available in the canon discussion post.
- It's a funny thing. The more I thought about this episode/movie for these questions, the more I realized I didn't like it very much. It was missing important elements that make SIGN what it is, like truly thrilling adventure, and Watson and Mary's love story. Too bad. Overall, this is a well-made version, and I like the casting of Mary particularly. The Sholtos are bizarre, even more so than I expected, given Thaddeus in the novel. Here he's quite creepy, and not in a good way.
- This adaptation is significantly less exciting than the novel it is based upon. Dark and spooky Pondicherry Lodge is discovered in broad daylight instead of in the pitch darkness. There is no fearful grabbing of hands since the romance between Watson and Mary is missing. The boat chase is slow and endless, and takes place in a dense artificial fog to hide modern London along the shoreline. The whole boat scene is just suspense-less, and the tense music only makes it seem even less thrilling. They chase for an age, what seems like hours as the sun sets and darkness falls. I wrote this in my notes as it continued interminably: "Well, it's hour fourteen of our high speed chase. We still are hundreds of yards away. Anybody want a sandwich?"
- Also missing is the sweet budding romance between Watson and Mary. They decided early in making these adaptations that Granada's versions would have Watson remain a bachelor throughout, probably a wise decision overall. But in this case it becomes quite awkward, as what was once a gentle love story devolves into awkwardly long meaningful glances between Edward Hardwicke's Watson and Jenny Seagrove's Mary, made more awkward by their rather off-putting age difference. Without the love at its center, there seemed to be a hole in the story.
- Holmes' cocaine use is entirely left out. Likely that is for the best, as that element is so dark in the text and would be difficult to pass on modern television. But taking it out does change the atmosphere that the story unfolds in. Instead of being a devolving addict and putting Watson in a very uncomfortable position as doctor and friend, Holmes is just being a general jerk to everyone, Watson included. It's almost all authentic dialogue, but it comes across more cruelly here than I took it reading it.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2013-01-08 02:12 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-01-13 09:10 am (UTC)As for why the adaptation ended up as it did, some of it was inevitable. Since the Granada people decided before they started filming that they weren't going to ever show Watson married in the show, they had to excise a key element of the plot right off the bat. Two, in fact, because they also were never going to accurately portray Holmes' out-of-control drug habit either.
But that's no excuse for why it's lacking in the excitement department. That's just poor film-making.