No, they're not doing some cross-over episodes (although... No, I suppose that really wouldn't work well at all). I'm just talking about both because they both recently aired here in the US.

---

Sherlock



I was quite impressed with the new Sherlock series as a whole. It worked surprisingly well as a modern telling of the classic detective. I've heard plenty of people rank it first against other recent adaptations of the famous detective (RDJ's Sherlock Holmes film and House M.D., to be specific) and I can definitely see where they're coming from.

I have to give Hugh Laurie's Dr. House credit for being the first (that I've seen, at least) to apply the modern "bro-mance" concept to the Holmes/Watson relationship with the House/Wilson dynamic on that show. He also really nailed the anti-social jerkiness of the character quite well. But then, his version of Holmes is diluted somewhat by focusing on medical mysteries instead of murder mysteries... so I give the BBC's the edge for being a far more concentrated dose of Holmes.

(I enjoyed Robert Downey Jr.'s take on the character as well, and quite liked the period stylings of it, but it definitely has the more cartoonish feel to it.)

So I was quite loving the new Sherlock series, and then earlier tonight I watched the third episode... and it all just sort of fell apart. I felt the ending was horrible. Not only did the story not go anywhere, but after all that build up to his introduction, their version of Moriarty was just god-awful. Nothing about him worked for me. It was like the least threatening person in the world tried to play the Joker. His flaming personality didn't come off as frightening or even legitimately unhinged... Just annoying.

And what was his plot? It apparently wasn't the missile plans... it apparently was just to #*@$ with Holmes, which is something I could maybe believe of some grandiose and famous criminal, but not of one that has apparently been so successful at covering his tracks and never giving anything of himself away until this point. It certainly couldn't help his business as a "consulting criminal" that he gave up his clients, putting Holmes on their cases in order to play this little game. And the whole idea of it being a way to tell Holmes to back off doesn't work when Holmes really didn't seem to be onto anything to begin with... Every time Holmes crossed paths with one of Moriarty's plans, it seemed to be because Moriarty steered it that way. So... why? No answer is given.

In fact, no ending is given to the episode. I don't mind cliffhangers (although when no further shows have been filmed, and there's only a vague idea that they'll make more a year from now, I'm not too thrilled with them either), but that particular non-ending was really horrible. There was absolutely nothing satisfying about it for me. They'll really have to dig themselves out of the hole they left themselves in when they get around to some more.

Other than that final 10 minutes or so, it really is a great show and well cast.

---

The Walking Dead


Anyway, I also watched my DVRed copy of AMC's The Walking Dead opening episode, based on the comic which I haven't read. Really quite good, but then I enjoy a good zombie flick anyway. This is another series where there are only a handful of episodes (6 for this verses 3 for Sherlock) before the end of the season and no solid promise when more will ever come. Still, I hear both shows were big hits so I'm sure more will be on the way.

I was very impressed with the special effects in the opening... some of those zombies are really impressive. What I like most, however, is that the format of an ongoing show allows them the time to really delve into the idea of a zombie apocalypse in ways that movies cannot. The first episode was practically feature length already, and yet didn't have to take things much farther than the initial set up. In some ways it makes it slow, but it really does allow the quiet moments to take root. Shows like "Lost" annoy me because they're based on a premise that has a definitive resolution (getting off the island) and you know that the only way for the show to last is to artificially delay that resolution for as long as possible. Here, there's no resolution waiting just over the horizon. There's no urgency to move on with the plot or to get the clues... it's all about the "now" of the situation. It makes it a much more satisfying viewing experience for me.

I do, however, dread the inevitable conflict among the living. I'm curious to see if I can stick with this show for the long term... I bowed out of shows like "E.R." when I realized that they were essentially about nothing but endless misery for the characters. I've got my own problems... I don't need to get attached to fictional characters and then sweat about their troubles too. With the dead over-running society, it'll be a tough balancing act to keep audiences from being fatigued by the hopeless situation. The first episode, however, had a really nice tone to it... hopefully they can maintain that balance.


In any event, I was quite thrilled to find 2 new scripted shows on television that really felt new and fresh while reviving some old classics. Soooo much more satisfying than reality television.

...Usually end with nobody making it out alive.

Spoilers follow, in case anyone is sensitive to hearing them:

In "Night of the Living Dead", which pretty much launched the idea of a zombie apocalypse (as opposed to isolated witch doctors raising individual zombies and such), order does seem to be restored by morning as the authorities and good ole boys with guns get the situation under seeming control. However, they mistakenly kill the last survivor of the main cast without ever realizing it.

In the original "Dawn of the Dead" the version that got released had the last two survivors of the mall take off to a fate unknown in a helicopter low on fuel over a world ruled by the dead. This was actually considered the upbeat, changed ending... in the original ending, the characters were to commit suicide after realizing their lives were hollow and meaningless now.

The remake of "Dawn of the Dead" had a band of survivors make it to a boat and head for an island in Lake Michigan. Scenes shown during the credits suggest they found that island overrun with zombies as well and fell victim to them.

In "Return of the Living Dead" the survivors call the emergency number on the side of the busted chemical drum that started the outbreak in that film. The military sends help right away in the form of a missile that destroys the callers along with the entire town (and launches the chemical into the atmosphere to fall down upon a larger area as chemical rain.)


On the flip side, humanity actually wins in "World War Z" (the novel) and society seems more or less restored by the time of the book's narration. So I guess it's possible to come back to a happy ending.

Or, you can end up with something like "The Road". Yikes.

Zombie movies don't get happy endings, unless they are Shaun of the Dead.

www.rubysworldcomic.com

He was a black man in the '60s. They were a gang of white good ol' boys.

I don't think they CARED whether he was a zombie or not.

To be fair to the fictional sheriff and his posse, that's all subtext. I don't think there are any lines that give a direct suggestion that the men are racist, or that they even saw that the movie's lead character was black before they shot him.

It's notable that the role of Ben wasn't specifically written for a black actor. It was a genius (and daring) bit of casting, but presumably white, uneducated truck driver Ben from the original script meets the same fate. They definitely played up the imagery afterwords to reinforce the idea that some members of society can't look to the rest for rescue, certainly.

I think the Vietnam subtext is quite strong there as well, with the troops moving through the countryside fighting hostiles with little regard to who is civilian and who is an enemy.

Future zombie films would play up these angles with lynchings and taunting of the dead, and callous, armed members of the living enjoying the violence they get to dish out, losing their humanity in the war against the unliving. Night of the Living Dead played things pretty straightforwardly though.

For all her faults, even Max's adversary, Auntie Entity, was motivated by the noble goal of wanting to rebuild the world without making the mistakes of old, to the point that even the barbarities of Thunderdome itself effectively accomplish the admirable goal of preempting any sort of larger wars. Moreover, once she realizes that she's lost, rather than killing Max, Auntie simply laughs and bids him farewell, because she sees no need for further bloodshed. How many other action movie adversaries have that much class or grace?

Likewise, as cloying as a lot of fans find the Waiting Ones, I loved seeing how they'd transformed modern media and their own circumstances into a hopeful cargo cult ("the tell," a dual reference to storytelling and to television, was an especially inspired narrative device). It's worth noting that Savannah Nix's final lines speak of leaving the lights on in the cities, so that Max and all the other lost souls can eventually find their way home.