On embracing current technology on Sherlock:
Well, the thing about Sherlock Holmes in the original is that he’s very, very techno-literate. I mean to a contemporary Victorian reader he was a sort of cutting-edge scientist. He was well up with all the stuff. He was also born for the Internet age because he loves research. He loves acquiring knowledge. So I just imagined that, you know, the Sherlock would be lurking on the chat rooms and forums and finding out what’s going on. So far from being a difficult thing to embrace, it was a joy because he would love it.
Moffat insulting Cumberbatch’s name. Hah! Not very diplomatic, sir.
That’s his name. Benedict Cumberbatch is actually his actual real name. I know, isn’t that great? How often is Sherlock Holmes played by someone with an even stupider name?
On Watson’s importance to the show:
Because if you look at the stories, you look you look at any good version of Sherlock Holmes, Dr. Watson is every bit as important a character as Sherlock Holmes, and some would argue more so because he’s our conduit to Sherlock Holmes. He’s the person to whom the story in a way happens. We are more emotionally resonant with Dr. Watson that we are with Sherlock Holmes because Sherlock Holmes is, you know, a hard man to empathize with.
On Sherlock’s future, now that Martin Freeman and Benedict Cumberbath are bigger stars, busy with other projects:
Yes, but we have their families trapped in a cellar. (Laugh) They are both, I can honestly say, very, very keen to carry on with “Sherlock” as it stands. Thing is, we do a limited amount of “Sherlock.” That’s the way we do it. Every year or so we get together and do three movies. So you are free to do other things. And I think it’ll do them both good to descend from their mighty star status in L.A. and New Zealand and get back in a small caravan in Wales and make some more “Sherlock.”
Listen to /download the interview here: http://www.npr.org/2012/05/03/151938002/the-man-who-revitalized-doctor-who-and-sherlock
Aghhhhhh, if only this would really happen! Alas, the film adaptation of Michael Chabon’s novel has been stuck in development hell for years. Joe or Sammy? Or is he too old for the two main characters, since they started as teenagers in the story? The shallow part of me wants him as Tracy Bacon the handsome actor (and Sammy’s love interest), hehe.
Lots of other interesting tidbits from this io9 article, basically a write-up of the Q&A session with Cumberbatch, Steven Moffatt and some other producers. No Martin Freeman, sadly. Executive producer Rebecca Eaton? Wait, is this the same Rebecca Eaton the executive producer of Downton Abbey who was complaining about Maggie Smith being “difficult” on set? Turns out she’s not a BBC producer, she works for PBS Masterpiece in the US, so was she even on the set of of Downton Abbey to see how “difficult” Maggie Smith is being?? Serves them right if Smith does decide to leave the show.
Back to Sherlock and Cumberbatch, BC is very gracious about the CBS show Elemntary (there’s enough space for multiple Sherlocks), and wishing the best of luck to Jonny Lee Miller. Awwww, that’s so sweet of him. But see, I don’t think the problem is with having multiple Sherlocks, it’s the fact that CBS DID initially approach Moffat and co. to adapt the series, and then went on to create their own show so close to Sherlock’s concept and basic premise. (Hey, we changed the city and Watson’s gender, what more do you want?) It’s soooooo not believable that this is an idea they came up on their own, uninfluenced by Sherlock’s success.
Moffat has no plans for Dr Who-Sherlock crossover. Really, why would anyone think that’s even a possibility? The rules and logic of the two shows are so different. Cumberbatch thinks the extent of Holmes’ drug use has been overblown (“It’s about someone who operates at the highest level of his function, and you can’t do that if you’re inebriated.”) His strangest fan experience? Someone sent him a whip in the mail. Hah! Have you been naughty, Sherlock?