Hi guys. I haven't read through the thread yet, I'll have a scout when I'm on my laptop.
I wasn't happy. Basically I think this was written for all the fans - it reeked of fanfiction (although in fairness I suppose Gatiss and Moffat are Conan Doyle's biggest fans). It was too cliche. Watson's wedding didn't need an entire episode, Mary didn't need to be pregnant (just too sugary sweet).
Overly done sweetness, if I were writing the fanfic it's exactly how I'd have done it... But I'm not Moffat, and I wouldn't be wasting 90 minutes. From the emotional perspective it was great, but we only get 3 episodes every two years and plot wise this has been the poorest of them all.
Yes we had a little plot but... Meh. A character I didn't care about.
However, it was lovely to see Irene "not now I'm busy" Adler. And drunk Sherlock may perhaps be my favourite thing ever, there was just too much of him.
Intrigued about next week's episode, perhaps no Watson, given the end of the episode?
Final edit: I think my dad put it best: "It was very good, but it wasn't Sherlock."
Hmmm, would be something sombre if Mary dies as a result of childbirth. I'm certain she passes away in the books, but not sure if it's specified.
I greatly enjoyed episode two and think its one of the most brilliantly constructed bits of television I've seen for a while. It was also filled to the brim with the visual style and pacing that has marked Sherlock out since day one and I've really enjoyed the greater focus on the characters and their interactions with this series. However, I can fully understand why not everyone has enjoyed that shift in focus and the changes its brought to the series and as a result the series has become somewhat more polarising than it was. Not everyone will enjoy that shift. Some people want those slick 90 minute mysteries and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
It might also be worth mentioning that episode two of Sherlock has a bit of a history of being the weakest of the bunch.
I greatly enjoyed episode two and think its one of the most brilliantly constructed bits of television I've seen for a while. It was also filled to the brim with the visual style and pacing that has marked Sherlock out since day one and I've really enjoyed the greater focus on the characters and their interactions with this series. However, I can fully understand why not everyone has enjoyed that shift in focus and the changes its brought to the series and as a result the series has become somewhat more polarising than it was. Not everyone will enjoy that shift. Some people want those slick 90 minute mysteries and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
It might also be worth mentioning that episode two of Sherlock has a bit of a history of being the weakest of the bunch.
Can I just ask you whether you have read any of the books or had any interaction with other incarnations of Sherlock Holmes?
Is it me or did Molly seem different? She was more confident and not as awkward around Sherlock, well, I say not as - she wasn't really awkward around him at all. Telling him that she and Tom are having "lots of sex" especially surprised me.
Am I missing something here? Is she just using this new boyfriend of hers and telling Sherlock about the sex to try and make him jealous?
Hmmm, would be something sombre if Mary dies as a result of childbirth. I'm certain she passes away in the books, but not sure if it's specified.
I'm guessing from the trailer for next week...
someone will die. The new villain is meant to be darker than the old one, so I'm guessing one of the below...
a) Mary dies, with baby.
b) Mary loses the baby (sad as it would be, but we'll pick up two years on so miss a lot of the dark grieving process anyway)
c) Cliffhanger not knowing if someone has died or not.
Either way, it'll be projected(maybe even WILL BE) Sherlock's fault.
I thought the main idea of telling a story in flash-backs during a Best Man's speech was really clever, but agree with those who say it was style over substance again, like last week.
It was, but there was way too much of the speech and way too little of the story. It was a funny speech, I enjoyed the episode but I can't help but feel sorely cheated out another good case to add to the collection, fine occasionally if you've got 20 episodes to play with, but you've only got 3 and we've waited two years for them.
The key is the location of the blow. A wound to the abdomen is most likely to be fatal and is generally relatively slow (particularly if you believe the belt thing - I don't know enough about such things to dispute this), giving the killer time to slip away. A stab to the heart is faster and more effective, but instantly observable.
My only issue with this element of the story is that it would make no difference if someone took the belt off or not. If you've receieved a fatal wound the belt isn't going to somehow hold it in.:D
I know what they were trying to do, and it's quite a nice idea. It just doesn't quite work.
It could if it was more like a fantasy set thing, like some Wuxia film, but this is based in the real world.
The belt thing where you only die when you take your belt off reminded me very much of The Five Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique from Kill Bill where the victim only falls down dead after taking 5 steps.:D
I like the idea of what they were trying to do, it's just that it doesn't really work.
In episodes past we've had stuff like Moriarty setting off a bomb and killing a blind old woman + many other innocents. Now we have 'Elephant in the room' and drunk Sherlock... the tone of the show is completely unrecognisable. I'm all for the humour, but tonight's episode was verging into a full blown sitcom at times.
The final episode will really make or break this season imo. Thankfully all the signs indicate that it will be plot driven, dramatic and possibly even tragic. I kind of hope they don't end on a cliffhanger again though, especially since the resolution of both season ending cliffhangers have been poor.
In episodes past we've had stuff like Moriarty setting off a bomb and killing a blind old woman + many other innocents. Now we have 'Elephant in the room' and drunk Sherlock... the tone of the show is completely unrecognisable. I'm all for the humour, but tonight's episode was verging into a full blown sitcom at times.
The final episode will really make or break this season imo. Thankfully all the signs indicate that it will be plot driven, dramatic and possibly even tragic. I kind of hope they don't end on a cliffhanger again though, especially since the resolution of both season ending cliffhangers have been poor.
It felt exactly like that, it was like watching a different show, I liked it for what it was, but as an episode of Sherlock I hated it. I'm fine with some humour, Sherlock's good at it, but it shouldn't take up an episode. The deduction we did see was good (though even then it was a little overly comical), there just wasn't anywhere enough of it. The crime solving shouldn't feel tagged on, the comedy should.
Not actually very accurate. The people who disliked the episode have provided reasons why, those who claim to have liked it have not.
Oh ok, here goes then:
I liked the programme because it teased with a lot of mysteries at the start - the bank robbery, the young soldier being spied upon and attempted murder, the major being targeted.
I really liked how Sherlock had to find a common thread connecting all the dots and finally working out how the two crimes were connected.
The sequence in the courtroom / chamber was excellent, clearly figments of his mind and showed how he works things out in an inquisitorial way.
The 'race against the clock' to discover the murderer at the wedding do was gripping and full of suspense.
It subverted last week's race against the clock story (the bomb) by revealing the attempted murder had long since been perpetrated by the photographer.
Aside from the mystery there were great forays into the characters with some classic exchanges between Sherlock and Mrs Hudson, and with Mycroft.
Sherlock's caring for his friend by interogating the ushers, exes etc was funny and endearing, as was the whole stag night scene, which again was a mixture of touching and very funny repartee.
It wasn't as good as last week's and I would liked to have seen the pace quicken at the start because we dwelt a little too long on the set-up. I'd say pacing is an area for improvement.
I liked the programme because it teased with a lot of mysteries at the start - the bank robbery, the young soldier being spied upon and attempted murder, the major being targeted.
I really liked how Sherlock had to find a common thread connecting all the dots and finally working out how the two crimes were connected.
The sequence in the courtroom / chamber was excellent, clearly figments of his mind and showed how he works things out in an inquisitorial way.
The 'race against the clock' to discover the murderer at the wedding do was gripping and full of suspense.
It subverted last week's race against the clock story (the bomb) by revealing the attempted murder had long since been perpetrated by the photographer.
Aside from the mystery there were great forays into the characters with some classic exchanges between Sherlock and Mrs Hudson, and with Mycroft.
Sherlock's caring for his friend by interogating the ushers, exes etc was funny and endearing, as was the whole stag night scene, which again was a mixture of touching and very funny repartee.
It wasn't as good as last week's and I would liked to have seen the pace quicken at the start because we dwelt a little too long on the set-up. I'd say pacing is an area for improvement.
Happy?
They spent so long on the set up that they needn't have had the end of story character scenes, they'd done all of that most the episode.
Only the people that liked it? Is everyone else just a Moffat hater?
No, I said 'some'.
When you have pages of the same people moaning about one person, it's pretty obvious a cult of hatred for some of those involved, especially as the person they're complaining about was only one third of the team of authors who wrote the programme.
No, I said 'some'.
When you have pages of the same people moaning about one person, it's pretty obvious a cult of hatred for some of those involved, especially as the person they're complaining about was only one third of the team of authors who wrote the programme.
But he is the main exec, and the main link to the other series, Doctor Who, which has recently been experiencing the same. It's pretty clear their shared troubles are down to him, the exec producer of both. That said Gatiss has always seemed like the bigger smug luvvie of the two. Moffat just seems to write what he thinks fans want, at the expense of what the real ones (those not on tumblr) actually want.
Quite. I like quality characters to tell a good and plotful story; on that premise, this series isn't working for me.
I came late to the first series, realised what I was missing and loved the second series. This one is a disappointment and in a 3-episode run, apparently using the 2nd episode to set up the third (if I'm understanding what some of the tiresome "in the know" posters are saying) is wasteful and self-indulgent. Particularly following an episode featuring a bomb with an off switch.
That's sort of how I feel.
Don't get me wrong, it's still pretty good and there's still much to enjoy. But in my opinion it's nowhere near the standard of the first two series.
I miss Moriarty already, or Richard Brooks if you like. Those scenes with Sherlock which were so magnificent and very edgy are possibly the glue which held it all together. Those scenes almost sold the tone of the show and what it was like back then.
The sense of urgency I felt that Sherlock needed to overcome Moriarty were probably key for me.
Unfortunately there's been nothing to really replace that important element this series.
Now the tone is very comedic, there hasn't been a strong antagonist which keeps that suspense and feeling of danger that Moriarty/Richard Brooks held over the show in the first two series.
Now it's very lightweight in comparison. The tension just isn't there now.
Still quite good, but falling well short of what it was.
Episodes like these last two I think would work so much better in a 6 episode run or longer. But 2 episodes out of a 3 episode series is pretty much your series gone. There's no more space left to have a few episodes which deliver the atmosphere of dark tension and brooding suspense which series one and two did so successfully. The series is all used up.
It was a powerful and compelling series before.
Now it's just entertaining, with one or two good set pieces. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but you know what I mean when I say that it lacks a lot of the power that it used to have.
But he is the main exec, and the main link to the other series, Doctor Who, which has recently been experiencing the same.
I suppose it just gets boring. I'm a casual viewer of Dr Who, and I'm not keen on the way it's gone, but it seems people are bringing all their overweight baggage and bitterness about that show over to Sherlock now.
Wish people could discuss the programme instead of incessantly moaning about one of the authors.
I suppose it just gets boring. I'm a casual viewer of Dr Who, and I'm not keen on the way it's gone, but it seems people are bringing all their overweight baggage and bitterness about that show over to Sherlock now.
Wish people could discuss the programme instead of incessantly moaning about one of the authors.
I actually wasn't going to mention Moffat at all until I realised while typing up my thoughts that these were also my current problems with Doctor Who. I think people are just frustrated, they've waited two years for a series of self-parodying in jokes, it wouldn't be so bad if they hadn't just waited the same for a full series of Doctor Who, a series that just a few years ago was on 14 times a year with two spin-offs.
That's sort of how I feel.
Don't get me wrong, it's still pretty good and there's still much to enjoy. But in my opinion it's nowhere near the standard of the first two series.
I miss Moriarty already, or Richard Brooks if you like. Those scenes with Sherlock which were so magnificent and very edgy are possibly the glue which held it all together. Those scenes almost sold the tone of the show and what it was like back then.
The sense of urgency I felt that Sherlock needed to overcome Moriarty were probably key for me.
Unfortunately there's been nothing to really replace that important element this series.
Now the tone is very comedic, there hasn't been a strong antagonist which keeps that suspense and feeling of danger that Moriarty/Richard Brooks held over the show in the first two series.
Now it's very lightweight in comparison. The tension just isn't there now.
Still quite good, but falling well short of what it was.
Episodes like these last two I think would work so much better in a 6 episode run or longer. But 2 episodes out of a 3 episode series is pretty much your series gone. There's no more space left to have a few episodes which deliver the atmosphere of dark tension and brooding suspense which series one and two did so successfully. The series is all used up.
It was a powerful and compelling series before.
Now it's just entertaining, with one or two good set pieces. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but you know what I mean when I say that it lacks a lot of the power that it used to have.
What tension was there in the episodes The Blind Banker or The Hounds of Baskerville then?
Did you even notice there was very clever subtle hints that foreshadowed and an element that tied into the main plot in this epiosde?
Seems like I'm the only one who loved that episode? Thought it was clever, funny and emotional and tied them all in well. The whole 'here is a mystery - how does Sherlock solve it' would get very old very quickly if repeated week in week out - a bit of change is good.
Chance would be a fine thing.
I really wish it was week in week out.
Comments
Or end up dead in the next episode.
I don't know how alone I am in thinking this, but Mary seems to occasionally throw amorous glances to Sherlock when John isn't looking.
I greatly enjoyed episode two and think its one of the most brilliantly constructed bits of television I've seen for a while. It was also filled to the brim with the visual style and pacing that has marked Sherlock out since day one and I've really enjoyed the greater focus on the characters and their interactions with this series. However, I can fully understand why not everyone has enjoyed that shift in focus and the changes its brought to the series and as a result the series has become somewhat more polarising than it was. Not everyone will enjoy that shift. Some people want those slick 90 minute mysteries and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
It might also be worth mentioning that episode two of Sherlock has a bit of a history of being the weakest of the bunch.
Can I just ask you whether you have read any of the books or had any interaction with other incarnations of Sherlock Holmes?
Am I missing something here? Is she just using this new boyfriend of hers and telling Sherlock about the sex to try and make him jealous?
I'm wondering if it's possible that this is the last ever series, and they're preparing a happy send-off for Watson?
As another poster said Cumberbatch is a big star now who appears in major films and this series may be the last.
I'm guessing from the trailer for next week...
a) Mary dies, with baby.
b) Mary loses the baby (sad as it would be, but we'll pick up two years on so miss a lot of the dark grieving process anyway)
c) Cliffhanger not knowing if someone has died or not.
Either way, it'll be projected(maybe even WILL BE) Sherlock's fault.
It was, but there was way too much of the speech and way too little of the story. It was a funny speech, I enjoyed the episode but I can't help but feel sorely cheated out another good case to add to the collection, fine occasionally if you've got 20 episodes to play with, but you've only got 3 and we've waited two years for them.
My only issue with this element of the story is that it would make no difference if someone took the belt off or not. If you've receieved a fatal wound the belt isn't going to somehow hold it in.:D
I know what they were trying to do, and it's quite a nice idea. It just doesn't quite work.
It could if it was more like a fantasy set thing, like some Wuxia film, but this is based in the real world.
The belt thing where you only die when you take your belt off reminded me very much of The Five Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique from Kill Bill where the victim only falls down dead after taking 5 steps.:D
I like the idea of what they were trying to do, it's just that it doesn't really work.
The final episode will really make or break this season imo. Thankfully all the signs indicate that it will be plot driven, dramatic and possibly even tragic. I kind of hope they don't end on a cliffhanger again though, especially since the resolution of both season ending cliffhangers have been poor.
It felt exactly like that, it was like watching a different show, I liked it for what it was, but as an episode of Sherlock I hated it. I'm fine with some humour, Sherlock's good at it, but it shouldn't take up an episode. The deduction we did see was good (though even then it was a little overly comical), there just wasn't anywhere enough of it. The crime solving shouldn't feel tagged on, the comedy should.
Oh ok, here goes then:
I liked the programme because it teased with a lot of mysteries at the start - the bank robbery, the young soldier being spied upon and attempted murder, the major being targeted.
I really liked how Sherlock had to find a common thread connecting all the dots and finally working out how the two crimes were connected.
The sequence in the courtroom / chamber was excellent, clearly figments of his mind and showed how he works things out in an inquisitorial way.
The 'race against the clock' to discover the murderer at the wedding do was gripping and full of suspense.
It subverted last week's race against the clock story (the bomb) by revealing the attempted murder had long since been perpetrated by the photographer.
Aside from the mystery there were great forays into the characters with some classic exchanges between Sherlock and Mrs Hudson, and with Mycroft.
Sherlock's caring for his friend by interogating the ushers, exes etc was funny and endearing, as was the whole stag night scene, which again was a mixture of touching and very funny repartee.
It wasn't as good as last week's and I would liked to have seen the pace quicken at the start because we dwelt a little too long on the set-up. I'd say pacing is an area for improvement.
Happy?
They spent so long on the set up that they needn't have had the end of story character scenes, they'd done all of that most the episode.
No, I said 'some'.
When you have pages of the same people moaning about one person, it's pretty obvious a cult of hatred for some of those involved, especially as the person they're complaining about was only one third of the team of authors who wrote the programme.
I disagree, but well-done for working it out.
But he is the main exec, and the main link to the other series, Doctor Who, which has recently been experiencing the same. It's pretty clear their shared troubles are down to him, the exec producer of both. That said Gatiss has always seemed like the bigger smug luvvie of the two. Moffat just seems to write what he thinks fans want, at the expense of what the real ones (those not on tumblr) actually want.
That's sort of how I feel.
Don't get me wrong, it's still pretty good and there's still much to enjoy. But in my opinion it's nowhere near the standard of the first two series.
I miss Moriarty already, or Richard Brooks if you like. Those scenes with Sherlock which were so magnificent and very edgy are possibly the glue which held it all together. Those scenes almost sold the tone of the show and what it was like back then.
The sense of urgency I felt that Sherlock needed to overcome Moriarty were probably key for me.
Unfortunately there's been nothing to really replace that important element this series.
Now the tone is very comedic, there hasn't been a strong antagonist which keeps that suspense and feeling of danger that Moriarty/Richard Brooks held over the show in the first two series.
Now it's very lightweight in comparison. The tension just isn't there now.
Still quite good, but falling well short of what it was.
Episodes like these last two I think would work so much better in a 6 episode run or longer. But 2 episodes out of a 3 episode series is pretty much your series gone. There's no more space left to have a few episodes which deliver the atmosphere of dark tension and brooding suspense which series one and two did so successfully. The series is all used up.
It was a powerful and compelling series before.
Now it's just entertaining, with one or two good set pieces. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but you know what I mean when I say that it lacks a lot of the power that it used to have.
I suppose it just gets boring. I'm a casual viewer of Dr Who, and I'm not keen on the way it's gone, but it seems people are bringing all their overweight baggage and bitterness about that show over to Sherlock now.
Wish people could discuss the programme instead of incessantly moaning about one of the authors.
I actually wasn't going to mention Moffat at all until I realised while typing up my thoughts that these were also my current problems with Doctor Who. I think people are just frustrated, they've waited two years for a series of self-parodying in jokes, it wouldn't be so bad if they hadn't just waited the same for a full series of Doctor Who, a series that just a few years ago was on 14 times a year with two spin-offs.
What tension was there in the episodes The Blind Banker or The Hounds of Baskerville then?
Did you even notice there was very clever subtle hints that foreshadowed and an element that tied into the main plot in this epiosde?
Chance would be a fine thing.
I really wish it was week in week out.