Author Topic: Sherlock  (Read 15849 times)

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28709
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #30 on: December 24, 2013, 01:40:43 PM »
That's great. So pumped for next week.
Check out my blog of many topics

“I’m not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!”

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 36128
  • Marathon Man
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #31 on: January 01, 2014, 10:30:48 PM »
The Empty Hearse
* 1/2

Why mess with a good thing? Why do people think the only schedules you need to work around are the actors? As if Cumberbatch and Freeman are solely responsible for the greatness of the series. This is a team effort, and critically missing in this episode are writer Steven Moffat (responsible for the other 2 season openers) and director Paul McGuigan. The Empty Hearse was written by Mark Gatiss, who seems like a nice person but, as is proven by the weakest episodes of the series, is rarely up to the challenge of writing a character who is smarter than us. There wasn't a single reveal I didn't figure out before it was explained to the audience.

The writing is a letdown from every possible angle. There's an odd streak of forced cleverness in moments like Holmes creating his French waiter disguise, the old couple or the board game surprise between Sherlock and Mycroft. I accept that people change over a couple of years, and it fits with Watson but Holmes is oddly different, and by "oddly" I mean he no longer seems like Holmes at all. He's got a warmth, an ability to make social connections. I hate that this rough edge that made Cumberbatch's portrayal so interesting has been smoothed over into a tick Holmes is aware of. Where's the accidental (or deliberate) rubbing people the wrong way? What about the transparent attempts to play sympathetic? Now he can do it earnestly. Boring.

The story is loaded up on the return of Holmes, and largely unconcerned with the mystery at hand. The terrorist plot is a paltry couple of unexplored details to where I suspected Holmes to turn untrustingly against the people providing the information. Instead he goes on a vague uber-quest waiting for a bunch of random people to break pattern. Then there's the brief subplot of personal danger, and at last in the final third Holmes and Watson follow the clues. I'm as happy to see Holmes back as anyone, and I want to hear the solution of his fall too, but why so much attention on that and so little on the new story? (It's a problem that plagues sequels which tread water because they don't know where to go next.)

The direction by Jeremy Lovering tries to copy Paul McGuigan's flashy style, but it's all empty flash here. Lots of weird double/triple composite shots while Holmes works out his process. (The "mind palace" has become like The Force, a once cool abstract idea turned into a bio-chemical mutant power.) The train route montage is the most egregious example, but throughout it's a case of a director trying on britches way too big for them.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2014, 06:22:06 PM by 1SO »

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 36128
  • Marathon Man
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #32 on: January 06, 2014, 10:52:21 AM »
The Sign of Three
* * *

Bound to be a very divisive point for the series. Possibly the definitive proof that Sherlock has jumped the shark. Most of the episode is played for laughs, and they're often not clever laughs but the kind of stuff you find on a TV sitcom. Jokes that both play into and make fun of Holmes' anti-social tendencies but don't poke holes in any sort of revealing way. I did laugh, but that's not why I'm watching Sherlock.

Much improved this time out is the mystery, which has a charming old-school quality to it, develops nicely in conjunction with the wedding story and is tough to figure out. The direction by Colm McCarthy sets a completely different tone than any other Sherlock episode. The show has never felt more TVish. The style shots are once again empty flash, though I found the on-screen text to be better handled and there's a good bit involving multiple chat rooms visualized inside a court room. On The Empty Hearse I said that Cumberbatch and Freeman are not solely responsible for the greatness of the series, however their chemistry (along with Rupert Graves' as Lastrade) is what ultimately makes this adventure worth a watch.

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28709
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #33 on: January 06, 2014, 10:59:04 AM »
There's a lot of speculation that the lightness of these two episodes is kind of a set up for the last episode of the season which will be very dark. There are quite a few hints, especially involving one of the marriage traditions and some seemingly throwaway lines about Mary's family. If that happens I think there's going to be a large scale revision of these two episodes in the eyes of the viewers (to be clear, I've enjoyed both, but I agree that they're not quite what I was expecting).

I really loved the courtroom stuff, though, plus the drunk stuff.
Check out my blog of many topics

“I’m not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!”

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 36128
  • Marathon Man
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #34 on: January 08, 2014, 11:19:09 AM »
Watched The Sign of Three with Mrs. 1SO. She liked it. Thinks that people will focus too much on the overdose of comedy, but if you look past that this is a proper Sherlock episode, with multiple mysteries that feed into each other. She had the killer pegged early, but couldn't figure out the 'How' till right before the reveal. As for the comedy, the first joke is over set-up, oversold. The elephant in the room is terribly cheap. However, she thought the chat room girls were clever fun, especially the kinky maid, and she's really liking Mrs. Watson and how easily she fits into the group dynamic.

As for me, the comedy is easy to brace for and disregard on a re-watch and the rest of it is fun, though disappointingly more like a regular TV show than a Sherlock. The drunk section goes on far too long.

ses

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 14979
    • Sarah's Kitchen Adventures
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #35 on: January 08, 2014, 01:19:17 PM »
So the mini episode is separate to any of the three stories?  It's not just a preview or the first seven minutes of Ep 1 in Season 3? 
"It's a fool who looks for logic in the chambers of the human heart"

http://sarahskitchenadventures.blogspot.com/

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 28709
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #36 on: January 08, 2014, 01:23:28 PM »
Correct. It happens before the first episode and covers some of the time between last season and this one.
Check out my blog of many topics

“I’m not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!”

ses

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 14979
    • Sarah's Kitchen Adventures
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #37 on: January 08, 2014, 01:24:23 PM »
Correct. It happens before the first episode and covers some of the time between last season and this one.

Okay, thanks.
"It's a fool who looks for logic in the chambers of the human heart"

http://sarahskitchenadventures.blogspot.com/

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 36128
  • Marathon Man
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #38 on: January 13, 2014, 01:15:34 AM »
His Final Vow
* * * 1/2


I wish we didn't have to trudge through the first two Season 3 Sherlocks to get to this one, but man there are a lot of payoffs. This may be the most complicated episode yet, with so much bouncing around in time and between reality, fantasy and dream that I struggled to keep up. I anxiously look forward to the re-watch with Mrs. 1SO, but this is as close as I've seen a TV show come to the experience I have watching The Big Sleep.

All kinds of awesome going on - none of which I will spoil, so excuse the obliqueness of the review. Easily the toughest acting called on yet for Cumberbatch and Freeman (and Louise Brealey, whose Molly Hooper packs a wallop when called on.) Director Nick Hurran (Doctor Who's "The Day of the Doctor") almost completely dropped the style tricks, which was a welcome decision. There's a fantastical bit in the middle clearly inspired by films like The Cell, but they don't cross into surreal lunacy. In the end, Steven Moffat went the Chris Nolan route of making everything way too serious. He wants to make this the ultimate Sherlock experience, but he's straining. So this is one of the Sherlock-level episodes, but I can't sort out how good till some re-watches.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2014, 06:54:57 PM by 1SO »

goodguy

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2099
  • Colleen West was here.
Re: Sherlock
« Reply #39 on: January 13, 2014, 06:05:28 AM »
I agree that the previous two episodes were pretty poor and this last one was a return to form and pretty exciting - up to the point were the secret of the vault was revealed.

Having the villain dance around for half an hour doing an 'Everything is in my head that's why you can't do anything'-routine and end it with the most obvious solution everyone watching probably had thought of in the first second is either the stupidest thing ever or I missed something important. Did I?

 

love