Stuff I Love meme - Days 16 and 17

[dimity_blue]

Two TV series: Garrison's Gorillas and Sherlock.

Garrison's Gorillas
I don't post a lot about Garrison's Gorillas but it's been a favourite of mine for 30 years now. It was made and shown in 1967/8, and lasted for 1 season. It was shown again in the UK in 1989 (which is when I first saw it).

It's set during World War II and is about an Intelligence unit comprised of an American Lt. and 4 convicts who are working for the US Army in order to earn a parole. The scripts are a bit hit and miss, with very improbable scenarios but there's quite a bit of humour included.

For me, the real attraction in Garrison's Gorillas is the characters and the friendships between the characters that develop over the episodes. They go from being suspicious of each other and their leader to close friends who'll risk their lives for each other.

Sherlock
Do I need to explain Sherlock? I think most people are aware of the series.

I really really enjoy the series, the first episode especially. I love the little details Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss included from the books (like the neighbour being Mrs. Turner), as well as the fun way they modernised everything.

I love all the main characters and the interactions between the characters. I love that they all acknowledge Sherlock is incredibly socially inept (he's a git) but they love him anyway.

Comments

[author_by_night]

I love all the main characters and the interactions between the characters. I love that they all acknowledge Sherlock is incredibly socially inept (he's a git) but they love him anyway.

Me too! I think that's actually so important.

I haven't read the original books, but I read one of the stories, and I read part of the first book. What also struck me was that Sherlock and Sherlock are actually quite different, yet they're odd in the ways that were considered odd in their respective times. Moffat's Sherlock would actually have fit in very well with Victorian society; he's grim, stoic and matter-of-fact about death. I can absolutely see him keeping a photo of a recently deceased loved one. Meanwhile, Sherlock of the books is eccentric, but fun. He sort of reminds me of the Tenth and Doctors - just a bit. In our time, he'd be seen as a little odd and dorky, but not so out of place. I don't know if that was intentional, but if it was, well done. (It may have been that Moffat realized the similarities between Sherlock and his Doctors, though, and decided to diverge a bit.)

ETA: Of course, I haven't read the books, so YMMV on the accuracy of my analysis. It's just what I observed, again, from a bit of the first book and from the short story, which I forget the name of now. It's actually surprisingly quite progressive, this man wants to find a woman who has wronged him, and has compromising photos of them together (I guess that sort of thing happened back then too?), but the story ends up portraying the female character as the victim. IIRC anyway. She even dupes the guy in the end, because she's quite clever. Apparently the series had an equivalent of that storyline, but I don't think I saw that episode.

[thisbluespirit]

Sherlock? What is that?


;-p

[dimity_blue]

A Scandal in Bohemia/A Scandal in Belgravia.

I'm not actually that impressed by Irene Adler (the original). Holmes is because she saw through his disguise as a vicar.

IMO, it's not that amazing that Irene realised she was being tricked. Irene broke a lot of taboos. One of the scandalous things she'd done was dress as a man, so she realised that a suit of clothes could be very misleading. A man in a Vicar's collar could be a Vicar but add a trick to make her reveal her hiding place and that 'Vicar' could well be Sherlock Holmes about whom she was warned.

Holmes either didn't expect a *woman* to see through his disguise or didn't expect anyone to see through one of *his* disguises.

[dimity_blue]

Nothing very interesting. :oD