that the only way she could have known his middle name was from the wedding invitation to his old capt.
Sherlock
- Thread starter CheadleBeagle
- Start date
that the only way she could have known his middle name was from the wedding invitation to his old capt.
Cumberbatch is a phenomenal actor. All those subtle facial emotions were justI felt so sorry for him at the end when he's walking away from the wedding.
Can someone explain the importance of the woman knowing the name 'John Hamish Watson?'
Watson doesnt let anyone know his middle name - they would only know via the wedding invitation. Sherlock deduced that each of the women he "met" on the internet were working for The Major (Gardener, Nurse, Security) and were using the wedding as an opportunity to make their move on him.
Beautiful episode.
Wait all of the women worked for him? I need to rewatch the ep.
I was worried when the speech kept going beyond the "I'm an awful person" bit (Which I think - as sentimentality goes - was pitched perfectly) and then increasingly antsy during the drunken bit, which looked like it could've unravelled the whole thing, but it all came together very nicely, and I actually came out the other end thinking it was a brilliant, inventive piece of writing. Even if the actual crime didn't make a lot of sense, and the arresting of the culprit was an anti-climax, for what they set out to do (half character piece, half mystery) I think they nailed it as well as can be. *
My main criticism would be of the showy for showy's sake ADHD direction (again!). But all in all it was a welcome return to form.
* though I still sort of vainly hope it's a straight mystery next week.
My main criticism would be of the showy for showy's sake ADHD direction (again!). But all in all it was a welcome return to form.
* though I still sort of vainly hope it's a straight mystery next week.
The whole season so far has felt like a build up the obvious cliffhanger at the end, where you'd think either John or Mary's life will be in danger. I've enjoyed it, though I preferred the first two seasons much more.
Okay, so, every episode is (loosely) based on one of Sir Arthur's famous stories, or at least contains quite a few elements of it. My question is, when they've covered all the books, will they keep going, make up their own Sherlock adventures, or is it only 3 episodes a season because they will stop after all books have been covered, hence spacing out the episodes?
The whole mysetery and subsequent solving of it was a bit of a massive coincedence - which is quite ironic considering what the episode itself said about coincedence.... though I now realise that was probably the whole point.
Nah, they're going to do the Famous Five books next. Timmy the dog will be played by Andy Serkis.
Well there's 60 Holmes stories, so it's unlikely they'll run out at a rate of 3 every 2 years. Not unless they develop some brilliant anti-aging effects.
Well yes, but if you're not going to be buy into the ludicrous coincidence that the unsolved cases he happens to have included in his Best Man speech (which is a slightly ludicrous idea anyway) end up all being related to a murder taking place at that very moment, then nothing in the episode is going to redeem it.
This why you're getting the lifetime achievement award. Gold standard.
Isn't their only like 9 proper books by Sir Arthur? I'm pretty sure two of thoes were a collection of short stories.
That's what I was talking about anyway, the major novels.
There are only something like 5 novels yes, but there are loads of short stories. A lot of these episodes have been based on them already. Irene Adler for example only ever appears in one very short story (even shorter than the one and only one Moriarty appears in) where she only meets Sherlock briefly. Liberties have constantly been taken.
Well I was thinking they might cover all the major novels, reference some short storiesand quit there.
I'm hoping that they go past that, though and come up with some new stuff.
I'm hoping that they go past that, though and come up with some new stuff.
That was pretty shit I thought to be honest. I laughed a couple times at the beginning but it became silly after. I am not interested in the three way relationship between Sherlock, John and Mary. Just have a fecking plot to the show like the other 2 seasons.
Still in disbelief over how poor Series 3 has been after 2 episodes
I absolutely loved it. Nice sentiment, beautiful acting once again (Cumberbatch was immense in that episode), I like the actress who plays Mary. I thought they did really well to bring it altogether while making it entertaining and enjoying to watch.
Heh, Troels Hartmann is the new bad guy. Should be fun.
The solving crime part was great to watch, the rest isn't my cup of tea.
The actual plot was complete nonsense when you actually analyse it. I mean, the idea that the photographer would manage to sleep with all the members of this guy's household, in the same way, without any of them interacting or talking about it (but they would all go on a website about sleeping with ghosts!?) and then actually stay at the wedding while the best man - who happened to be a world famous detective - vocally described to everyone the two exact cases he was guilty of. I mean, it was fecking bonkers, but if you can blind yourself to that, it was very well engineered.
*sighs* Is this one of those new-fangled modern series in which there are endless cliffhangers/puzzles (à la Lost) spun out forever because...the writers just wanted to feature captivating mysteries/puzzles without actually bothering to work out the solutions in advance?
No. First two seasons had very good plots in each episode that were resolved nicely, besides the cliffhangers at the end of both seasons which weren't really about finding a solution to a mystery.
Oh well, that's me told. I shall now beat a dignified retreat!
*trousers fall down*
Damn.
*trousers fall down*
Damn.
Nah not at all Steve, there's not that aspect that you talk about in Sherlock, it's not really a series with a plot over all the episodes. Most of them are stand alone episodes actually. It's not the Lost aspect that is annoying the frustrated fans I think.
EDIT: ok Mel answered before me but Australia is like 12 hours in front of us so I'm not doing that bad.
EDIT: ok Mel answered before me but Australia is like 12 hours in front of us so I'm not doing that bad.
Just watch the series Steve! There's only 3 episodes in each season anyway, albeit very long episodes.
I really should've actually watched it before opening my gob, shouldn't I?
Well for starters you can pull your trousers back up.I really should've actually watched it before opening my gob, shouldn't I?
I do hope the last episode of Season 3 is amazing though. The first two episodes were okay, but such was the standard of the previous two seasons that I found this season underwhelming.
Wasn't the point that he didn't sleep with them? Just chatted to them like some nice/thoughtful bloke?
You're right though - as I said yesterday, just a ridiculous coincedence - unless you go along with the idea that he was purposefully describing the two cases he didn't solve because they play on his mind - but that's reaching.
Some were better than others... I would actually say this second episode was better than either of the second episodes in the first two seasons... and the Hounds of Baskerville episode is still the weakest so far.
To be fair to the writers/makers, I think it must be very tough to put a credible, modern spin on the Holmes stories.
Like The Mentalist, you mean? That was the biggest con ever. They spend five seasons building up a massive mystery and then dispose of it within half an hour without explaining any of it.
Like AN!, I thought the second episodes in seasons 1 and 2 were the weakest, though I actually enjoyed Hounds of the Baskerville for some reason. The second episode in season 1 though was nothing special, I mean it's still better than most TV out there, but I don't think it was up there with the best ones. So I was pleasantly surprised by this one as I was expecting it to be below par.
My favourite episode is a Scandal in Belgravia, brilliant, brilliant TV. As we saw, be it briefly, Irene Adler in yesterday's episode, does anyone think we'll see her again?
My favourite episode is a Scandal in Belgravia, brilliant, brilliant TV. As we saw, be it briefly, Irene Adler in yesterday's episode, does anyone think we'll see her again?
Second episode is definitely the weakest in each season, but I quite enjoyed the Blind Banker. But in terms of what Steve is asking, each mystery was resolved in each episode. The only tenuous overarching plot was Moriarty.
Scandal in Belgravia is my favourite episode. I still remember my jaw dropping (figuratively) at the big reveal at the end.
Haven't you seen any of this BBC one Steve? Honestly, you should give the first episode a try, it has the essence of the show with the acting and interacting between the characters, and the directing/production, so you'll have a pretty good idea on whether or not you like it.
No, I haven't, mate. But will do.
Good man. But seriously, those trousers, pull them up now.No, I haven't, mate. But will do.
... but fools seldom differ?Great minds think alike
This season has been shit so far. The first episode was a whole load of nothing, culminating in even more nothing. The second episode was 1 hour and 20 minutes of seemingly random shit that all conveniently came together at the wedding. Obviously they're going for a plot over all three episodes here, but I don't think the links have been near strong enough. Seeing a close up of Fergie's nostrils as he watched John get pulled out of a bonfire wasn't really a clue to anything other than someone else had planned it, which we knew anyway, and the CAM thing was so subtle that many probably just passed it off as another telegram. So far we've had a really long and drawn out tie-up of last series (although even that's not been properly resolved), and what feels like a filler episode.
Baskerville isn't that bad. It gets the tone right, and there are some nice bits, but it hinges on a completely ridiculous conceit..
That a super secret government project would make T-shirts, and that the person re-visiting that research years later would wear said T-shirt whilst killing someone
I'm one of the few people that thought the Reichenbach Fall/Final Problem one was the worst episode. It was certainly the most like Lost if we're using that analogy. It was all set up, and no answers, and even if the eventual answers had been good, it still wouldn't have made that episode satisfying. As it was they sort of fudged the answers/changed the focus of what the cliffhanger was about anyway. Though admittedly I did like what they did with the Reichenbach "fall"....The first season cliff hanger was a much better contained story that gave us mysteries, then solved them, and then had a coda with Moriarty that didn't feel like a cheat. I actually really liked that episode, even though I didn't really like Moriarty.
I think I'm with RiP & Mel though, Scandal is the best one, though it continues Steven Moffat's trend of being completely unable to kill any of his characters. It's certainly either that or Study in Pink (Also Moffat)...Interestingly both of them were probably the closest 'adaptations'
The next one's Moffat's. So fingers crossed.