Mycroft was right. Correction: Mycroft is right. It is impossible not to read the name Sherlock Holmes in news print, in books, on TV or in the street come to that. Sherlock Holmes is indeed everywhere. What is the lasting appeal of this man? To what can we attribute this popularity which has gone on unabated for 125 years? The last three novels I have read were set in three different continents (shades of Watson's experience of the fair sex) but all mentioned Sherlock Holmes in one context or another. Is Holmes that likeable? Are there other forces at work here?
He was arrogant, surly and treated Watson shabbily on numerous occasions. Jeremy Brett said Holmes was someone he would not cross the street to meet, yet he survives into the 21st century as the very embodiment of the Victorian hero. The Holmes/Watson friendship was very seriously undermined by Holmes's less than fair treatment of Watson. He was scathing about Watson's assistance, his intelligence and his efforts as a chronicler. Notwithstanding that, Holmes needed Watson as much as he needed anyone and although he may not have seen that himself, commentators on the Canon do and recognise the importance of one to the other. Emotionally they clung to each other. So is that the secret to the character's popularity and longevity? Or is it the atmosphere? The hansom cabs rattling through another thick, yellow London fog (quite rare in the Canon actually)?
To me all these are components in making the canon the success it was and is, but more than that, it is the rhythm of Conan Doyle's writing thats tells most of us all. The Victorian era was awash with detective stories, densely and cleverly plotted with ingenius solutions, but read them and you quickly see what sets the Holmes stories.....that rhythm and pacing which belonged exclusively to Conan Doyle. The dialogue is pushed forward in a logical and naturalistic way whilst retaining that 'correctness' of speech. The most importanmt part of any Holmes piece I write is my desire to replicate this rhythm of story and rhythm of dialogue.....without it, you have no true pastiche. It compels me to add in a small way to the literature of Sherlock Holmes, being a delight and a pleasure to put words into the mouth of these two creations of Conan Doyle and my word for all his lackadaisical approch to the writing of Holmes stories, they worked like no others have done before or since. For instance, Agatha Christie was a great plotter, she gave us Hercule Poirot/Captain Hastings and Miss Marple. I have read everything in which these characters appear, but have I ever felt like writing Christie pastiches? No, never. The Poirot cases extend over a scarcely credible fifty years so if you had thoughts of writing a Poirot pastiche, where would you start? The 20's, 30's 40's etc etc? Othere than the character of Poirot there is no consistent style to hany your writing hat on. Although the Holmes stories cover thirty-three years apart from the odd intrusion of the telephone or motor-car, they could all take place in 1895. To some of us...they do.
Sherlock Holmes for the 21st century? Yes and for as long as people read. So be it.
Thursday, 1 March 2012
Sunday, 19 February 2012
The Great Sherlock Holmes Debate
Ahead of the Great Sherlock Holmes Debate some views on screen portrayals......
Before I go further I have to say I have not seen the Guy Ritchie movies nor at this stage have I any intention of so doing....I just know I would hate them, yes, no logic involved in that statement, but what the hell.
I grew up watching the Basil Rathbone/Nigel Bruce series of films. I thought Rathbone to be the perfect embodiment of Holmes in looks and in manner, cool and detached just how I see Holmes. The flip side to that was Nigel Bruce's Watson which quickly became more of a comic foil than 'trusty comrade', that is not to say that he does not have a certain appeal for he does, but he is most assuredly no Conan Doyle's Watson.
Peter Cushing came along in the late fifties and sixties. Again, in looks nigh well perfect. His Holmes was a diffident, fussy one who never seemed to be taken it seriously, yet Cushing was solid and consistent and to give him credit he endeavoured to keep the producers and directors in a Canonlike frame of mind.
Then Granada......and Jeremy Brett. I remember sitting down with some trepidation to watch the first episode and after twenty minutes I thought, 'He's nailed it'. Here was a Holmes who was arrogant, cool and just as how I always imagined him to be. Rathbone's and Cushing's portrayals were both consistent and when you sit down to watch them at work you know exactly what you are getting. With Jeremy Brett there was an edge, an unpredictability, surely like Holmes himself. Although JB was just as consistent as Rathbone and Cushing, where he scored over them was his flashes of brilliance that are so fondly remembered; the leap for joy at the end of 'The Second Stain', his emotional response to Lestrade's praise in 'The Six Napoleons', his 'explosion' at the end of 'The Blue Carbuncle' and many more breathtaking moments. David Burke and Edward Hardwicke as a composite Watson could never be surpassed. David Burke, a joy to watch as a man in awe of his companion and Edward Hardwicke more of a weary, but solid, questioning post-Hiatus Watson.
And now......Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman. Once more settling in for the first episode with some trepidation, but being blown over very quickly. How clever of the writers to be able to appeal to Holmes purists and the modern Dr Who generation. The humour underpinning the relationship between Holmes and Watson is never allowed to break out and swamp proceedings, the canon references are sometimes fleeting, but always you think added with great affection by the writers. BC's Holmes never strays to far from the original blueprint and Freeman perfectly captures what it must be like to be friends with such a man. What I would really love to see is a 'Christmas special', maybe 'The Blue Carbuncle' filmed with these two actors, but in period. I really believe they could pull it off.
As a footnote, when I am am writing this is who I have in mind; Holmes-Jeremy Brett, Watson-Edward Hardwicke, Lestrade-Colin Jeavons. Granada wins the day for me.
Before I go further I have to say I have not seen the Guy Ritchie movies nor at this stage have I any intention of so doing....I just know I would hate them, yes, no logic involved in that statement, but what the hell.
I grew up watching the Basil Rathbone/Nigel Bruce series of films. I thought Rathbone to be the perfect embodiment of Holmes in looks and in manner, cool and detached just how I see Holmes. The flip side to that was Nigel Bruce's Watson which quickly became more of a comic foil than 'trusty comrade', that is not to say that he does not have a certain appeal for he does, but he is most assuredly no Conan Doyle's Watson.
Peter Cushing came along in the late fifties and sixties. Again, in looks nigh well perfect. His Holmes was a diffident, fussy one who never seemed to be taken it seriously, yet Cushing was solid and consistent and to give him credit he endeavoured to keep the producers and directors in a Canonlike frame of mind.
Then Granada......and Jeremy Brett. I remember sitting down with some trepidation to watch the first episode and after twenty minutes I thought, 'He's nailed it'. Here was a Holmes who was arrogant, cool and just as how I always imagined him to be. Rathbone's and Cushing's portrayals were both consistent and when you sit down to watch them at work you know exactly what you are getting. With Jeremy Brett there was an edge, an unpredictability, surely like Holmes himself. Although JB was just as consistent as Rathbone and Cushing, where he scored over them was his flashes of brilliance that are so fondly remembered; the leap for joy at the end of 'The Second Stain', his emotional response to Lestrade's praise in 'The Six Napoleons', his 'explosion' at the end of 'The Blue Carbuncle' and many more breathtaking moments. David Burke and Edward Hardwicke as a composite Watson could never be surpassed. David Burke, a joy to watch as a man in awe of his companion and Edward Hardwicke more of a weary, but solid, questioning post-Hiatus Watson.
And now......Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman. Once more settling in for the first episode with some trepidation, but being blown over very quickly. How clever of the writers to be able to appeal to Holmes purists and the modern Dr Who generation. The humour underpinning the relationship between Holmes and Watson is never allowed to break out and swamp proceedings, the canon references are sometimes fleeting, but always you think added with great affection by the writers. BC's Holmes never strays to far from the original blueprint and Freeman perfectly captures what it must be like to be friends with such a man. What I would really love to see is a 'Christmas special', maybe 'The Blue Carbuncle' filmed with these two actors, but in period. I really believe they could pull it off.
As a footnote, when I am am writing this is who I have in mind; Holmes-Jeremy Brett, Watson-Edward Hardwicke, Lestrade-Colin Jeavons. Granada wins the day for me.
Sunday, 5 February 2012
Thoughts from Dan Andriacco
A big welcome please to this weeks guest blogger, Dan Andriacco with his usual insightful thoughts.
SHERLOCK HOLMES AND AMERICA
Sherlock Holmes fans on both sides of the Atlantic understandably reacted with dismay to the news that the American television network CBS plans a new series,
“Elementary,” transferring Holmes not only to the 21st Century (been there, done that) but to New York.
This idea has “dreadful” written all over it.But it did set me to thinking about how Sherlock Holmes’s career has had deep connections to the United States from the beginning. Fully half of A Study in Scarlet is set in Utah, the first of many stories in the Canon with American roots.Perhaps that is why the book was a bit of a hit in the United Sates, attracting the attention of Joseph Marshall Stoddart, the publisher of Lippincott’s Monthly Magazine in Philadelphia. It is well known that Stoddart held a dinner party in London in 1889 at which he commissioned Arthur Conan Doyle and Oscar Wilde to write novels. And so The Sign of Four and The Picture of Dorian Grey came to be.
A decade later, the American actor William Gillette substantially rewrote a play by Arthur Conan Doyle to create the melodrama Sherlock Holmes. He played the part for 30 years and became the model of Holmes – curved pipe and all – for Frederick Dorr Steele’s illustrations in Collier’s magazine.
Holmes has always been tremendously popular in the United States. Many of the early Holmes scholars were Americans – the likes of Vincent Starrett, Christopher Morley, Edgar W. Smith, Dr. Julian Wolff, and Ellery Queen. Baker Street Irregulars, of which they were all members, now has scion societies around the world.
The resurgence of Holmes in the 1970s was largely an American phenomenon fueled by the popularity of Nicholas Meyer’s 1974 novel and subsequent film The Seven Per-Cent Solution. A deluge of pastiches followed. In our own day, I’m among those who think the Warner Bros. films starring Robert Downey, Jr. and Jude Law are entertaining American action movies that could just as well have given the main characters different names for all the resemblance they bear to the canonical characters.
But guess what? They are bringing new readers to Sherlock Holmes. And that’s a very good thing indeed.
No wonder Sherlock Holmes once said, “I am always glad to meet an American.” But that’s a subject for another blog post.
Dan Andriacco lives in Cincinnati, Ohio, USA. He is the author of Baker Street Beat, No Police Like Holmes, and the upcoming Holmes Sweet Holmes. He blogs at:
http://bakerstreetbeat.blogspot.com/
SHERLOCK HOLMES AND AMERICA
Sherlock Holmes fans on both sides of the Atlantic understandably reacted with dismay to the news that the American television network CBS plans a new series,
“Elementary,” transferring Holmes not only to the 21st Century (been there, done that) but to New York.
This idea has “dreadful” written all over it.But it did set me to thinking about how Sherlock Holmes’s career has had deep connections to the United States from the beginning. Fully half of A Study in Scarlet is set in Utah, the first of many stories in the Canon with American roots.Perhaps that is why the book was a bit of a hit in the United Sates, attracting the attention of Joseph Marshall Stoddart, the publisher of Lippincott’s Monthly Magazine in Philadelphia. It is well known that Stoddart held a dinner party in London in 1889 at which he commissioned Arthur Conan Doyle and Oscar Wilde to write novels. And so The Sign of Four and The Picture of Dorian Grey came to be.
A decade later, the American actor William Gillette substantially rewrote a play by Arthur Conan Doyle to create the melodrama Sherlock Holmes. He played the part for 30 years and became the model of Holmes – curved pipe and all – for Frederick Dorr Steele’s illustrations in Collier’s magazine.
Holmes has always been tremendously popular in the United States. Many of the early Holmes scholars were Americans – the likes of Vincent Starrett, Christopher Morley, Edgar W. Smith, Dr. Julian Wolff, and Ellery Queen. Baker Street Irregulars, of which they were all members, now has scion societies around the world.
The resurgence of Holmes in the 1970s was largely an American phenomenon fueled by the popularity of Nicholas Meyer’s 1974 novel and subsequent film The Seven Per-Cent Solution. A deluge of pastiches followed. In our own day, I’m among those who think the Warner Bros. films starring Robert Downey, Jr. and Jude Law are entertaining American action movies that could just as well have given the main characters different names for all the resemblance they bear to the canonical characters.
But guess what? They are bringing new readers to Sherlock Holmes. And that’s a very good thing indeed.
No wonder Sherlock Holmes once said, “I am always glad to meet an American.” But that’s a subject for another blog post.
Dan Andriacco lives in Cincinnati, Ohio, USA. He is the author of Baker Street Beat, No Police Like Holmes, and the upcoming Holmes Sweet Holmes. He blogs at:
http://bakerstreetbeat.blogspot.com/
Thursday, 2 February 2012
The Sign of Fear by Molly Carr
What we have here is no more or less than a gorgeous romp involving several characters from the Holmes Canon, principally Mary Watson. Married to the good doctor who is forever heeding Holmes's calls and leaving Mary twiddling her thumbs at home. Mary is eveidently too feisty and individual a wman to let this state of affairs continue for long and proceed to set herself up as a detective in harness with the startlingly un-Victorian Emily Fanshaw. The action flows alonng with great humour (very often at Watson's expense) and verve. A rollercoaster of a novel with gear changes a plenty (in more ways than one!), a delicious turn of phrase on occasion, a whiff of sexuality and a fabulously drawn central character in Mary Watson. You will never think of Watson's wife in the same vein again. Along the way we meet parents of Hercule Poirot and Miss Jane Marple, throw in Raffles and Bunny and you will start to see what fun Molly Carr is having. And fortunately, us too. Highly recommended.
Available from Amazon both in paperback form and Kindle and from all book selling websites, your local bookshops or direct from the publisher, who publish a whole range of Sherlock Holmes books.
MX Publishing
Wednesday, 25 January 2012
An Interview with Sherlock Holmes author, Kate Workman.
Kate Workman is the author of two Sherlock Homes novel: 'Rendezvous At The Populaire' and 'I Will Find The Answer' both available from Amazon and all book-seeling websites, from your local bookstore or direct from the publisher, MX Publishing.
Q. Has your interest in Holmes been life long?
A. Not quite life long, but I've been aware of Sherlock Holmes as long as I can remember. My first clear memory of anything Holmes related is my dad sitting me down one day and showing me Young Sherlock Holmes, a movie made in 1985 where Holmes and Watson meet as schoolboys and solve a mystery involving an Egyptian cult. I didn't realize it till years later, but it attempts to explain how Holmes became the cold, calculated, analytical man we all love from Conan Doyle.
Q. When did you first have the urge to write a Holmes piece?
A. I actually first had the urge my senior year of high school. Hard to believe that's been over ten years now! I've loved Phantom of the Opera since my freshman year, and for whatever reason, I began thinking how cool it would be to have Holmes and the Phantom in one novel. But I didn't know enough about Holmes back then to actually sit down and start writing anything. Obviously, the idea remained in the back of my mind.
Q. And when you did, how did it feel?
A. I finally sat down and began writing Rendezvous at the Populaire in 2007, seven years after I graduated high school. I was living in Kansas at the time, just sitting in the apartment I had, and I decided, 'You know what? I wanna write this, so I'm gonna learn about Holmes and start writing it!' I wrote some preliminary pages, some of which actually made it into the beginning of the book where Watson is describing Holmes's misfortune thanks to Moriarty's henchman, and I also went out to Barnes and Noble and bought the hardbound, gold-edged page volume of the Complete Sherlock Holmes. Then I began reading, because I wanted to get Watson's voice as correct as I could. When I actually sat down and began piecing segments together (Rendezvous is the first novel I've ever written in a non-linear fashion,) it felt pretty awesome. I was following in the footsteps of two other author-giants and a blockbuster musical, so it was also humbling. But I think there was nothing better than when I actually opened the box with y author copies and held my book in my hands. Knowing that it wasn't something that was just in a binder on my shelf anymore. It was an actual book. Nothing beats that feeling.
Q. Do you re-read the original stories often or just selected ones?
A. I'll often look over random ones. Right now, what with working on the Ripper novel, I'm looking at a few in particular, once again, to attempt to get voices as correct as I can. Unfortunately, and I'm a little ashamed to admit this, but I haven't yet read the complete canon. One day I will, though.
Q. I get the impression you are an Anglophile.....have you visited England?
A. Not yet, though I would LOVE to! Not only am I a Holmes fan, I'm also a huge Beatles fan. I was obsessed in high school. Literally, obsessed. I'd have to say my best Halloween costume was my junior year, when I dressed as Paul McCartney from the Sgt. Pepper album. So, yeah. When I ever get to that side of the pond, so to speak, I'll definitely be visiting London for 221B Baker Street, among other things, and Liverpool for everything Beatles that's there.
Q. Back to your writing; with each successive book do you fee that you gain more insight into Holmes's character?
A. Holmes, as Arthur Conan Doyle wrote him, I'm not sure. I freely admit, though I make references back to the original stories, my Holmes would not pass for Conan Doyle's Holmes. However, with each passing novel, I have better insight into how I've portrayed Holmes. He's a fuller character with each novel that comes out, because he gains more and more of a past with each one. Yes, he has a past in Rendezvous, but it's reviewed rather than lived through. As I write them and others read them, we see the journey he goes on and can look back at the novels and see how he changed and became what he is in the latest one.
Q. Your upcoming novel features Holmes up against Jack The Ripper. Without giving anything anything away, how do you think you have kept this well-used theme fresh and exciting?
A. How I keep the Ripper story fresh? That is an excellent question, and I wish I could give it the full answer it deserves, but I would end up giving away too much. However, I honestly don't think there is a way to overdo Jack the Ripper. There are so many theories, ranging from the absurd (Lewis Carrol as the killer,) to the full-blown conspiracies (implicating the entire royal family!) that as long as it's done with some thought, some creativity, and a sense of logic that doesn't snap one's suspension of disbelief, who the Ripper could be and who catches him will never get old. My novel personally, the identity of the Ripper was too good an idea to pass up. I have no idea how the Holmes community will receive it, but I hope it's taken well. At first, I thought it was a completely original idea, but it has been done at least once before, it turns out. I don't know about more than that, but I'd find it incredible if myself and one other person were the only ones who thought of this in all, what are there, over ten thousand pastiches written on Holmes?
Q. Which other pastiches would you recommend?
A. Though I've yet to read it completely, I like what I've read of Lindsay Faye's Dust and Shadow. I definitely enjoyed Shadow of Reinchenbach Falls, by John R. King, a book where instead of dying, or even catching himself on the cliff, Holmes goes over the falls, survives, but has amnesia. Though I've collected more, I've yet to read anymore of Laurie King's Mary Russel and Holmes books, though I did enjoy the Beekeeper's Apprentice. I'm also looking forward to a couple MX books I should receive soon. Specifically, a copy of the Case of the Whitechapel Vampire. I want to see how well Jack the Ripper being a vampire and Holmes dealing with that reality is written, especially since the author was able to get the Conan Doyle estate's approval.
Q. If there was to be a film made of any one of your novels, who would you cast in the main roles?
A. If my books were made into movies, I'd LOVE to see Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman as Holmes and Watson. That pair is simply brilliant, and since I went with the idea of them being late twenties in 1882, it would work perfectly. If they weren't available, I'd want Hugh Laurie and Robert Sean Leonard. The chemistry between them is awesome, and let's face it, Hugh Laurie's already used to walking with a cane and playing a Holmes-like character. (Yes, I think House was a subconscious influence when I decided on an injured Holmes.) The Phantom, I think I would cast Hugo Weaving. I think it'd be fascinating to see Maggie Smith as Mrs. Hudson. And I am working on a Dracula one, so it'd be pretty cool to see Alan Rickman play Dracula.
Q. Oh....and do you have an allotted time in the day/week when you write or is it as and when the muse takes you?
A. I wish I had an allotted time during the day to sit and write. But, no, usually it's just when the muse takes me. I find more often than not, if I try to force myself to write, I hate everything I come up with. Or, not hate, but it just doesn't feel right. Other times, I'll be in a writing zone, and everything just comes perfectly. Of course, things will be repetitive in places, but hey, that's what editing is for!
Q. Has your interest in Holmes been life long?
A. Not quite life long, but I've been aware of Sherlock Holmes as long as I can remember. My first clear memory of anything Holmes related is my dad sitting me down one day and showing me Young Sherlock Holmes, a movie made in 1985 where Holmes and Watson meet as schoolboys and solve a mystery involving an Egyptian cult. I didn't realize it till years later, but it attempts to explain how Holmes became the cold, calculated, analytical man we all love from Conan Doyle.
Q. When did you first have the urge to write a Holmes piece?
A. I actually first had the urge my senior year of high school. Hard to believe that's been over ten years now! I've loved Phantom of the Opera since my freshman year, and for whatever reason, I began thinking how cool it would be to have Holmes and the Phantom in one novel. But I didn't know enough about Holmes back then to actually sit down and start writing anything. Obviously, the idea remained in the back of my mind.
Q. And when you did, how did it feel?
A. I finally sat down and began writing Rendezvous at the Populaire in 2007, seven years after I graduated high school. I was living in Kansas at the time, just sitting in the apartment I had, and I decided, 'You know what? I wanna write this, so I'm gonna learn about Holmes and start writing it!' I wrote some preliminary pages, some of which actually made it into the beginning of the book where Watson is describing Holmes's misfortune thanks to Moriarty's henchman, and I also went out to Barnes and Noble and bought the hardbound, gold-edged page volume of the Complete Sherlock Holmes. Then I began reading, because I wanted to get Watson's voice as correct as I could. When I actually sat down and began piecing segments together (Rendezvous is the first novel I've ever written in a non-linear fashion,) it felt pretty awesome. I was following in the footsteps of two other author-giants and a blockbuster musical, so it was also humbling. But I think there was nothing better than when I actually opened the box with y author copies and held my book in my hands. Knowing that it wasn't something that was just in a binder on my shelf anymore. It was an actual book. Nothing beats that feeling.
Q. Do you re-read the original stories often or just selected ones?
A. I'll often look over random ones. Right now, what with working on the Ripper novel, I'm looking at a few in particular, once again, to attempt to get voices as correct as I can. Unfortunately, and I'm a little ashamed to admit this, but I haven't yet read the complete canon. One day I will, though.
Q. I get the impression you are an Anglophile.....have you visited England?
A. Not yet, though I would LOVE to! Not only am I a Holmes fan, I'm also a huge Beatles fan. I was obsessed in high school. Literally, obsessed. I'd have to say my best Halloween costume was my junior year, when I dressed as Paul McCartney from the Sgt. Pepper album. So, yeah. When I ever get to that side of the pond, so to speak, I'll definitely be visiting London for 221B Baker Street, among other things, and Liverpool for everything Beatles that's there.
Q. Back to your writing; with each successive book do you fee that you gain more insight into Holmes's character?
A. Holmes, as Arthur Conan Doyle wrote him, I'm not sure. I freely admit, though I make references back to the original stories, my Holmes would not pass for Conan Doyle's Holmes. However, with each passing novel, I have better insight into how I've portrayed Holmes. He's a fuller character with each novel that comes out, because he gains more and more of a past with each one. Yes, he has a past in Rendezvous, but it's reviewed rather than lived through. As I write them and others read them, we see the journey he goes on and can look back at the novels and see how he changed and became what he is in the latest one.
Q. Your upcoming novel features Holmes up against Jack The Ripper. Without giving anything anything away, how do you think you have kept this well-used theme fresh and exciting?
A. How I keep the Ripper story fresh? That is an excellent question, and I wish I could give it the full answer it deserves, but I would end up giving away too much. However, I honestly don't think there is a way to overdo Jack the Ripper. There are so many theories, ranging from the absurd (Lewis Carrol as the killer,) to the full-blown conspiracies (implicating the entire royal family!) that as long as it's done with some thought, some creativity, and a sense of logic that doesn't snap one's suspension of disbelief, who the Ripper could be and who catches him will never get old. My novel personally, the identity of the Ripper was too good an idea to pass up. I have no idea how the Holmes community will receive it, but I hope it's taken well. At first, I thought it was a completely original idea, but it has been done at least once before, it turns out. I don't know about more than that, but I'd find it incredible if myself and one other person were the only ones who thought of this in all, what are there, over ten thousand pastiches written on Holmes?
Q. Which other pastiches would you recommend?
A. Though I've yet to read it completely, I like what I've read of Lindsay Faye's Dust and Shadow. I definitely enjoyed Shadow of Reinchenbach Falls, by John R. King, a book where instead of dying, or even catching himself on the cliff, Holmes goes over the falls, survives, but has amnesia. Though I've collected more, I've yet to read anymore of Laurie King's Mary Russel and Holmes books, though I did enjoy the Beekeeper's Apprentice. I'm also looking forward to a couple MX books I should receive soon. Specifically, a copy of the Case of the Whitechapel Vampire. I want to see how well Jack the Ripper being a vampire and Holmes dealing with that reality is written, especially since the author was able to get the Conan Doyle estate's approval.
Q. If there was to be a film made of any one of your novels, who would you cast in the main roles?
A. If my books were made into movies, I'd LOVE to see Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman as Holmes and Watson. That pair is simply brilliant, and since I went with the idea of them being late twenties in 1882, it would work perfectly. If they weren't available, I'd want Hugh Laurie and Robert Sean Leonard. The chemistry between them is awesome, and let's face it, Hugh Laurie's already used to walking with a cane and playing a Holmes-like character. (Yes, I think House was a subconscious influence when I decided on an injured Holmes.) The Phantom, I think I would cast Hugo Weaving. I think it'd be fascinating to see Maggie Smith as Mrs. Hudson. And I am working on a Dracula one, so it'd be pretty cool to see Alan Rickman play Dracula.
Q. Oh....and do you have an allotted time in the day/week when you write or is it as and when the muse takes you?
A. I wish I had an allotted time during the day to sit and write. But, no, usually it's just when the muse takes me. I find more often than not, if I try to force myself to write, I hate everything I come up with. Or, not hate, but it just doesn't feel right. Other times, I'll be in a writing zone, and everything just comes perfectly. Of course, things will be repetitive in places, but hey, that's what editing is for!
Tuesday, 24 January 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)