Did Monk Rip This Movie Off?

I don't think Monk did "rip it off" as the two characters are essentially opposites. Monk is a detective that longs to be taken back into the fold of society in general and the police department in particular. He was always a little obsessive-compulsive, but his wife's murder threw him off the deep end. Additionally, Monk solves crimes based on being in the middle of it.

Zero whines when he realizes he has to leave his house to solve a crime. He relies almost exclusively on research. Due to this research he is able to get to the scene of the crime before one happens in some cases. After all, "people know they're being followed when they turn around and see someone following them. They can't tell they're being followed if you get there first."

Well, I'm not that familiar with Sherlock Holmes (only read "Hound of the Baskervilles"). But I did think that Monk was a rip off of Zero Effect. Yeah, there are differences, but it's basically the same idea--a brilliant detective is plagued by inordinent fears of interacting with the public on a normal basis. If Zero Effect had been a smash hit, I doubt that Monk would have ever happened. It would have been too obvious a rip off. Since ZE bombed, few knew about it and the idea was still worth exploring. Also, I would like to see a sequel. Too bad Kim Dickens couldn't be in it.



"You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test."--George W. Bush

I see the similarities, but Monk and Zero Effect are nowhere near alike for one to be considered the rip off of the other. Zero is an odd-ball, but the only major diagnosis one could give him would be a very mild case of agoraphobia. Monk, on the other hand, has extreme OCD and phobias about just about everything. He can't even touch skin with another human being without discomfort.

They also solve their cases in pretty different ways. Both do use acute observation, but Monk takes it further than Zero. He has to always go to the scene and walk through it in great detail. Zero only leaves his place when it's absolutely neccessary. Both characters don't have proper interactive skills with other people, but Zero can be damn good at faking it. Monk can't. He can't fake normalcy like Zero. He always sticks out like a sore thumb while Zero can disappear into a crowd.

Also, Zero is a very isolated character. Besides Arlo, he does not have strong, intimate relationships with other people and he doesn't seek them out or seek to hold onto them. Monk remains good friends with his old partner, now the captain of the police precinct Monk sometimes works for, and still loves his late wife. He may be isolated from much of the world, but he also has a need to be a part of it despite his many issues. Monk also isn't so fanatic about always being objective.

The thing the two characters have most in common, besides being derivatives of the iconic Sherlock character, is their need for a mediator and assistant who can take care of things they can't/won't do themselves.

Monk may have similarities with Zero Effect, but it stands on its own as an original.

The thing that haunts a guy is the stuff he wasn't ordered to do.