This week the teaser poster came out for May's Star Trek: Into Darkness, and the general feeling is that the single well-coated figure standing amidst devastation with all London laid out before him is Benedict Cumberbatch's character in the movie. If his villain turn is even close to what it potentially could be, our British Sherlock's star is going to be glowing brightly by June.
And with pre-release buzz for the first part of The Hobbit at a raging high, Martin Freeman, our British Watson (is there any other kind, really?) is already going nova. A delay of the third season of Sherlock to allow for these two stars' schedules is horrible news for one and all, but who can begrudge two such fine actors all the success in the world.
But who says we can't have it all? The third season of the series is contracted and sure to happen, but after that? The series is over, right?
Yes. The television series.
If someone in movieland isn't bright enough to put the pieces together and see what money could be made by putting Cumberbatch and Freeman together in a certain pair of roles, Hollywood must not be as interested in making money as they're known for being.
Between BBC and Moffat and Gatiss and whoever, couldn't somebody work out a way to bring Sherlock to the big screen, with all the budget and creativity such a venture would deserve?
My lord, that could even redeem a certain CBS show about certain supposed characters in the modern day, were American theater-goers (and later, DVD viewers) be given a full chance to see what a modern day Sherlock Holmes can really be done like!
Cumberbatch and Freeman get the continued success their talents deserve, we get more Sherlock . . . it's the sort of thing the phrase "win-win" was invented for.
So wish the boys well in their movie turns. They're still fairly young, and hopefully have plenty of Holmes and Watson left in them, on whatever stage life provides.