I am – Hercules!!
A series of three British TV-movies (running on consecutive Sundays starting tonight) from longtime “Doctor Who” writers Steven Moffatt and Mark Gatiss, “Sherlock” reimagines Sherlock Holmes and John Watson as 21st century bloggers armed with cellphones. It stars Benedict Cumberbatch (“Atonement”) and Martin Freeman (who was Tim on BBC’s “The Office” and will be Bilbo in “The Hobbit”).
A lot of the critics mention “House”:
Time says:
… kinetic, wry … The highest praise I can give the series is that I'm neither a Doctor Who cultist or a particular detective-story fan, yet I enjoyed it immensely. …
TV Guide says:
… wonderful brain candy. … Their adventures are never boring. Clever and harrowing, but also often hilarious, the stories move us ever closer to a fateful encounter with Holmes' arch-nemesis Moriarty. Some things never change. Sherlock is the rare reinvention that's likely to enchant purists as well as those yearning for a new look at an old favorite. Should you bookmark it now on your DVR? The answer, my dear reader and viewer, is elementary.
USA Today says:
… a sharp, funny, clever series that remains faithful to the spirit of Doyle's stories while infusing them with a vibrant spirit of modernity. You'll notice the updates, from the cellphone-provided clues to Sherlock's use of a homeless network of informers, but they're never forced or intrusive and they never fail to form a coherent whole, so you don't feel like you're watching some museum display stuffed into modern dress. …
The New York Times says:
… Mr. Freeman’s deft performance as the grouchy but loyal Watson is one of the show’s pleasures, along with Rupert Graves’s avuncular take on Inspector Lestrade. It should also be mentioned that Mr. Graves, who has been making a specialty of guest appearances on British crime dramas (“Marple,” “Lewis,” “Wallander”), belongs with George Clooney in the pantheon of the well-aging male. Add Mr. Cumberbatch, who brings to the table his piercing gray eyes and an appealingly playful arrogance, and you have an ensemble that lives up to the verve and braininess of Mr. Moffat and Mr. Gatiss’s writing. …
The Los Angeles Times says:
… Benedict Cumberbatch is tall and narrow in the familiar mode, with a haughty intensity but also something of a sense of fun. It takes all of 30 seconds, watching him, to go from "Hmmm," to "Oh, yes." As the kids say, he owns this. …
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette says:
… hugely entertaining. Viewers who dismiss PBS programs as boring or stuffy risk embarrassment if someone should use "Sherlock" as defense Exhibit A. … Tonight's premiere has a zippy energy that can be attributed to the writing and Mr. Cumberbatch's riveting, gonzo performance. He plays Sherlock as authoritative and arrogant but also with a hint of excited madness that makes for an engrossing new take on this classic character.
The San Francsico Chronicle says:
… There have been many great "Masterpiece" offerings over the decades, but I can't think of a single one that is as much out-and-out fun as "Sherlock," a modern-dress Conan Doyle that crackles with superb writing, brilliant performances and snappy direction, and does it all while somehow managing to be oddly faithful to the original source material. …
HitFix says:
… thanks to committed performances from Cumberbatch and Freeman, and clever writing from Moffat and Gatiss, most of it works splendidly. … The first and third installments are a bit stronger than the second, as the first deals with the origin of the Holmes/Watson partnership and the third pits Holmes against arch-rival Moriarty, where the middle chapter is a straightforward mystery. (In that way, the mini-season isn’t unlike the many current American dramas that become less interesting the more standalone a particular episode becomes.) Overall, though, the reinvention is so smart and funny and thrilling that I hope we get another, longer season before too long …
TV Squad says:
… a witty, wise, even thrilling update. … if it has one (easily overlooked) fault, it can get a bit over-caffeinated in an effort to prove that it is not your father's stodgy Holmes' adaptation. On the other hand, this sprightly trio of TV movies are more rigorous and well-written than the rather sloppy, scattershot 2009 film adaptation starring Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law. …
The Boston Globe says:
… a strange, fascinating, and sometimes brilliant contemporary take on the father of forensic crime-solving. This texting, laptopping Sherlock is part Conan Doyle, part House, part petulant rock star, and part Sheldon from “The Big Bang Theory’’ as he makes social blunders with shades of Asperger’s. … The three episodes are a mixed bag in terms of the crime plots. (A new trilogy is in the works, by the way.) Ultimately, though, it doesn’t matter; the show is all about Sherlock and Watson, circa 2010.
The Hollywood Reporter says:
… That well-honed dynamic and a sly sense of humor keep “Sherlock” compelling even when its plotting falters, as it does in part three, “The Great Game,” with its overburdened grid of crisscrossing cases. As a cliffhanger it’s effective, but the episode works itself into too much of a lather preparing for the showy entrance of Holmes’ arch enemy and criminal mastermind counterpart, Moriarty (Andrew Scott). The sharpest of the three 90-minute self-contained mysteries is the opener …
9 p.m. or thereabouts. Sunday. PBS.
Follow Herc on Twitter!!
Follow Evil Herc on Twitter!!
