|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Aug 18, 2020 5:29:00 GMT 1
I watched Seasons/Series 1 and 2 when they came out, watched “The Empty Hearse” and (not in order, I know) The Abominable Bride, and never actually got around to “The Sign of Three” until now. I’m just never sure what I think of this show. Freeman is excellent, Cumberbatch is pretty good, and many of the scripts appear clever—but, like every other Moffat and Gatiss show (I should just refer to them as one unit: “Moffat-Gatiss”) I’ve seen, it’s just so much in love with itself and its own cleverness. Worse, that cleverness is often specious: “The Reichenbach Fall” is basically a million plot threads that don’t actually fit together, all culminating in a “twist” that originally seems cool but on second glance clearly doesn’t make any more sense to the writers than to the viewers. Meanwhile, the filming style is a jumble of self-consciously ‘arty’ shots that tend to make make the plots even more confusing. That said, I prefer Sherlock to Moffat-Gatiss’ Dracula or Gatiss’ solo Crooked House, both of which had these problems in spades. Moffat-Gatiss do deserve credit for modernizing Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson without losing character or (rather remarkably) atmosphere, even if ultimately I miss “the world where it’s always 1895.” And “The Sign of Three” is quite good. It may be my favorite Sherlock episode so far, or at least tied with “A Study in Pink.” It was funny throughout, and the mystery-plotting was high-quality: it had so many clues that Moffat-Gatiss didn’t actually refer to them all in Holmes’ summation, yet it was hard to piece together unless you were thinking that way. I worked out the guard’s murder (much faster than Sherlock! ), largely because I have seen many mystery-solutions like that before, but I didn’t work out the rather Agatha-Christiesque motive for that killing, how it connected with the second killing, or really anything else. And most of the clues—the guard’s tight uniform and training so he doesn’t “scratch his arse” in particular—went right over my head. The only one I saw was the obvious business with Watson’s name. Gah! My biggest problem with the episode is that Sherlock’s recital of all the cases in his best-man speech didn’t strike me as realistic behavior for anyone, “high-functioning sociopath” or not. To be fair, Moffat-Gatiss usually set their work in these plot-driven fantasylands, but Sherlock requires some kind of grounding in the real world. In retrospect, that’s what annoyed me about the Hound of the Baskervilles ep, even though I mostly liked it: it’s basically fantasy, and the point of Sherlock is that it’s not fantasy. Anyway. That’s a lot of words. What do you think? Should I persevere with the series, even though it annoys me at times? (Probably.)
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Aug 18, 2020 9:57:18 GMT 1
AQUA SALZ! - It's interesting how much our opinions on the show differ, as 'The Sign of Three' was probably my least favourite of Season 3 (my least favourite season of the show, actually), while I actually liked 'The Hounds of the Baskerville'. Seasons 1 and 2 were the best, in my opinion, and I didn't mind Season 4 or the final episode (unlike a lot of people). Have you seen Season 4? The reason I'm not sure is because I didn't see you mention anything from Season 4 in your post (and I'd imagine you might have a bit to say about that final season once you have seen it), but because you put the dates the show started and finished in your subject line, I thought that meant you'd watched the complete series. Just in case you haven't... **spoilers below for Season 4/the final season** I thought the actress they got to play Eurus (revealed to be Sherlock's sister) did a good job. Yes, she would fall into the category of 'all-knowing'/'all-seeing' villain who seems omniscient...but then Moriarty felt that way too. Eurus' games with Sherlock, Watson and Mycroft was the first actual interesting thing I felt happened in the season (after the reveal of Eurus playing three different roles in the previous episode). I realise I'm probably in the 'minority' with this^ opinion, but that's okay. I was fine with how the show ended (but it probably should've actually ended with Season 2). So many shows don't seem to know when to quit.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Aug 18, 2020 14:22:41 GMT 1
No, Chalice_Of_Evil, I haven’t seen Season 4; what I meant was that I hadn’t seen any of the episodes after “Hearse” (except Bride) before last night. (That’s confusing.) As for “Three,” one blogger I read called it the most internally-consistent episode, and I think I agree. Sherlock’s speech aside, everything in it feels possible in the real world, whereas “Hounds” is pure fantasy. ( Bride’s an even worse offender in this regard.) Now, I have no problem with fantasy at all, but it goes against the rules and real-world grounding the show sets up. It also feels self-contained as a story, so I can understand why fans who watch the show for overarching plot threads may not love it, but my preference is for self-contained TV episodes. And the mystery plotting is clever. I know Season 4 jumped the shark for a lot of people… Kind of going in with trepidation!
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Aug 19, 2020 6:02:56 GMT 1
No, Chalice_Of_Evil , I haven’t seen Season 4; what I meant was that I hadn’t seen any of the episodes after “Hearse” (except Bride) before last night. (That’s confusing.) As for “Three,” one blogger I read called it the most internally-consistent episode, and I think I agree. Sherlock’s speech aside, everything in it feels possible in the real world, whereas “Hounds” is pure fantasy. ( Bride’s an even worse offender in this regard.) Now, I have no problem with fantasy at all, but it goes against the rules and real-world grounding the show sets up. It also feels self-contained as a story, so I can understand why fans who watch the show for overarching plot threads may not love it, but my preference is for self-contained TV episodes. And the mystery plotting is clever. I know Season 4 jumped the shark for a lot of people… Kind of going in with trepidation! Apologies, Sa[lzmar]kaar. I hope my spoiler warning was enough and you refrained from reading underneath it until you watch the final season. I try to avoid spoiling things for anyone. As for 'The Hounds of the Baskerville', although there appeared to be a big demon dog at one point, I thought they explained it away with the gas causing hallucinations. I just appreciated that particular installment attempting to insert some 'horror' elements, as I always think of that particular story being like that. With 'The Sign of Three', I personally thought it was a bit all over the place. The jumping back and forth between different points in time and especially the 'bachelor party' segment (which went off on its own tangent) just left me feeling like the episode was a bit chaotic/lack coherency. Season 3 was where my enjoying the series waned a bit. I wasn't that into Season 4 either until the end of the second episode. Unlike most, I quite enjoyed the final - that one I was able to follow (despite the twists and turns).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2020 17:14:09 GMT 1
Overall, I really like the series. But it has very high highs and very low lows. It can be brilliantly written and acted and tons of fun, but it can also be smug, convoluted and silly.
The first episode, in my opinion, was never matched in tone or quality and remains the best one. I also really like the Irene Adler episode. Season three is maybe my favorite season though because it's so much fun - very self indulgent - but fun.
Personally I would say that season 4 isn't worth watching. I hated every part of it and would not reccomend it.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Aug 19, 2020 18:52:47 GMT 1
Chalice_Of_Evil said:No worries! I resisted temptation…for now! I agree that Hound should have horror elements, which many adaptations deemphasize for some reason. The 2002 BBC adaptation is never going to be anyone’s favorite version (the writers’ decision to make Holmes and Watson vaguely contemptuous of each other is, uh, weird), but I’m sorta-kinda fond of it for stressing the atmospherics. By “fantasy,” I don’t mean that the hound in that ep was actually real—as you say, it was actually a hallucination. Problem is, that hallucinogenic gas caused by pressure-pads in Scooby Doo stuff, which would be fine except that Sherlock often pretends to be real-world-grounded. It’s like “no ghosts need apply, but scary sci-fi explanations do.” That said, I admired the atmospherics and updates to the original story in that episode. I kinda agree that “Three” is all over the place, but I didn’t mind it that much… I more minded how those all-over-the-place plot-threads felt shoehorned in there; in real life, could you see all the partygoers sitting around waiting for Sherlock to finish his lengthy case run-throughs? And, yes, they all fit together, but that’s a remarkable coincidence. That said, how they all fit together seemed genuinely clever to me, engendering a lot of good will, and I thought the script was funny. @raimiackbar said:That’s what I meant to say… I’m a big fan of “A Study in Pink” too, both for humor and plotting. (For all my Moffat-Gatiss criticisms, they must have worked hard on that script. A Study in Scarlet is a hard story to adapt, let alone update and make into a coherent, surprising mystery plot.) “It can be brilliantly written and acted and tons of fun, but it can also be smug, convoluted and silly” is spot-on. Everyone I know who’s seen the show likes the Irene Adler episode. I saw it when it first came on PBS and didn’t like it, but for the life of me I can’t remember why. Maybe I didn’t like the portrayal of Irene…? (She’s probably my favorite character in the original Canon.) Will have to give it another watch. Umm… OK, my trepidation is mounting re: Season 4…
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Aug 19, 2020 19:46:24 GMT 1
Also: What do we all think of Abominable Bride? I may rewatch after Season 3 so that it, er, makes more sense for me in context (I’m trying and failing not to spoil anything), but I thought it was awful first time around, largely because… Well, I’ll have to spoil this part: The women’s secret society’s motive is horrid and makes no sense, and it feels stupidly political—that is to say, as if Moffat-Gatiss aren’t deep political thinkers but are pretending to be.
Even worse was the big it’s-all-in-his-mind twist. I saw that coming early on and was still disappointed. Not to mention, speaking of “fantasy,” that developing a whole alternate world in your brain, including scenes for which your ‘avatar’ isn’t actually present and strenuously exact Victorian details, is, again, basically fantasy.
Which is all too bad because I liked the Victorian-set first half and think Cumberbatch and Freeman would make a great regular Holmes and Watson. Too bad they’ll most likely never get that chance now. Probably my least favorite episode so far.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2020 22:51:43 GMT 1
Also: What do we all think of Abominable Bride? I may rewatch when after Season 3 so that it, er, makes more sense for me in context (I’m trying and failing not to spoil anything), but I thought it was awful first time around, largely because… Well, I’ll have to spoil this part: The women’s secret society’s motive is horrid and makes no sense, and it feels stupidly political—that is to say, as if Moffat-Gatiss aren’t deep political thinkers but are pretending to be.
Even worse was the big it’s-all-in-his-mind twist. I saw that coming early on and was still disappointed. Not to mention, speaking of “fantasy,” that developing a whole alternate world in your brain, including scenes for which your ‘avatar’ isn’t actually present and strenuously exact Victorian details, is, again, basically fantasy.
Which is all too bad because I liked the Victorian-set first half and think Cumberbatch and Freeman would make a great regular Holmes and Watson. Too bad they’ll most likely never get that chance now. Probably my least favorite episode so far. I hated that one. In theory I think the underground women's club could've been clever, but the writing in that episode embraces all of the worst tendencies of the creators. It really lacks all the show's best elements and ends up being all gimmicks and self indulgent humor/fourth wall breaking. What bothers me most is that it has one amazing exhange where John asks "What made you this way?" to which Holmes replies "Oh John, nothing made me. I made me." I really hate that they wasted that awesome dialogue in this terrible special. It's one of my favorite quotes from the show.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2020 23:07:39 GMT 1
AQUA SALZ!, Irene Adler was also my favorite side character from the original stories. I can absolutely understand not liking how she was portrayed. They do take some bold and probably excessive liberties with her, including the dominatrix bit. But I loved how they managed to believably capture Sherlock's complete and utter bewilderment when faced with her. He can't read her, and can barely outthink her. But it's not even because of sexual attraction, which the writers brilliantly obfuscate to the point where we don't even know if Sherlock is attracted to her. I also like how he becomes obssesed, even devasted when she fakes her death, but then heartlessly defeats her to prove his superiority. And the actress was perfectly cast too. The show also was firing on all cylinders creatively. I especially love that boomarang sequence- not because the solution was clever, which it kind of wasnt, but because it was so visually captivating. I also love the ambiguity of the ending with fans still debating whether or not Holmes actually saved her or was just fantasizing. Just my opinion though. I'd love to read a counter review. You should rewatch it!
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Aug 19, 2020 23:29:10 GMT 1
AQUA SALZ!, Irene Adler was also my favorite side character from the original stories. I can absolutely understand not liking how she was portrayed. They do take some bold and probably excessive liberties with her, including the dominatrix bit. But I loved how they managed to believably capture Sherlock's complete and utter bewilderment when faced with her. He can't read her, and can barely outthink her. But it's not even because of sexual attraction, which the writers brilliantly obfuscate to the point where we don't even know if Sherlock is attracted to her. I also like how he becomes obssesed, even devasted when she fakes her death, but then heartlessly defeats her to prove his superiority. And the actress was perfectly cast too. The show also was firing on all cylinders creatively. I especially love that boomarang sequence- not because the solution was clever, which it kind of wasnt, but because it was so visually captivating. I also love the ambiguity of the ending with fans still debating whether or not Holmes actually saved her or was just fantasizing. Just my opinion though. I'd love to read a counter review. You should rewatch it! Will do, and glad to see another Mrs. Norton fan!
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Aug 21, 2020 2:18:13 GMT 1
I thought Season 2 was the 'best' season (I would've said Season 1, but I thought the middle episode in that season was a bit weak when compared to the first and third). I had no problem with the season final (and feel that if the show had wanted to 'go out on a high', it should've ended there). I actually really enjoyed the premiere, 'A Scandal in Belgravia' too. It was twisty and turn-y, but I was at least bale to follow it (though I didn't know the ending was up for debate. I just took it at face value). I haven't read the books, so that might be why the show's version of Irene Adler didn't bother me.
I think part of the reason I didn't enjoy Season 3 was because I wasn't a fan of the show's version of Mary. She bugged me. I also thought the villain in the season final was pretty weak when compared to Moriarty (and I wasn't even fond of this version of Moriarty. The actor who played him seemed to be going OTT, in my opinion. I much-preferred the version of the character in the TV series Elementary).
I'm with you on the 'The Abominable Bride'. I too hated that one/liked it the least (when I eventually bought the series on Blu-ray, I didn't even bother getting that one).
“It can be brilliantly written and acted and tons of fun, but it can also be smug, convoluted and silly” is spot-on.
I agree.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 1, 2020 5:59:51 GMT 1
Watching “His Last Vow” now. About an hour into it. SPOILERS.
Ugh, I’m not a fan of this one (so far, at least). It feels like it’s set in a different world from all the other episodes—crueler, for one thing. There’s little humor, lightness, or even fun here. I like this show’s Mary a lot, and this episode sacrifices her carefully-set-up character for a plot twist. (The so-called clues the show provides don’t actually establish anything.) Despite (or maybe because of?) my fondness for plot-cleverness, I’ve always loathed that kind of sacrifice.
Which is all too bad because Lars Mikkelsen’s Milverton/Magnussen is by far the best villain this show has had. What a letdown after “Sign.”
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 1, 2020 6:23:27 GMT 1
I’m not sure what I think of Sherlock’s decision re: Magnussen on plot-grounds (it works on character-grounds)…but I think I like it. It would have been better if Sherlock had distinctly stated he was tricked, though.
That said, I don’t like how Sherlock’s “exile” became a joke at the end. It was kind of an interesting moral dilemma.
|
|
|
Post by Chalice_Of_Evil on Sept 1, 2020 8:26:57 GMT 1
Watching “His Last Vow” now. About an hour into it. SPOILERS. Ugh, I’m not a fan of this one (so far, at least). It feels like it’s set in a different world from all the other episodes—crueler, for one thing. There’s little humor, lightness, or even fun here. I like this show’s Mary a lot, and this episode sacrifices her carefully-set-up character for a plot twist. (The so-called clues the show provides don’t actually establish anything.) Despite (or maybe because of?) my fondness for plot-cleverness, I’ve always loathed that kind of sacrifice. Which is all too bad because Lars Mikkelsen’s Milverton/Magnussen is by far the best villain this show has had. What a letdown after “Sign.” **spoilers below for the episode** Personally, I wasn't a fan of Charles Augustus Magnussen. All I remember about him was that he licked some poor woman's face, got his kicks from flicking Watson's eye and his version of Sherlock's 'Mind Palace' looked a lot sillier (as he physically sorted through 'files' in his mind with his hands and such). To me it felt like the show was desperate to find a villain that lived up to or even 'beat' their Moriarty. As I've stated elsewhere, I didn't even like this show's version of Moriarty much...but at least he could be somewhat entertaining at times. Magnussen was just simply gross/annoying in equal measure. I was so relieved when Sherlock simply put a bullet in the jerk's head, as one episode was more than enough of that character (for me) and I couldn't have tolerated him for any more episodes. I've mentioned my feelings regarding this show's version of the Mary character in a previous post, so I won't repeat myself. I'm going to take a wild guess and say you're probably not going to be fond of Season 4, Sa[lzmar]kaar.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 1, 2020 15:54:24 GMT 1
One of these days, by the way, I will watch Elementary to compare and contrast. One of these days… Chalice_Of_Evil said:Well, I never like the “mind palace” stuff anyway, it just seems such a ridiculous cop-out Moffat-Gatiss use to explain away plot problems, and I agree the sorting through files is silly. That said, I didn’t guess the twist with CAM’s “vaults,” which I think Moffat-Gatiss did well except for the “mind palace” reference. I liked Magnussen a lot as a villain (more than Jimbo Moriarty), though, and was, er, pleasantly surprised he was so similar to Doyle’s original character. His grossness and weirdness just made him a more effective and more odious villain, in my opinion, and made his comeuppance feel deserved. I’m not sure if I would have wanted him to stay a recurring villain in more episodes, but I do kind of wish we’d seen him in-person earlier in the season.To be honest, after all the warnings about Season 4, I’m kind of looking forward to it—even if just to see exactly what about it irritated so many people.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 3, 2020 5:07:01 GMT 1
I hated that one. In theory I think the underground women's club could've been clever, but the writing in that episode embraces all of the worst tendencies of the creators. It really lacks all the show's best elements and ends up being all gimmicks and self indulgent humor/fourth wall breaking. What bothers me most is that it has one amazing exhange where John asks "What made you this way?" to which Holmes replies "Oh John, nothing made me. I made me." I really hate that they wasted that awesome dialogue in this terrible special. It's one of my favorite quotes from the show. So, rewatching this. The first time I watched this, I liked the Victorian-era first half and hated the twist and everything after it. This time, I don’t think I even like the beginning (the biggest exception is Freeman, who’s always excellent in his part). Also, does anyone else think Cumberbatch’s Holmes is at times Fraiser-esque? I hadn’t noticed it before, but one line-reading in particular came across as pure Kelsey Grammer! Other than the direct canonical quotations and the “I made me” line you mention, most of the dialogue is as abominable as the titular bride. The feminist stuff is horribly obvious and shoehorned in, and nearly every female character is even less sympathetic than the intentionally-unsympathetic Watson. (And why do Moffat-Gatiss make Watson unsympathetic? Watson?!) One of the few positives, other than Freeman’s performance, is just how scary the Bride is. She’s really a great and great-looking monster, and I wish she were more than a figment of Sherlock’s imagination. The mystery plot is also surprisingly above-average. The twist, however, ruins just about everything. It’s worse than execrable, it makes no sense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2020 5:55:31 GMT 1
Watching “His Last Vow” now. About an hour into it. SPOILERS. Ugh, I’m not a fan of this one (so far, at least). It feels like it’s set in a different world from all the other episodes—crueler, for one thing. There’s little humor, lightness, or even fun here. I like this show’s Mary a lot, and this episode sacrifices her carefully-set-up character for a plot twist. (The so-called clues the show provides don’t actually establish anything.) Despite (or maybe because of?) my fondness for plot-cleverness, I’ve always loathed that kind of sacrifice. Which is all too bad because Lars Mikkelsen’s Milverton/Magnussen is by far the best villain this show has had. What a letdown after “Sign.” I also disliked the Mary twist... At first. Then when I rewatched season three I ended up really liking it. It feels way less random when you know it from the start. I especially loved the explanation of Watson being attracted to dangerous people, both in lovers and friends i.e. Sherlock. And damn if I'm not a sucker for that surrealistic montage of him falling in slow motion while going through bizzare hallucinations of various characters and memories. It's self indulgent, I know, but still fun. I also loved that Redbeard turned out to be a dog- but be prepared for them to annihilate that in season four.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 3, 2020 14:46:29 GMT 1
I also disliked the Mary twist... At first. Then when I rewatched season three I ended up really liking it. It feels way less random when you know it from the start. I especially loved the explanation of Watson being attracted to dangerous people, both in lovers and friends i.e. Sherlock. And damn if I'm not a sucker for that surrealistic montage of him falling in slow motion while going through bizzare hallucinations of various characters and memories. It's self indulgent, I know, but still fun. I also loved that Redbeard turned out to be a dog- but be prepared for them to annihilate that in season four. Interesting! That was kind of the trajectory I followed on the “Luke Skywalker ends up being a crotchety old hermit” twist in The Last Jedi, so I may completely change my mind on the Mary twist yet! That said, I just really liked the characterization they’d set up for Mary previous to this, so I didn’t like all of that being a lie and she’s actually an ex-CIA assassin (!). They could have made her a Magnusson blackmailing victim without the assassin twist. By the way, what did you think of Magnusson—and Sherlock’s decision at the end?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2020 17:45:31 GMT 1
I also disliked the Mary twist... At first. Then when I rewatched season three I ended up really liking it. It feels way less random when you know it from the start. I especially loved the explanation of Watson being attracted to dangerous people, both in lovers and friends i.e. Sherlock. And damn if I'm not a sucker for that surrealistic montage of him falling in slow motion while going through bizzare hallucinations of various characters and memories. It's self indulgent, I know, but still fun. I also loved that Redbeard turned out to be a dog- but be prepared for them to annihilate that in season four. Interesting! That was kind of the trajectory I followed on the “Luke Skywalker ends up being a crotchety old hermit” twist in The Last Jedi, so I may completely change my mind on the Mary twist yet! That said, I just really liked the characterization they’d set up for Mary previous to this, so I didn’t like all of that being a lie and she’s actually an ex-CIA assassin (!). They could have made her a Magnusson blackmailing victim without the assassin twist. By the way, what did you think of Magnusson—and Sherlock’s decision at the end? I liked Magnuson because he was over the top in all the right ways. I was really getting tired of Moriarty at that point, because while he could great in certain scenes, he was also way too campy. Magnuson felt more organically evil, and a bit more formidable as well. Do you mean Sherlock's decision to kill him? . If so I thought it worked. It felt a tiny bit forced though and not nearly as dramatic as it should have. That's the first time we see him do anything that extreme and violent so it seemed a little out of character- although his motives were clear enough.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 3, 2020 18:14:38 GMT 1
Interesting! That was kind of the trajectory I followed on the “Luke Skywalker ends up being a crotchety old hermit” twist in The Last Jedi, so I may completely change my mind on the Mary twist yet! That said, I just really liked the characterization they’d set up for Mary previous to this, so I didn’t like all of that being a lie and she’s actually an ex-CIA assassin (!). They could have made her a Magnusson blackmailing victim without the assassin twist. By the way, what did you think of Magnusson—and Sherlock’s decision at the end? I liked Magnuson because he was over the top in all the right ways. I was really getting tired of Moriarty at that point, because while he could great in certain scenes, he was also way too campy. Magnuson felt more organically evil, and a bit more formidable as well. Do you mean Sherlock's decision to kill him? . If so I thought it worked. It felt a tiny bit forced though and not nearly as dramatic as it should have. That's the first time we see him do anything that extreme and violent so it seemed a little out of character- although his motives were clear enough. Yes, that decision, Completely agreed on all, both on Magnussen and the positives and negatives of the writing around Sherlock’s decision.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 5, 2020 3:46:34 GMT 1
Starting “The Six Thatchers”! We’ll see how this goes. EDIT I: Not to make this another ‘Salzmank Reviews…,’ but it’s weird, they haven’t done anything with the huge “Mary is an ex-CIA assassin” twist. EDIT II: Oh. I should keep my big mouth shut. EDIT III: OK, this is a weak one. The mystery is essentially non-existent, and the mean-spirited twist ending is undeserved. Mary was my favorite character in this show after John.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 6, 2020 6:00:28 GMT 1
So, just saw “The Lying Detective.” SPOILERS. Actually thought it was quite good; I like how Moffat handled Mary (and Mrs. H) here. (Wish Molly were in it more, though.) Freeman was excellent, as always, but Cumberbatch gave probably his best performance since Season 1, and despite her character’s being dead, Amanda Abbington gave her best performance in the show here. Toby Jones was a magnificent, and magnificently creepy, guest villain. Not sure what I think of the twist. Unfortunately, someone (not you, Chalice_Of_Evil!) had spoiled the “Sherlock and Mycroft have a sister” part for me already, so it’s hard to say if I would have been surprised by that or not. I half-suspected something was up with the girl on the bus in “Thatchers,” largely because that thread was so quickly dropped and Moffat-Gatiss don’t usually throw in plot-threads for no reason. I also wondered why Moffat-Gatiss had changed John’s therapist since just the last episode, but I quickly forgot about it as the plot went on. That said, I was completely hornswoggled by the Culverton Smith daughter twist, so points to Moffat on that. (But were there any clues?) Unfortunately, nearly all the good stuff here is in the second half; on a whole, the episode took a while to get going. Still, this was a huge improvement over “Thatchers.” Interested in seeing the last one!
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 7, 2020 4:15:35 GMT 1
“The Final Problem” is just kind of boring so far. Is this what really made you hated Season 4, @raimiackbar? Because I can absolutely understand that.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 7, 2020 4:57:56 GMT 1
So, “The Final Problem” is bad. Like, really, really bad, to a ridiculous degree of bad. SPOILERS. What’s weird is I can see what Moffat-Gatiss are going for and would actually cheer the absurdity of it all in a different show. As taylorfirst1 knows, for example, I like the much-criticized last two episodes of The Prisoner. But The Prisoner has its own kind of logic, and McGoohan gives us a buildup from the more-or-less-plausible to (pardon my French) the batshit-insane. This is just batshit-insane all of a sudden, out of nowhere in the last episode. And it’s horrid, and—worse than horrid—boring, because it’s so clearly not happening in the real world that you might as well call the world of the show “Narnia” or “Middle-Earth” or “The Sunken City of R’lyeh.” (Actually, the prison sequences would make more sense if East Wind girl were Cthulhu.) It’s just… Oh, Lord. Even Moffat-Gatiss’ controversial (and oh so similar) Dracula finale wasn’t this lousy. Despite that last speech, I really got the sense here that Moffat-Gatiss hate Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson. Now there’s a twist. In order to make myself feel better, I’m going to copy a Vincent Starrett sonnet that says in 14 lines what Moffat-Gatiss failed to say in hours:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2020 6:23:52 GMT 1
“The Final Problem” is just kind of boring so far. Is this what really made you hated Season 4, @raimiackbar? Because I can absolutely understand that. I found The Six Thatchers to be really dull and forgettable. All the energy had gone out of the show. Mary was killed off in the stupidest, most predictable way possible. And the mysteries had absurd logic. Hiding in a fake car seat?! WHAT?! Hahaha I always liked the second one. Toby What'shisname is excellent and creepy AF. Actually, he's a little too creepy. I find his character really unnerving, and not necessarily in a good way. Sherlock was very entertaining in that episode though. I love how manic he is. Of course, the sister twist completely ruined it. God I HATE that part. And it basically rules out rewatching only this episode- which I would do- because she plays such a big role and it ends on the cliffhanger. Btw, I wasn't the one who spoiled that for you was I? If so... Appologies. And then there's that last one with the mutant sister that can mind control people in a house of horrors. Killed the show for me. The less said about it the better. It was unspeakably bad right at the start: Watson and Sherlock scaring Mycroft with a clown suit? Ahhhhhhhhhhhh! So stupid!
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 7, 2020 13:02:52 GMT 1
“The Final Problem” is just kind of boring so far. Is this what really made you hated Season 4, @raimiackbar ? Because I can absolutely understand that. Btw, I wasn't the one who spoiled that for you was I? If so... Appologies. Oh, no no no no, Ack… I have a friend whose brother is really into the Moffat Dr. Who, and he told me… No worries at all; I only tagged Chalice there because he had that “spoiler” segment before. Yes! Spot-on about “energy”; everyone (except Freeman)and everything in that episode was past caring about the show or about sane writing. Imagine being a TV director and getting handed a script that terrible? They should have just jettisoned the mysteries in that one, they were so pointless. Mary’s death was insulting to the audience’s intelligence. And it’s boring.I loved Jones’ performance—I also found it unnerving, but in a good way for me… What about it didn’t you like? Cumberbatch gave a great performance, yes. Y’know, I’m not actually opposed to the sister twist in theory, and naming her “East Wind” would be sorta cool, if a little too fanboy-y, if they didn’t keep explaining it. (Naming the prison “Sherrinford” is just way too much of an in-joke.) And then there’s this one, yes indeed. The whole time I was convinced it was taking place in Sherlock’s mind palace (or something). Strike that; I was hoping it was taking place in Sherlock’s mind palace (or something). Was it? Was there something I missed and Watson’s all hallucinating this before his psychiatrist shoots him? That would make more sense than the crap they gave us. So much wrong with this that I don’t even know where to begin.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 7, 2020 17:12:31 GMT 1
The more I think about it, the more I half-think this is true.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2020 18:07:29 GMT 1
Btw, I wasn't the one who spoiled that for you was I? If so... Appologies. Oh, no no no no, Ack… I have a friend whose brother is really into the Moffat Dr. Who, and he told me… No worries at all; I only tagged Chalice there because he had that “spoiler” segment before. Yes! Spot-on about “energy”; everyone (except Freeman)and everything in that episode was past caring about the show or about sane writing. Imagine being a TV director and getting handed a script that terrible? They should have just jettisoned the mysteries in that one, they were so pointless. Mary’s death was insulting to the audience’s intelligence. And it’s boring.I loved Jones’ performance—I also found it unnerving, but in a good way for me… What about it didn’t you like? Cumberbatch gave a great performance, yes. Y’know, I’m not actually opposed to the sister twist in theory, and naming her “East Wind” would be sorta cool, if a little too fanboy-y, if they didn’t keep explaining it. (Naming the prison “Sherrinford” is just way too much of an in-joke.) And then there’s this one, yes indeed. The whole time I was convinced it was taking place in Sherlock’s mind palace (or something). Strike that; I was hoping it was taking place in Sherlock’s mind palace (or something). Was it? Was there something I missed and Watson’s all hallucinating this before his psychiatrist shoots him? That would make more sense than the crap they gave us. So much wrong with this that I don’t even know where to begin. There were rumors of internal conflict in the show- particularly regarding Freeman and Cumberbatch no longer getting along. I don't know how much that impacted the writing though. The thing I really hate about that sister twist was that it really made no sense for her to pretend to be multiple people throughout the plot. Just John's therapist- fine. But why and how did she pull off being the daughter? It also really takes away from the story at hand just to set up the next episode. And Sherlock's temporary explanation that he's just so brilliant that his mind created her to aid his investigation was outright laughable. Unfortunately, I don't think it was meant to be a hallucination. But even it was, I'd still personally find the episode unwatchable. There were always rumors of a season five, but I don't know how interested I'd be. I think they should just leave it be.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Sept 9, 2020 3:04:36 GMT 1
There were rumors of internal conflict in the show- particularly regarding Freeman and Cumberbatch no longer getting along. I don't know how much that impacted the writing though. Really? Interesting. I wouldn’t have imagined that. Their friendship here was as convincing as ever.Now I thought that the daughter thing was one of Smith’s tricks (that’s what they seem to be leading up to with Smith laughing at Holmes)—and that they’d explain it in the last episode. Alas. As ever, my friend, your points are spot-on: the last episode explains nothing.If and only if Season 5 retcons “The Final Problem,” I guess I’d be interested. Otherwise… No. If a show in which logic supposedly reigns supreme actually allows, as you so accurately put it, a “mutant sister that can mind control people in a house of horrors,” it’s so insubstantial and self-contradictory that watching it is pointless; it might as well just allow dragons and unicorns. As for hallucination…I don’t seriously think they meant it definitely to be a hallucination, but I think they intentionally wrote in outs so that it could just be: Sister’s mental powers, disappearing glass, Sherlock disappears from the prison and pops up at his ancestral home. Watching this, by the way, has inspired me to rewatch some Jeremy Brett Holmes episodes. For all the time-period-difference, Brett and Cumberbatch’s Holmeses are remarkably similar. (Freeman’s closer to David Burke than Edward Hardwicke as Watson—which is all to the best for me, anyway, as I don’t mind Hardwicke’s Watson but prefer Burke’s.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2020 4:24:21 GMT 1
I watched Seasons/Series 1 and 2 when they came out, watched “The Empty Hearse” and (not in order, I know) The Abominable Bride, and never actually got around to “The Sign of Three” until now. I’m just never sure what I think of this show. Freeman is excellent, Cumberbatch is pretty good, and many of the scripts appear clever—but, like every other Moffat and Gatiss show (I should just refer to them as one unit: “Moffat-Gatiss”) I’ve seen, it’s just so much in love with itself and its own cleverness. Worse, that cleverness is often specious: “The Reichenbach Fall” is basically a million plot threads that don’t actually fit together, all culminating in a “twist” that originally seems cool but on second glance clearly doesn’t make any more sense to the writers than to the viewers. Meanwhile, the filming style is a jumble of self-consciously ‘arty’ shots that tend to make make the plots even more confusing. That said, I prefer Sherlock to Moffat-Gatiss’ Dracula or Gatiss’ solo Crooked House, both of which had these problems in spades. Moffat-Gatiss do deserve credit for modernizing Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson without losing character or (rather remarkably) atmosphere, even if ultimately I miss “the world where it’s always 1895.” And “The Sign of Three” is quite good. It may be my favorite Sherlock episode so far, or at least tied with “A Study in Pink.” It was funny throughout, and the mystery-plotting was high-quality: it had so many clues that Moffat-Gatiss didn’t actually refer to them all in Holmes’ summation, yet it was hard to piece together unless you were thinking that way. I worked out the guard’s murder (much faster than Sherlock! ), largely because I have seen many mystery-solutions like that before, but I didn’t work out the rather Agatha-Christiesque motive for that killing, how it connected with the second killing, or really anything else. And most of the clues—the guard’s tight uniform and training so he doesn’t “scratch his arse” in particular—went right over my head. The only one I saw was the obvious business with Watson’s name. Gah! My biggest problem with the episode is that Sherlock’s recital of all the cases in his best-man speech didn’t strike me as realistic behavior for anyone, “high-functioning sociopath” or not. To be fair, Moffat-Gatiss usually set their work in these plot-driven fantasylands, but Sherlock requires some kind of grounding in the real world. In retrospect, that’s what annoyed me about the Hound of the Baskervilles ep, even though I mostly liked it: it’s basically fantasy, and the point of Sherlock is that it’s not fantasy. Anyway. That’s a lot of words. What do you think? Should I persevere with the series, even though it annoys me at times? (Probably.) I'm a huge fan of SHERLOCK HOLMES... but this version has left me feeling disinterested and uninvested in the characters or plots... As for Muppet and the great Gatiss, I think they're are gnats, standing on the shoulders of giants. It took little discipline or effort for them to attain their goal, because they simply saw what others had done before them and copied it. The trouble is their copy is a pale and inferior version of the original.Then they try to claim all of the accolades and credit for themselves... Accolades and credit that often belong to their predecessors and betters. This also applies to their work down on DOCTOR WHO.
|
|