Holmes
First and most obvious we must compare the center of this universe: Sherlock Holmes himself. Downey's Holmes is much like Downey himself, or the character type he loves to play that isn't twitchy drug addict, namely and irrepressible rapscallion, full of wit and enough twinkle in his eye to dazzle entire roomfuls of women. He isn't quite the solemn, rail thin and cerebral deductive character that Sir Doyle presented him as, but he is a thoroughly modern character. He is full of irrepressible action and motion, his deductive reasoning capabilities more of a free flowing form of intelligence that accompanies him on his way. His many vices are presented as charming and eccentric, rather than just bewildering and a little disturbing. Most cannot help but like him, unless the script tells them not to. In short, he is Swashbuckling Sherlock Holmes, with a torn shirt, a rakish grin and a bottle of gin. And the ladies did swoon.
Benedict Cumberbatch (HOLY CRAP whatta name) Sherlock Holmes hews much closer to the source material, and is therefore far creepier. A self proclaimed "high functioning sociopath" in modern day London, this Holmes will not be buckling swash nor will he be attracting hordes of women (at least not onscreen, fangirls...). He is robotic, calculating and and has about as much charm as moss growing on rock. His deductive intellect is who he is just as much as it is his curse. While Downey-Holmes would leap at a case for the chance of adventure, Cumberbatch-Holmes does so because the real world bores him to the edge of suicide. He lives for the thrill and is compelled to know if he is right. It is some form of terrible compulsion, he can't stop himself, wouldn't know how to even if he did acknowledge it as a problem in the first place. At the news that there is a serial killer on the loose he comes alive, cackling with joy at another challenge. In terms of the modern Zeitgeist (Oh look it up!) Downey-Holmes fulfills our desire for Capt. Sparrow-esque high flying adventure, ass kicking and sex appeal. Cumberbatch-Holmes is the realization that the line between monsters and great men is often a matter of perception.
Watson
Watson is our connection into Holmes' world, without him, Holmes would alienate us just as much as every other character, though I would hesitate to call an Afghan war veteran and doctor an "everyman". Law-Watson is less of a doorway into Holmes' alien genius than he is the congenial straight man who has to bail out his slightly more outta control buddy. Maybe that is the draw back of coming into the Holmes universe when the friendship is already well established. Holmes and Watson have become so alike that its somewhat hard to tell the difference, other than that Law-Watson looks exasperated about 35% of the movie, not because he needs to wrangle a cold somewhat alien genius but because his somewhat eccentric frat pal refuses to grow up. He is defined almost entirely by his relationship with Downey-Holmes, still a dashing swordsman in his own right, but just somewhat less so than his Holmes. And the women did swoon, but a bit less.
Martin Freeman is known to me for his comedy work (The Office, Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy), but Freeman-Watson carries more depth of personality to him than Law-Watson can even begin to muster. From the beginning Watson's Afghan experience is put front an center, defining his abilities and his personal scars. Looking back, I have found that this aspect of the traditional Victorian era Watson is generally glossed over. The British Afghan expedition in the late 19th century was no less bloody or disastrous than the current one and in order to have survived Watson would have had to be very capable as both a doctor and a soldier (I hope in the future they will go into the conflict of him being a man trained to kill but having taken an oath to preserve life). In the beginning of the episode, Freeman-Watson is diagnosed with PTSD, but the truth is that he is a thrill junkie much like Holmes. He is addicted to danger, the adrenaline of constantly standing on the edge of life and death. This is a very interesting supposition, how many of the soldiers returning from Afghanistan are having problems readjusting civilian life not because of PTSD, but because the thrill of combat is like heroin? Freeman-Watson connects with Cumberbatch-Holmes not on an "let's go on another adventure old chum" level but because he recognizes in Holmes the same addiction and emptiness in himself. And he kinda like this weirdo.
I find it hard coming to a conclusion about which embodiments of Sherlock Holmes and John Watson is the superior one. The Guy Ritchee tag team are all charm and flash, action and cheekiness. The type of heroes that can only have come into existence in the post Indiana Jones/Lethal Weapon/Pirates of the Caribbean era. Downey-Holmes would work fine by himself, but would be greatly diminished if he didn't have Law-Watson to play off of. The objective isn't mystery but adventure. The Moffat series is much closer to Dexter. A sociopath hunting psychopath killers (I know, they are basically interchangeable terms), not because of any sense of right and wrong, but for the thrill and the intellectual challenge. One light, one dark. One charming, one vaguely frightening. I think in order to decide I will have to wait for the next Downey-Holmes movie and finish the Sherlock series. Have to say, quite looking forward to it.
No comments:
Post a Comment