I suppose whether the show is for you depends on what got you hooked on the original stories. Of the TV adaptations I have seen, this one comes closest to the characters as I found them in the books, including Holmes being brilliant but also very egocentric and sometimes an aasshole (or potentially having Asperger's syndrome). I also do see the self-mockery of Watson in the show, though you're right, it's kind of hard to transfer that into screenwriting. Maybe your general contempt for Moffat (which I do understand) is coloring your view rather strongly?
I totally agree about the "he didn't die, stupid!" thing. It's definitely the show's worst part. However, it got much better afterwards, basically starting right after Sherlock came back. (Okay, so I really liked most of the two seasons before that, too (basically everything except the Baskerville episode), but the two seasons that followed got much closer to the characters personally, which were always the parts I loved best in the books, too. ("The Sign of Four" is easily and by far my favourite.) And it gave them a chance to develop, especially Sherlock, to become that man who inspires that fierce loyalty.
So, yes, Sherlock as portraied in this show starts out as much more of an asshole than he even was in the books. But I generally like it when characters start out strongly flawed, so they have something to grow out of. (And somehow, the very common "misunderstood/traumatised person who just bites to protect themselves from more pain" theme doesn't do it for me. When I think about awesome character development, I think of Londo Mollari, or Cordelia Chase. Sherlock, as portraied in this show, fits right in there (though he probably would have taken more years to carry the development quite as far as those other two, and maybe then he wouldn't have been quite so Sherlock anymore so it might be a good thing they quit the show when they did).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2017-10-10 07:07 pm (UTC)I totally agree about the "he didn't die, stupid!" thing. It's definitely the show's worst part. However, it got much better afterwards, basically starting right after Sherlock came back. (Okay, so I really liked most of the two seasons before that, too (basically everything except the Baskerville episode), but the two seasons that followed got much closer to the characters personally, which were always the parts I loved best in the books, too. ("The Sign of Four" is easily and by far my favourite.) And it gave them a chance to develop, especially Sherlock, to become that man who inspires that fierce loyalty.
So, yes, Sherlock as portraied in this show starts out as much more of an asshole than he even was in the books. But I generally like it when characters start out strongly flawed, so they have something to grow out of. (And somehow, the very common "misunderstood/traumatised person who just bites to protect themselves from more pain" theme doesn't do it for me. When I think about awesome character development, I think of Londo Mollari, or Cordelia Chase. Sherlock, as portraied in this show, fits right in there (though he probably would have taken more years to carry the development quite as far as those other two, and maybe then he wouldn't have been quite so Sherlock anymore so it might be a good thing they quit the show when they did).