Not the same women. The assistant used by Irene Adler looked similar to Mycroft's assistant, but they are not the same people at all.

The wound is covered, by the belt. Sherlock said they were stabbed through the belt, is not near it.

I thought I had been even handed with my overview of the episode. The comedy parts were fine but the murder of Bainbridge didn't add up. As it's a Sherlock story I watch for the murder case and the solution to the case.I felt the comedy bits subtracted from the core parts of a Sherlock episode. Had the murder case made sense then the comedy would have been a welcome addition.

But it may be that the writer was too engrossed in the funny relationship stuff.

So I marked this one down somewhat.

Is it possible the very thin blade was somehow attached to the belt and withdrawn when the belt was removed, since they do say removing a knife from a stab wound is the worst thing you can do since the knife
prevents oftentimes the fatal bleeding.

By being ironic, you raise another point.
Are people even alowed to touch them? I think they're not really guarding anything and are there for touristic reasons, but still.
If people are alowed to touch them and it becomes a thrill to do it because of Sherlock, i predict they will change that.

A "couple of divisive episodes"?! You mean "two-thirds of the entire 2014 series".

I did think she was more responsive than before but it sure fooled me.
Thanks.

You aren't allowed to touch the Guardsmen.

IIRC most guardsmen are soldiers on active duty, probably been on a tour or two of Afghanistan, and the weapons are real, so you'd be well advised not to re-enact scenes from hit BBC series Sherlock on any of them.

Just watched ep 2.

I'm sorry, but I thought it was bollocks.

Drawn out, too quirky for its own good, plot holes, too unbelievable.

And boring, mostly.

V disappointed!

Another plot hole then.
But that part deals with national security. So i agree with an earlier post, when you're dealing with something that could give ideas to terrorists, i'm much more forgiving.
Like the almost absurd plot in the underground tunnel. Fun to notice unreal aspect but that's not what bothered me in The Empty Hearst.

Too much comedy not enough plot. An hour and a half and most of it was wasted. I'll give it until the next episode but if it hasnt improved i wont be bothering with next series

Yes but with regards to a Doctor Who comparison many people thought S2 of that show was a creative low point. It came back from that. Why write off the entire thing? No show is perfect. Of course due to the episode count being so low there is more pressure but these are the same people who made the first six episodes. Maybe episode three will live up to more of the audiences expectations? Even if it doesn't polls in national newspapers about shark jumping are a pathetic over reaction. We are in danger of becoming too used to knee jerk reactions which has caused many a potentially decent US show to be shut down because of immediate opinion. Even if S3 proves to be the poorest of the 3 (i don't btw. I already think its better than S1) in general opinion then so what? A bad run of episodes. Theyll come back with more and lets see what they do. The fact the gold standard of British TV drama has gone from treasure to troublesome in the space of 180 minutes is just silly hyperbole.

Some people didn't like the Rose / Who relationship in S2 of Who, but this is the first time I have heard it being described as a creative low point. It even had Steven Moffat's greatest ever contribution to television. This couldn't possibly be you making things up again could it? Funny how you are now deriding national newspaper reviews when they have a different opinion from yours when only yesterday you were praising them when their opinions were similar to yours.

Some clues I think I've spotted for episode 3:

I think a lot of knee jerking happened right after the first ever episode aired. But as to the last 2 eps, maybe the reaction wouldn't be as extreme if the ptb hadn't had ~2 years to get the eps up to the high-quality we saw in (some of the) 6 before ones.


Sherlock was given the awesome label too quickly, maybe these 2 eps have shown that this version of Sherlock lacks longevity.

My general perception is that many people think S2 was a bit of a mess.

and i wasn't praising the papers. Just pointing out that if I were a BBC boss i would be happy with the reviews for the first episode. I have since seen alot of negativity which is equally valid if slightly strange.

And just to add. The negative reviews/comments seem focussed on Moffat. Witness that Jim Shelley review when he basically uses it as an excuse to slate Doctor Who...again...and makes bizarre comments like Tennants performance of the Doctor has ruined Moffats Who. Erm Tennant wasn't even in the Moffat era which suggests a lazy journalist parroting equally lazy social media criticisms because it suits their agenda.

The rule of 2 has been broken. In the previous series the 2nd episode has been the worst in my opinion - I thought this was absolutely fantastic. Really funny, touching and interesting.

Prob one of my favourites.

(makes last week's, which i wasn't a fan of) look even poorer in comparison)

also at the time I made those comments the reviews had been almost universally positive. There have been more negative comments and reviews since. Which I'm sure the BBC will notice.

My point yesterday was that the BBC care more about those reviews and the viewing figures than the opinion of The Gatherer or me. I think that still stands. Out of interest...have you actually watched the episode yet?

Oh yeah, don't disagree with you about lazy journalists. As for S2 of Who, that was before Twitter and before I was a member of this forum so if there was negativity I wasn't aware of it. But for me it was a good series and far better than 5-7. As I said, "The Girl in the Fireplace" is a superb episode and my favourite Moffat work and the two part finale is also my favourite.

No I haven't watched it. I don't think I will because of the negative comments on here. I think if I did watch it it would just wind me up!

But that's what I mean by the wound not being covered by the belt,
The would-be murderer stabbed through the belt meaning that there is a hole in the belt too. So the belt doesn't cover the wound, it's an open hole.

BIB: And also how we're given pointers to magic and magic tricks over and over again, especially in the 'Reichenbach Fall' and 'Empty Hearse' episodes.