The Flat Earth Society
Other Discussion Boards => Arts & Entertainment => Topic started by: EnigmaZV 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.
-
Moffat and Gatis are cruel, cruel people
-
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*
-
I have never seen this show, but just going by this thread, it sounds utterly wretched.
-
The first two series were good.
-
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.
-
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?)
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.
-
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?)
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
I thought it was a pretty good episode.
-
Next episode is in a few hours. I really wish I didn't have to use a livestream
-
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.
-
Mary is totally going to die.
-
I quite liked the way it ended. Looking forward to the next series.
-
And me. The bad guy was deliciously creepy.
-
I quite liked the way it ended. Looking forward to the next series.
How long's that going to take?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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. >_<
-
Perhaps he actually is dead and this is Sherlock's way of not being sent off to die? Doubtful, but possible.
-
Perhaps he actually is dead and this is Sherlock's way of not being sent off to die? Doubtful, but possible.
Oh, like Sherlock orchestrated the whole thing and it turns out Moffat was just trolling? It's a possibility.
-
I can't wait to watch Martin Freeman be Martin Freeman.
-
Just watched the last episode of Season 2 again last night. Considering the end of Season 3, I have a new theory on how Moriarty could have survived. What if Richard Brook was really an actor the whole time?
-
How would that work?
-
How would that work?
Well, there's a lot of evidence given in the last episode that Richard Brook was a real person. For example, all the newspaper clippings and the fact that he was an actor on a British hospital drama on television. Why would he make something like that up when it is very very easy for Sherlock to disprove? Sherlock could just buy the DVDs or watch a rerun of the show on TV. Moriarty is not that stupid.
Also, considering no one in the series could confirm that Jim Moriarty was a real person to begin with, there's no record of him anywhere. No one knew what Moriarty looked like before he "revealed" himself to Sherlock and John at the end of season 1. One of the reasons Rciahrd Brook gives for this is because he had that "line of computer code" that was pretty much magical and could hack into anything. Later on, we find out that the computer code doesn't even exist.
Plus, I find it very odd that the writers would kill off Moriarty so early in the series. I really think he'll be back in one form or another.
-
Basically, the writers had written themselves into a corner with the Reichenbach Falls. They knew there was no realistic way for Sherlock to survive without cheating, so they didn't bother. They gave us an episode which was all style and no substance. it reminds me of Annie Wilkes rom Misery
Anyway, my favourite was Rocketman, and once it was a no breaks chapter. The bad guy stuck him in a car on a mountain road and knocked him out and welded the door shut and tore out the brakes and started him to his death, and he woke up and tried to steer and tried to get out but the car went off a cliff before he could escape! And it crashed and burned and I was so upset and excited, and the next week, you better believe I was first in line. And they always start with the end of the last week. And there was Rocketman, trying to get out, and here comes the cliff, and just before the car went off the cliff, he jumped free! And all the kids cheered! But I didn't cheer. I stood right up and started shouting. This isn't what happened last week! Have you all got amnesia? They just cheated us! This isn't fair! HE DID'NT GET OUT OF THE COCK - A - DOODIE CAR!
-
Trying my best not to read this thread because spoilers, but I just watched the first episode, and it was good. The modern style, cast, re-imagined characters, and humor were all great. I really just had two problems with it - one being that the climax, with the two pills, wasn't nearly as clever and intriguing as the show seemed to think it was. Come on, guys, The Princess Bride already did this. They tried so hard to convince us that it was so incredibly deep and strategic, but the only thing I could think of was the "Inconceivable!" guy babbling about Australia. And speaking of people using words that they don't understand, lol@that bullshit about psychopaths and "high-functioning sociopaths." Twenty seconds is all it would have taken to simply Google those terms.
The other issue I had is a bit more personal - I simply can't maintain suspension of disbelief over that ridiculous Sherlock scan (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SherlockScan) gimmick. Every single time he went off on one of those tangents, it was little more than conjecture, and I was almost always able to think of several perfectly reasonable alternative explanations. I know that this is his thing and all, so getting rid of it was hardly an option, but they could have at least tried to make them a bit less...speculative. Like, accusing a guy of having an affair because there happens to be a nearby woman wearing the same brand of deodarant? That's really weak.
But like I said, I did enjoy it overall. I shall watch moar.
-
Does this incarnation of Sherlock Holmes have ESP or something? I watched an episode and he had some sort of telepathic GPS in his head that allowed him to track a taxi across London without actually seeing it.
-
The other issue I had is a bit more personal - I simply can't maintain suspension of disbelief over that ridiculous Sherlock scan (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SherlockScan) gimmick. Every single time he went off on one of those tangents, it was little more than conjecture, and I was almost always able to think of several perfectly reasonable alternative explanations. I know that this is his thing and all, so getting rid of it was hardly an option but they could have at least tried to make them a bit less...speculative. Like, accusing a guy of having an affair because there happens to be a nearby woman wearing the same brand of deodarant? That's really weak.
Does this incarnation of Sherlock Holmes have ESP or something? I watched an episode and he had some sort of telepathic GPS in his head that allowed him to track a taxi across London without actually seeing it.
This is just a visualization of Sherlock's deductive powers. It's not as if Sherlock is actually seeing a GPS screen in his head with arrows pointing every which way and whatnot. It's just the writers don't think we can understand how Sherlock's super autistic mind works, so they help us a bit (whether it's helpful or beneficial to the show is still up for debate). About the deodorant, it's silly... but women don't normally wear men's deodorant (especially the same brand as a coworker). I'd say that's one of his more believable deductions. He attempts other deductions like this in later episodes and is sometimes just flat out wrong, which is amusing and somewhat enlightening.
And Saddam, the first episode is pretty weak story-wise. It ends with a stupid ultimatum game and takes itself way too seriously. But this is a norm for the show. Every episode thinks it is smarter than it actually is. It's one of the reasons I don't give the show high marks (even though I still like it a lot). You'll see a pattern emerge as you keep going, but there are some genuinely good episodes in the series (although they're rare, and season 1 is not the best example).
Oh, and I would like to add that detective work is usually speculative. Until there is concrete evidence. Sherlock is guesstimating, what makes him so special is that his guesses are usually right even when there could have been other explanations.
-
I like the little visual cues. They give the show a more unique feel.
-
Does this incarnation of Sherlock Holmes have ESP or something? I watched an episode and he had some sort of telepathic GPS in his head that allowed him to track a taxi across London without actually seeing it.
This is just a visualization of Sherlock's deductive powers. It's not as if Sherlock is actually seeing a GPS screen in his head with arrows pointing every which way and whatnot. It's just the writers don't think we can understand how Sherlock's super autistic mind works, so they help us a bit (whether it's helpful or beneficial to the show is still up for debate).
But he wasn't deducing anything, he just magically knew the route the taxi was taking because magic.
-
Does this incarnation of Sherlock Holmes have ESP or something? I watched an episode and he had some sort of telepathic GPS in his head that allowed him to track a taxi across London without actually seeing it.
This is just a visualization of Sherlock's deductive powers. It's not as if Sherlock is actually seeing a GPS screen in his head with arrows pointing every which way and whatnot. It's just the writers don't think we can understand how Sherlock's super autistic mind works, so they help us a bit (whether it's helpful or beneficial to the show is still up for debate).
But he wasn't deducing anything, he just magically knew the route the taxi was taking because magic.
He calculated the fastest route by factoring in traffic patterns and stop-lights. He lives in the area. There was no magic.
Regardless, Sherlock is no stranger to using his iPhone to look up information as well. So he could have used that. Either way, it's believable given how intelligent Sherlock is supposed to be.
-
Does this incarnation of Sherlock Holmes have ESP or something? I watched an episode and he had some sort of telepathic GPS in his head that allowed him to track a taxi across London without actually seeing it.
This is just a visualization of Sherlock's deductive powers. It's not as if Sherlock is actually seeing a GPS screen in his head with arrows pointing every which way and whatnot. It's just the writers don't think we can understand how Sherlock's super autistic mind works, so they help us a bit (whether it's helpful or beneficial to the show is still up for debate).
But he wasn't deducing anything, he just magically knew the route the taxi was taking because magic.
He calculated the fastest route by factoring in traffic patterns and stop-lights. He lives in the area. There was no magic.
Regardless, Sherlock is no stranger to using his iPhone to look up information as well. So he could have used that. Either way, it's believable given how intelligent Sherlock is supposed to be.
But the route to where? He knew where it was going and how it would get there despite only briefly glancing at it and having no other information to go on. Unless he has ESP or is literally magic I just don't understand how he would know all that.
-
Does this incarnation of Sherlock Holmes have ESP or something? I watched an episode and he had some sort of telepathic GPS in his head that allowed him to track a taxi across London without actually seeing it.
This is just a visualization of Sherlock's deductive powers. It's not as if Sherlock is actually seeing a GPS screen in his head with arrows pointing every which way and whatnot. It's just the writers don't think we can understand how Sherlock's super autistic mind works, so they help us a bit (whether it's helpful or beneficial to the show is still up for debate).
But he wasn't deducing anything, he just magically knew the route the taxi was taking because magic.
He calculated the fastest route by factoring in traffic patterns and stop-lights. He lives in the area. There was no magic.
Regardless, Sherlock is no stranger to using his iPhone to look up information as well. So he could have used that. Either way, it's believable given how intelligent Sherlock is supposed to be.
But the route to where? He knew where it was going and how it would get there despite only briefly glancing at it and having no other information to go on. Unless he has ESP or is literally magic I just don't understand how he would know all that.
It was a cab. Sherlock knows the area, including road-blocks, lights, one-way signs, whatever. The cab was facing a particular direction. It seems like the area had pretty narrow roads, since it is a city, there's not many routes you can go. Sherlock deduced from the direction the car was initialing heading that there was only ONE way the cab could logically go if the cabbie knew what he was doing.
There's also this thing about taxi drivers having "The Knowledge".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/9421234/Taxi-drivers-and-the-importance-of-The-Knowledge.html
Sherlock is presumably aware of "The knowledge" and used it to his advantage.
I'd also like to add that Sherlock had a visual on the cab during some of the chase, so he could keep track of where it was going.
-
The "the inside of her ring is clean so she must be a serial adulteress" deduction was dumb too. Lots of people simply fidget with their rings. Bah. Anyway, "A Scandal in Belgravia" is the weakest one I've seen so far. What a confusing, convoluted mess.
-
The "the inside of her ring is clean so she must be a serial adulteress" deduction was dumb too. Lots of people simply fidget with their rings. Bah. Anyway, "A Scandal in Belgravia" is the weakest one I've seen so far. What a confusing, convoluted mess.
I disliked that episode as well, but still thought it was better than "The Blind Banker". That episode was trash until the sewer scene at the end where Sherlock acts like Batman.
-
The finale of the second season - or series, whatever - is the best episode I've seen so far. However, I have to say that I really didn't like how they handled Moriarty. The original character was already interesting, and could have easily been updated for modern times. For the show to throw all that out the window and just go with a blatant rip-off of the Joker was very disappointing.
-
a blatant ripoff of the Joker was very disappointing.
Why, because he's crazy and bad? I don't think the Joker was the first crazy and bad guy. Moriarty wasn't actually given much page time in the original stories, but what we saw and heard of him indicated that he was brilliant and prone to violent outbursts, just like he's portrayed in the BBC series. Besides, Batman was inspired in part by Sherlock Holmes, so checkmate comic book nerds.
-
Yes, he was brilliant and prone to violent outbursts. But he wasn't a deranged lunatic who committed crimes and killed people just for fun, and he wasn't a hammy eccentric constantly pulling silly faces and making dumb jokes. That's completely the Joker. Look, here's Moffat admitting that Moriarty basically has nothing to do with the original character:
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/aug/10/sherlock-second-series-bbc
"We knew what we wanted to do with Moriarty from the very beginning. Moriarty is usually a rather dull, rather posh villain so we thought someone who was genuinely properly frightening. Someone who's an absolute psycho," Moffat said.
"Yeah, a brilliant math professor who's secretly a ruthless mob boss? Booooooooring! Zero potential there. Let's have him be a scenery-chewing cartoon character instead. Viewers will be pissing themselves with fear!"
-
If you keep watching there are subtle hints that that is not the real Moriarty. That's my personally theory right now, given the ending of Season 3.
I hate what Sherlock did to Moriarty, so maybe this is just wishful thinking. However, there are clues throughout the show that hint at this as well, although some of them are a bit of a stretch.
-
The original Moriarty didn't really have any personality to speak of. He was more of a plot device than an active participant in any of the stories. In the one story where he does make an actual appearance, he still doesn't portray much character.
-
It's enough character to show that he wasn't a flamboyant, manic loony.
-
Right, he was a characterless set piece that was created only for the purpose of killing Sherlock Holmes because ACD was sick of writing the character. How is that any better?
-
I have to agree with PP, Moriarty in the stories was bland and dull. If you really didn't think Andrew Scott's performance was amazing, I want nothing to do with you from now on
-
In Doyle's work he was a set piece, but he has become a more realized character since then with movies, radio plays, and other Sherlock Holmes media.
-
In Doyle's work he was a set piece, but he has become a more realized character since then with movies, radio plays, and other Sherlock Holmes media.
Irrelevant. We're talking about the "original character".
-
In Doyle's work he was a set piece, but he has become a more realized character since then with movies, radio plays, and other Sherlock Holmes media.
Irrelevant. We're talking about the "original character".
There's no such thing as an original character. lrn2rushy
-
I still think that a brilliant math professor who's secretly a ruthless mob boss would have been far more interesting than yet another chaotic evil madman who doesn't care about anything but watching the world burn or whatever. Obviously, they'd need to flesh him out as a more distinctive character first, but it could be done. Disney did it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP8QdFttugg
Literally the best version of Moriarty to date. Prove me wrong.
A minor quibble, admittedly, but I don't like the gay jokes the show keeps making about Sherlock and John. Not so much because I find them to be unfunny and immature - although I do - but because they're not justified by the context. What I mean by this is that for all its faults, one thing the show handles very well is its portrayal of Sherlock and John, and their relationship. They have a great friendship; unique, certainly, but also funny, touching, and believable. They're not just bros who hang out and do stuff together, they have a real connection. And at the same time, they're both clearly straight men. There's no real gay subtext or homo tension, at least not compared to something like, I don't know, Frodo and Sam from LotR. So anytime someone makes a joke about how they must be gay, it feels like it just comes out of left field. They're gay? They're gay because they work together? They're gay because they happen to share an apartment so they can split the rent? They're gay because they dare to be close friends who trust and confide in each other?
It's unnecessary self-deprecation, in other words. It's like the show feels the need to occasionally turn to the viewers and say, "No homo, we promise!" as if we're suddenly going to forget that they're just friends. Because they're talking to each other about their feelings and stuff, and we all know that only women and gay men do that, right? ::)
-
People will always make gay jokes about two very close friends of the same sex, especially if they live together. It has happened to me and every one of my male best friends. Do you even second grade, Saddam?
-
Sherlock is gay tho
Right?
-
People will always make gay jokes about two very close friends of the same sex, especially if they live together. It has happened to me and every one of my male best friends. Do you even second grade, Saddam?
I'm aware that the practice is dumb, immature, and usually off-base. That seems like a very good reason why the show should drop it. If you're trying to argue that the show is justified in including it because it's common IRL, I say that's dumb. This lady argues why better than I can:
http://www.overthinkingit.com/2014/05/12/to-hell-with-your-realism/
-
It's been a while, but I don't remember the show making a big deal out of it.
-
Nor do I. There were a few very short gay jokes. Only the SJW crowd would manage to get so worked up over something so miniscule and unimportant
-
There were a few very short gay jokes.
Which they consistently make in every episode. It's annoying.
-
Maybe you should stop being such a homo about it.
-
There were a few very short gay jokes.
Which they consistently make in every episode. It's annoying.
I'm going to count the gay jokes when I next watch soon. It better be every single episode.
-
I don't think it's even every episode. I counted maybe 4 altogether.
-
I watched the last episode today. It, along with the previous one, were my favorites. No gay jokes, and much better writing with much more simplified mysteries. I'm not looking forward to the rehash of the poor man's Joker that looks like it's coming next. They probably won't bother trying to explain how Moriarity faked his death, either.
-
I watched the last episode today. It, along with the previous one, were my favorites. No gay jokes, and much better writing with much more simplified mysteries. I'm not looking forward to the rehash of the poor man's Joker that looks like it's coming next. They probably won't bother trying to explain how Moriarity faked his death, either.
There are a few theories going around about how Moriarity could have survived. One of them is that the person we know of as Moriarity isn't really him; he's really just an actor. But it's Moffat, so it's probably going to be something stupid. The last episode of Season 3 is my favorite episode of Sherlock so far. I'm glad you liked it because a lot of people seem to rate it as one of the worst episodes of the series. I don't know why.
-
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 ?
-
On the notion of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nk86jSLufLs
-
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 ?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
...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 (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EvilCounterpart) 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.
-
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.
-
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:
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.
-
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
-
"The Lying Detective" was dumb. The best part was Toby Jones hamming it up.
-
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
<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
-
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.
-
It wasn't necessarily that, either. It was just them trying to wrap up the series on this note (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AndTheAdventureContinues). 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.
-
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.