Are people who have seen the first two series really happy with "The elephant in the room" and the glowing matchbox as references to Sherlock's cases? Really?

Maybe they've just forgotten how good this programme was previously.

This week's episode - the comedy was comedic, the emotion was emotional, the dialogue was sharp, the Sherlock thinking was well done, Benny and Martin would be worth watching if they were reading the telephone directory aloud, the portrayal of the relationships were spot on, but - it wasn't Sherlock. I'm not Sherlocked.

The crime bits were just pathetic. No tension, no urgency, no menace.

And how much padding is necessary? John and Mary's dance went on and on. So far these have been hour long episodes stretched to fit an hour and a half.

I hope for an improvement next week.

There's been a lot of remarks on here about Moffat. I've disliked a lot of his stuff for Doctor Who, felt that Moffat had lost the plot, and then, suddenly, he'll pull something out of the hat that takes your breath away by his sheer genius. Crossing fingers he'll do that for me again next week with Sherlock.

Dear Mr Moffat, why have you turned this show into Dr Who meets Eastenders??

How do you know? How many terrorist bombs have you encountered?

As I did last week, I've compiled a list of references in last night's episode (ten in all) to The Sign of Four and various other Sherlock Holmes stories - link below.

http://slouchingtowardstv.com/2014/0...y-have-missed/

I'm sure I've missed a load more, so feel free to let me know what a dullard I've been!

Also, here's my review of last night's episode, which some have referenced already:
http://slouchingtowardstv.com/2014/0...sign-of-three/

Hope these are useful/interesting.

Normally yes, but in this case i think that can be explained by the fact he had already had a lot of beers, so his "meticulous palette' would not have been working to full effectiveness.

This annoyed me too, reminded me of how slow he was to realise that Watson fired the shot in the first episode of series 1.

Does anyone know, why did the photographer have to watch that young soldier so much that he felt he was being stalked? Surely the photographer didn't need a particular soldier to be his victim, just any of the guards who did that duty would have done? So I would have thought he just needed to watch long enough to find out how long a duty shift lasted and what time they switched over, so he would know what time he wanted to do the stabbing?

Well the Army and bomb disposal units seem to take terrorists bombs very seriously, especially in their approach to diffusing them. They must be wasting their time if such bombs have a simple on off switch.

How many examples can you give of terrorist bombs that have been diffused because they had a simple on off switch.


As for the bomb in Sherlock, it may had an on off switch on purpose and was just a calling card to Sherlock from the bad guy.

But terrorist bombs do not have on off switches, and neither do they have nice LED time displays to show the count down. Unfortunately terrorists aren't that considerate.

The overnight ratings are in.

Sherlock drew 8.84m, down only 400k from Wednesday's record high (which is a remarkably strong performance, as ratings for all shows almost always tail off after the season opener).

31.9% share of audience, comfortably the most-watched show from yesterday.

The overall number will go up once repeat showings, iPlayer and other time-shifted viewing is taken into account in a week's time.

A lot of people on DS are critical about the current series (I make no judgement about that - each to their own) but there can be no question that Sherlock is delivering seriously good numbers for the Beeb and that the vast majority of viewers were happy enough with episode 1 to tune in to episode 2 too.

Excellent news!

That episode was mind blowingly self indulgent. The writers and producers obviously believe their own hype a bit too much and feel they can churn out any old pish and convince people it's 'OMG, like sooooo amazing'.

Embarrassing.

From Wikipedia, just for comparison's sake:


I'd expect the final audience number for episode 1 (including time-shifting and repeats) to be well north of 11m, possibly even approaching 12m.

I think you're missing the point. Of course (I think) they wouldn't have off switches, in the same way they probably don't have different coloured wires or LED countdown timers (or any timers at all if they are being set off remotely). The writers were following a convention regarding bombs planted in this sort of situation. it allowed the writers to use this convention to play a joke on the viewers, by subverting the genre. And also a tool by which Holmes could manipulate Watson.

I remember a scene in Young Frankenstien where Gene Wilder approaches a door as the background music steadily increases in volume and tension. he reaches for the door handle as the music further builds the tension. he turns the handle, and it comes off in his hand. A very similar effect on the audience.

I doubt that bombs do have off switches in real life, but they are probably as valid as any other cliche regarding bombs, and there was a plausible explanation. It was a safety feature for the bomb makers. If they are relying on the bomb not being found, then an off switch would be fine.

Having said that, I agree that it is just as possible that they were meant to find and disarm the bomb - we'll not know until the series is complete - and maybe not even then.

You conveniently left out the fact that over 600,000 viewers turned off before the end.

What of it? I could instead have skewed things by quoting the 'peak' audience number. I simply quoted the 'average' audience for the time-slot, which is the one most commonly referred to in the media.

600k people switched off/over. Do you really think Sherlock is the only programme which sheds a proportion of its audience during its timeslot? The number you cite is actually pretty low in percentage terms. Why don't you look up how many viewers Dancing on Ice lost during its timeslot and then make a comparison? I'm not the one trying to use data to skew the argument to my agenda here.

So what?, the ratings are still massively good. Even when its not at its peak it's still one of the best things on tv and i'm glad its getting lots of viewers.

Also can someone very briefly explain why people hate Moffet for what he has done to Dr Who? I love nearly all the new Who and think its been great since he took over as does my friend who is possibly the biggest Who nerd ever.

The Great Sherlock Holmes, knowing its Nov5th, a bomb is on the Carraige , its about to blow, goes down into the tunnel, telling no one ( a bomb squad ?? like any normal person ) where there is NO mobile signal, gets onto the carraige when all of a sudden .....a mysterious "REMOTE SIGNAL " gets through to arm the bomb.

DOOOOHHH !!!!! Sherlock Holmes ....Homer Simpson.

at that point I left this " OMG its Soooooo deep and amazing , like it is soooo great and the ratings are Sooooo like popular ... that Moffat is sooooo talented ... over arcing 3 episodes 3 hours to get to the point GRIPPING stufff..


Sorry but Popularity is not quality.


So Moffat produces a programme almost as popular as Mrs Browns boys ?? Hardly a god is he.

Mobile networks are the only way to send remote signals - of course. Sherlock also called the bomb squad. They were seen in the tunnels.

"Of course I called the police."

Jeremy Brett is harumphing in his grave.

Sherlock did tell the bomb squad. You did watch the programme right?

Loved Sherlock !

You are spot on!


neither is it fun! But Jack Kerouac is one of my heroes.

Thanks for that.

There is also a nice review on the DS main page which I've just noticed. Don't know if it's already been linked here, and I don't really want to go back over dozens of pages to find out!

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/s129/...of-an-era.html

Edit: This series has definitely felt "different" so far, but worth watching for the fab Sherlock/Watson double act alone. Benedict and Martin have both been brilliant.

Why would he. This is not a failed attempt to repeat a TV series set in the 1800s.

If anyone wants a general feeling of the likes vs dislikes there's a poll up on the guardian at the moment.

http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-ra...k-jumped-shark

Currently just under 2/3rds are in the 'like' camp...


Its certainly was a divisive episode.

Sadly there's no option for how I feel about this series so far, "Meh".