Discussion Main / AbledInTheAdaptation

I don’t want to be the Political Correctness Police, but the phrasing of a lot of the examples is pretty outdated, particularly the use of the terms “crippled” and “wheelchair-bound,” which are pretty universally reviled by the disabled community. (To the point that “cripple” and it’s shortened form “crip” are reclaimed in a similar way to “queer.”). I’m a bit leery about going through and changing the phrasing of examples though.

• Batman (1966) with Adam West notably lacks the PTSD the character is known for.

Was the character known for this in 1966? I mean, even setting aside that post-traumatic stress disorder was only defined in 1978, was the Batman of Silver Age comic books meant to be understood as psychologically damaged by his childhood trauma? I always thought that aspect of the character developed somewhere between Englehart's seventies stories and Miller's Year One.

Removed from the page:

Franchises

• While usually not considered a disability, Sherlock Holmes had a cocaine habit in the original Sherlock Holmes books. Most adaptations do away with any drug references. Exceptions are:
  • The 21st century Setting Update Sherlock has Holmes as being on a nicotine patch as a Mythology Gag to both his drug addiction and his smoking habit.
  • Elementary is set in the 2010s and is outright based around Sherlock's addiction. It starts with Joan being Sherlock's sober companion in order to help him kick his heroin addiction. Sherlock's problems with his addiction are referenced many times and he relapses at one point.
  • Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes references his cocaine habit without actually saying cocaine, with Watson finding an empty container and saying: "You know what you're taking is intended for eye surgery?"

There are a couple of reasons I don't think this is a suitable example.

For one thing, "usually not considered a disability" is right.

For another, this is a general example that basically boils down to "In the twentieth century, Sherlock Holmes adaptations usually left it out; in the twenty-first century, Sherlock Holmes adaptations often leave it in". Doing it properly would mean listing every Holmes adaptation and saying whether it did or didn't, which would take up most of the page and I don't see it being worth the effort.