#nothing like comparing two uncomparable movies

[bestanimatedmovie]

Perfect Blue vs Chicken Run 

Vote in the other polls!

Watch the trailers:

[theenigmaticlife]

How Elementary stuck to its guns and became better than BBC Sherlock: An unpopular opinion in four parts

When Elementary premiered on CBS in 2012, it's timeliness was the thing that was either going to propel it forward or be the nail in its coffin. Sherlock Holmes was in the zeitgeist (and while never really leaving it fully, now more than ever it was the shit) - with Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes (2009) and BBC's Sherlock (2010 - ), the popculture was saturated with Doyle's beloved and familiar characters and the question was 'Do we want more?'

I'll be the first to admit, when I first heard they were developing Holmes for American television, one which is also in modern times, and they were making Watson a woman , I was as enraged as the Hulk in close proximity to Loki has ever been. We were well in the era of remakes/reboots/rehashes and all I could think was "Fucking American TV and their fucking greed, will they leave nothing pure?! They are going to shove some insufferable romance in there and it will be another Castle / Bones undestinguishable serial monstrosity that is going to sully the good name of my favourite crimesolving duo. At least I will still have Sherlock (BBC)." (And yes, if it hasn't become clear, I am very emotionally attached to this property).

But I was going to check it out. And lo and behold, 5 years later, I can confidently say, not only was I wrong, but I could never have predicted that while Elementary was going to go on its merry way for 5 seasons, the BBC series (which I once honestly considered to be the most brilliant show ever made), came out with such a disappointing 4th outing that now I say to myself "At least I still have Elementary".

So what happened?

1. It benefits from its length.

Elementary not only doesn't get bogged down by its network-required 22-24 episodes per season, but it is not afraid to use them, And while I am not saying every episode is pure brilliance, it benefits from the long seasons in that it has the time and opportunity to explore different character's storylines - some with more success than others, sure. It has the time to try, fail and try again. It makes us care about not just Holmes and Watson, but Captain Gregson (a terifically funny and charming Aidan Quinn), Marcus Bell, Alfredo, Kitty and Shinwell, Morland and Mycroft, Watson's family, Watson's boyfriend and even the damn coroner.

I challenge you now, tell me something about the backstory of any of the supporting characters in the BBC show (besides Mycroft and Moriarty) that is more than a caricatureish snippet masquerading as a personality - Molly is in love with Sherlock, Anderson is stupid, Mrs Hudson is a generator for one-liners. I know.

But let's say it's not Sherlock's fault for not having enough time to show us more than the backstory of its two main characters. Can we blame it that it seems to struggle to fill its 3-episode quota with whole episodes that you remember nothing about the minute after they've finished (I'm looking at you, episode about ancient Chinese artifacts). Yes, there are episodes of Elementary I don't remember - but they aren't feature-length movies that come out every two years.

2. It doesn't idolise Holmes.

What I think the most important difference between the two shows is that Elementary doesn't off-handedly mention Holmes' drug addiction whenever its convinient to the plot (or for a charmingly funny scene of cigarette-sharing between brothers to escape a Christmas family nightmare), but it is in fact a major storyline throughout the show - it informs the whole characterization of the protagonist, as addiction to hard drugs is known to do. But they can't be compared on that note, because it is a creator's prerogative which traits of a character to focus on, and I understand why Moffat/Gatiss decided to not lean so much on that part of Holmes in their show.

What they can be compared on, however, is how they approach the character as a whole. The British writing duo make it clear at every available opportunity : "Holmes is smarter than you (because we are smarter than you). Yes, that makes him a dick sometimes, because otherwise what would we need Watson for (we're not sure why we need him now, let's have him cheat on his wife for no reason and have him kidnapped at every turn), but he is so much smarter than you, you can never comprehend it, unless he deigned to explain it. Holmes is better in every way, he is insufferable and brilliant and magnetic and everyone is in love with him and in awe of him and you will feel this way too. He is better than everyone else and it is only because of his good will that you are allowed in his mind."

In contrast, CBS's Holmes is so incredibly flawed, so disarmingly noble and so very self-aware, that you cannot help but fall in love with him; not because it is shoved down your throat to admire him, but because you genuinely want to. On the one hand, you have BBC's Sherlock, where I am entirely unconvinced that Moffat / Gatiss are even familiar with the concept of self-awareness. On the other, you have CBS's Sherlock who, from the get-go, makes it clear that he wants to help people, he seeks justice and not just the thrill of exercising his mind - he constantly talks about the victims, the families, "there is a killer on the loose", "closure" and so on. And while they both grow to care over time, one does it kicking and screaming and constantly fucking denying it; the other embraces it, makes it a part of himself, talks about how being a mentor is his most fulfilling experience and at one point regretfully confides (in one of my personal favourite quotes of the show): "Misantrophy was so easy, Watson. Elegant. I miss it sometimes."

And yes, I know, those are also two different approaches to the character. But on the BBC they do it as another part of the mosaic of what makes their Holmes so-damn-cool (not just the upturned collar) and uncomparable, while CBS does it to bring him down to our level and make him relatable.

And because I mentiond mentoring:

3. Watson is a person when she is alone

(And wow, what a relief to not use possessives to distinguish for once:) On the BBC, John Watson is a beautiful ball of loveliness, that is undeniable. He is also, at least in the beginning, kind of there to stare in slack-jawed awe at Sherlock. Later, he is there to make sure Sherlock is not rude to clients / policemen / journalists / people giving them awards / Mrs Hudson. Later still, he is there to stare at his wife, then his baby, then his emotional mistress, then Sherlock again. And while I am not saying he does not have a personality whatsoever, he does seem to spend an awful lot of time being something-at-someone: annoyed at Mycroft, annoyed at Holmes, in love with Mary, angry at Holmes, angry at Mary, scared of the sister (more on her later), grateful to Holmes and so on.

Joan on the other hand, while no less in awe / annoyed / whatever at Sherlock, comes in with a lot of her own baggage, her own opinions and most importantly, her own storylines. She has a beautiful relationship with her Holmes, but she also makes desicions, has opinions and generally lives her life not only when Holmes is away from her (as John does), but very much so while he is right there in her life. The fact that over the course of the very first season she becomes a detective in her own right (and the writing-and-fawning is relegated to somebody else and mentioned only briefly) shows that she is treated in a very different way than her male "version" is. While Joan and Holmes are very much partners, she is more than that as a character. Her existence doesn't revolve around Holmes. Which is why we, as a captive audience, are perfectly comfortable watching her tackle her own cases and have interactions with Sherlock which are of the "Here is what I did today, what do you think?" variety, while we are sick to our stomachs when John and Sherlock over on the other side of the Atlantic are fighting - not only is John there angry at Sherlock for incomprehensible reasons (his wife died because she was a spy, ffs), we do not know how to handle these characters when they are not together in perfect harmony, because we never see them not in relation to one another.

And finally:

4. Elementary embraces what it is and goes for it

So here is where I preemptively confront the haters (if they have gotten to this point instead of scrolling straight down to spew obsenities in the comments) : On every one of the points I raised, you could argue "Oh, you are wrong, here is this one moment when John does do that thing you say he doesn't / Joan doesn't do that thing you say she does / you are human trashcompactor who doesn't understand TV" or something similar. Of course these shows are way too different to compare in depth. Of course you can like both (I do!) or only one or neither.

And no, I would never perform the sacrilege of disparaging either one of the two amazing casts, who make these characters the equivalents of divine chocolate souflé on TV. What I argue is not to compare how the two shows are structured, but how they have lived their toddler-sized lives.

BBC Sherlock started off with an uncertain-to-be-successful premise, but an incredible production budget, veteran writers and two brilliant actors to helm it. It grew and became beloved because it was thought-out to an absurd detail, relied on its unconventional release schedule and its brilliant writing, but most importantly, it was extremely extremely clever. And then came series four, where inexplicably it became a melodrama of epic proportions, everything that happened was more illogical than the previous thing and every decision a character made was so eyeroll-inducing my head hurt by the end of every episode. Did Moffat / Gatiss forget where their character (yes, just the one) started and they just didn't know what to do with him or anyone else anymore? Did they decide that the fanatical nature of the Sherlock fanbase on tumblr is so starved and so blindly devoted that they would forgive anything they do, no matter how out-of-character, poorly thought-out, soap-like or just plain stupid it is? Or did they just give the network what they wanted to make their trucks of money without bothering their increasingly-busy actors too much with acting anything of substance, hoping that Toby Jones with weird teeth and weird voice / an out-of-the-blue sister and a fanservice cameo will fill any plothole some pedantics might notice?

CBS's Elementary on the other hand is a procedural primetime show that cannot go too far with what it shows, cannot go too weird with where the story goes, because of the countless other shows its in fierce competition with every sweeps season. So it relies on its no less stellar cast to go very deep to the one deep place its allowed to go, and meanwhile have fun, crack jokes, introduce you to everyone, make you smile and make you care enough to come back week after week to see not only these two beautiful creatures on your screen, but also their friends and family and enemies and rivals and their fucking turtle Clyde.

And if you ever doubt what I've said here about Elementary, just watch the finale of season 3 "A Controlled Descent" and tell me it didn't absolutely gut you.

TL;DR: I rave about the Sherlock Series 4 and masochistically wait to hear if anybody will come and threaten me over it,.