The aspect I find to be a stretch is that the train actually took a diversion and the two men somehow placed the carriage in the right position, and then started the train back up and got back on route.
I find the notion that nobody who works for the tube would notice that a bit hard to swallow.
Maybe it is possible, but it is something that seems to stretch credibility and make me think how that could happen in this day and age. It's not like a bus which can just drive off somewhere and then get back on route.

As I say, I'm not stating that it's impossible, it just sounded like too much of a stretch to accept, and maybe if they'd showed Sherlock imagining it in his mind to demonstrate to the viewer how that sequence would have worked out it might have sat a little better with me without me being distracted with thinking how that would work.
I wasn't looking for any potential plothole, it's just that this in particular jarred and jumped out at me.

Toby Haynes directed the 2-parter biggies from Series 5/6 : Pandorica/Big Bang and Day of the Moon/Impossible Astronaut plus also A Christmas Carol. So I wished they had used him again for this episode. The next episode will also be directed by someone from Who, Colm McCarthy ( The Bells of Saint John ) but a lot of people didn't like the directing in that episode. I'm really looking forward to Episode 3 actually, as Who "veteran" Nick Hurran takes over the finale. He's got the track record. I think he was voted the best director for Series 7A for Asylum of the Daleks and The Angels Take Manhattan by Doctor Who magazine readers. And ... he directed The Day of the Doctor. Moffat had better deliver with the script.

Thanks for that farquharstreet. The direction is key to the episode's style coupled critically with the writing. Back to discussions on tube trains then.......

I'm looking forward to watching it tonight. It feels quite unusual to not have to wait so long for the second episode to be shown after the first. I think more shows should try it.

Some of the best films of all time have had gaping plot holes. Who cares? You seem to imply that only the more intelligent viewers can see these plot holes and therefore it detracts from the story. I am an intelligent viewer, I see the plot holes and I don't care. There is always another viewpoint than your own, although I do understand what you are trying to say. It's just that you are wearing blinkers while saying it.

I think I am the same, I just enjoyed it, it's that simple. People who are looking for a larger plot are understandably dissapointed with the first episode, it did take a back seat in favour of the character related plot. I personally watch Sherlock for the characters, and then the mystery, I don't know how common or uncommon that is. But the actual mystery is secondary to me, so I can't say the plot holes even entered my head before I read about it on this thread. Other episodes have balanced the character developemnt and main plot much better, but because I love the characters so much I really didn't mind.

It would be a bit boring on here, though, if all the posts said "Well, that was fun!"..."Yes, it was"..."I agree" etc.

And writers, directors etc don't always get it right.


Fiction involves suspension of disbelief - unlikely things can happen. But not contravention of the laws of physics. (Unless it's sci-fi/fantasy, and even that must have internal logic or else it becomes nonsense).

I wouldn't be surprised if the Moffat & Gatiss production team didn't throw down the gauntlet and offer one or two of the most ardent critics on here the going rate to come up with an episode as good (or even better!) as they could write and produce themselves. There seem to be some amongst us who have implied that the current team is beneath contempt for delivering the script, plot, characterisation etc of The Empty Hearse.

No. It was character-focussed. Nothing wrong woith that. Some of the best dramas are character-focussed.


No.

It was a detective story, but where the actual "mystery" & detection was secondary to tying up the loose ends around a man reappearing after dying, and his best friend having attended his funeral. But I have a feeling that in this case, the mystery will tie in with episodes 2 and 3.

Now that rather awkward part of the storytelling is out of the way, eps 2 & 3 can revert to normal.

Or would it have been better/more believable if Holmes had simply turned up on Watson's doorstep unannounced, Watson had said "Sherlock, you're not dead then" and they had picked up their friendship & the very next case without any other reference to his "death" and subsequent disappearance?

I think that many would have picked holes in that scenario


A rather dismissive, and if I might say, superior attitude - you've obviously not frequented many of the DS Doctor Who threads either.

There are more possible scenarios than the one we got and the one you have outlined, you know.

A densely plotted mystery with John's reaction to the return of Sherlock woven into it, with both humour and tension, could surely be achieved?

After all, they have done that six times before! It's not like they don't know how it's done!

Yes, possible, but they have never had to deal with someone returning from the dead, with his closest friend and crime-solving partner being totally unaware of him still being alive over the intervening two years. In real life (yeah, I know) people would have been suspicious, they would be wary, they would feel hurt & shunned, even angry (and anger did come through), they would not expect to be able to pick up where they left off.

Of course, I did use the "one bound and we're free" scenario as an exaggerated example to drive the point home.

It's still written for everyone though, not just one group of viewers who expect one format.

Still, that's my opinion, as someone who enjoys complex dramas that make you think. In all of this, no-one is wrong, they simply have differing views.
Last edited by mossy2103 : 05-01-2014 at 16:34

Being 'character focussed' is irrelevant to whether the mystery/crime is any good or not. You are wrongly stating that one must come at the expense of the other.

Why on earth would I frequent Dr Who threads,I don't watch it??

I said that one of the categories of viewer that Sherlock appeals to (and is designed specifically to appeal to), is the Dr Who fan. This, due to the special effects, etc.

To those of us who like mystery and crime dramas, Sherlock is lacking. Or it certainly was in this episode anyway. But then none of the three writers are experienced in writing crime/mystery. Perhaps they need a consultant writer. Or perhaps its all good, as long as they have the Dr Who fans and those who will forgive a lot just because of the characterisation.

I suspect that plots would be ripped to shreds by some even if written by the great ACD himself.

Strange, you don't watch the show, but you see fit to make rather disparaging comments about what Doctor Who fans are satisfied with.

I think you're misunderstanding: many of us liked the characterisation. We're not criticising that. But the crime they are solving needs to be properly developed and devised also.

I agree with all you say - I just think the detective aspect, the emotional aspect and the humorous aspect could have been better balanced, and I think the writers have done a superb job previously in achieving that, so I was a bit disappointed that one aspect - the mystery - suffered in this episode (imo).

I must say, having another episode tonight, so soon after the first, feels wonderful. It's Christmas!

Dr Who is not just fiction, its fantasy. Nothing wrong with that, if its your thing. Sherlock is not meant to be fantasy. There is supposed to be a factual situation going on which Sherlock's brain is capable of detecting. The writers of Sherlock, however, have openly said that they are now catering to the Dr Who audience. So, its turning into fantasy.

I fully accept your point of view, as I said, no-one is wrong (it's just that we want or expect different things).


Yes, let's hope that tonight's goes some way towards meeting some of those expectations expressed here.

I watch Doctor Who and frequent the DW forum and I don't give a fig for special effects. I like a good, well plotted story with good strong characters. Perhaps you could stop generalising about DW fans? In my experience they don't forgive anything.

Well, having now properly explained your position, perhaps your earlier comment was uncalled for as it does not seem to encapsulate the explanation above, and does come across as rather superior-sounding (which I am sure was not your intention):

I agree. The forums are here for us to chew the fat over a TV show we've just seen.
It's a good thing.

It's especially good with shows such as this as I believe it adds to the enjoyment of a show when people discuss plot related elements.
Sometimes it's just going to happen that certain elements will come under scrutiny. It's important for a show like Sherlock. If some people like to watch it and have it wash over them as a bit of lightearted fun, that's fine. But they shouldn't begrudge the people who enjoy the show also for some of the perhaps more subtle elements in the writing.

If you're following a mystery it's only natural for something to leap out that doesn't seem to fit for some reason. Quite often it can be deliberate in order to present a red herring to throw the viewer off the scent.
If viewers happen to see something that seems to be more like a far-fetched idea or a plot hole that doesn't add up, I think it's perfectly fine for that to be commented on.
It's a detective show. It's bound to happen from time to time as the writers are inviting the viewer to be hooked into the mystery.
I wouldn't enjoy this show as much if all the stories were weak throwaway rubbish that didn't make sense. Maybe some would, but we're not all like that.

Well that would be fine too. In fact to some extent they already have with some saying that this modern interpretation has handled one or two things better in their opinion.

Sorry if it sounded like that - I take it that you must be a Dr Who fan, but you are being, in my opinion, rather too sensitive about it. I admit that I don't 'get' Dr Who, or indeed any science fiction type stuff at all, but the one thing I am sure of, is that it requires you to be happy to completely enter into fantasy land. I'm not, and that's that.

I didn't know that. I'd say that after the success of the first two series if it isn't broke then don't try to fix it.
If it tries to seek the Doctor Who audience so specifically then at the same time it also risks losing some of the current audience they've already built up over the years it's been on.

A couple of people have said that it would be a bad idea for them to cater to a fanbase, but if they've actually said that they're trying to appeal to the Doctor Who audience then that's exactly what they'd be doing.

Ha, your right, Over on the Dr Who forum, each episode is quite often ripped to shreds. Dr Who fans have very high expectations, a few special effects aren't enough to make an episode great, so I'm not sure where this idea of Dr Who fans being easily pleased came from? It's not exactly aimed at casual viewers, they wouldn't know what the hell was going on.

I'm so happy that we get another episode tonight, I can't wait.