.

I'm pretty sure there was a very similar plot to this in The Avengers from the '60s.

I FRIGGIN LOVE THIS PROGRAMME! Benedict and Martin are both two brilliant actors and have great chemistry. The episodes always spring up surprises that you truly aren't expecting! I have to admit though that i felt the episode wasn't as good as the first, and an hour and a half does feel a bit long for a tv programme, but i cannot wait for the finale its looking good! I also thought Russell Tovey was disappointing in his role - very screamy. BRING BACK LARA PULVER! :P

One thing that took me by surprise - Sherlock driving!

Lara Pulver without a pullover!

Its not as good as it used to be

Weakest Sherlock for me, it was ok while leading up to the finish, but when he went to his mind palace and from then on it didnt work for me. Still probably better than most other tv shows though.

The end to set up next episode makes little sense.

Last time we saw Moriarty texting Mycroft at the end of the last episode, he was a free man walking along the Thames. When did they capture him and lock him up long enough for him to go mad and obssessively etch in Sherlock's name onto every available surface? Did I miss something about Moriarty's capture at the end of last episode?

A Scandal In Belgravia was watched by 10.66m in the BARB ratings! Blimey!

This came over as bad fan fiction IMO. HOTB is rightly held in high regard & I found it SO difficult to understand how a self confessed fan like Mark Gatiss could think this cuts the mustard in ANY way. My instant reaction is to re-read the book or watch the Jeremy Brett version to wash this from mine eyes. Sorry guys, Moriarty doesnt work as a goof & if you arent able to improve on the original HOTB why bother? Again, sorry you apparently just arent that good.

Makes little sense?

Firstly we have no exact time line between each episode have we? It could have been months since the first episode.

Secondly what evidence have you that Moriarty had gone mad? He had written on the walls and grown a vague beard, neither of which takes years (he could have written all those Sherlocks in an hour tops). He could have been making a point with the writing rather then expressing insanity, a message for Mycroft perhaps.

In the first episode Mycroft said that Moriarty "seems desperate for my attention" (or something like that). I assume that at some point he received it. Things are allowed to happen off-screen.

Alternatively, as suggested above, it could have been a flashback from years ago.

[quote=Rorschach;55796011]
In the first episode Mycroft said that Moriarty seemed "desperate for my attention" (or something like that). I assume that at some point he received it. Things are allowed to happen off-screen.QUOTE]

Unfortunately, there seems to be a growing trend towards ahving everything explained immediately with no lose threads or teasers.

Unless people can turn off the TV knowing everything and not having to think about anything once the programme is over people think they have missed something rather than simply - it not being explainde at that point.

Also, people making comments about Moriarty and jumping to conclusions: I would hjave thought 'all' the posts about the use of the word 'cell-phone' and people jumpin got conclusion about 'oh, here we go pandering the US market' when it was a salient plot point should teach people that being negative and putting everything down when not knowing the full facts is not a good way to go with...especially with intelligent dramas from people who are known to like to make the viewers think and does not treat them like idiots.

No mention was made of Moriarty's capture. So why am I to assume he was if I am not told by the source material that fairly important part of information in order for the conclusion of the episode to make sense?

I am here to watch a TV show and be entertained. The show does not come with a disclaimed at the start saying "Please be aware not all relevant plot details will be announced during the broadcast of this program so the producers of this show advise the audience to make up what they like for this all to make some sense to them. We apologise in advance but hope you enjoy the show all the same. Kind Regards, BBC." As such I figured you know, if they have a story to tell, they'd tell me the important details of it rather than expecting me to put nothing and nothing together to make something.

The showed a mirrored cell with etchings of Sherlock's name on all the walls. That, as a visual trope, is more or less slang for "longed in a cell so long you've went mad." Only thing that could have added to it was if it was all in blood. You have watching the Shining, right? What about The Number 23? How about Seven? Because, you know, if you have, it should be clear the end scene was meant to convey the idea of a man locked up so long he's went nuts over his obsession.

As for sending Mycroft a message... um, he texted him last time of a disposal mobile phone. If he wants to send him a message, he knows how: SMS text.

I guess I just expect a story to tell itself, not expect the audience to make up half of it themselves because the writers can't be bothered to fill in the quite massive blanks to explain the situations they are trying to set up.

Moriarty is obsessed with Sherlock - thats all.
Have you seen him? Hes already mad.


No - were going to find out next week ffs
Its a wee prologue at the end. Thats all.

Or as I have said above they leave stuff for the intelligent viewer and not expect spoon feeding of everything.

I for one do not mind the odd unexplained thing here and there - the odd loose end is nice.

I missed that part. Was there an announcement "Find out just how Moriarty as caught... and what he has planned for Sherlock next week at the later time of 9"? Because I didn't hear that. I did hear them say it would be on later next week but no other information was given to explain Moriarty being in a cell this week when he was a free man last week.

I'd prefer to think the producers assumed that not all relevant plot details will be revealed during this episode, so advise viewers to think and try and work it out for themselves. They may be pleasantly [or not] surprised in the next ep.?

I'll write to the BBC - hopefully they'll also tell you how to turn your TV off once the programmes finished.

Its a bit obvious its leading into next week.

So when watching the first episode of The Killing you want a message that some of the people being investigated in the episode aren't actually the murderer but are red herrings?

Before the very first episode of Masterchef you want a note that you shouldn't get attached to anyone in the heat because none of them, in fact, will reach the final.

When watching Aliens you want a detailed description of how the alien spaceship came to be on planet LV-426 in the first place because they never actually show you you know.

In the first book of a trilogy you don't want to see a single line that relates to a plot in the next two books. It must be entirely self-contained.

In Con Air there's an entire plane full of criminals and not a single one of them is shown being arrested!

It's a serial drama, the ending was a foreshadowing of the coming episode. It will make sense after you have watched the next one.


PS - We never saw how Watson got his breakfast, no one was seen cooking it or even buying the ingredients. Am I expected to just assume it was prepared in the kitchens of the pub where they were staying? Bloody lazy writers.

Your reductive logic is inapplicable and immature. Please do not bother to discuss this matter if you cannot avoid trying to personally insult me because I point out a discrepancy in the writing process that means the situation they are setting up does not have any internal logic to it.

The new movie Prometheus will explain the Space Jockey in Alien.

In Con Air you see Nic Cage arrested and wrongly convicted for the bar fight.

So you're incorrect anyway.

You also want to compare episodic reality TV cookery shows to a three part serial drama based on fictional works.

As I said, inapplicable and immature. Do not bother discussing things if you cannot engage on the same level of discussion that is attempting to be had.

well .... that wasn't very good .

it was all just a bit boring .

You do realise that it was a trailer, right? A teaser for next week's episode.

And you want it to be a self contained story in its own right?

How about waiting until they actually broadcast the whole thing and then see if things are explained?

sorry but I really don't see the problem here. Surely it was just a little taster of what's to come next week?

Superbeast, seriously, just wait until the next episode.

No, I thought it was an epic saga in and of itself. Please can the sarcasm, I'm not an idiot despite everyone trying to make me out as one for noticing a plot hole.

I do not expect a set up for next week to be in and of itself self explanatory. What I would like is if they ae going to present the threat of Moriarty's release, establishing him being captured in the first place. Apparently that's expecting too much of professional writers these days.

You would normally expect the screen to go blank for a second before the "coming next time" trailer (just about giving you time to switch off if you don't want to see spoilers) but I don't think it did - it just seemed like the same episode continuing to me.