DS Forums

 
 

Sherlock - BBC Drama (Part 3)


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 13-01-2014, 00:04
Kapellmeister
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Taedet animam meam vitae
Posts: 40,368
i sort of enjoyed it, but all the way through i was painfully aware that it is the acting of Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman that make the programme work for me.

I won't repeat criticisms that have been posted already but things in the writing really annoy me; an example would be in episode two Mary, as a doctor's receptionist, announcing each patient with their ailment for comedic effect drove me bonkers, that never happens and i found it tiresome. It wasn't needed to show the tedium of John's day.

i guess i am a lone voice in that i don't like the portrayal of Moriarty, it is overly hammy for my tastes.

To end on a positive note though i do like Holmes and Watson their chemistry and performance really make the show for me, without them i doubt the programme would be the success it is...
Not quite a lone voice as I couldn't stand his hammy, eye-rolling over-the-top performance either. It was a blatant rip-off of John Simm's equally unbearable Master in 'Doctor Who'.
Kapellmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 13-01-2014, 00:05
Vast_Girth
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,262
Loved it all the way through! Stunning TV. Right up to the point where Sherlock Shot Magnusson. Would have much preferred it if he had outwitted him, but i suppose it does tie in with the original story.

Great to see Moriarty is back!
Vast_Girth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:06
fefster
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 5,840
Not quite a lone voice as I couldn't stand his hammy, eye-rolling over-the-top performance either. It was a blatant rip-off of John Simm's equally unbearable Master in 'Doctor Who'.
He is a colourful baddie and is supposed to be the opposite of Holmes in every way. I like his portrayal - it makes me laugh and adds enjoyment
fefster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:06
eggshell
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,766
Not quite a lone voice as I couldn't stand his hammy, eye-rolling over-the-top performance either. It was a blatant rip-off of John Simm's equally unbearable Master in 'Doctor Who'.
And this nationwide broadcast is so OTT that it doesn't bode well.

He's not a master criminal he's a loon.
eggshell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:06
Welsh-lad
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mid Wales / Canolbarth Cymru
Posts: 37,480
Not quite a lone voice as I couldn't stand his hammy, eye-rolling over-the-top performance either. It was a blatant rip-off of John Simm's equally unbearable Master in 'Doctor Who'.
There's the rub. Baggage much?
Welsh-lad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:07
AlexiR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 12,683
He easily accepted the laptop - a shrewd man who didn't want to be part of something big would have dismissed Sherlock's gift.

There are reasons to think that Mycroft's acceptance of him may have less to do with believing him an asset and more to do with something seedy Mycroft has done.
He didn't accept the laptop though did he.

Also yes that's entirely possible (RE: Mycroft).
AlexiR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:08
AlexiR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 12,683
And this nationwide broadcast is so OTT that it doesn't bode well.

He's not a master criminal he's a loon.
Just London wide wasn't it?
AlexiR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:09
The Gatherer
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,610
Weren't you also arguing with everyone about how much you hated Dr Who on Christmas night. Why do you watch all this stuff you don't like? I haven't got the time.
Which means you don't know the answers.
The Gatherer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:09
Kapellmeister
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Taedet animam meam vitae
Posts: 40,368
And this nationwide broadcast is so OTT that it doesn't bode well.

He's not a master criminal he's a loon.
The nationwide broadcast was very RTD-era 'Doctor Who'. But as I said before, I don't believe Moriarty is back, thank the lord.
Kapellmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:09
eggshell
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,766
Just London wide wasn't it?
Oh that's alright then.
eggshell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:10
planets
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: goo goo ka choo
Posts: 25,475
Just London wide wasn't it?
i thought they said "nationwide" i may have misheard
planets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:10
Alrightmate
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,741
The case didn't warrant 90 minutes of television. It was too thin. Mary was revealed to have a dark past but after that nothing much happened until the end.

Magnusson was never presented as being 'evil' enough to warrant his execution. Robert Hardy was much more convincing in this respect in ITV's iffy 'Master Blackmailer'. In that it is someone who is being directly blackmailed who kills Milverton, not Sherlock, and the consequences of the blackmail on individuals is shown to be much more severe than in tonight's episode.

As I said before, the 'twists' were too predictable.

There was a lot of what might be called padding. All the stuff at the Holmes house at Christmas I could've done without. Same goes for the endless sequence after Sherlock is shot.

Sherlock, again, doesn't have to use his powers of deduction. He just shoots someone.

Little sense of the characters being in jeopardy.
I think that's a fair point. Something didn't sit well with me with Sherlock effectively just executing him. As you point out I'm not sure that Magnussen deserved to be actually murdered. That's like giving Sherlock God-like authority over everything we perceive to be just and right.

In the episode itself it highlighted the fact that Sherlock is a sociopath, (or psychopath if you prefer), but it also highlighted what ensures that he is a force for good in that he does kill people. That's the difference.
So for me that was a line that should never have been crossed.

You can't have Sherlock just killing people to solve a problem. It doesn't sit right and it undermines the image of him having this remarkable talent for solving crimes.
All this mind palace stuff, and it comes down to simply shooting somebody in the head with a gun.
No, that doesn't sit right with me at all. Shouldn't have crossed that line as far as I'm concerned.

In regard to your other points. Perhaps the Holmes house at Christmas could be described as padding. But I felt that the sequence after Sherlock was shot was wonderful. Exactly the sort of thing I like about this show.
I don't think that the episode was padded out as much as you do. I felt that the content was about right, the pace just right, the balance between character and crime solving was about right, and I felt that it fulfilled delivering much of what some felt was lacking in the previous two episodes.

As I say I do agree with one or two criticisms, but on the whole I'm very happy with the episode.
Alrightmate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:11
Cissy Fairfax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,349
I had quite high hopes for it too. Unfortunately the mystery/case never really got going, IMO. It was on for one-and-a-half hours and what really happened? We were introduced to Magnusson blackmailing Lindsay Duncan. We found out Mary had a dark past. Mary shot Sherlock. Watson forgave Mary. Uh...Sherlock shot Magnusson and Moriarty's face was shown at the end. It was all just 'meh'. I didn't care about any of it. For example, when Sherlock confronts Mary in Magnusson's office I was hoping for a great scene between the two of them. Instead she shoots him and then we're subjected to an almost endless, fatuous sequence of Sherlock trying 'reason' his way into surviving. The ending was equally trite. In a move that reminded me of the simplistic 'off switch' in episode one, Sherlock decides to 'solve' the case by shooting Magnusson dead. Big deal. It rarely felt like the stakes were high or that anyone was really in any danger or jeopardy.

I'm glad people have enjoyed this series but I know I haven't, and people I know haven't enjoyed it either for similar reasons.
I would agree generally. Its still one of the best shows on TV and tonights was the better of the three episodes, but Ive been underwhelmed a little by this series. The first took an age to get going but understandable as they had so much to tie up and to set up. The second improved but struggled to fill 90 mins. Tonights was better, more like the old and back to allowing us to play detective but the story was not a great one (last weeks was better imo). They seemed to have gone a little overboard on the edits and jumping around too, Sherlock being shot seemed to drag on and like you I thought was one of the lower points.

The problem with these 3 episode stints and leaving cliffhangers makes it more difficult to have any standalone detection episode.

Id fancy when Jonathan Creek comes back for its three episode stint again, it will get into the tried and tested format much quicker, rightly or wrongly.
Cissy Fairfax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:11
AlexiR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 12,683
Which means you don't know the answers.
What were the questions?

Oh that's alright then.
Well more easily explained at least. Plus, you know, accurate criticism and all that. Plus I was asking. It might have been nationwide I suppose.

EDIT - Just checked. They did say every screen in the country. I'll let you off.
AlexiR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:13
Vol
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 2,194
Has Sherlock jumped the shark? Absolutely. Will I watch season four? Oh god yes.
Vol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:15
Super_Furry
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 633
Hmm... Haven't been impressed by the last 3 episodes.
Not a patch on seasons 1 and 2 IMHO.
Super_Furry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:15
bp2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,040
I should have expected Moriarty to return. I believe he is back properly. However it could just be for the next series only and the last episode would be based on the valley of fear or they could just use its name and write a different story
bp2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:15
planets
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: goo goo ka choo
Posts: 25,475
just out of interest, does that end bit mean that Sherlock didn't dismantle Moraity's network as said in episode 1?
planets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:15
eggshell
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,766
Just London wide wasn't it?
What were the questions?


Well more easily explained at least. Plus, you know, accurate criticism and all that. Plus I was asking. It might have been nationwide I suppose.

EDIT - Just checked. They did say every screen in the country. I'll let you off.
Lol...in keeping with the show you would have been better saying " I've just checked and...OH LOOK ITS MORIARTY !!"
eggshell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:16
Hetal
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,250
We all agree that:

Season 2 > Season 1 > Season 3?

Season 3 > Better than most other TV?
Hetal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:16
The Gatherer
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,610
There's the rub. Baggage much?
Hilarious! Anyone who watches both shows can make the connection. And Simm's Master wasn't written by Moffat, so how does this fit your bashing Moffat agenda?
The Gatherer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:18
solenoid
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 14,764
Trying to link the story with reality (easier to do than with Doctor Who) - Magnusson wouldn't really be that powerful even with his colossal memory.

It would have been easy to charge him with a number of blackmails. Would he really have knowledge of sufficient secrets to hinder justice? Blackmail every judge in the land?

It's unlikely.


However let's go with the idea that the whole of British authority is undermined by secrets galore and Magnusson could never be convicted of his crimes.

The only logical step (once the true nature of his archive was known) was to kill him.

So in this TV world Sherlock did the right thing. Although any of Mycroft's stooges could just as easily have pulled the trigger once Mycroft was told about Magnusson's mental powers.
solenoid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:19
eggshell
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,766
We all agree that:

Season 2 > Season 1 > Season 3?

Season 3 > Better than most other TV?
You could write the Beeb blurb for the next series :

"Sherlock..its better than Atlantis "
eggshell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:20
L_Silverwolf
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Holby
Posts: 687
The critical response has been bizarre, not because it's been largely positive but because the praise has been so completely uncritical. As you say, the same basic story transferred into another series wouldn't have received anywhere near the same praise as it was neither interesting enough or original enough. For example, the moral dubiousness of Sherlock executing Magnusson to protect Watson's cosy family life isn't even mentioned.
I remember Sherlock describing himself as a "high functioning sociopath" on at least a couple of occasions in this series. Surely a sociopath possesses a high level of moral "dubiousness", and so I'd argue that it is sufficiently mentioned.
L_Silverwolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-01-2014, 00:20
Kapellmeister
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Taedet animam meam vitae
Posts: 40,368
You could write the Beeb blurb for the next series :

"Sherlock..its better than Atlantis "
lol
Kapellmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 17:50.