This week I was able to watch, once again, 'Young Sherlock Holmes' thanks to Amazon Prime.
Although a fun film, it was hardly remarkable, only receiving Oscar nods in a technical category.
It's biggest fault is that after a pretty good start, it fell into a 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' like story arc.
The sets were wonderful, CGI groundbreaking and the cast was acceptable.
The writer went on to do great things with Harry Potter, and the director has gone on to do many good movies.
All three lead actors continue to make movies, but have, for the most part, had, well, unremarkable careers.
What I would like to discuss here, and I feel I should discuss something about this movie since my wife was kinda forced to watch it last night, is the portrayal of Holmes by Nicholas Rowe.
Nicholas was 19 at the time the movie came out, having read for the part while still in university.
He had only acted in one movie up till this point.
His build embodied a stature you could imagine Holmes having while young and still in college. He was tall, and had very angular features. He easily had what could be described as a hawk like nose.
He had long dramatic fingers, very violin worthy.
He walked with a certain impatience and he played well an individual that had lots of energy and impatience.
His mannerisms easily pulled off concentration and briskness, and he more than ably delivered his lines.
I think you could have easily pictured him working over test tubes when first introduced to Watson some years later.
As has so often plagued actors who have played Holmes, he was saddled with a weak story and if not bad writing, at least non-canonical.
Alan Cox, the actor chose to play Watson, was expected to play a Watson along the lines of Nigel Bruce's version. And we have all come to know how hard it is for Sherlock to be credible along side that. He was hardly steadfast and reliable.
I think Nicholas Rowe's performance would have been more memorable if he had been given a truer mystery in story and less action adventure, which we had kinda come to expect in the mid-80's.
Next time you have time for a mindless evening, watch it again and see what you think.
Monday, January 7, 2013
Friday, January 4, 2013
And from the same source. . .
Contact Music dropped a bit of a bombshell this week when announcing that Dame Judi Dench has been contacted to play the role of Mrs Hudson for an upcoming TV adaptation of Sherlock Holmes: “The Oscar winner is in talks to portray the super snoop’s loyal employee Mrs. Hudson in a new show based on her journals, called A View From The Landing At 221B Baker Street. The script has been penned by British comedy writer Barry Cryer and his son, Bob, and the pair is adamant the Bond actress is the perfect person for the job. Cryer tells Britain’s Daily Mail, “It’s all at a very early stage but it would be brilliant if Dame Judi were to play Mrs. Hudson. She would be ideal.”
This is interesting. . . and make good use of it!!!
Welcome to Always1895.net in 2013!! Mr Ray Wilcockson started the new year with a bang by announcing that the calendar for the year 1895 is identical to that of 2013, a happy coincidence which I hope to make use of throughout the next 365 days. Observe thecalendar for 1895 below and then compare it to a calendar for 2013 (eg. Vincent Starrett’s birthday, October 26, falls on a Saturday on both calendars). Now all I need to do is find an intact vintage calendar from 1895 and hang it on my wall.
CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE.
CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE.
Without a Clue - Elementary episode #11 - 'Dirty Laundry'
After several weeks of trying to rally the troops in support of this show, 'Dirty Laundry' seems to have taken a swipe at my resolve.
I prepared and watched this episode in hopes of coming up with revelations like the ones I felt I had found in the episode before Christmas.
It very much reminded me of some of the Canonical tales that detractors like to argue that Watson did not write.
I would not fight that argument on this episode.
I could argue, weakly I'm afraid, that this episode was written in such a way as to make it seem that 'Sherlock' handled the case the way he did to allow Watson more involvement as a way of showing her that she wanted to continue working beside and with him.
When I first heard that 'Holmes' was going to offer 'Watson' an apprenticeship to continue to work with him, I though if handled well it could be a good way to handle 'Watson's' remaining. It however was not handled well. And 'Watson' will probably want to leave even more after this one. As will Gregson and Bell.
They need to find a way for Joan to come to this conclusion on her own. And with Holmes acting even more the slob, I feel it will become very hard to find a plausible way to make that happen. (The slob thing I believe is a way of trying to connect to the canonical fact that Holmes' papers and such would be scattered when working on a case. However, missing the point that in personal habits, he was very neat.)
I think 'Holmes' talents were displayed in the least appealing way so far of all the stories.
And I also feel the writers are really hung up on the hooker thing.
I think both actors are still doing great with what they are given, and it is the writers that are letting them down.
I am really reaching to think that this story may reference the Second Stain a little, with the stain being hidden and with it involving international intrigue, but like I said, it is really reaching.
And the fact that 'Holmes' just happened to have the 'magic key' that unlocked the hidden photos was writing facts to help a story you don't know how to get out of. (You can't come up with anything better than invisible ink?? Probably most crime scenes now use UV lights as standard practice.)
Still love the show,
but give this episode only ;
I prepared and watched this episode in hopes of coming up with revelations like the ones I felt I had found in the episode before Christmas.
It very much reminded me of some of the Canonical tales that detractors like to argue that Watson did not write.
I would not fight that argument on this episode.
I could argue, weakly I'm afraid, that this episode was written in such a way as to make it seem that 'Sherlock' handled the case the way he did to allow Watson more involvement as a way of showing her that she wanted to continue working beside and with him.
When I first heard that 'Holmes' was going to offer 'Watson' an apprenticeship to continue to work with him, I though if handled well it could be a good way to handle 'Watson's' remaining. It however was not handled well. And 'Watson' will probably want to leave even more after this one. As will Gregson and Bell.
They need to find a way for Joan to come to this conclusion on her own. And with Holmes acting even more the slob, I feel it will become very hard to find a plausible way to make that happen. (The slob thing I believe is a way of trying to connect to the canonical fact that Holmes' papers and such would be scattered when working on a case. However, missing the point that in personal habits, he was very neat.)
I think 'Holmes' talents were displayed in the least appealing way so far of all the stories.
And I also feel the writers are really hung up on the hooker thing.
I think both actors are still doing great with what they are given, and it is the writers that are letting them down.
I am really reaching to think that this story may reference the Second Stain a little, with the stain being hidden and with it involving international intrigue, but like I said, it is really reaching.
And the fact that 'Holmes' just happened to have the 'magic key' that unlocked the hidden photos was writing facts to help a story you don't know how to get out of. (You can't come up with anything better than invisible ink?? Probably most crime scenes now use UV lights as standard practice.)
but give this episode only ;
Thursday, January 3, 2013
Over the next couple of days. . .
NPR will be interviewing the cast of Downton Abbey in prep. for this weekends start of Season Three.
It started today, and I know it continues at least tomorrow.
It started today, and I know it continues at least tomorrow.
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
Again, if you like Downton Abbey, you will enjoy this. . .
The REAL story of Britain's servant class (and it wasn't exactly Downton Abbey): New BBC series reveals what it was really like downstairs
- Life for servants in late Victorian and early Edwardian Britain was brutal
- New staff were often given generic names such as Henry and Sarah
- Tasks included clipping your master's toenails and ironing his shoelaces
- Maids would not be able to turn down a master's sexual advances
- Over 1.5 million British people worked as servants
- Most of the UK population would have been Downstairs...not Upstairs
PUBLISHED: 11:42 EST, 24 September 2012 | UPDATED: 13:58 EST, 25 September 2012
They all look so jolly on television, forging friendships in the basement and occasionally nipping upstairs to lay the table or snuff out a candle.
But the truth of how most servants lived in Britain at the beginning of the twentieth century is a far cry from the soft-centred fiction portrayed in period dramas such as Downton Abbey, Upstairs Downstairs and Gosford Park.
Clipping your master's toenails, ironing his shoelaces, spending 17-hour days doing back-breaking work with no employment rights were just some of the realities facing servants in late Victorian and early Edwardian Britain, according to a new BBC series.


Then and now: A young 'tweeny' maid, left, in late nineteenth century Britain, and Downton Abbey's scullery maid Daisy, played by Sophie McShera.
Servants: the True Story Of Life Below Stairs explores the reality of life as a servant in Britain from the Victorian era through to the Second World War.
And it wasn't exactly like Carson, Anna, Bates and Daisy have it in Downton Abbey.
Upon entering service, new servants were often given 'acceptable', easy to remember and generic names - Henry, John and William were popular choices for men, while many female servants were frequently named Sarah or Emma.
Moreover, if female servants received unwanted advances from their masters, they had little power to stop them.
In her new, eye-opening three-part series, social historian Dr Pamela Cox - herself the great-granddaughter of servants - explains that life for these people was much less 'cosy' than is imagined in television period dramas.


The way we were: A British cook and Downton Abbey's cook Mrs Patmore, played by Lesley Nicol.
A century ago, 1.5 million British people worked as servants
As a rule, most servants tended to work not in big stately homes full of fellow workers and camaraderie but as the lone member of staff in a middle class town house - and lives for these people was lonely, dark and damp, according to a new BBC documentary series.
Dr Cox reveals that her own ancestors never enjoyed their time as servants as much as those in ITV's Downton Abbey seem to.
A GUIDE TO VICTORIAN SERVANTS
- The butler - in charge of the house, coachmen, footmen and wine cellar.
- The housekeeper - responsible for the housemaids and carried keys to the china and linen cupboards.
- The ladies maid - the mistress of the house's personal attendant, helping her dress and do her hair.
- The valet - the master's manservant, attending to his requests and preparing his clothes and shaving tools.
- The cook - ran the kitchen and larder, overseeing the kitchen, dairy and scullery maids.
- The governess - educated and cared for the children.
- The hallboy - worked 16-hour days, lighting all the lamps and candles and polishing the staff boots.
- The tweeny - in-between stairs maid earned £13 a year, worked seven days a week from 5am-10pm.
Thanks to the emergence of the new middle classes, the majority of household staff worked as the only servant in a home.
And instead of partaking in a lively, jolly dinner after serving the family upstairs, these servants would live and eat alone in Britain's dark, damp, dirty basement kitchens.
Servants in grand houses fared little better.
Staff in stately homes were kept hidden from the 'polite' eyes of their masters with complex mazes of hidden passages throughout the home, helpful when trying to enforce complete segregation.
Moreover, strict servant hierarchy even separated staff from each other.
Dr Cox explains that in 1901 one in four people were domestic servants, mostly women, and that these people were seldom seen as 'working-class heroes'.
Servants tended to work seven days a week, often from as early as 5am until as late as 10pm, for very little money.
And, unlike the kind and empathetic Crawley family of Downton Abbey, employers were unlikely to take pity on staff who were overworked, exhausted or ill - even if they were just children.
Servants: The True Story Of Life Below The Stairs starts on Friday on BBC2 at 9pm.


A maid's work: A British maid during the late nineteenth century, left, and Downton Abbey's lady's maid Anna Bates, played by Joanne Froggatt, right.


Domestic life: A gardener in Britain in the early twentieth century, left, and Downton Abbey's Mr Bates, right, Lord Grantham's former valet, played by Brendan Coyle.
RULES FOR SERVANTS IN LATE NINETEENTH CENTURY BRITAIN
- Never let your voice be heard by the ladies and gentlemen of the house
- Always 'give room' if you meet one of your employers or betters on the stairs.
- Always stand still when being spoken to by a lady and look at the person speaking to you.
- Never begin to talk to ladies and gentlemen.
- Servants should never offer any opinion to their employers, nor even to say good night.
- Never talk to another servant in the presence of your mistress.
- Never call from one room to another.
- Always answer when you have received an order.
- Always keep outer doors fastened. Only the butler may answer the bell.
- Every servant must be punctual at meal times.
- No servant is to take any knives or forks or other article, nor on any account to remove any provisions, nor ale or beer out of the hall.
- No gambling, or oaths, or abusive language are allowed.
- The female staff are forbidden from smoking.
- No servant is to receive any visitor, friend or relative into the house.
- Any maid found fraternising with a member of the opposite sex will be dismissed without a hearing.
- The hall door is to be finally closed at half-past ten every night.
- The servants' hall is to be cleared and closed at half-past ten at night.
- Any breakages or damage to the house will be deducted from wages.

A late nineteenth century British family with their solitary servant.

Downton Abbey's staff of twelve.

A group of women partake in garden tea in Edwardian Britain, served by a maid.
Read more: Credit where credit is due. . .
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)







