[ SECRET POST #4892 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4892 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.



__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 11 secrets from Secret Submission Post #700.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Character adaptations that you hate

[(Anonymous)]

I liked Irene Adler in the original story. I haven't seen a single version of her character that does her justice, but I especially hated what they did to her in BBC's Sherlock.

Re: Character adaptations that you hate

[(Anonymous)]

God, yes.

That was the first Sherlock episode I saw and it made it impossible for me to really like any other part of the series.

Re: Character adaptations that you hate

[(Anonymous)]

If she had won in the end, it would have been okay at least, even if not great. But she lost, and then he had to go save her, and it made everything all the stupider and grosser. Moffat's Sherlock had to be the indomitable ubermensch, and that made everything they did with Irene a nonstarter; she was never going to go toe to toe with him. She was always going to fail. She was written to fail.

The other issue, of course, was an issue of Moffat fucking up what he was insinuating in his writing. If-- if-- he had actually gone through with making Irene and John mirrors of each other (a gay woman with an exception; a straight man with an exception) then it might not have tasted as shitty for him to have leaned into the horrible lesbophobic trope of there always being at least one man that she'll go for. The framework was there. But then Moffat 100% doubled down on his het bullshit and denied any homosexual intent between Sherlock and John, which then also silently doubled down on having actually thrown a gay woman under the shitty trope bus.

LONG STORY SHORT I 100% agree with you and it breaks my heart because it could have been so much better.

Re: Character adaptations that you hate

[(Anonymous)]

Strongly seconding all of this. They had so many good ingredients there, but the way they used them was just insultingly horrible. I loved Irene, in all her vicious, brilliant, unapologetic, indomitable glory...until the writers threw her under the bus.

Re: Character adaptations that you hate

[(Anonymous)]

Personally, I loved her character in BBC Sherlock--I just hated how that episode played out.

Ruthless, cunning Dominatrix who's a genius at reading people and even better at manipulating them, introduced as the epitome of Neutral Evil, but may have the potential to be swayed towards True Neutral and even occasional acts of good? I am so here for it.

But then they had to go and make her "fall for" Sherlock, plus that stupidity with making the all-important password his name (JFC that's dumb), and then he bests her, and then he rescues her from certain death?! Yeah, ugh, giant NO to all of that.

Re: Character adaptations that you hate

[(Anonymous)]

I actually liked that he rescues her. I like Sherlock and I'm not too anoyed that he's overpowered, tho... him on the field with a sword? What a joke. I like the idea that they keep in touch and help each other. The password and falling in love so much that Irene does stupid thing, that one I hated. Irene is way cooler than that. Also they didn't even spend much time together.

Re: Character adaptations that you hate

[(Anonymous)]

Argh, yes! What is not interesting about her as-is? She’s shrewd and resolute, but that doesn’t cancel out her kindness and honor. She and Holmes find admiration or even some level of kinship in each other’s quick wits and ways of thinking, but she’s got her own life, y’know?

Re: Character adaptations that you hate

[(Anonymous)]

I haven't seen the Granada version in ages and don't remember it, but what bugs me about all other adaptations I know of is the insistence on creating a relationship, or even just a mutual attraction, where there is none in the original story. Holmes might brood over having failed to do what he set out to do, but there's never any indication that Irene is into Holmes at all. He's just a guy in her way.

That's what's cool about Irene Adler is the way she side-steps Holmes and keeps going, barely breaking her stride.

(Then she leaves and is never mentioned again for the whole rest of the canon - A Scandal in Bohemia was only the third Sherlock Holmes story ever.)

I know Holmes/Irene is as old as dirt, though, so *sigh.*

Re: Character adaptations that you hate

[(Anonymous)]

But she's not even in the original story. Oh, her name is important and the things she does are important, but she's not a character.

Re: Character adaptations that you hate

[greghousesgf]

yeah, me too.