It's on BBC tonight isn't it? Can't wait, should be able to watch it tomorrow!
Sherlock
- Thread starter CheadleBeagle
- Start date
I really can't see how they are going to explain the faked death.
I've missed a bit - have they yet?
Haven't explained it yet
Well, I thought that was a bit bollocks personally.
It was rather masturbatory.
I dont get why he went to all that trouble just to fool his best mate. Wasn't it the assassins they had to fool? The assassins who Mycroft had shot anyway. What was the point in any of it?
Also, there wasn't really a plot to that episode.
Also, there wasn't really a plot to that episode.
One hour of nothing happening other than slapstick humour, followed by 5 minutes of intrigue, then seen out by nothing happening. All set to a Tony Scott style-production on steroids.
There was a plot, erm, #sherlock?
It wasn't the plot holes that bothered me, as bad as they were, as much as the show becoming self aware all of a sudden. It doesn't really work very well.
It wasn't the plot holes that bothered me, as bad as they were, as much as the show becoming self aware all of a sudden. It doesn't really work very well.
That tube line isn't underground is it?
Neither did Conan Doyle!!
You don't need a plot if you've got slow motion.
I actually thought it started quite well, and the actual explanation was always going to be disappointing (there's only so many ways you can fall off a roof and survive without it being stupid) but I didn't get the point of why he did it in the end. If Mycroft shot the assassins (which were the actual peril) why did he get loads of people involved in an elaborate plan just to fool John? And if the assassins weren't killed, why don't they just kill them all now? What's changed? What was to be gained from fooling just John?
Also the plot, what plot there was, just...well sort of went nowhere. I thought the fake opening, Watson's reaction to first seeing Sherlock and a couple of Mycroft/Sherlock moments were fun. But then there was a pointless slow motion motorcycle chase, loads of hugely over stylised for stylisings sake bits, and a rushed non-terrorist story ripped from V for Vendetta.
Bit meh. Well made and acted meh. But still meh.
I actually thought it started quite well, and the actual explanation was always going to be disappointing (there's only so many ways you can fall off a roof and survive without it being stupid) but I didn't get the point of why he did it in the end. If Mycroft shot the assassins (which were the actual peril) why did he get loads of people involved in an elaborate plan just to fool John? And if the assassins weren't killed, why don't they just kill them all now? What's changed? What was to be gained from fooling just John?
Also the plot, what plot there was, just...well sort of went nowhere. I thought the fake opening, Watson's reaction to first seeing Sherlock and a couple of Mycroft/Sherlock moments were fun. But then there was a pointless slow motion motorcycle chase, loads of hugely over stylised for stylisings sake bits, and a rushed non-terrorist story ripped from V for Vendetta.
Bit meh. Well made and acted meh. But still meh.
A problematic episode done reasonably well I thought. They obviously had to do a big reset and deal with the issues/problems left over from the last season...So with that in consideration, I found it enjoyable enough.
Liked it, the beginning was a nice touch. Probably the disadvantage of having ~90 minute episodes that too much time was diverted to resolving the hangovers, but the next two should be back to normal.
You say that, but the pilot managed to introduce all the characters and concepts in the same time whilst also having a plot. 90 minutes is more than enough. It's more than virtually anything else gets.
There was definitely time for an actual plot if you took out lots of the Mycroft stuff (Gatiss writing lots of scenes for himself) the fan group/guilty policeman stuff, the irrelevant crime solving with Molly montage, the motorcycle chase that wasn't a chase, the stuff with his parents (meta cameo that made little sense - even Fraiser was savvy enough to know uber clever children need some kind of plausible nurture) all of which just reduced a conceptually huge plot about the blowing up of Parliament to a tiny 5 minute skit with a stupid ending.
There was definitely time for an actual plot if you took out lots of the Mycroft stuff (Gatiss writing lots of scenes for himself) the fan group/guilty policeman stuff, the irrelevant crime solving with Molly montage, the motorcycle chase that wasn't a chase, the stuff with his parents (meta cameo that made little sense - even Fraiser was savvy enough to know uber clever children need some kind of plausible nurture) all of which just reduced a conceptually huge plot about the blowing up of Parliament to a tiny 5 minute skit with a stupid ending.
That was my point! 90 minutes is too much time to spin out the "he's not dead!" reactions for, which is pretty much what the whole episode was (understandably) about. Could've done with being an hour instead, but it would be odd to shorten just one episode. Either way, was a better watch than most other stuff, glad it's back.
I dont think Sherlocks explanation to... whatever his name is, is the true one. We will find out what actually happened when he tells Watson.
And I agree the plot went out of the window. I actually was surprised when it ended, which I guess shows it was entertaining, because the 90 minutes went by far faster than watching United earlier, but it didn't feel like that much actually happened. Certainly not as much as in previous episodes. I totally cant remember what the first episode was like, but this did feel like a half-reboot. Much like Buffy the Vampire Slayer 6. Totally like Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season 6.
Also, I'm looking forward to it being back on Sundays. I watched 5 minutes of EastEnders and had an instant feeling of depression, and the need to have a shower.
Yeah, I actually thought this same thing after I made that post... so yeah, very fair point.
I liked the return, well written and well acted.
The group that kept coming up with how they thought he had faked it , did not like them, I meant a gay kiss between Holmes and Moriarty
The way he reviled himself to Watson was very well done , then the down grading of eating places after Watson hit Holmes was funny.
I thought the main plot line about the terrorist attack might has well not of been there, it was like OH shit we have this plot, we must do something with it.
I wanted them to tell us how Holmes faked his death.
The group that kept coming up with how they thought he had faked it , did not like them, I meant a gay kiss between Holmes and Moriarty
The way he reviled himself to Watson was very well done , then the down grading of eating places after Watson hit Holmes was funny.
I thought the main plot line about the terrorist attack might has well not of been there, it was like OH shit we have this plot, we must do something with it.
I wanted them to tell us how Holmes faked his death.
Did those people have a bonfire the night before bonfire night then?
I thought the episode was very funny.
I thought the episode was very funny.
I liked the return, well written and well acted.
The group that kept coming up with how they thought he had faked it , did not like them, I meant a gay kiss between Holmes and Moriarty
The way he reviled himself to Watson was very well done , then the down grading of eating places after Watson hit Holmes was funny.
I thought the main plot line about the terrorist attack might has well not of been there, it was like OH shit we have this plot, we must do something with it.
I wanted them to tell us how Holmes faked his death.
Good point. I've read the moaning in here banging on about how the fake death explanation was poor or boring bla bla bla....bit of a silly judgement when he never actually revealed how he did it. Yet.
I don't think he has revealed it yet, though.
Now, he might have been through all that trouble not only to deceive John regardless of the shooters, but also because he had to dismantle Moriarty's network as a whole, and he needed to do it in silence, while people thought he was dead. Had the shooters seen he had faked it, the network would have known.
Now, he might have been through all that trouble not only to deceive John regardless of the shooters, but also because he had to dismantle Moriarty's network as a whole, and he needed to do it in silence, while people thought he was dead. Had the shooters seen he had faked it, the network would have known.
It was very much style over substance and I found it to be disappointing too. I guess the previous episodes were of such a high standard that something had to slip eventually.
I found myself wondering why he faked his death if the gunmen were already taken care of. I suppose it was to keep Moriarty's criminal network in the dark until he'd hunted them all down?
Wait so you people think what he told Anderson wasn't the truth?
I thought it was a weak enough episode, tbh. Obviously there's going to be a reveal as to how he did it but I wasn't massively bothered about that. I just thought the plot itself wasn't one of their better ones. I thought they overdid with those little cutaway fantasy scenes and Sherlock going into his mind. It all looked a bit stylish without necessarily achieving anything.
The fantasy scenes were just fan service, especially the Moriarty-Sherlock kiss. Weird fanfiction and whatnot.
Nope, not in the slightest. They kept referencing to 13 different scenarios, we seen 4(?), we'll probably see all 13 with the 13th and real one being told to Watson at the end of this series. Sherlock made a point to Anderson that why would he have come to tell him, out of everyone, the truth. Anderson also twigged it probably wasn't real when he mentioned Watson would have had to stay in the same place for it to work perfectly. Oh and at the end of the episode they also made a point of Watson asking Sherlock to at least tell him how he managed to do it.
Great cameo by SAF at the end there.
The one he told Anderson was pretty much the most popular fan theory. Something to cushion his fall and the rubber ball to stop his pulse. It's pretty plausible although I thought there was another one of Moriarty's men watching the rooftop so that he could tell the snipers if Sherlock jumped. Wouldn't he have seen the huge blue cushion? Anderson going crazy at the end made me laugh. I do hope the real explanation is good though.
Q: How would this show appeal to people like me, who love the Conan Doyle stories & Jeremy Brett's portrayal of Sherlock?
I have to say I enjoyed it. I agree with the criticism levelled at it here really, but I just couldn't help enjoy it because Cumberbatch being Cumberbatchy is great. The chemistry between the characters is excellent, and I'm not bothered by the style they go for. It's been the same since the beginning, there was just the motorbike scene that I found a bit out of place. A lot of laughs throughout and it felt like a reboot episode in the sense that they didn't really care about the plot in this one, it was just to kind of get him back into the swing of things.
Mockney, you say that the pilot managed to introduce everyone whilst still having a plot, you're right, but I think in a way the beginning of this episode was more tricky to handle. It was introducing people, it was resolving loose ends and not leaving too much hanging in the air (although I like that they haven't yet told us how he did it, sure it's not primordial but I like how they're building it up).
I also thought having his real life parents in the episode was quite funny. Basically, it was a bit 'fan porn', loads of treats.
Mockney, you say that the pilot managed to introduce everyone whilst still having a plot, you're right, but I think in a way the beginning of this episode was more tricky to handle. It was introducing people, it was resolving loose ends and not leaving too much hanging in the air (although I like that they haven't yet told us how he did it, sure it's not primordial but I like how they're building it up).
I also thought having his real life parents in the episode was quite funny. Basically, it was a bit 'fan porn', loads of treats.
Benedict Cumberbatch is Sherlock. The writing is excellent and the two main characters have great chemistry. Someone else can probably convince you better, but it's mostly the writing and Cumberbatch that made me a fan. The producers based the plots on Doyle's stories anyway so it's definitely canonical to an extent.
Yeah it's got great acting, it's quite fast paced, some episodes are truly excellent, and even the weaker ones are enjoyable. It's also very funny and witty, some of the one liners are SteveJ-worthy, which is saying a lot.
Oh, and what Mel said: Cumberbatch.
Thanks very much, Mel & Mr RiP. 
I think you'll like it Steve. But don't watch and fret over things they've changed/updated. That way madness always lies. Just go with it, because they get the ethos right. I'd go with A Study in Pink, The Great Game and A Scandal in Belgravia.
No. Pilots are always harder. And the beginning of the episode was fine. It was the last half that should've had a plot that wasn't.
More than the pilot?
One, possibly two loose ends. The main one it didn't resolve until the very end (rightly IMO)
If they haven't, then it's even more criminal that they spent about of a 3rd of the episode dealing with or alluding to it when there should've been a plot.
Fan porn is almost always bad, especially when it's used as misdirection from an actual plot. Everything needs a plot!
Also Freeman was far better than Cumberbatch in this ep. In fact it's probably the best role he's ever player.
No. Pilots are always harder. And the beginning of the episode was fine. It was the last half that should've had a plot that wasn't.
More than the pilot?
One, possibly two loose ends. The main one it didn't resolve until the very end (rightly IMO)
If they haven't, then it's even more criminal that they spent about of a 3rd of the episode dealing with or alluding to it when there should've been a plot.
Fan porn is almost always bad, especially when it's used as misdirection from an actual plot. Everything needs a plot!
Also Freeman was far better than Cumberbatch in this ep. In fact it's probably the best role he's ever player.
Sorry, I meant 'reintroducing' people. The whole 30 first minutes of the film where trying to create the link between season 2 and 3. And I think you're a bit harsh: the plot was weak and wasn't as good as in other episodes, but there still was one, it wasn't people making jokes randomly for 90 minutes. And it certainly didn't feel that way. Also, I don't think there's too much wrong with a little bit of fanporn, there were loads of nice little touches that made Sherlock's return very enjoyable.
Mockney: Cheers, mate.
PS Any news on your tv work?
PS Any news on your tv work?
The plot, about an underground conspiracy to destroy parliament, took up about as much time as the essentially pointless "Solving crimes with Molly" montage (also, was it just me, or did Molly's boyfriend look nothing like Sherlock?)
The thing about fan porn is it's making it very enjoyable for fans and those who've been semi-obsessive about it's cliffhanger since it's been away. Shows giving something easter eggy or special for these people is great, but it shouldn't be only great for these fans, it should be great for everyone. Even those who've never watched it before. Once "fan-porn" becomes a reason to like the episode in of itself, it's not doing it's job IMO.
This is prime time BBC fare written by great writers Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss. They can (and did) do a webisode for fan porn.
But no, it wasn't awful, and I'm overdoing the criticism because that's the way it works when you try and highlight points on a forum (I've said there were good bits, and in all it was perfectly enjoyable)
@Steve: Writing a new thing now. In last draft stage. Which, as you know, is only matched in annoyingness by first draft stage! Trying to work out whether to pitch it or film it.
The thing about fan porn is it's making it very enjoyable for fans and those who've been semi-obsessive about it's cliffhanger since it's been away. Shows giving something easter eggy or special for these people is great, but it shouldn't be only great for these fans, it should be great for everyone. Even those who've never watched it before. Once "fan-porn" becomes a reason to like the episode in of itself, it's not doing it's job IMO.
This is prime time BBC fare written by great writers Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss. They can (and did) do a webisode for fan porn.
But no, it wasn't awful, and I'm overdoing the criticism because that's the way it works when you try and highlight points on a forum (I've said there were good bits, and in all it was perfectly enjoyable)
@Steve: Writing a new thing now. In last draft stage. Which, as you know, is only matched in annoyingness by first draft stage! Trying to work out whether to pitch it or film it.
Yeah yeah I know Mockney, I know your points probably seems harsher than you actually mean, and as I said myself, I don't think it was vintage Sherlock, I just tried to explain why I enjoyed it myself. I can't wait for next episode with the new villain.
Oh and I agree on Freeman by the way, I thought he was excellent. All the parts following Sherlock revealing himself, and his delivery in the underground which could've easily been cheesy, were great. He's an excellent actor.
Oh and I agree on Freeman by the way, I thought he was excellent. All the parts following Sherlock revealing himself, and his delivery in the underground which could've easily been cheesy, were great. He's an excellent actor.
Compare with the silliness of the Conan Doyle Holmes' escape from death virtue of baritsu...and the wonderful scene in which he reveals himself (ooer) to the heartbroken Watson; so, I find it hard to criticise this new show's approach, as it seems similar (in a way).