From that Metro review:

Like cooking a Christmas roast, this episode requires patience. The central mystery takes a long time to cook and, for its opening hour, has more than a whiff of turkey about it. However, the end result is a pleasant enough filler episode – diverting, but run-of-the-mill by Sherlock’s standards - more stuffing than turkey.

But the story is unlikely to top many fans’ favourite episode lists. For me, it took too long to pull the threads together, rendering the narrative shapeless until the closing 20 minutes. Fans upset by a perceived increase in ‘soapy’ and humorous elements at the expense of plot in the opener will have more ammunition here.

This is the problem I had with it. Parts of the episode I loved but it really felt like a filler episode, and when you only get 3 episodes every 2 bloody years or whatever, you don't have time for filler episodes! Whereas we're normally shown Sherlock's strengths, this episode seemed very much about his weaknesses. I don't know, it was an odd one for me...

That's the first time I've felt disappointed after watching Sherlock. The trailer for next week looks interesting so fingers crossed for that.

"Pleasant enough filler episode".

Says it all really. We only have 3 films, is there room for filler?

No it really wasn't a fair point. Maybe if you paid more attention to the posts.....

Disappointed. Was looking forward to the episode but got rather bored. Hope the next one is back on track.

And I'm equally sick of those who defend Moffat despite all the evidence that he is a very poor showrunner and writer (talking about quality of scripts not ratings).

It's like they wrote 3 x 90 minute in-jokes then realised they forgot any actual crime deduction and thew some in in the final draft.

What happens in episode 3?

Next Sunday
Sherlock Holmes encounters Charles Augustus Magnussen, the one man he truly hates, through a case of stolen letters. How will he tackle an enemy who specialises in blackmail and knows the personal weakness of every eminent person in the Western world?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03pzpgy
Radio Times http://www.radiotimes.com/episode/cr...3-his-last-vow

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 looks and sounds very promising. Like the 'Sherlock' of old. Maybe we can salvage one good episode from the series!

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.

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.

So I'll wade into this then.

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?

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...

hello, sorry
Last edited by abercrombie : 06-01-2014 at 01:46

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.

^^ I love Molly

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.

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.

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.

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?