Sherlock
« on: January 03, 2014, 04:26:29 AM »
Series 3 just started the other day. I will be watching it shortly once it downloads. For some reason the streaming BBC iPlayer doesn't like my computer.
Quote from: Saddam Hussein
I don't know what you're implying, but you're probably wrong.

*

Offline Tausami

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 890
  • Magistrum Fallaciae
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #1 on: January 03, 2014, 04:52:05 AM »
Moffat and Gatis are cruel, cruel people
« Last Edit: January 03, 2014, 05:55:45 AM by Tausami »
That's how far the horizon is, not how far you can see.

Read the FAQ: http://wiki.tfes.org/index.php?title=FAQ

*

Offline Ghost Spaghetti

  • *
  • Posts: 820
  • Don't look in that mirror. It's absolutely furious
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #2 on: January 03, 2014, 11:01:16 AM »
I thought The Empty Hearse was a godawful episode. Not only does the method that he survived not make sense* but the pacing and plot of it was all over the place, jumping from place to place, from past to future with no apparent reason or rhyme made it painfully difficult to keep track of what (if anything) was going on. The amount of filler and padding didn't help, with far too much time being spent with the Sherlock fanclub. With so much going on, none of the characters had time to show emotions developing naturally, they were just lurched from one extreme to the other.

Sherlock was also really out of character. I understand him being callous, he's a self-admitted sociopath, but the playing with John at the end for his own amusement was just cruel - the act of a psychopath rather than a sociopath.

Furthermore, the 'deductions' Sherlock is making now aren't even explained, they might as well give him psychc powers. How does he sudden; l know about *SPOILERS* an underground station under the houses of parliament that the Underground geek just neglected to remember until Sherlock reminded him, despite having the maps spread out in front of him?

*SPOILERS*




Moriarty had people watching to make sure Sherlock died, are you telling me that none of them noticed people moving a sodding bouncy castle below? Or the army of people making it look as though Sherlock had died? I hope that this isn't the 'real' explanation because if so then it only makes sense if his death was orchestrated purely for John's sake

*/SPOILERS*


Saddam Hussein

Re: Sherlock
« Reply #3 on: January 03, 2014, 02:19:36 PM »
I have never seen this show, but just going by this thread, it sounds utterly wretched.

Re: Sherlock
« Reply #4 on: January 03, 2014, 03:34:56 PM »
The first two series were good.
Quote from: Saddam Hussein
I don't know what you're implying, but you're probably wrong.

*

Offline Tausami

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 890
  • Magistrum Fallaciae
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #5 on: January 03, 2014, 03:38:23 PM »
I thought The Empty Hearse was a godawful episode. Not only does the method that he survived not make sense* but the pacing and plot of it was all over the place, jumping from place to place, from past to future with no apparent reason or rhyme made it painfully difficult to keep track of what (if anything) was going on. The amount of filler and padding didn't help, with far too much time being spent with the Sherlock fanclub. With so much going on, none of the characters had time to show emotions developing naturally, they were just lurched from one extreme to the other.

Sherlock was also really out of character. I understand him being callous, he's a self-admitted sociopath, but the playing with John at the end for his own amusement was just cruel - the act of a psychopath rather than a sociopath.

Furthermore, the 'deductions' Sherlock is making now aren't even explained, they might as well give him psychc powers. How does he sudden; l know about *SPOILERS* an underground station under the houses of parliament that the Underground geek just neglected to remember until Sherlock reminded him, despite having the maps spread out in front of him?

*SPOILERS*




Moriarty had people watching to make sure Sherlock died, are you telling me that none of them noticed people moving a sodding bouncy castle below? Or the army of people making it look as though Sherlock had died? I hope that this isn't the 'real' explanation because if so then it only makes sense if his death was orchestrated purely for John's sake

*/SPOILERS*


As for your spoilers,

*SPOILERS*

That isn't how he survived. That was Anderson being schizophrenic. They never explained how he survived. As for the underground station, Sherlock didn't know anything about it. He just said the words, which reminded the geeky guy that there was a station that was never on any maps because it was never opened. The rest of his deductions weren't any different than before except that he wasn't saying them outloud as much, or explaining, which makes sense contextually.
*/Spoilers*

I thought it was a great episode. All of the stuff you thought was filler, I thought was brilliant. They were throwing a bone to the starving fandom that waited for two years. Also making fun of us.

I also didn't notice any issues with pacing or whatever, myself. To each his own.

Also sociopaths and psychopaths are the same thing. There's literally no difference between those two terms. Society just has a very twisted idea of what psychopathy is because we confuse it with psychosis. They're both just different words for the same disorder, ASPD. And Sherlock doesn't have ASPD. Either he was screwing with people when he said that, or it's another example of television being really bad at understanding what mental disorders are.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2014, 03:45:45 PM by Tausami »
That's how far the horizon is, not how far you can see.

Read the FAQ: http://wiki.tfes.org/index.php?title=FAQ

*

Offline Ghost Spaghetti

  • *
  • Posts: 820
  • Don't look in that mirror. It's absolutely furious
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #6 on: January 03, 2014, 05:10:03 PM »
Quote
They never explained how he survived.

I'm confused, so when 'Sherlock' reveals his trick with the airbag, that was just in the fan's head? In which case, why splice that scene in with the cliffhanger on the train? This is the sort of incoherent plotting I was talking about.

As for the station, I'd have to watch again because I'm pretty sure Sherlock found or remembered the station while talking to the geek. (Didn't he then go on to explain how various stations have closed and opened or merged over time?)

Quote
The rest of his deductions weren't any different than before


The obvious one is the guard in Serbia who he tells about his wife having an affair, not only that she was having an affair but when he could catch them at it. Chances are Sherlock lied and he just knew that the guard was paranoid about his wife which Sherlock exploited, in which case, fair enough.

While there might not be a difference in the Real World, Sherlock clearly believes there is (See the first episode.) Regardless, if Sherlock's character has gone from being being uncaring about people's feelings to actually taking gleeful pleasure in making them suffer then it isn't a character development that I like. If it was a bit of a writing slip-up then I can move on and forget about it but this version has worked well because despite being obnoxious and smug, Sherlock is still supposed to be a sympathetic character. What he did on the train with John was just unsympathetically cruel.

*

Offline Tausami

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 890
  • Magistrum Fallaciae
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #7 on: January 03, 2014, 06:13:28 PM »
Quote
They never explained how he survived.

I'm confused, so when 'Sherlock' reveals his trick with the airbag, that was just in the fan's head? In which case, why splice that scene in with the cliffhanger on the train? This is the sort of incoherent plotting I was talking about.

As for the station, I'd have to watch again because I'm pretty sure Sherlock found or remembered the station while talking to the geek. (Didn't he then go on to explain how various stations have closed and opened or merged over time?)

Quote
The rest of his deductions weren't any different than before


The obvious one is the guard in Serbia who he tells about his wife having an affair, not only that she was having an affair but when he could catch them at it. Chances are Sherlock lied and he just knew that the guard was paranoid about his wife which Sherlock exploited, in which case, fair enough.

While there might not be a difference in the Real World, Sherlock clearly believes there is (See the first episode.) Regardless, if Sherlock's character has gone from being being uncaring about people's feelings to actually taking gleeful pleasure in making them suffer then it isn't a character development that I like. If it was a bit of a writing slip-up then I can move on and forget about it but this version has worked well because despite being obnoxious and smug, Sherlock is still supposed to be a sympathetic character. What he did on the train with John was just unsympathetically cruel.

That wasn't a fan. That was Anderson. They were showing how he's gone schizophrenic out of guilt. I agree about the placement though, it was kind of jarring. I think they were just trying to troll everyone. If it had been an actual explanation it would have been a decent place for it.

He's supposed to be more of an asshole than before, I think. He became more human while he was with John, and then he lost a lot of that while he was hiding. He's regressed.
That's how far the horizon is, not how far you can see.

Read the FAQ: http://wiki.tfes.org/index.php?title=FAQ

Re: Sherlock
« Reply #8 on: January 03, 2014, 09:33:35 PM »
I ended up not watching it, because of the baby, but definitely this weekend.

Also, do we have working spoiler tags here, and if not, can we get some? I don't personally care about spoilers, but others do.
Quote from: Saddam Hussein
I don't know what you're implying, but you're probably wrong.

*

Offline Ghost Spaghetti

  • *
  • Posts: 820
  • Don't look in that mirror. It's absolutely furious
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #9 on: January 05, 2014, 12:03:12 PM »
Quote
He's supposed to be more of an asshole than before, I think. He became more human while he was with John, and then he lost a lot of that while he was hiding. He's regressed.

Let's hope they get him back on track soon. A smug, likeable character is a joy to watch but a smug asshole is just grating.

Re: Sherlock
« Reply #10 on: January 05, 2014, 04:04:15 PM »
I thought it was a pretty good episode.

*

Offline Tausami

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 890
  • Magistrum Fallaciae
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #11 on: January 05, 2014, 05:41:15 PM »
Next episode is in a few hours. I really wish I didn't have to use a livestream
That's how far the horizon is, not how far you can see.

Read the FAQ: http://wiki.tfes.org/index.php?title=FAQ

*

Offline Ghost Spaghetti

  • *
  • Posts: 820
  • Don't look in that mirror. It's absolutely furious
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #12 on: January 05, 2014, 10:08:56 PM »
That was more like it. there was a crime to solve, Sherlock was a curmudgeon not an ass, it was coherent, all the plot points were relevant, it didn't spend half am hour with its head up its rectum. Back on form.

*

Offline Tausami

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 890
  • Magistrum Fallaciae
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #13 on: January 05, 2014, 11:31:23 PM »
Mary is totally going to die.
That's how far the horizon is, not how far you can see.

Read the FAQ: http://wiki.tfes.org/index.php?title=FAQ

Re: Sherlock
« Reply #14 on: January 14, 2014, 05:30:25 AM »
I quite liked the way it ended. Looking forward to the next series.
Quote from: Saddam Hussein
I don't know what you're implying, but you're probably wrong.

*

Offline Ghost Spaghetti

  • *
  • Posts: 820
  • Don't look in that mirror. It's absolutely furious
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #15 on: January 14, 2014, 09:11:26 AM »
And me. The bad guy was deliciously creepy.

Re: Sherlock
« Reply #16 on: January 14, 2014, 06:19:19 PM »
I quite liked the way it ended. Looking forward to the next series.

How long's that going to take?

Re: Sherlock
« Reply #17 on: January 14, 2014, 07:54:22 PM »
I quite liked the way it ended. Looking forward to the next series.

How long's that going to take?

From what I've heard, the end of 2014, early 2015 we'll have another 3 episodes.
Quote from: Saddam Hussein
I don't know what you're implying, but you're probably wrong.

*

Offline Tausami

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 890
  • Magistrum Fallaciae
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #18 on: January 14, 2014, 08:36:45 PM »
That ending messed me up a bit. I absolutely missed him.

The BBC is supposedly trying to get the next season done as quickly as possible because this one was so successful. Last I heard, they were just trying to agree about dates with Martin Freeman and Blended Cucumber.
That's how far the horizon is, not how far you can see.

Read the FAQ: http://wiki.tfes.org/index.php?title=FAQ

Ghost of V

Re: Sherlock
« Reply #19 on: April 25, 2014, 07:48:10 PM »
Bump.

I'm excited about Season 4. The last episode of Season 3 is easily the best Sherlock episode yet, it totally made up for the previous two subpar (terrible) episodes before it.

How is he coming back, exactly? He's supposed to be dead. We should really have spoiler tags. >_<