Sherlock Creators Not Pleased About CBS's New Show

[Caffiene]

Making modern versions of classic books isn't exactly a revolutionary thought, and I'd be extremely surprised if there wasn't a whole host of modern takes on Sherlock out there.

I strongly doubt that they actually could protect the "Sherlock" TV show based only on the fact that its a modern take. I think it would need to have many more similarities than that. As you say, the idea to set a classic story in the modern day is very common, and certain things naturally extend from that idea (for example "people have mobile phones" is just a natural part of the modern setting) - you couldnt just own those parts. Where you would start having a case is I think more in specific things like

Spoiler

"a clue left by a victim turns out to be a password for a mobile phone".

The point of the court case is to figure out where to draw the line as to what counts as being specific enough to be an original idea and a new invention to the story.

If someone out there can make a better modern day Sherlock Holmes than you can (doubtful in this case, as I hear the show is really good), then why shouldn't they be able to do it? That's what capitalism is all about, yet copyright laws make it illegal to compete with the first product in that specific area.

Its a bit of a chicken & egg problem... Would that person have had the idea to make a better modern show if the original modern show hadnt existed? I mean, in the case of Sherlock the stories have been around for decades... CBS hadnt wanted to make a modern sherlock holmes before now, why the sudden interest? Or, if the original modern show hadnt done the work to get people interested, would the new one have actually managed to be more successful? It needs to be figured out whether the new competitor is actually creating their own customers, or if theyre just stealing the customers the first guy spent their time and money creating.

The other part of the idea of IP laws is that they are intended to create an incentive to take risks and make new things. Like the chicken & egg problem I mentioned above: Its much easier to come into an existing market than it is to develop something from scratch. Without IP laws to say "you have some exclusive rights to ensure you profit from your hard work", a lot more people would want to just sit and wait for someone else to do it first and then copy them, because theres no benefit to being the first. IP is supposed to reward people for creating new things, so that we end up with more new & unique things being made.

 

[Vault Citizen]

Oh no, please don't stop the Americans making an American Sherlock Holmes, the character would be a lot poorer for it.

That should cover my sarcasm quota for the day.

 

[Therumancer]

To be honest Sherlock Holmes is so iconic and has been used so many differant ways over the years that I don't think the BBC show has a leg to stand on here. Relocating Sherlock Holmes to the modern day is such a typical idea that I can't see anyone making claim to it, and really any arguements about it in terms of costumes, plots, and similar things when the vibe for such a show is pretty much self-suggestive are likewise extremely silly.

IMO both groups should just zip it and try and make the best shows they can, and see which stands the test of time (or if genere fans are lucky, both will). TV knocks itself off regularly anyway.

To be entirely honest I think one of the big reasons why you see so many attempts to remake things for the US audience is that the BBC tends to do most of it's stuff on a comparitive shoestring. Even the best show from the BBC seems to come accross as being rather cheap.

I've long since thought that if the BBC increased it's production values it could more easily release accross the english speaking world.

What's more I've typically found that like with everything the original version usually has better writing. The creator usually does things a specific way for a reason after a lot of though, and when something is re-produced the creative team there feels the need to put their touch into it to make it "theirs" without half as much thought and the results are rarely positive.

With a general idea like this since I don't think we're dealing with a direct knock off/re tread I'd immediatly guess that the US version "Elementary" is probably going to be better because more money is going to be put into it even if that doesn't always guarantee quality. I doubt there is going to be much effort to knock off costumes and sets, because and American studio is probably going to have that all over your typical British production.

 

[Quellist]

Since Sherlock, like Doctor Who and most anything else the BBC creates recently seems to be marketed to 13 year olds with short attention spans who needs bells, whistles and fancy crosscut chase scenes to keep them entertained. I find myself utterly unable to care if the US series is a rip off or not.

Go ahead and copy rubbish, but copied rubbish is likely to be more rubbish...

 

[Olrod]

Sherlock executive producer Sue Vertrue (who's married to the show's co-creator Steven Moffat), took to Twitter after CBS announced the ordered pilot. While she didn't exactly call the network out for being run by unoriginal hacks, she did note that this show was ordered only after CBS offered to do an American remake of Sherlock:

Just FYI: It's Sue Vertue, not Vertrue.

 

[The Dutchess]

People who don't like BBC Sherlock won't like this and people who DO like BBC Sherlock will watch that instead ... why bother?

I love BBC Sherlock and Cumberbatch is epic (as is Freeman as Watson). Who the hell could be better?

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

This is just pathetic on CBS' part.

 

[ablac]

Sherlock Holmes is in public domain so while id rather not see an american Holmes since being British and living on baker street in London are part of his character and to make him American for the sake of it seems like an unfitting portrayal of the charater. However it seems they may simply be re-making the recent BBC series rather than making an original show. That I dont really view as fair as while the plots of the BBC series are based off the novels (I think I never read them and some of the characters have been totally re written apparently again i dont know) they have been extremely well done and well written for their new setting.

 

[BlackHazard]

This remake is pointless because Sherlock already set the bar way high.
And this remake is just a waste of time and money but I could be wrong.
I doubt it but I could be wrong.

 

[Woodsey]

Since Sherlock [...] seems to be marketed to 13 year olds with short attention spans

Uh... which episodes have you seen, exactly?

 

[Smiley Face]

Making modern versions of classic books isn't exactly a revolutionary thought, and I'd be extremely surprised if there wasn't a whole host of modern takes on Sherlock out there.

I strongly doubt that they actually could protect the "Sherlock" TV show based only on the fact that its a modern take. I think it would need to have many more similarities than that. As you say, the idea to set a classic story in the modern day is very common, and certain things naturally extend from that idea (for example "people have mobile phones" is just a natural part of the modern setting) - you couldnt just own those parts. Where you would start having a case is I think more in specific things like

Spoiler

"a clue left by a victim turns out to be a password for a mobile phone".

Yeah, this. Absolutely, BBC has no claim to all modern reimaginings of Sherlock Holmes. But given that CBS is acting on the heels of BBC's success, and that they actually asked BBC's permission to do a remake of their version before embarking on the current one, you have to assume that they're taking what the BBC's done into account - and if it's stylistically really close, then that's is plagiarism/copyright infringement on what the BBC's done.

Sherlock Holmes is in public domain so while id rather not see an american Holmes since being British and living on baker street in London are part of his character and to make him American for the sake of it seems like an unfitting portrayal of the charater. However it seems they may simply be re-making the recent BBC series rather than making an original show. That I dont really view as fair as while the plots of the BBC series are based off the novels (I think I never read them and some of the characters have been totally re written apparently again i dont know) they have been extremely well done and well written for their new setting.

Oh crap, I didn't even think of this until you mentioned it. This would be AN AMERICAN HOLMES. IN AMERICA. While that certainly gives it the potential to skirt the whole infringement issue, it does it by... gah, I don't want to think about that. An Americanized Holmes is just so alien a thought that it defies the imagination.

 

[DTWolfwood]

Would it cost CBS more money to license Sherlock and bring it over to american shores instead of making a completely Copied series with terrible american english actors?

 

[Kismet42]

Agreed that there already is an "American Holmes" of sorts in the form of House, which I love.

It's funny, the trend seems to have been for US networks and studios to poach British acting talent and now if they're ever running dry on ideas, British ideas are being "borrowed" too.

None of us has a problem with actors disappearing abroad, especially if they're helping to tell great stories in doing so- whether it's Hugh Laurie's House or Stephen Moyer's Bill Compton (True Blood).

But doing US remakes/copies/clones of British shows is such a cop-out and so unoriginal.

It's almost as if they don't think American viewers would be able to handle British shows unless they were "Americanised". I think on the whole, the American audience is smart enough to appreciate British shows in their original pure unadulterated forms. Why change something that isn't broken?

Of course there are British remakes of Americans shows... but compare:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_television_programmes_based_on_American_television_series
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_television_series_based_on_British_television_series

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Oh great. We're gonna rip off another brilliant British TV show. Can't wait not to watch it.

 

[SovietSecrets]

I wouldn't mind if HBO or Showtime would have been picked to do the American version since most of their shows are insanely good. Showtime does a hell of a good job with the American version of Shameless. With CBS on this, I am a bit wary.

 

[LobsterFeng]

I don't think it's been fixed yet. Your first link leads to this: http://www.wisegeek.com/is-it-really-illegal-to-display-the-swastika-symbol-in-germany.htm Was this intentional?

Sherlock is okay I guess. I can see why people like it but I'm not really into the mystery/suspense stuff so I couldn't get into it. I can't imagine why CBS would think we'd want another one.

 

[TimeLord]

Need I mention the US Red Dwarf, Life On Mars, Coupling(Moffat), The IT Crowd...

You've got the US "Holmes", he's called House MD.

An American Red Dwarf... *shudders*

Anyway, as much as I hate to see an American remake of such a brilliant and recent success that is Moffat's Sherlock. I would like to see it made so I can utterly laugh at it.

 

[EHKOS]

Hey guys, don't forget to tune in and watch CBS' brand new show, Dr. What.

 

[Korenith]

We understand that CBS are doing their own version of an updated Sherlock Holmes. It's interesting, as they approached us a while back about remaking our show.

At the time, they made great assurances about their integrity, so we have to assume that their modernised Sherlock Holmes doesn't resemble ours in any way, as that would be extremely worrying.

We are very proud of our show and like any proud parent, will protect the interest and wellbeing of our offspring.

Even if said offspring is actually the child of Arthur Conan Doyle, not the BBC, and has been in the public domain for decades now...

I dunno. As a fan of the original stories, I wasn't all that enamoured with Sherlock. Cool idea, and the acting was mostly good, but as a crime show I feel it was pretty lacklustre. And they completely botched Moriarty from being a cool Godfather-type lord of the Underworld ("The Napolean of crime") into some annoying Joker knock off, complete with Ho-Yay fixation on the hero.

Tbh I thought Moriarty worked. Admittedly I'm not overly familiar with Conan Doyle's version but for me an extremely unhinged man who commits crimes just for the thrill and challenge of it is much scarier than somebody just looking to maintain an ultimate crime empire. Plus he is a great foil for the equally unhinged Sherlock. The series has a clear interest in mental health issues with Watson's psychosomatic (is that the right word) tremor and Sherlocks own inability to interact socially so it seems only fitting that Moriarty be the way he is.

That said I do get the Joker comparisons but hey the lunatic villian has been around much longer than that.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

An American Red Dwarf... *shudders*

That which has been seen...