Sherlock (Steven Moffat BBC series)

[Vertigo]

I'm not so sure. I totally knew what to expect this week, so I didn't have that 'Road to Damascus' conversion moment that I had last week when watching. Was this a re-writing of 'The Sign of Four'?

You might be right there Dave - I did wonder myself how much of the enjoyment of the first episode was the freshness of something new which was inevitably lacking in the second. But I still feel it was less subtle somehow, which for me detracted from it. However I'm not knocking it really, as I say I did still enjoy it.

 

[PTeppic]

Was this a re-writing of 'The Sign of Four'?

The reviewer from Radio Times thought "The Dancing Men" and "The Sign of Four"

 

[Anne Lyle]

The reviewer from Radio Times thought "The Dancing Men" and "The Sign of Four"

Those were the two stories I mentioned when discussing it with my other half - though I've only seen the Jeremy Brett adaptations of those.

Can't really add anything to previous comments - episode two was inevitably a slight disappointment, after all the cool setup in episode one, but I'm still looking forward to episode three.

I wonder if they'll try and rework "The Hound of the Baskervilles"...

 

[thaddeus6th]

I thought episode 3 was quite enjoyable... until the ridiculous Moriarty. About as menacing and impressive as a chihuahua in a tutu. Disliked the ending also.

 

[Vertigo]

Yes I thought episode 3 was as good as the first again, lots more intiguing deduction, in the second episode the only real deductive work was breaking the code. This episode was much better. But I have to agree the Moriarty character with his ridiculous accent was dreadful.

 

[Lenny]

Sterling way to ensure you get yourself a second series!

I enjoyed tonight's episode of "Quick Fire Sherlock". Whilst chess with human pieces isn't particularly nice, the idea of two minds playing the game simply because they're bored is... well, not nice either, but it does well to set them apart from the mundane population.

I'd have thought that Mycroft, seeing as he seemed to be able to deduce on the same level as Sherlock ("Nice night on the sofa?"), would have been able to find the missing USB pen himself (now is that a bit of satire we saw before us? The British government is so careless that they allow their employees to carry top-secret documents on, what I assume was, an unencrypted USB pen to the pub? I suppose Apple did something similar, but that's no excuse!).

Halfway through the episode I realised the quality of acting. Whilst last weeks episode wasn't at all good, the acting in all three has been superb. Ironically, what made me realise was the awful acting of Adam West's fiancé.

Moriarty grated on me... though part of me was amused. I don't understand why he'd show up as acting as whatshernames gay boyfriend, either.

Some more good lines. I quite liked:

So you scratch their back... ?
And disinfect myself straight after.

Anywho, I look forward to the next threesome, which I deduce will hit our screens next year.

Oh, and would a mod mind changing the thread title to something like Sherlock, BBC1 (2010), please? I originally intended to have three threads (one for each episode).

 

[thaddeus6th]

Just realised who Moriarty reminded me of: a slightly drunk Graham Norton.

[Ahem. Not that I've ever met a slightly drunk Graham Norton].

I don't see why this fashion for replacing understated, serious, menacing characters (cf. the Master) with hyperactive dingbats has emerged. I hope, should the series return, 'Moriarty' is not actually Moriarty, and someone rather more impressive (Derek Jacobi or someone similar) is the man himself.

 

[Overread]

I sort of watched the second episode whilst eating dinner and overall disliked it greatly. It just didn't feel polished or anything and I rather grew a little annoyed with the overly dark exposure they used whilst mixing it in with small sets (its been done before so many times).

I might try watching it (all the way through) again after reading comments here, but I feel that I won't become a convert for this series.

 

[Cayal]

So is this a series or a 3 part show?

I just recently heard about it and plan to have a look at it.

 

[Vertigo]

There's just the three parts in this first run but I'm pretty sure that there will be another mini series. The end of this one almost certainly guarantees it. Lenny suggests next year - don't know if that's a guess or based on research. I think it is definitely worth a watch on iPlayer or whatever.

 

[Ursa major]

Thoughts on the ending.

May contain Spoilers.




The defining characteristic of Moriarty in this series, at least until the last ten minutes of the third episode, was his hands-off approach. He avoids direct contact with the crimes he organises. He enjoys manipulating folk; he enjoys using them, as evidenced by the "go-betweens". Given this, is it likely that he would put himself in direct danger? If the answer is no, then there are a number of possibilities:

1. The explosives are not real. We have seen what they can do when they are real: twelve dead in a block of flats. No-one near the pool, perhaps not even the unseen gunmen, would survive an explosion.
2. There are explosives, but there are not as powerful as we assume. This wouldn't have protected Moriarty when he was in close contact with them, though.
3. The person calling himself Moriarty is not Moriarty. This makes far more sense. Getting other people to speak his words was his modus operandi in this episode, even though it was entirely unnecessary (by which I mean: no-one traced the location of any of the "go-betweens", so they wouldn't have found Moriarty either). Why, when the danger is so apparent, would he do so at the end? Is it for the excitement? Then why pursue a criminal career avoiding risks? No, he gets his pleasure from being the puppet master, not a puppet.

I also agree with whoever it was mentioned the non-appearance of Mycroft at the denouement, but my take on this would be that he hasn't missed a trick. Apart from anything else, Sherlock was supposed to be in possession of something that Mycroft was keen to find.

I'm probably wrong.

 

[Interference]

There's just the three parts in this first run but I'm pretty sure that there will be another mini series. The end of this one almost certainly guarantees it. Lenny suggests next year - don't know if that's a guess or based on research. I think it is definitely worth a watch on iPlayer or whatever.

Possibly with DW on his to-do list, Moffat will be working on Holmes during his down-time. I hope it won't suffer.

 

[Moonbat]

I thought this mini series (3 episodes ) was brilliant. I really enjoyed last night's episode. It was great, Sherlock solving crimes quickly. I must admit I was impressed by the writing, how do they write such convincing crimes and investigations?
I liked when Watson thought he had solved the crime (with the disinfected cat), and also when Sherlock was following him for the USB crime.
I thought the Golem was quite good, although it was a shame they didn't catch him, I expect we will see him in later episodes.
I initially liked Moriaty, I thought it was a nice twist that he had shown up earlier and Sherlock had dismissed him, but thinking back I didn't like his acting, he wasn't menacing enough, and the small show of anger was not scary at all.
I expect that was the real Moriaty, as dissapointing as that may be, but he did fit well as the modern Sherlock's nemisis.
Quite an ending, what will happen?
no doubt they will skip past it when the new series starts.

 

[Vertigo]

Further to Ursa's comments and another possible SPOILER if you've not watched yet:

Did the Moriarty at the end have a "soft voice" - that is how the old woman described his voice earlier on? And they clearly made a point of us hearing that - it was otherwise unnecessary to the plot, it was not essential that one victim die. Just a thought!

By the way Ursa I like the trick of doing spoilers so they can only be seen when selected - very neat!

 

[FeedMeTV]

I adored this mini-series. I even liked Moriarty which appears to be quite a controversial opinion! I thought the end scene was fantastic and had me ooh-ing and eek-ing; cliffhanger endings are generally annoying but I felt this one was pulled off with class and hopefully a good incentive for the BBC to commission another series.

 

[TheEndIsNigh]

I thought the last episode was poor compared to the first.

Reverting to Ursa mode - Nothing offensive contained therein, just potential spoilers

There was no need to cram so many crimes into one episode. I suspect lack of proper budgeting and it was supposed to be a full series but when the money ran out they had to move things along. From memory I seem to think M was never seen by anyone else but Sherlock; and only then at the ravine.

I agree with Ursa that it's unlikely the real M would reveal himself as mentioned above but, given the new treatment, it's forgivable I suppose.

The thing I found really annoying was the laser sighting. Where were these gunmen because they seemed to be in every direction and able to aim through solid walls. Not to mention as marksmen they gunmen seemed to lack the basic skill of keeping the target. It would have been far more convincing if they had actually been there as the threat at the end to shoot the you know what would have given them pause too.

Then there was the lack of shooting. On what planet would S not have shot M. The pros far outweigh the cons IMO. With M dead the gunmen would likely as not leave S alive as their paymaster was dead. Plus given S's determination to do one thing - rid the world of M why would he pass up the chance.

Then there's the head. I wonder where that will end.

On the whole though I still think the series was a refreshing change both for TV in general and as a break from the traditional interpretation of S.H.

So a reluctant thumbs up - WHAT AM I SAYING.

Vertigo: Obviously I agree that Ursa method is a good one but, I bet you couldn't resist seeing this

 

[Ursa major]

Glad you enjoyed it, TEIN.

Originally posted by TheEndIsNigh

The thing I found really annoying was the laser sighting. Where were these gunmen because they seemed to be in every direction and able to aim through solid walls.
​

My memory may be playing tricks, but wasn't there a first-floor** balcony around the pool? There would have been at least two gunmen (not marksmen, as you've pointed out).

Originally posted by TheEndIsNigh

Then there was the lack of shooting. On what planet would S not have shot M. The pros far outweigh the cons IMO. With M dead the gunmen would likely as not leave S alive as their paymaster was dead. Plus given S's determination to do one thing - rid the world of M why would he pass up the chance.
​

Perhaps Sherlock believed that "Moriarty" had some direct control - like a deadman's handle - over the firing of the explosives. (It isn't unknown in TV shows and films where someone's wearing an explosive belt.)

Originally posted by TheEndIsNigh

Then there's the head. I wonder where that will end.
​

You have reminded me of one thing I found annoying: Sherlock's firing of bullets into the wall. I'm assuming the gun he used was Watson's, the one that fired the bullet that killed the serial "murderer" in episode one. I'm not doubting that this version of Sherlock would do it - he seems to enjoy dropping Watson in it (the paint can in episode 2, for instance) - but that Watson, who is otherwise quite intelligent, is not in the least concerned about it. (Can we expect to discover that Moriarty - the real one - has noted the location of the various bullets that have come from Watson's gun?)


** - Second-floor, I think, for those in North America.

 

[Anne Lyle]

Further to Ursa's comments and another possible SPOILER if you've not watched yet:

Did the Moriarty at the end have a "soft voice" - that is how the old woman described his voice earlier on? And they clearly made a point of us hearing that - it was otherwise unnecessary to the plot, it was not essential that one victim die. Just a thought!

By the way Ursa I like the trick of doing spoilers so they can only be seen when selected - very neat!

Probably stole the technique from TV Tropes

My thoughts exactly re the voice - given that the other clues were obvious enough to any viewer with half a brain. One can only hope...

Not impressed by the closing scene, either - Mark Gatiss chews almost as much scenery as a writer as he does as an actor! More Benedict C running round London in an awesome greatcoat, please, and fewer histrionics

 

[Vertigo]

Heh Heh... More SPOLIERS

You have reminded me of one thing I found annoying: Sherlock's firing of bullets into the wall. I'm assuming the gun he used was Watson's, the one that fired the bullet that killed the serial "murderer" in episode one. I'm not doubting that this version of Sherlock would do it - he seems to enjoy dropping Watson in it (the paint can in episode 2, for instance) - but that Watson, who is otherwise quite intelligent, is not in the least concerned about it. (Can we expect to discover that Moriarty - the real one - has noted the location of the various bullets that have come from Watson's gun?)

I had completely forgotten that scene - and yes that annoyed me too for a number of reasons -

1. Assuming it was Watson's gun they would surely have got rid of it - keeping the ballistic evidence to what was essentially (in law at least) a murder is downright stupid.

2. Assuming they had kept it for some obscure reason - blasting away with it like that would only draw attention to it and said crime.

3. Handguns make an awful lot of noise (more than most people realise), the neigbours would surely have come around banging on doors.

4. I am not certain about this but I don't think it was an outside wall or the wall to the next house. If it was an interior wall even in a old house like that there is a good chance the bullets would have gone straight through - I always get annoyed by films that have people stopping bullets at short range with a turned over table, it just won't work unless it is a very thick very solid piece of wood. If it was the wall to the neighbours and was solid brick then that certainly would have got their attention if not dislodged some plaster.

Bottom line; you just don't go around blasting away with a 9mm automatic inside a terraced house, it's plain foolish and would leave you with very painful ringing ears at the very least. That scene did annoy me.

OK so maybe I being a pedantic realist but these sort of TV shows purport to present their story in a believable, realistic manner.

 

[PTeppic]

hopefully a good incentive for the BBC to commission another series.

The producers have confirmed there will be more. At some point.