In-Class Movie: "The Blind Banker" (Sherlock, 2010)

“Wastson, you here! I’ll take the armchair in the middle. I think that we are now sufficiently imposing to strike terror into a guilty beast. Kindly ring the bell.”

--Sherlock Holmes, “The Adventure of Three Students”

Austin: So I watched Sherlock weekly when it first aired in August in the UK. (I saw it through magic.) My brother and I adored the pilot and were so excited to watch this one. After it was done, we both thought, “Huh. So this is the kind of show it’s going to be.” This isn’t a bad episode, but it’s a midseason filler. No advancements in the main storyline except for name dropping Morarity as if he was Bad Wolf.

Thankfully the show has evolved to make each episode count more, but this still remains as a bit of an odd bird in the series. A group of Chinese smugglers sneak in goods to the UK and leave ridiculous yellow markings to communicate and threaten their colleagues. This leads to some fun action scenes and an exciting (yet still ridiculous) conclusion involving a compacted deathtrap. 

Next time you can just send me an invoice.

Yet here’s where we’ve been talking about for the past few weeks on this blog: the heightened aspect. Sherlock Holmes stories stand out because of their superhuman deduction, exotic elements and crazy cases. This has all three, but when you place this show in some sort of modern day—those elements also stand out as odd. This is the one episode where the tone really feels off. I shouldn’t be asking, “Why would you even put those marks like that? Wouldn’t that attract more attention to your group instead of just sending them a note in the mail?” As Film Critic Hulk would say, that is not a plot hole, but it does hurt the criminal’s credibility in my mind. 

Other things draw me out of this story like the way the story is plotted. No matter how many times I watch this, I feel there could be a more concise way of telling this story because it feels like they’re moving from building to building just to switch locales, especially since they end up going back to the same places multiple times.

Book Review: "The Adventure of the Three Students" (Doyle, 1904)

“Well, Soames, I think we have cleared your little problem up, and our breakfast awaits us at home. Come Watson!”

--Sherlock Holmes, “The Adventure of the Three Students”

Leigh: In Sherlock Holmes' latest adventure, him and Watson go back to school but not at all in a fun way, more like news reporter going back to high school to try to find out about youth culture kinda way. 

Holmes and Watson are at Generic University using their library to look up information about some case that sounds incredibly interesting but Watson thinks the one he is telling us is more worthy of our time. Holmes has a friend come and find him and tell him all about how the answers to the upcoming Greek scholarship test were not where he left him and how it was obvious that someone had broken into his room and copied the answers, a plot point that seems more appropriate for Animal House than Sherlock Holmes. Holmes is intrigued and goes to investigate the crime scene. 

There's a reason why Sherlock Holmes was brought in.

We eventually go and meet all of the possible suspects and this is where I began to have problems with it. I know it was probably written to be a mirror of the time, but the insistence that Watson had about the Indian student being the obvious culprit felt misplaced and disingenuine, almost like an attempt at a red herring but more of someone pointing and saying, "Look! Over there!" I also felt that the clue of the weird clay blobs laying about was obvious too. 

I enjoyed the brevity of this story and made for a nice one to get back in the swing of things but I didn't think that this was Doyle's best effort. 

What say you, Lugar?

In-Class Movie: "Zero Effect" (Pullman, 1998)

“Is Mr. Sherlock Holmes here?”

My friend bowed and smiled. “Mr. Sandeford, of Reading, I suppose?” said he.

“Yes, sir, I fear that I am a little late, but the trains were awkward.”

--Arthur Conan Doyle, “The Adventure of the Six Napeleons”

Austin: We’re finally back! Many apologies for our hiatus. It’s entirely my fault. I was distracted with a number of things and now I’m able to be back on a proper schedule.

After many rescheduling, we’re finally ready to talk about the underappreciated Zero Effect, the first film by Jake Kasdan (The TV Set, Walk Hard, TV’s New Girl). It’s a little bit Nero Wolfe and a lotta bit of Arthur Conan Doyle. Bill Pullman plays the brilliant but difficult Daryl Zero. Ben Stiller is his often annoyed partner, Steve Arlo. Ryan O’Neal is the client and the always wonderful Kim Dickens is the woman.

Backwards cap > deerstalker?

What struck me this time watching it was just how damn American this is. Obviously we have many thoughts on Elementary, but that is a Sherlock that is literally imported from England to live in New York. Zero is American through and through. Americans seems more obnoxious in how they break their taboos so Zero’s rudeness is often seen as exhausting instead of quirky. The whole mystery plot is definitely influenced by Doyle, but it also reminds me of American neo-noirs. This isn’t as cynical as something like Chinatown, but the blackmailers do feel dirtier and more personal than we read about in Victorian times. There’s more of a willingness to delve into the emotions of our characters than sticking with the seemingly calm, collected Brits.

Most importantly, this all worked in the movie for me. I still get lost in the connecting the dots element of the mystery, but I really liked watching all of these characters interact especially Stiller’s Arlo. It’s a nice subdued film that is able to accomplish some impressive things without being tied down by canon.

Did you like it? Or was this long wait ruined by a lackluster movie? 

Book Review: "The Adventure of the Six Napoleons" (Doyle, 1904)

“The affair seems absurdly trifling, and yet I dare not call nothing trivial when I reflect that some of my most classic cases have had the least promising commencement."

--Sherlock Holmes, “The Adventure of the Six Napoleons”

Leigh: First, I need to apologize, dear readers. I have really procrastinated on writing this initial email. Why? Because I've been putting off reading the story, “The Adventure of the Six Napoleons”. Why? Because it's boring. THERE, I'VE SAID IT! One of the stories from The Return of Sherlock Holmes is boring. Soooo booooring. I tried listening to it through Librivox, I tried reading it myself, I tried osmosis and sat on the book a while (not really but wouldn't that be cool if it could work that way?). But I put it off and put it off and put it off because it is such a boring story.

"But Leigh! There's murder! And a crazy man! And Napoleon! How can it be boring?" Because it's the same story as “The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle” which I believe we reviewed around this time last year but instead of a carbuncle, it's pearls and instead of a goose it's a bunch of busts of Napoleon. I didn't remember too much from it, just that it was similar and then I started reading it. Once I got to the murder, I remembered that it is the same story.

In-Class Movie: "The Snowmen" (Doctor Who, 2012)

“I am never precipitate in my actions, nor would I adopt so energetic and, indeed, dangerous a course, if any other were possible.”

--Sherlock Holmes, “The Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton”

Austin: I like to switch things up a bit. Instead of just referencing Doctor Who in every post, we're going to do that but be on topic! Last year we talked about the Tom Baker (Fourth Doctor) story The Talons of Weng-Chiang where The Doctor and Leela found their deerstalkers to investigate a wonderfully ridiculous Victorian mystery. Now we are back in that time, but it's an episode that was made in 2012 with Matt Smith (Eleventh Doctor).

This may be the trickiest one to write because the Sherlock Holmes aspect is just a small part of this tale. It's really just a straightforward Doctor Who story with The Doctor hiding himself away after the loss of his best friends. He meets a mysterious barmaid with a secret that she doesn't even know she has---all will be revealed in the season finale! There's a monster from the Classic era of Doctor Who voiced by Sir Ian McKellen. There is silliness, sci-fi gibberish, the power of the human spirit and plenty of humor.

Ian McKellen is the one on the left. Far left.

This episode was written by the showrunner Steven Moffat who also co-runs BBC's Sherlock. Since both shows sparked fans so wildly, plenty of people have demanded a cross-over where Benedict Cumberbatch and Matt Smith can chat about who has the most ridiculous bone structure in their face. Seeing how a time machine could ruin every single Sherlock Holmes story, Moffat has made the cross-over impossible by revealed who really is the inspiration for the Arthur Conan Doyle stories. 

So what would you like to cover first, Leigh? What do you think of who really is Doyle's inspiration for Sherlock and Watson or what do you think of the scene with The Doctor trying to imitate their style?

Book Report: "The Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton" (Doyle, 1904)

“I’ll tell you Watson. He is the king of all the blackmailers. Heaven help the man, and still more the woman, whose secret and reputation come into the power of Milverton! With a smiling face and a heart of marble, he will squeeze and squeeze until he has drained them dry.”

--Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton

Leigh: This story might actually be my favorite. I know I say that a lot about a lot of them but this one might actually have the #1 spot. It is wacky and crazy and ends in a way that you don't really see coming, which I love. 

Charles Augustus Milverton is a blackmailer and is so despicable, Holmes calls him the worst person ON DA EARF which I guess is an easy roll to fill since Moriarty is dead. CAM decides to get letters of young women that would ruin their career and then blackmail them so that their lives aren't ruined. These young women agree because a young woman in Victorian England doesn't have many choices and if she doesn't marry rich, she's pretty much screwed. Holmes has a client that happens to be one of these young ladies who can't afford the ransom of her personal letters and so Holmes decides to break into Milverton's house and steal them but only after he has gotten himself engaged to Milverton's housemaid. This isn't one of those situations where Holmes falls in love (HA!) but one where he is emotionally manipulating a woman to get what he wants. He doesn't care about breaking the housemaid's poor heart but he CANNOT let that rich woman gets her heart broken! It seems classist to me and rude but again, it was another era.

Holmes tells Watson what he's done and Watson decides he needs to help Holmes break into Milverton's house. He even goes so far as to say, "If you don't let me come with you to break into some guy's house then I'M TELLING MOM, I MEAN LESTRADE!" So Holmes reluctantly lets Watson come along. And then they go so far as to wear bandit masks when breaking into Milverton's house which I thought was possibly one of the funniest images ever. And then shit goes down.

In-Class Movie: "Pursuit to Algiers" (Rathbone, 1945)

“Well, I kept my knowledge to myself, and waited to see what would come of it.”

--Arthur Conan Doyle, “The Adventure of the Black Peter”

Austin: So we return to the magical world of Sherlock Holmes and Watson ruled by Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce. We've had fun in the past, but this is the first time where we really delve into their time when they spent in 1940s European espionage. We've seen Sherlock Holmes in plenty of different time periods like 2012 and 2012 so we know that there is a wealth of stories that can arise from placing this iconic character in a new situation.

We'll get into the duo stopping Nazis later for today they're just escorting a Prince to safety. By stagecoach? By train? By armored car? Nope. BY A BOAT MOTHERFUCKERS! 

"Watson, fetch my nautical themed deerstalker."

The boat is filled with subjects just like Death on the Nile and there is plenty of false identity going on just like Death on the Nile. Also they occasionally stop like in Death on the Nile. It's very strange to see the most iconic detectives ever take its lead from the most popular mystery writer of all time. Especially when the results aren't that satisfying.

I'll get into this more in a bit, but I found this to be very disappointing mostly because at just a bit over an hour this seemed to be stalling for majority of its run. Am I just being mean or did you find some charm in this one?