Re: Sherlock - BBC [3]

by halfwise Fri Jan 03, 2014 5:53 pm

Funny, I liked everything about the Hound of the Baskervilles except the way the key plot was done. Didn't like the government lab, induced psychosis, etc. All else was great.

by halfwise Fri Jan 03, 2014 6:10 pm

Mrs Figg wrote:This is the same old tosh Moffat & co reel out in Dr Who. Is the Doctor/Sherlock as little clay foot gods with the rest of us looking up in awe while the demi-god does his cool stuff. The god has his temple and inner sanctum TARDIS/221b Baker Street, his fawning acolyte groupies, the women are either sexy predators or losers in White coats and long scarves and the men are fanboys who havent a clue without the master on hand to save the day. Its all high gloss action filled and very little real content. Its 'fun' but you cant really watch the episodes twice without noticing the cracks.

Not a bad analogy. I'm not totally with you but I can see how he would be attracted to both. But I'm not sure the Moffat of Coupling is really a Moffat that doesn't understand women. Maybe I'm seeing it through a male lens, but it didn't seem biased to me.

by Mrs Figg Fri Jan 03, 2014 6:24 pm

In the book Moriartys henchmen knew he was alive and he was forced to leave Watson to save both of their lives, but Sherlock in the tv episode seems to do it for fun, it seems a cavalier way to treat the grieving Watson. I didnt like it, nor the way he patronizes Molly with a kiss.

by Eldorion Fri Jan 03, 2014 8:21 pm

halfwise wrote:Eldo, how did you see it? Every site I tried wouldn't work in America. PBS still hasn't shown it.

BBC iPlayer, using Hola.org's Google Chrome app to get around the geographic restrictions.

by Eldorion Fri Jan 03, 2014 8:26 pm

Norc wrote:I liked that it was all about reunion. Also... To quote sherlocl "everyone's a critic" they knew it wouldn't please everyone and therefore played around with the different theories.

After having had time for reflection, the most disappointing thing about the explanation, for me, is how un-clever it is. I know I was hoping for some unpredictable, wildly clever explanation for how Sherlock faked his death. Instead, much of the speculation from when people first saw the episode was correct. And let's face it, anybody can jump off a building and secretly survive if they have 25 assistants on hand, one of those mattress things the police use to stop suicidal people, and a screenwriter willing to pretend that this can be done in the middle of one of the largest cities in the world without anyone noticing anything unusual, not even the evil sniper who was right there aiming at John (and who would presumably have been able to see the mattress people when they ran around to the back side of the ambulance building). The show tries to preempt this criticism by having Sherlock tell Anderson that they closed the street, but this just leaves the audience to assume that (1) no one thought this suspicious, even during the investigation into Sherlock's death, and (2) no one in any of the surrounding buildings happened to look out their windows at any point during this fairly elaborate production.

by Eldorion Fri Jan 03, 2014 8:28 pm

Mrs Figg wrote:In the book Moriartys henchmen knew he was alive and he was forced to leave Watson to save both of their lives, but Sherlock in the tv episode seems to do it for fun, it seems a cavalier way to treat the grieving Watson. I didnt like it, nor the way he patronizes Molly with a kiss.

Agreed. I mentioned last night that there was no satisfactory explanation for Sherlock keeping John in the dark, and after the bomb scene at the end of the episode it really does seem like he just did it because it amuses him to torment John. I get that that's something Sherlock does, but this seems to be a rather extreme case.

by Eldorion Fri Jan 03, 2014 8:34 pm

Mrs Figg wrote:This is the same old tosh Moffat & co reel out in Dr Who. Is the Doctor/Sherlock as little clay foot gods with the rest of us looking up in awe while the demi-god does his cool stuff. The god has his temple and inner sanctum TARDIS/221b Baker Street, his fawning acolyte groupies, the women are either sexy predators or losers in White coats and long scarves and the men are fanboys who havent a clue without the master on hand to save the day. Its all high gloss action filled and very little real content. Its 'fun' but you cant really watch the episodes twice without noticing the cracks.

I noticed that the writers seemed very impatient to get into this dynamic. Razz

An important element of The Reichenbach Fall was that Moriarty's plan largely works because so many people resent Sherlock and only work with him because he's useful (cf. the Sir Boast-a-lot story). Sherlock to some extent brings his own troubles upon himself. But in the first few minutes of The Empty Hearse we're told via montage that Sherlock was posthumously cleared of all wrongdoing and he now seems to be viewed not only as a genius but also a martyr, and the police officer who hated him most is now his biggest fan. Then when he comes back, John is (and even points out in the show) the only one bothered by the self-absorbed, basically cruel manner of Sherlock's return.

I dunno. I'm not trying to be overly critical since I by and large loved the first two seasons, but this episode felt really off. Norc mentioned that it was "for the fans" and I don't necessarily disagree, but trying to cater to fan demands usually works out poorly since the most vocal demands are often miss the point of what makes a show good in the first place.

by Mrs Figg Fri Jan 03, 2014 8:43 pm

Eldorion wrote:
Norc wrote:I liked that it was all about reunion. Also... To quote sherlocl "everyone's a critic" they knew it wouldn't please everyone and therefore played around with the different theories.

After having had time for reflection, the most disappointing thing about the explanation, for me, is how un-clever it is. I know I was hoping for some unpredictable, wildly clever explanation for how Sherlock faked his death. Instead, much of the speculation from when people first saw the episode was correct. And let's face it, anybody can jump off a building and secretly survive if they have 25 assistants on hand, one of those mattress things the police use to stop suicidal people, and a screenwriter willing to pretend that this can be done in the middle of one of the largest cities in the world without anyone noticing anything unusual, not even the evil sniper who was right there aiming at John (and who would presumably have been able to see the mattress people when they ran around to the back side of the ambulance building). The show tries to preempt this criticism by having Sherlock tell Anderson that they closed the street, but this just leaves the audience to assume that (1) no one thought this suspicious, even during the investigation into Sherlock's death, and (2) no one in any of the surrounding buildings happened to look out their windows at any point during this fairly elaborate production.

I liked the Derren Brown idea, that John could have been hypnotized into thinking Sherlock had jumped when he hadnt actually. That may have been too simple however.

by Bluebottle Fri Jan 03, 2014 11:45 pm

Norc wrote: very amazing

thanx ^^

Sherlock - BBC [3] - Page 16 Tumblr_mfwfhfXhTZ1qcdqs3o1_500

by Norc Fri Jan 03, 2014 11:52 pm

Eldorion wrote:
Norc wrote:I liked that it was all about reunion. Also... To quote sherlocl "everyone's a critic" they knew it wouldn't please everyone and therefore played around with the different theories.

After having had time for reflection, the most disappointing thing about the explanation, for me, is how un-clever it is. I know I was hoping for some unpredictable, wildly clever explanation for how Sherlock faked his death. Instead, much of the speculation from when people first saw the episode was correct. And let's face it, anybody can jump off a building and secretly survive if they have 25 assistants on hand, one of those mattress things the police use to stop suicidal people, and a screenwriter willing to pretend that this can be done in the middle of one of the largest cities in the world without anyone noticing anything unusual, not even the evil sniper who was right there aiming at John (and who would presumably have been able to see the mattress people when they ran around to the back side of the ambulance building). The show tries to preempt this criticism by having Sherlock tell Anderson that they closed the street, but this just leaves the audience to assume that (1) no one thought this suspicious, even during the investigation into Sherlock's death, and (2) no one in any of the surrounding buildings happened to look out their windows at any point during this fairly elaborate production.

the thing is... we didn't really get any answer.. we can choose to believe what Sherlock told anderson, or, as anderson, not believe it. and you pretty much have the same reaction as Anderson. And i think moffat and gatiss knew they couldn't please everyone. i think it was clever anyway.

by Kafria Fri Jan 03, 2014 11:54 pm

Sherlock - BBC [3] - Page 16 C4287c84066c4b22c561365b410c47c8

Made me smile.

by Norc Fri Jan 03, 2014 11:55 pm

Eldorion wrote:
Mrs Figg wrote:In the book Moriartys henchmen knew he was alive and he was forced to leave Watson to save both of their lives, but Sherlock in the tv episode seems to do it for fun, it seems a cavalier way to treat the grieving Watson. I didnt like it, nor the way he patronizes Molly with a kiss.

Agreed. I mentioned last night that there was no satisfactory explanation for Sherlock keeping John in the dark, and after the bomb scene at the end of the episode it really does seem like he just did it because it amuses him to torment John. I get that that's something Sherlock does, but this seems to be a rather extreme case.

i think the bomb scene makes lots of sense. i honestly believe that Sherlock panicked and didn't notice the off-switch until he had bent down and fumbled about.i think he let John keep believing they would die because he knew that John (and sherlock too for that matter) didn't do this honest stuff very well, and to have this time to say what needed to be said and then laugh it off and never speak of it again was the tihng to do.

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Jan 04, 2014 12:28 am

I agree Norc. Both on the final scene and in what its for.

Regards Sherlocks plan I also agree we have been given a choice, pick your favourite, or choose another.
When Watson demands to know Sherlock tells him, and the audience- "You know my methods"- in the original books and in this adaptation thats the author saying Ive given you all the information you need, work it out yourself (any of the explanations offered are also a much better explanation it has to be said than the one Doyle actually came up with for Sherlocks survival, given when he wrote the death scene he really did mean for him to be dead).

I dont see Sherlock as 'torturing' John at all, on the contrary it shows he understands John incredibly well as a person, probably the only person he does understand as a person- this was empathised in the scenes with Mycroft on the subject ad finally at the end where he uses the threat of imminent death to let John say what he has to say to move on, and what he would never otherwise have been able to say because even more than most Brits John is to emotionally stunted to let it out.

"it seems a cavalier way to treat the grieving Watson" - Mrs Figg

"there was no satisfactory explanation for Sherlock keeping John in the dark"- Eldo

I wouldnt say any less or more so than in the original, where Holmes pretends to be a book seller rather than a waiter (referenced with the scene in the Doctors surgery) and nearly gives Watson a heart attack.
We are offered two explanations in the episode for why he didn't contact John- one we know from others- that he was going through Europe dismantling Moriarty's network.
In the original the only explanation he gives is that he 'saw an opportunity' and that it was 'to dangerous'- in Sherlock the viewer is told this but Sherlock doesn't tell John.

And the second reason is the one Watson gives to Mrs Hudson for likewise not being intouch with her (and one would hardly accuse Watson of doing that for malicious delight)
Sometimes things just get harder and harder to do the more you put them off, even for Sherlock Holmes.

But the episode offers as much an explanation as Doyle did.
I have to wonder how the internet would have greeted Doyles original story had it existed at the time, I suspect he would just have stopped there, considered he was right not to keep going in the first place and given up there and then.

by Norc Sat Jan 04, 2014 12:49 am

well said, Petty, i agree Smile

(it's so good to have u here to compare and justify it to doyle Very Happy

)

by Bluebottle Sat Jan 04, 2014 1:06 am

I don't go much in for reviews, but I finally saw it and I ... rather liked it. Very Happy

It was always going to struggle a bit from a story telling perspective having to tie up so many loose knots from the last episode and it's perfectly acted and and a top level BBC production of course, which does forgive some weaknesses in the writing.

All in all it would be a lot fairer to judge by next weeks episode, I guess.

Still, I really enjoyed it. Nod

(Despite norwegian television putting 15 minutes of news in the middle of the episode. Whoever came up with that brilliant idea? Rolling Eyes

)

by Norc Sat Jan 04, 2014 1:10 am

haha, yeah that was annoying, but gave us time to talk a bit of what we've watched Very Happy

also.. the subtitles kept disappearing and Leopold was CONSTANTLY in the way Rolling Eyes

by Bluebottle Sat Jan 04, 2014 1:18 am

He probably hadn't seen it. Laughing

That is such a telvision executive thing to do though. Let's forget all about aritistic output and put 15 minutes of news in the middle of a long awaited program. Rolling Eyes

It's certainly a norwegian construction. Practical, but completely misguided. Laughing

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Jan 04, 2014 1:29 am

Also think when people say there was no cleverness in the episode they may have missed it.
The cleverness was not about solving the mystery, it was about letting John get over his justifiable anger and pain and be able to get beyond it.

Spoiler:

by Eldorion Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:03 am

Pettytyrant101 wrote:But the episode offers as much an explanation as Doyle did.

I've never read the stories so I don't really care how close this was to the original, but at least Doyle has the excuse that he originally intended for Sherlock to die and then had to pull details out of his ass when he changed his mind later. Moffat and Co. knew what they were doing from the beginning and still didn't turn in anything meaningful on the characterization front (IMO of course).

by Eldorion Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:07 am

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Also think when people say there was no cleverness in the episode they may have missed it.
The cleverness was not about solving the mystery, it was about letting John get over his justifiable anger and pain and be able to get beyond it.

Spoiler:

by Eldorion Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:09 am

Norc wrote:i think the bomb scene makes lots of sense. i honestly believe that Sherlock panicked and didn't notice the off-switch until he had bent down and fumbled about.i think he let John keep believing they would die because he knew that John (and sherlock too for that matter) didn't do this honest stuff very well, and to have this time to say what needed to be said and then laugh it off and never speak of it again was the tihng to do.

That seems rather out of character for Sherlock, and doesn't jive with his having already called Mycroft and the police.

Anyway, I do get that this is only the first episode, but we're also already a third of the way through the season so I'm not sure how much water that excuse holds. Razz

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:26 am

Eldo its about Johns character.

Spoiler:

by halfwise Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:27 am

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Also think when people say there was no cleverness in the episode they may have missed it.
The cleverness was not about solving the mystery, it was about letting John get over his justifiable anger and pain and be able to get beyond it.

Spoiler:

It wasn't Sherlockian type of cleverness.

Spoiler:

by Eldorion Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:29 am

Their friendship was already thoroughly soured. That's the problem. Sherlock already knows how John feels, too, so the bigger problem is Sherlock refusing to acknowledge or do anything different in response to John's feelings.

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:38 am

Spoiler: