Star Trek and Sherlock Holmes

Being a fan of both source materials for these reboots (and adaptations) I was keen on comparing them to the originals. And as it stands, the screenwriters for both films took hugely different directions with their new works. I was thrown off almost immediately by the look and feel of both of them.

Star Trek began with an epic, emotional mid-space struggle involving Kirk's parents -- very fitting for this reboot, to start not only from the beginning of the story, but the beginning of the main character's life -- while Holmes began mid-investigation, with an action-packed infiltration sequence. Star Trek felt at home in its introduction, the series and older films are no strangers to the epic space battle. The only difference being this time is the degree of choreography used. No more do we put up with FIRE PHASERS and then a shot of some phasers firing. It's all high-speed and bad-ass, a welcome change. It threw me off because I was expecting something very different. Something very new-age and differing heavily from source material.

Holmes on the other hand threw me off because I came in knowing it would be different from the source material, yet in the back of my head I hoped it would follow it exactly -- you stubborn people know what I'm saying -- and while the books are explicit in saying Holmes is an expert swordsman and accomplished hand-to-hand fighter, these things are rarely utilised in any way; his brain being his main form of attack and defence. But what really surprised me was the level of thought that went into making Holmes a bad-ass John McLean action hero. This was not the work of producer x and his many minions, or if it was, the screenwriters felt they had to excuse it in same way. So, I will say the character, Holmes made the fights a puzzle for himself. Much like the character House, based on Sherlock Holmes, he sees every facet of life as a puzzle, and I think that showing his fighting style as obvious puzzle-solving was genius. (Actually I would post that on tvtrope's Fridge Brilliance section if I hadn't realized it DURING the movie, after both of the puzzle fighting sequences had taken place.)

Again Star Trek surprises me in the look and feel. Even with the superior directing (action-wise) of JJ Abrams, the sets, uniforms, aliens, they all look so Trek. Everything. Lovingly recreated, while Sherlock Holmes took on a new persona in its sets, and costumes. Holmes classic bonnet and cloak are gone, and he is put in a much more Van Helsing Victorian London, complete with eerily shot dark streets and gothic cathedrals. But this is where things change for the best I think:

The characters. Both pull this off wonderfully. Star Trek tries its utmost to recreate every cartoon by every minute detail -- sometimes even physically in the case of Spock -- making sure they even sound alike, and not just in the level of emotion they put out. Snarkiness and accents are perfectly (almost creepily reproduced, apart from Scotty who now hails from Glasgow as opposed to Aberdeen, but that is a minor complaint, since neither of the actors who played Scotty were from Scotland at all.) Holmes is the more shocking of the two though: Downey Jr? Playing this sophisticated "consultant detective"? Oh no, I did not think that was a great idea. But I was reminded by several people that (paraphrasing now) this "isn't yer pappy's Sherlock Holmes," which I almost accepted. Almost accepted to the degree that when I went into the cinema I had pre-disappointment -- an awful thing. But back to the characters:

Leaving Holmes for last because his update confuses, let us go to the sidekick, Watson is made much smarter. I fondly recall Watson being out-deduced by Holmes at every turn yet at many a time during the movie Holmes would go 'well done, Watson' and continue to expand on WATSON'S point. At first I was like EH, but then I realized this was to make Watson's departure from Holmes for this new WOMAN more of a threat and accepted it gladly. Lestrad, the police detective who takes all the credit for Holmes' cases in the books is portrayed as an even MORE jealous man than the original, but yet keeps his sights firmly on the law, and in that he is surely the same man. The woman, I always forget her name, is one of my favourite minor Holmes characters from the short stories and I was happy to see her return. Though I was annoyed that she is indicated as a past lover since Holmes very clearly states in the books that he is not interested in women. Though Watson muses that if he were, he bets it would be here, so this is not a deviation, just an expanded point, I feel.

Now, Holmes the character himself confuses me somewhat. Everything about this movie is designed to be MORE BROOTAL than the books, yet inkeeping with the whole spirit of things, and while each and every other character does this perfectly I feel the screenwriters missed a really good opportunity here. In the books Holmes is heavily addicted to heroin in his long bouts of worklessness, as well as a multitude of other drugs. While in the movie the most he does is drink some mild anaesthetic. If they wanted to be more brootal they could have at least made REFERENCE to his addiction.

Now this is the point where the movies begin to differ: plot. Star Trek goes for a time travel paradox alternate universe silliness, which is overused and silly, but is efficient. I understand that this is the STAR TREK BEGINS movie, but it feels lazy and underdeveloped, and is ONLY efficient to reintroduce these characters. While Holmes starts in a world much like the original's world, but, again, MORE HARDCORE, and begins in a case that is very like a case the original would take. In fact, I found myself wondering how sir Arthur Conan Doyle himself would have written this story (without the explosions I expect, but I doubt he would change MUCH of the actual plot). I was disappointed to find MAGIC would play a part in this Holmes experience, but I gritted my teeth and dove in nevertheless. To my pleasure I found the whole magic thing to be a ruse, much like Hound of the Baskervilles. In fact, I found a lot of similarities between this WORLD, its cases, its history, and the original, while Star Trek changed its world to fit its new paradigm.

Improvements? Star Trek's improvements are simple, it took out the stupid fucking explosions. Why does shooting the side of a ship cause consoles to explode in the middle? Makes no fucking sense. So the wise screenwriters removed it. But they also, mistakenly I imagine, took out morality and bad guy motivation. Why? I don't understand. Star Trek is famous for (silly sometimes) moral choices and epic villains. So why? Oh well, maybe STAR TREK II: POSSIBLY HOPEFULLY SOMETHING TO DO WITH KHAN will improve once again.

I previously mentioned the fighting in Holmes being an IMPROVEMENT, an ingenious one, but the action and chase sequences were beautiful too. Everything was UPDATED, not just changed, it felt more relevant, or at least better eye candy. Books rarely make good eye candy and a good adaptation at the same time, but it managed it.

All in all I'd say Sherlock Holmes was a pleasant surprise, and while Star Trek was also pleasant, more of a surprise that it wasn't MORE pleasant.