Sherlock Holmes: The Shadow in the Window

As thin shadows swayed across my window blind, my fingers clutched the book to my chest. My throat muscles convulsed, and the blood trapped in my veins by the shock suddenly thundered on, rushing heat through my body.

It was him… the creeping man.

This was my first identifiable memory as a Sherlock Holmes fan.

Of course, the creeping man wasn’t actually outside my window; it was a crazy shadow cast by a tree devoid of its leaves in the winter. But that moment of utter terror experienced in my early twenties decided my favorite Sherlock Holmes short story for me.

The Creeping Man startles the imagination with its ghastly and Gothic possibilities, making it one of the most iconic of Arthur Conan Doyle’s stories.

Read More

Radio Theater: Sir John Gielgud and Sir Ralph Richardson as Holmes and Watson (1955)

I'm on the eternal hunt for the ideal Holmes and Watson pairing.

Oh, of course, many come close, like Jeremy Brett and David Burke in the celebrated BBC television series from the 1980s, or even Ian Richardson as Holmes, but alas, I can't recall his Watson, which is never a good sign.

Sir John Gielgud

But I believe I may have finally found the ideal paring in Gielgud and Richardson, both esteemed stage actors in their own right with all of the professional training needed to make radio theater a success.

In a word, they're marvelous.

I mentioned Ian Richardson a moment ago, and I actually hold him up as the ideal Holmes. They only thing he didn't have was Holmes' height, but everything else was absolutely 100% spot on, from his mannerisms to his appearance.

John Gielgud is the same, only on the radio.

One doesn't need much imagination to conjure an image of Sherlock Holmes while listening to Gielgud's radio theater performance. He has just the right touch of arrogance and humility in his performance, the proper notes of conviviality paired with the behavior of a social recluse. That mixture is what makes Arthur Conan Doyle such a delight to read. It's not everyday that a lead character can be offensive and still likeable.

Gielgud plays Holmes with a genuine fondness for Watson, a nice change from some of the more unpleasant incarnations of the man, and he absolutely sells that the story is happening in real time, at this very moment. No small feat.

Sir Ralph Richardson

Then there is Ralph Richardson, not to be confused with Ian Richardson. RR is a marvel. I've not encountered him very often in my movie watching ventures. He just sort of slipped on by me, as it were, although he does play Lord Mere in The Divorce of Lady X with Laurence Olivier and Merle Obern, one of my favorite romcoms from the 1930s.

I guess the real question is who do you see when you think of Dr. John Watson? I don't see an idle, fat man with absolutely no brains at all. I'll be forever troubled that Watson is often cast as such when there is no evidence at all in the canon that he was overweight and stupid. Opposite Holmes, almost anybody would seem stupid.

RR's Watson is delightfully amiable, awash with a warmth and enthusiasm for life that just makes the listener smile. He can and does keep up with Holmes on their ventures. His radio theater performance in The Dying Detective, the hurt and dismay he feels in thinking Holmes doesn't trust his expertise as a doctor, is perfection itself. Those authentic emotions are like nothing you have ever heard.

As if it were possible to improve on perfection, somehow this radio theater series managed it in the simple act of casting Orson Welles as Professor Moriarty in The Final Problem. Welles delivers an understated, calm performance as the devious Moriarty, a refreshing change to the Moriarty performances which hint at just a bit of crazy.

Sir John Gielgud, Sir Ralph Richardson, and Orson Welles

Paired together, Sir John Gielgud and Sir Ralph Richardson elevate the Holmes canon with their performance.

They show how the stories can and should be performed. I would give almost anything for a new television rendering of the stories if I trusted the BBC to get it right. But I don't trust them to not stay true to Doyle's original stories, so there's no point in my even going on about it, alas.

On a complete side note, my one annoyance with the series is the narrator's continued ignorance. He insists on calling Watson, Dr. James Watson! I mean, really!?

The radio series has 16 episodes (how I wish it were longer!)

Dr Watson Meets Sherlock Holmes
A Scandal in Bohemia
The Red-Headed League
The Six Napoleons
The Blue Carbuncle (an absolute gem)
The Speckled Band (shivers galore)
The Disappearance of Silver Blaze
The Golden Pince-Nez
A Case of Identity
The Final Problem (an absolute must)
The Empty House (again, an absolute must)
The Second Stain
The Bruce-Partington Plans
The Dying Detective (my personal favorite)
The Norwood Builder
The Solitary Cyclist (another favorite)

You can find them all HERE for free streaming, which I think is a lovely service.

If you do get a chance to listen, what is your favorite of the stories? What do you think of the performances? And, most especially, which of the Holmes stories do you wish they had performed!

Read More

Frank Langella as the Great Sherlock Holmes on the Stage in 1981

Written for my Frank Langella Celebration! ❤

There are three types of Sherlockians in the world. If you don’t know what the word even means, then you’re clearly not one of them. Love you anyway!

You either a) are a Sherlock Holmes purist and only read the novels because no film adaptation has ever done the stories justice, b) don’t mind some changes to the concept so long as the general design of Sherlock Holmes remains intact, or c) are good with any and all adaptations and don’t care whether they match the books are not.

I, personally, fall into the 2nd category with occasional leanings either way depending on what it is I’m watching or reading.

My less forgiving Sherlock Holmes stance omits the idea of an older Holmes marrying a girl in her twenties like in Laurie R. King’s novels (despite liking the authoress as a person because she’s hilarious).

My more forgiving side is what we’re here to discuss right now.

Because Frank Langella (who I adore) played the great detective himself in a filmed theater production in 1981. It was based off a silent film from 1916 and even appears to use the same screenplay, although I’ve never seen the original so I can’t truly compare the two.

Having just recently watched The Twelve Chairs from 1970 with Frank (review coming later!), there is one scene in that movie which set him up as being a potentially brilliant Holmes. He’s masquerading as a communist worker in the bureau of chairs and tables and is so convincingly strict, so coldly calculating, so delightfully rude that it just screamed “cast me as Sherlock Holmes” to the world.

The world obviously listened.

Frank Langella embodies a perfectly entertaining version of Sherlock Holmes that has always and will always make me smile. I can even forgive his Holmes falling in love . . . because he does, and to the beautiful, young Alice Faulkner who wishes only to protect him. Yes, I find that funny since I’m certain Holmes can protect himself with very little effort. But there you have it, true love can be so very blind. So the romantic in me is indulgent of Holmes and Alice’s love, simply because it is Frank Langella and I can never get enough of him as a romantic lead. You’ll either love or hate this aspect of the play.

Romance aside, however, the mystery itself is a clever mashup of several of Holmes’ cases. I spotted elements of A Scandal in Bohemia and The Disappearance of Lady Frances Carfax, although I suspect there are more of the short stories incorporated into the plot. Holmes himself is both colder than normal and more yearning. He confesses to hopes and dreams that I’m sure the “real” Holmes never experienced. But his interaction with the feared Moriarty is fiendishly clever, and a goodly portion of the dialogue is played for laughs, which really works in a theater setting. You’re supposed to laugh when things are funny and so the staging of the lines ensures that you will.

The costuming is stunning as is the set-dressing. I fully believed I was watching scenes from actual Victorian, England, they were that good.

If you’re only accustomed to Frank in the movies, then you’re missing out. There are many nuances to stage acting that must be eradicated or toned down for film acting and so it’s intriguing to watch the stage version of Langella and discover just how very much of his acting style he had to change depending on whether he was on film or on the stage. It takes real talent to make an accomplishment of both venues.

Really, if you’re a diehard Langella fan, like me most of the time, then you’ll be forgiving of the little quips and quibbles in this play. Is it a faithful representation of Sherlock Holmes? No, it is idealized and humanizes him more than probably any other filmed version I’ve seen except for the steampunk movies of RDJ. But a little bit of humanizing never hurt anyone and I love to see Holmes revealing a softer side to Watson and to Alice, a side that many fans wish existed. This play isn’t for purists and that’s okay. It is, however, for Frank Langella fans, which is why I guiltily indulge in a viewing every couple of years or so, wishing that it was better film quality and dreaming that I will someday own an officially released DVD (not ever going to happen, I’m sure).

Should you care to try his charming version of Sherlock Holmes, visit the Youtube link below!

 

Read More

Author Meet-and-Greet with Laurie R. King

Thanks to a good friend of mine, I attended an author signing/Q&A/reading with Laurie R. King in Denver on Friday night!

For the uninformed, she writes the Mary Russell and Sherlock Holmes mysteries, and I think she has another series too, but I'm not sure what it's called.

Now, I've never read her books, but thought the event sounded like fun and it was . . . just a terrific way to spend an evening with my friend! If you're ever in Denver and get a chance to go to the Tattered Cover bookstore on Colfax, it is AMAZING. I highly recommend it, just to wander through in awe!

But back to Ms. King. 

Here's a few fun facts about her in regards to her work.

She does not use an outline when she writes. In fact, the closest she ever got to an outline was little 3x5 inch notecards. That didn't last. She considers the difference in authors that are for or against outlines to be simply a matter of "organization" vs. "organic." I thought that to be a very congenial way to describe it.

However, she does write down plot points she must hit when she's working on her mysteries, just so she doesn't leave anything out.

She never writes about places that she hasn't visited herself (very wise, I think, and something I must remember with my own writing).

She does have a writing schedule, but it's usually no more than 1,500 words a day, sometimes as little as 600.

She knows that if she has writer's block than she's taken a wrong turn in the story somewhere and will re-read the book she's having trouble with until she finds the spot where she went wrong.

Her creativity flows in the way she sits. She wrote her stories longhand for the longest time until laptop computers actually became light enough to put on your lap. Then she could sit in the same position she was used to sitting in to write and her brain continued to work. Until laptops, if she tried to write on a computer, her brain blanked on her.

Her reason behind Mary Russell and Sherlock Holmes was a wish to contrast and compare such incredible intellect side by side, 2 different people from different generations put together. When you think about it, that's really quite clever.

I found Ms. King to be utterly fascinating and very entertaining. She loves her work, enjoys her fans, and really has a deep respect for Sherlock Holmes, which I appreciate. I may not fully agree with her take on Dr. Watson, but is it really her take or how Mary Russell perceives him? Who knows?

And yes, I did stand in line to get her latest book, The Murder of Mary Russell signed. Not for me, but for someone else who I know is a fan and reads her books faithfully.

Here's a photo that Ms. King herself took from the podium and posted on Facebook and the little person circled in purple in the back on the left is, in fact, me. So exciting!

Now the biggest question is probably, do I want to read her work? Well, I started listening to The Beekeeper's Apprentice audio book at work on Friday before the event. So I'm not very far in. But I find it intriguing. While I am not really one for series in general, as most of you know, I may buckle down and try reading Ms. King's work. Or I may find that one book is plenty.

What I do know is that as an orator Laurie R. King is a pure delight. In fact, I bet taking a writing class from her would be a really entertaining and fun experience.

So there you have my weekend experience. I am now in love with the Tattered Cover bookstore and since my friend, Lindsay, is in love with it too and they have authors visit regularly, we might just make it a regular thing we do together. Now that would be awesome!

One last photo for the road, me meeting Laurie R. King. Proof positive that she signed a book for me! You didn't know my blonde hair was so long, eh?

Read More

Is Sherlock an introvert?

How do you tell an introvert from an extrovert? It has nothing to do with how socially comfortable you are, it really doesn't. How do you recharge? If you recharge by being around people, then you're an extrovert. If you recharge by spending time alone . . .introvert. It's really that simple.

In that same vein, how does Sherlock recharge? Where does he get his juice, his pep, his vim and vigor? Let's be honest, the temptation, and I succumbed to this myself a few years ago, is to assume that he's an introvert because he spends so much time alone. But what does his alone time accomplish? It accomplishes boredom on a massive level that sinks into depression at suicidal rates! Do not let that man spend too much time alone is your take-away lesson for this evening.

So, Sherlock in Sherlock is actually an EXTROVERT. Which sort of amazes me since Holmes in the canon is an introvert. But he's not the first extroverted version of Sherlock Holmes, so hey, it works. Sherlock requires people, gains his energy from people even if it means sniping at them, and when he isn't around people, he's lethargic and broody. Simple analysis, end of story . . . extrovert.

But I'm not about to guess what personality type on MBTI he actually is because he embodies several different types. Go figure. Must be that high-functioning sociopath coming through again.

Read More

Mr. Holmes (2015)

When I first realized Ian McKellen was going to play an old Sherlock Holmes, I balked. Not because of Sir Ian, but because the very idea of an "old" Sherlock Holmes just didn't sit right with me somehow. It's a reminder of mortality . . . the notion that the world's greatest detective could grow old. And worse yet, grow senile.

Such is the case with Holmes. It is now well into the early 1940s and Holmes is aged, well into his 90s, if I were to make an estimated guess. He's become something of a recluse, hiding himself away in the country with his bee gums for the past 30 years. Why? All because of his last case, the case that went wrong. Now that he's setting out to correct the misconception John Watson created about this particular case, he can barely remember the details. They come to him in irksome snatches where only a few years before he could have told anyone every single detail of any one of his cases. Not so now.

If not for Roger, the young son of his housekeeper, Holmes might have actually given up trying to remember. But the lad wants to read the story Holmes is writing, is eager, even desperate, to connect to the world-weary detective. And Holmes finds an affinity in the boy's wit and intellect, for Roger loves learning in ways that the child's mother cannot even begin to comprehend. So the two, old man and young boy, journey together down memory lane, as Holmes fights every step of the way to maintain the vast intellect that earned him so much respect during his career.

Read More

Murder Rooms Week: A Fandom I Love that Doesn't Get Nearly the Acclaim It Deserves

As you can probably guess, I'm participating, almost late might I add, in a BLOG PARTY for the great miniseries/book series Murder Rooms: The Dark Beginnings of Sherlock Holmes. If you've not heard of it, or if you have, come join me and may you come to love it as much as I do.

Do you ever have those moments when a fandom feels like it was only yesterday? When in reality it was 10 years ago? Because I have those moments, frequently, whether it's grieving the all-too-short run of Moonlight, the best ever vampire drama on television, or aching for the days when Lord of the Rings websites, blogs, and forums abounded online. Somewhere along the line, years passed, other people moved on, and I am left to remember in silence those beautiful stories that I loved for what felt like decades, but was, in fact, only a few years before everyone else found something new to love.

Read More

BBC Sherlock (2014): The Sign of Three

Change isn't always easy or fun. Sherlock doesn't always adapt well to change, but in this 3rd season of Sherlock, he's at least trying. Episode 3.2, The Sign of Three, involves a lot of change for Sherlock and John. Why? Because John Watson has finally found the love of his life, Mary Morstan, and this episode covers their wedding. In other words, John's leaving for a new life.

This season is more character-centric than the previous seasons. The cases are pretty much unimportant in comparison to the growth and development of the characters. Take, Sherlock Holmes, for example. In this episode, Sherlock is learning to be empathetic towards other people. This is not a primary function for him, as we all know! The episode opens with him sending an urgent text, pleading with Lestrade to help him, immediately, at once, and he gives no details. Lestrade, being the big boob that he is, doesn't ask for the details, instead flying to Baker Street with the entire cavalry in tow, helicopters and all. Sherlock needs help with his best man speech. That's it. This is typical Sherlock behavior if I ever saw it! What isn't so typical of him is his statement of hoping that Lestrade hadn't gone to too much trouble. This is unusual, my friends!

Read More

BBC Sherlock (2014) - The Empty Hearse

Imagine living 2 years without your best friend. Everything points to that person being dead. You've finally managed to move on, although life doesn't have quite as much excitement or meaning as before. Then, on a seemingly normal evening, you take your girlfriend out to dinner, planning to propose, finally meet the eyes of your waiter, and discover that it is none other than Sherlock Holmes, risen from the dead. Yeah, John didn't handle that one so well!

Needless to say, Sherlock isn't dead. John's been living an average life for 2 years, actually fallen in love, grown a mustache, and when Sherlock pops back into his life, he runs the full gamut of emotions in the span of thirty seconds. Then, in true John fashion, he grabs at Sherlock's neck in a blind rage. It's funny. Yes, it's absolutely hysterical because John punches at him not once, but three times, and each time they get thrown out of the restaurant, moving to one progressively lower class. It's AWESOME!

Read More

Book Review: A Study in Silks by Emma Jane Holloway

A Study in Silks by Emma Jane Holloway

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Evelina Cooper's world consists of steam-powered machines, fancy-dress parties, and the mysterious death of a servant in her best friend, Imogen's, house. This is Evelina's year to come out in Victorian society, that is, Victorian society of the steam-powered, speculative variety. All she should be concerned with is obtaining an invitation to be greeted by Queen Victoria, certainly not spending her time worrying over the untimely demise of Grace Child. Unfortunately for her, Evelina is the niece of renowned detective Sherlock Holmes, and like her brilliant uncle, finds the mundane, drudge of existence to be utterly tiresome. So, Evelina involves herself in catching Grace's murderer, not only to serve justice to the poor, murdered girl, but also to exercise the talents she has been given, both the intellect of the Holmes family, but also the magical talents of the Coopers. Evelina literally has a foot in two worlds, torn between the high society and promises of a good match, possibly even with Tobias Roth, the man her heart yearns for, or the world of the circus and magic where she grew up, and the Indomitable Niccolo whose very touch sparks unspeakable magic and passion between them. Evelina must decide which world to involve herself in, but both are fraught with tension, danger, and intrigue.

Ms. Holloway is a master storyteller. Even the characters that I do not want to like based on moral grounds (cough, Tobias, cough), I still end up liking. Her villains are solidly crafted, and her world is vividly devised. I love all of the steam-powered machinery, both the ones that are man-made, and the ones that have a little additional touch of magic to make them work like Evelina's Mouse and Bird. Steampunk fiction is rare, especially of the variety that I would like to read. I love this delightful world that Ms. Holloway has so flawlessly created with her agile and clean writing style. It's beautiful and vibrant and I wish I could see this world for myself.

Now, on to the reasons for only giving 3 stars. Ms. Holloway uses too many voices. The book is supposedly about Evelina, but because of the many other characters that we follow, there can be 30 or 40 pages where Evelina is simply gone. And unfortunately for the author, those tend to be the pages I like best. I like following the villains of the story because they are much more interesting than the heroine. I even loved the chapters from Tobias' view, and especially the ones from Nick's perspective. On top of that, Evelina is tormented by romantic afflictions of the most repetitive nature. I could understand ruminating over her dangerous feelings for Nick once or maybe even twice, but any more than that slows the story down and had me almost wishing to skip ahead to some action. This book is 531 pages long. She could have told the story more concisely in half the time and I would have finished it in 2 days instead of 9. Her plot and her characters are bogged down by too much information and too many voices.

The other point against the book is the heroine's supposed cleverness. She's not that clever, and a reader of even the remotest intelligence will note this fact. Everything Evelina discovers is told to her by someone else. Her investigative skills are sadly lacking, and it's a bad sign when the reader is 4 steps ahead of the heroine because one of the other characters revealed something to us, but not to her. Evelina seemed almost blind in comparison to me, but I really shouldn't blame her because I was the one with the other characters, not her, and I couldn't expect her to be a fly on the wall like me. If Ms. Holloway had narrowed the book down to a single voice, Evelina's, or even her, Tobias, and Nick, then the flow would have been much smoother.

Then we have Sherlock Holmes. In some ways, I think Ms. Holloway believes Evelina is more clever than the great detective. No, she is not. And by trying to declare that belief, however subtly, to me as a reader only made me think Evelina arrogant in her magical talents because she has something that Holmes lacks. Add to that the unrealistic tenor of Holmes' personality, and I didn't buy his addition to the story at all. She would have done better to develop this story in steampunk Victorian England utterly devoid of the great detective. I would have bought her story completely, instead I found the logical side of my brain saying, "Why would Holmes care about this?" or "He wouldn't act this way!" Ms. Holloway did herself a disservice by including the great detective.

"A Study in Silks" is, on the whole, very good. I love Ms. Holloway's writing style and her character development, but there is no excuse for the formatting or the length of the novel. I hope her next novel corrects some of the mistakes made in this one, especially chopping down the number of voices. I'll just have to wait and see.

Read More

Sherlock Holmes Corrections

Looks like I should probably clarify a few things about my previous Sherlock Holmes posts. :-)

You know the ones, where I prefer the recent films to Sherlock?

As it turns out my opinion really wasn't set in stone. Makes me wonder if I should hold off on posting certain thoughts until I've given them a few weeks to simmer. In this case the new Downey Jr. film makes me nervous and uneasy because of the gay overtones. Yes, they are there and no, I don't like them. They became more obvious to me the more I thought about them and within a few months I realized I likely would never watch Game of Shadows again.

Now, I know that people are going to make assumptions about their gayness or straightness regardless of what movie or tv series we're talking about. But you know the difference? WATSON! That is the difference. I look at Martin Freeman and under no circumstances could I imagine that John and Sherlock could be gay. It's bloody impossible, end of story.

Then there's Jude Law. His Watson is written almost as if he were a pansy. Well, that might be a bit extreme but, I ask you, who did teach his Watson to dance? Makes you wonder and I'd rather not have to worry about wondering, period.

So, there we go. My most recent Holmesesque thoughts. A Scandal in Belgravia is still ICK and so far off canon it hit Pluto on its journey out of the Milky Way but I'd still pick Sherlock as my #1 choice of recent Holmes film/tv adaptations. Hands down awesomeness.

Read More

Sherlock vs. Sherlock Holmes

Per the usual, Sherlock Holmes the movie left me speechless. It takes me about 2-3 days to figure out whether I even like these Holmes films or not. All it took, apparently, was watching the first episode of the new season of Sherlock to help me decide. I'd rather have a quirky Holmes with a brilliant Moriarty than a brilliant Sherlock and a naked Irene Adler. I won't give away too many details on A Scandal in Belgravia other than to say that it did not live up to my expectations. The first season was incredible, with exciting concepts and blazing originality. It left me salivating for more. The new season's debut only left me uncomfortable and grateful that it wasn't airing yet and that I could forewarn my parents against watching the first episode.

I'd rather have them in theaters watching Sherlock Holmes in disguise wearing a bonnet and lipstick than seeing a carefully filmed naked woman parade in front of Sherlock and make not only Watson but the audience uncomfortable.

No major spoilers within, just my brief mention of disappointments and personal warnings.

Read More

Thoughts on Masterpiece Mystery's Sherlock

"Watson, come at once if convenient. If inconvenient, come all the same." - Sherlock Holmes, no matter the era or actor

Anyone who knows me knows that I love Sherlock Holmes. A friend introduced me to him about 8 years ago and my life hasn't been the same since. Not that I'm complaining, mind you, but it's difficult loving a character that most people think was either gay (shame on them!) or (as in recent films) completely infatuated with Irene Adler. *tsk, tsk* Not that I dislike Robert Downey Jr. as Holmes (in fact I find him highly amusing and entertaining), but a part of my heart winces every time I imagine him and Irene together. Some things should never have come to pass. So naturally when I heard that a new series was being made, one in which Sherlock Holmes would be thrust into the heart of modern London, I doomed it to failure. Nothing and no one could possibly make such a ludicrous idea into a success, I ranted! Well, it seems I was wrong.

I loved the new Sherlock Holmes movie, you know. And that surprised me. I had no idea there would be two surprises in the same year and that I would come to love the new Masterpiece Mystery! series entitled Sherlock as much as that crazy new movie! Or, dare I say it, even more. Because as much as Robert Downey Jr. entertains me, he's not quite the right appearance for Holmes, in my own mind. Not that I could see Benedict Cumberbatch (yes, it's all right to snicker) boxing 5 rounds with some of the bruisers RDJ took on, but I can definitely picture him fencing the pants off a villain at some point (not literally). Benedict is Holmes. He was Holmes for me within 1/2 an hour and that, my friends, takes some doing. Especially since I never fully accepted RDJ as Holmes, even though I love the film. You might be asking, how does Holmes fit into modern society? Very well, thank you. He's socially awkward, the same as Victorian Holmes, or in Sherlock's words, "I'm a high-functioning sociopath." Can you argue with that type of logic? Nope. Holmes is the same no matter what era he's zapped into.

The writing, I confess, can be good or bad, defining whether the Holmes will be a success or not. But with this brilliant new series, I see Holmes, just as I've always seen him. Rude and obnoxious and undeniably brilliant, with a hint of attraction thrown in just to gain a lady's interest (such as myself). Most women are drawn to Holmes because he has no interest and it makes us curious. I just know that Benedict will make Sherlock a success. Does this mean I'll stop loving Jeremy Brett? In what universe! I love many different versions of Holmes, including Frank Langella's stage production where, saints preserve us, he too fell in love with Irene Adler (read my thoughts on the stage play). What is the power that mysterious woman holds over Holmes? But anyway, all that aside, I'm glad I've given Sherlock the chance to impress me.

That first episode was a humdinger and waiting an entire week for the next installment will be torturous. But wait I will because I am going to show PBS that one more household can love a modern Holmes. Not that my parents are complaining: Mom loves him and Dad chortled at Holmes' smart witticisms. It's awesome knowing I won't be watching alone!

Read More