Re: Sherlock
« Reply #60 on: August 01, 2015, 04:25:37 PM »
I understand this topic hasn't been active for at least 120 days and this is not exactly on topic.

However, since the subject is "Sherlock", I will ask my question anyway.

Are there any readers of "Sherlock Holmes In Dallas", by "Edmund Aubrey" (Pen Name of a British Political Scientist) and have any comments on it ?
Stick close to your P.C's and never go to sea
And You All may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Yes, Never, Never, Never go to sea
Just look out your windows,
Flat ! Flat ! Flat !
Is all that you shall see !

Saddam Hussein

Re: Sherlock
« Reply #61 on: October 24, 2015, 06:45:18 PM »
On the notion of this:


Re: Sherlock
« Reply #62 on: October 28, 2015, 04:35:56 PM »
I understand this topic hasn't been active for at least 120 days and this is not exactly on topic.

However, since the subject is "Sherlock", I will ask my question anyway.

Are there any readers of "Sherlock Holmes In Dallas", by "Edmund Aubrey" (Pen Name of a British Political Scientist) and have any comments on it ?

Or for that matter, any comments on any Sherlock Holmes pastiches ?
Stick close to your P.C's and never go to sea
And You All may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Yes, Never, Never, Never go to sea
Just look out your windows,
Flat ! Flat ! Flat !
Is all that you shall see !

Saddam Hussein

Re: Sherlock
« Reply #63 on: January 07, 2016, 06:04:36 PM »
So, did anyone watch "The Abominable Bride"?  I enjoyed it - this show is always worth watching just for how great the cast is - but the story was even more baffling and incomprehensible than usual.  If I'm understanding it right, then the only part of this episode that turned out to be "real" was the very last scene.  Everything else, including the historical case and how it tied into the present, was just the invention of Sherlock's "mind palace."  Taking that into consideration, it's probably not entirely fair to criticize the fictitious historical mystery too much, but all the same, it would have been nice if it had been a bit less ludicrous.  The solution stood out as being especially unsatisfying.  It's kind of like with Sherlock's faked death - having a large conspiracy be key to the solution of a mystery doesn't feel right.  It's almost cheating on the part of the writer.  There's no trickery involved, no sleight of hand, no real intelligence; it's basically just brute force.

I did appreciate the (seeming) confirmation that Moriarty is really dead.  I really, really hate this version of him, and don't want to see any more of him again.  Obviously you all disagree with me, but as far as I'm concerned, he was a lame rip-off of the Joker, and the idea that this giggling nut was any kind of criminal mastermind was easily the least believable thing this show has ever asked us to accept.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2016, 10:43:48 AM by Saddam Hussein »

*

Offline Ghost Spaghetti

  • *
  • Posts: 820
  • Don't look in that mirror. It's absolutely furious
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #64 on: January 08, 2016, 09:32:59 AM »
I saw it and wished that they'd just kept things simple. A Victorian-set Sherlock worked well, as did the initial revelation that it was a dream (It's actually refreshingly audacious to see 'it was all a dream' as  a plot-mechanic. )

Where it let itself down was the ridiculous skipping back-and-forth. Typically, Moffat tried to be too clever by half and ended up spoiling the ending by making it vanish up its own arse.

I'm with you that hearing that Moriarty was really dead made me cheer.


*

Online Snupes

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1587
  • Bird with a broken wing
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #65 on: January 14, 2016, 03:37:34 PM »
Loved the episode, and I actually like that they made it a little more complex and surreal. Had it just been a Victorian Sherlock, it would've been a little boring for me. Wouldn't have been anything other than a throwback episode; same old Sherlock with a paint job to look older.

Also, on one hand I'm glad that Moriarty is dead just because it would've been a bit absurd to have him alive again, but on the other hand I'm sad because Andrew Scott is wonderful. Despite Saddam's retarded comparison, I find him fun to watch and seeing him as a very different foil to Sherlock is fun. I'm sick of shows and stories where the villain is just a carbon copy of the hero turned evil.
Quote from: garygreen date=1480782226
i also took an online quiz that said i was a giraffe.  and i guess you're dumb enough to believe that i must be because the internet said so.

Saddam Hussein

Re: Sherlock
« Reply #66 on: January 14, 2016, 09:14:47 PM »
...seeing him as a very different foil to Sherlock is fun. I'm sick of shows and stories where the villain is just a carbon copy of the hero turned evil.

That's interesting, because - setting aside our opinions of how well it worked out - it felt to me like the show was very heavily leaning on the idea that Moriarty was very much the evil counterpart of Sherlock.  He brags about being the "consulting criminal" to Sherlock's "consulting detective," he's obsessed with outsmarting him, and they have several of those odd little sessions of intellectual sparring together where they guess what each other knows or is up to.

*

Online Snupes

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1587
  • Bird with a broken wing
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #67 on: January 14, 2016, 11:08:21 PM »
They're counterparts in the sense that they're rivals and emotional matches for each other, but they aren't actually very similar themselves, IMO.
Quote from: garygreen date=1480782226
i also took an online quiz that said i was a giraffe.  and i guess you're dumb enough to believe that i must be because the internet said so.

George

Re: Sherlock
« Reply #68 on: January 02, 2017, 02:32:53 AM »
Moar Sherlock!  I really liked "The Six Thatchers."  The writers didn't shove their heads up their asses in a desperate attempt to show off how smart they are this time around, and I particularly enjoyed their willingness to poke fun at how nonsensical Sherlock's deductions so often are.  Great acting all around, too, especially from Blackberry Cuntpunt at the end as he struggled with his emotions.  "High-functioning sociopath," my ass.  He's most likely on the spectrum.

I do take issue with their mangling of "The Appointment in Samarra," however.  They fucked it up.  Their version of the story is basically just "a guy ran to another city to escape Death but Death found him there."  That frames it almost like it's simply a chase.  And if the protagonist knew that Death was surprised to see him, why would he even run away at all?  I don't think it's too much of a stretch to suppose that Death wasn't coming to claim him if he/she/it was surprised to see him!  Allow me to show you what is objectively the best version of this story, as retold by W. Somerset Maugham:

Quote
There was a merchant in Bagdad who sent his servant to market to buy provisions and in a little while the servant came back, white and trembling, and said, Master, just now when I was in the marketplace I was jostled by a woman in the crowd and when I turned I saw it was Death that jostled me.  She looked at me and made a threatening gesture; now, lend me your horse, and I will ride away from this city and avoid my fate.  I will go to Samarra and there Death will not find me.  The merchant lent him his horse, and the servant mounted it, and he dug his spurs in its flanks and as fast as the horse could gallop he went.  Then the merchant went down to the marketplace and he saw me standing in the crowd and he came to me and said, Why did you make a threatening gesture to my servant when you saw him this morning?  That was not a threatening gesture, I said, it was only a start of surprise.  I was astonished to see him in Bagdad, for I had an appointment with him tonight in Samarra.

Much, much better.

Re: Sherlock
« Reply #69 on: January 04, 2017, 01:47:15 PM »
I was pleasantly surprised with "The Six Thatchers." I honestly wasn't that excited for the new season and wasn't expecting much from it, precisely because of the head-up-assness of the writers last season. With "The Reichenbach Fall" they wrote themselves into a corner with a major cliffhanger, made their fanbase wait two years, and then dodged answering it and just pumped the whole season full of blatant fan service in an attempt to make up for it.

But yeah, "The Six Thatchers" was enjoyable. Slightly worried about how they'll deal with the whole John-wants-nothing-to-do-with-Sherlock-now thing. We'll see.

edit: added spoiler censory thingy
« Last Edit: January 04, 2017, 01:49:55 PM by mollete »

*

Online honk

  • *
  • Posts: 323
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #70 on: January 12, 2017, 04:35:22 AM »
"The Lying Detective" was dumb. The best part was Toby Jones hamming it up.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2017, 06:29:59 PM by honk »
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Ghost Spaghetti

  • *
  • Posts: 820
  • Don't look in that mirror. It's absolutely furious
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #71 on: January 13, 2017, 04:31:02 PM »
I don't know if I'm even going to bother watching any more. 'The Six Thatchers' and 'The Lying Detective' were just awful. I'm finding the hyperactive editing so distracting now that I can barely follow what's going on at times, if I was even interested in following this poor man's James Bond storyline.

I find myself pining for the early seasons when Sherlock solved a clever murder cleverly with some dry humour and witty dialogue to string it all together instead of the bloated 'too-clever-by-half' plots, superspy characters, and ridiculous villains.

*

Online honk

  • *
  • Posts: 323
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #72 on: January 16, 2017, 08:25:20 PM »
I find myself pining for the early seasons when Sherlock solved a clever murder cleverly with some dry humour and witty dialogue to string it all together instead of the bloated 'too-clever-by-half' plots, superspy characters, and ridiculous villains.

It's interesting that you say that, because I'm not sure that I'd call those elements new additions to the series. Sherlock was tangling with spies and assassins in "The Blind Banker," and "A Scandal in Belgravia," the main villain in the first two seasons was Moriarty, and they had their fair share of overly-convoluted plots.

Holy shit, "The Final Problem" was fucking horrendous. I've excused weaker episodes in the past on the grounds of the cast being good enough to make it enjoyable, but even they couldn't save this one. This was painful. This was agonizing. Nothing about it had anything to do with the Sherlock we know and love, and none of it made any sense. Where to even fucking begin with this?

Why would Sherlock think that the best way to trick Mycroft into revealing Eurus's existence was with staging a weird horror movie-like scene?
Why would Mycroft fall for that? He knew that Eurus was an adult and supposedly imprisoned.
Wouldn't it have been so much simpler for Sherlock to talk to his own non-secretive, down-to-earth parents first? They didn't know everything, admittedly, but they could have at least confirmed Eurus's existence.
How could Eurus be controlling or programming people with her pseudo-nihilistic gibberish?
Even if we allow that her nonsense was particularly compelling or persuasive (it wasn't), how could she have control over the entire Sherrinford staff, to the degree that nobody tried to stop her during this weird scheme of hers? Did everyone there have to spend some time with her?
Why did Eurus even bother with that whole impersonation stunt in the last episode, anyway? None of it had anything to do with the plot in this one.
How did Eurus get to and from Sherrinford? Did the staff provide her with helicopter rides or something?
How did Eurus get ahold of the governor's wife?
How did Eurus get ahold of the three brothers and discover the details of their alleged crime?
How did Eurus get ahold of all her props and equipment for her scheme? The rifle, the coffin, the multiple TVs, etc.
How did Eurus bring Sherlock and John back to Sherlock's old home?
How could Eurus simply have been impersonating the girl on the plane the whole time? Even if Sherlock couldn't tell that Eurus was simply disguising her voice, wouldn't the lack of background noise (like the roar of the engines) give it away?
How does it make sense for Sherlock to replace the memories of his friend with the memories of a dog? That's just stupid.
What was the point of bringing Moriarty back for this, from an in-universe perspective? The video clips of him didn't really add anything to the intensity of Eurus's dilemmas.
How did Moriarty somehow manage to be the most sane and rational part of this episode?
« Last Edit: January 17, 2017, 01:22:13 PM by honk »
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Ghost Spaghetti

  • *
  • Posts: 820
  • Don't look in that mirror. It's absolutely furious
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #73 on: January 23, 2017, 02:43:07 PM »
So, because Mrs Spaghetti wanted to watch it, I finally saw The Final Problem.

Overall I found it the most enjoyable of this season's simply because they tuned down the hyperactive editing  and bouncing between about three different plots enough to actually understand what was going on. The problem with that is that what was going on made no sense, especially the whole Moriarty cameos. I get the feeling that the writers wrote the 'did you miss me?' videos into the cliff-hanger of season 3 without any real idea about how to make use of it, the entire Moriarty angle screamed of post-hoc justification.

Also: Are you trying to tell me that a man who can tell how many kids you've got by the sauce stain on your shirt couldn't tell that Eurus' cage didn't have glass in it?

Also also: Eurus' riddle talked about Redbeard being drowned 'deep under' or words to that effect. You'd have thought that someone who pent years trying to unpick Eurus' mystery would have at least cast a fleeting glance down the massive well within strolling distance from his house? (Another minor thing with John stuck in the well - at the end we see him being rescued by holding onto a rope and being pulled out - a couple of minutes before we saw that his foot had been chained to something heavy enough that he couldn't shift it.

It has been hinted that 4.3 was the final Sherlock, and I really hope that's true. It's obvious now that Sherlock has jumped the shark and prolonging its decline just seems cruel.

*

Online honk

  • *
  • Posts: 323
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #74 on: February 12, 2017, 07:02:22 PM »
<Saddam> The third one was the utter worst, prove me wrong
<SnupeDogg> Nah
<Saddam> Please argue with me in the Sherlock thread
<SnupeDogg> No
<Saddam> I wrote a long list of shit that made no sense about that one
<SnupeDogg> Cool
<Saddam> How did Eurus control people?
<SnupeDogg> She is very persuasive
<Saddam> No she isn't
<SnupeDogg> Okay
<Saddam> We hear the dumb shit she says
<Saddam> It's objectively gibberish
<SnupeDogg> Neato
<Saddam> Also, how did she find out about the three brothers and set up the murder mystery thing?
<Saddam> Did they like, fly her out to the local police station where she charmed everyone into handing over the evidence and the three brothers?
<SnupeDogg> Sure
<Saddam> At the very least, you must admit that it was a weak payoff as far as the Moriarty cliffhanger went
<Saddam> They wrote the cliffhanger before they had any idea how he'd figure into the next season
<SnupeDogg> Yeah, I was hoping for more Moriarty, not "hey I recorded a couple of videos of me making goofy noises"
<Saddam> If nothing else, the episode at least softened me on Moriarty a bit
<SnupeDogg> I'm guessing I was the only one who enjoyed the drug-addled ADHD of The Lying Detective
<SnupeDogg> Also I disagree with Chris that this should be the last season
<SnupeDogg> If anything, I hope the end was a hint towards a more grounded story
<SnupeDogg> I don't mind the flirting with grandiosity, but the whole "we have to one-up the last season" attitude is exhausting.
<Saddam> I liked the crazy drug part too
<Saddam> What annoyed me about that episode was all the Eurus shit shoved into it
<SnupeDogg> There wasn't that much Eurus until the end, as I recall
<SnupeDogg> Except for her impersonating Toby Jones' daughter, which was stupid
<SnupeDogg> Honestly all of her disguises were pretty dumb and pointless
<SnupeDogg> Granted I liked it to the extent that it made Sherlock look even more drugged-up than he was and made reality more questionable
<SnupeDogg> But I'm sure they could've come up with something better than "something something Eurus disguise because eh why not"
<Saddam> They just made it up as they went along
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Ghost Spaghetti

  • *
  • Posts: 820
  • Don't look in that mirror. It's absolutely furious
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #75 on: February 13, 2017, 04:03:36 PM »
Quote
If anything, I hope the end was a hint towards a more grounded story

I disagree, the montage of them solving old-fashioned cases implies that they're going to keep doing what they did in S3 and 4, namely focussing on weird, stupid stories whilst having 'normal' cases keep occurring in the background to suggest that Sherlock's life isn't all about international spies. I'm done with it.

*

Online honk

  • *
  • Posts: 323
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #76 on: February 13, 2017, 04:49:05 PM »
It wasn't necessarily that, either. It was just them trying to wrap up the series on this note. If they do ever make another season, they won't feel beholden to what they put in the last few minutes of the last episode. They never do. Remember when Sherlock was saying that he knew what Moriarty was about to do at the end of "The Abominable Bride," only to have that plot point be dismissed at the very beginning of this season? They were obviously planning a seasonal arc about Moriarty's post-mortem scheme then, and didn't decide until later to make it all about Eurus. Of course, I strongly suspect that it would end up revolving around yet another Big Bad who proves to be Sherlock and John's greatest enemy ever with another nonsensical, convoluted plot. It might also feature some more footage from Mary's seemingly never-ending tape.
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Ghost Spaghetti

  • *
  • Posts: 820
  • Don't look in that mirror. It's absolutely furious
    • View Profile
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #77 on: February 14, 2017, 10:26:47 AM »
Possibly, but if they do another series I think I'll wait until I see a few reviews to see if it's worth bothering with again.