Sherlock

[mnchiefsguy]

Originally Posted by Third Eye

Very doubtful that they would return to Victorian England. You'll understand after you watch it.

Yeah I am waiting for a two hour time block to watch it completely removed from reality (ie--the wife and kids). Will probably watch it late tomorrow night.

[Anyong Bluth]

Originally Posted by Anyong Bluth

I feel like the special is just employing a dreamscape as means to adjust the historical period. Unless I missed the news that they are shifting the time period going forward for the remainder of the series?

This guy nailed it.

[DaFace]

How are you guys watching it? I'm not sure where it's available.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by DaFace

How are you guys watching it? I'm not sure where it's available.

It's on PBS, listed as an episode of 'Masterpiece'

If you can't find it locally, PBS.com will start streaming it again on the 11th

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/masterpiece/...minable-bride/

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

It's on PBS, listed as an episode of 'Masterpiece'

Excellent - thanks.

[MMXcalibur]

Did not like the whole

Spoiler!

time-traveling between Victorian era and modern era. Would have preferred they had just focused on the The Abominable Bride case throughout and save the modern era storyline for Season 4.

.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by KCtotheSB

Did not like the whole

Spoiler!

time-traveling between Victorian era and modern era. Would have preferred they had just focused on the The Abominable Bride case throughout and save the modern era storyline for Season 4.

.

But

Spoiler!

they didn't time travel, and the Abominable Bride story was integral to the modern era storyline

[Baby Lee]

Not saying I agree, just food for thought.

[Anyong Bluth]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Not saying I agree, just food for thought.

Definitely not. He's complaining about having to think about what's going on on a mystery detective show, and effectively just wants it all regurgitated back in easy to follow plots and dialogue.

He complains that Christmas specials are supposed to be about attracting new fans with a simple taster episode? No, they’re usually a gift to the fans and typically a bit more lighthearted with some wink to the universe or background easter eggs pertaining to the show.

I say this fully conceding the Sherlock special didn't have the normal payoff, and got somewhat muddled in the concept of jumbling time periods. Perhaps, the quality of the script suffered because Moffitt is being stretched thin with taking on Dr. Who. A bit more time to tighten up the script more than likely would have been a large benefit to satisfyingly pulling off the dream throwback plot wrinkle.

Either way, the episode is still definitely in the top 10 best episodes for the show all time.

Lastly, he complains Dr. Who has become too confusing and used to be a "family" show. WTF is he talking about? I know jackshit about Who, but I do know it's always been out there with a heavy learning curve, and an extensive history that has significance in new shows. It's never been a one off stand alone show format.

Seems to be he's just not a fan of Moffitt's headier style, and wants dialogue more on par with something like Two Broke Girls. Again, I don't think I've ever seen Two Broke Girls, but the promos for the show give a fairly certain indication as to the gravitas of the material.

We definitely got some revelations of upcoming events - such as Mycroft upcoming death based upon the consumption conversation and bet, and then Watson and Mycroft's plea to please look out for Sherlock after a previous scene discussing family and Sherlock's support system.

The diary we get a quick glimpse at that had Redbeard in large letters, as well as Vernet - which is both an old established European family the Holmes are descendants of as well as a syndrome that involves tumorous growths in and around the cranial nerves.

It could be an indication of someone's impending death, or potentially a clue as to why both or one of the Holmes brothers have such an amazing intellect.

Brain tumors have been medically documented to sometimes result in highly advanced brain function through overstimulation of area of the brain that control various functions and processing centers.

It's not uncommon that persons with Vernet syndrome show growth of these cranial nerve tumors but an overwhelming majority of them are benign even though it may have other negative effects such a seizures, ticks, temporary irregular speech patterns, lack of emotional processing, among other things.

Then there's the emergence of Mary and her role and her intellectual prowess. As she says, 'I don’t care if you go or how long you're away, I just don't want to be left behind," to Watson. Possibly an indication of a reinventing of the character and her capabilities - which this episode most definitely touched upon the role of women and the equals to men. Mary certainly showed herself to be an equal peer among the 3 men and her capabilities to be resourceful.

So, Moriarty is 'dead' yet Sherlock says he knows what his next move is?

This episode didn't have the same punch or payoff, but it certainly got the wheels turning to set in motion for the upcoming season(s).

Moffitt has already said that they have tentatively sketched out 8 or 9 seasons, but that is completely dependant on the actors being available and wanting to do it, and for the studio being flexible in allowing for extended breaks between seasons to accommodate everyone's schedule and other obligations / projects.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by Anyong Bluth

Definitely not.

Good stuff. The kind of stuff I was looking for posting that.

A much more salient criticism I saw was Moffat's weird embracing of feminist issues. They whole suffragist thing was neat to reference. But nothing came of it as it was a mental exercise, and the story was told entirely through Sherlock's speechifying, with mute columns of women watching reverently, no less.

Kind of a paternalistic co-opting.

[Third Eye]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Good stuff. The kind of stuff I was looking for posting that.

A much more salient criticism I saw was Moffat's weird embracing of feminist issues. They whole suffragist thing was neat to reference. But nothing came of it as it was a mental exercise, and the story was told entirely through Sherlock's speechifying, with mute columns of women watching reverently, no less.

Kind of a paternalistic co-opting.

And anything less would be completely untrue to the Sherlock that Moffat has created and could be considered pandering.

As far as the concerns go about the declining quality of the Moff's shows, I just don't see it. Has Who changed? Sure, but I don't personally see the shift away from the swashbuckling Who of the 70s and 80s to the more reflective or philosophical current iteration as a bad thing. Similarly, while this may not have been the best Sherlock yet, I'd rank it 4th or 5th of the 10 episodes that they've created. Relative to the quality of the majority of TV programming, that's pretty damn good.

[Anyong Bluth]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Good stuff. The kind of stuff I was looking for posting that.

A much more salient criticism I saw was Moffat's weird embracing of feminist issues. They whole suffragist thing was neat to reference. But nothing came of it as it was a mental exercise, and the story was told entirely through Sherlock's speechifying, with mute columns of women watching reverently, no less.

Kind of a paternalistic co-opting.

There's more no doubt, and I'm sure I'm biased in my defense of Moffitt.

He and Milch are what they are, and any man responsible for Deadwood (Milch) gets my undying benefit of the doubt, and the bar set for them is so much higher than your average show, even a decent offering by them often is still a rather compelling watch. Moffitt gets that same treatment because he's got a track record that's proven!

If people think Sherlock or Who have been too heady, try watching John from Cincinnati. A show so packed with obscure historical and literary reference and symbolism it's mind boggling. Not to mention the dialogue is dense and ratchets up the weight found in Deadwood. It's a bit of a blend of Shakespeare meets Melville.

At first blush, a fair number of people would be put off by it, and at the very least wondering what the **** is going on. You have to dig into it, but there's discussions you can find to help fill in the places you need to appreciate all that's going on as well as the references and topics discussed.

No doubt, that's not everyone's cup of tea, but if you do your homework and accept the need that it's a show that almost requires footnotes, it's extremely rewarding, and amazing just how rich the material is. The Analysis and payoff for that show is the most rewarding of any show or film I've seen with the exception of a number of Kubrick's films.

No different than a cold read of Shakespeare, there's a lot to process and contextualize before fully appreciated.

It's a shame it only lasted one season, but I understand that the show ended up being a tough sell to gain a broad audience because it required the viewer to do some heavy lifting to get "it". Some people will absolutely hate that- especially if you consider a show to be simply escapism for amusement.

I loved the challenge Moffitt offered up by rewarding those who took the time to unlock the full meaning of the material he was presenting!

It was the show equivalent of those computer generated pictures.
At first glance, all you see is a blob of various colors, and you're say what the **** am I looking at?
However, with spending some time and adjusting how you look at the piece, all of a sudden a picture of something all of a sudden comes into focus and there's a sailboat, for example, in the same picture of colored blobs. The picture didn't change - you just needed to look deeper and adjust your vantage point to appreciate what you were looking at at first glance.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by Anyong Bluth

There's more no doubt, and I'm sure I'm biased in my defense of Moffitt.

He and Milch are what they are, and any man responsible for Deadwood (Milch) gets my undying benefit of the doubt, and the bar set for them is so much higher than your average show, even a decent offering by them often is still a rather compelling watch.

Oh I agree. Particularly the pairing of Moffat and Milch, who if you know me I place in the pantheon of greatest television writers in history, perhaps the greatest.

The appropriation of feminism was more of a subject matter/political critique than a craft/ability one.

Bit of trivia, did you know Milch was a frat brothers with Dubya?

[DaFace]

Ended up just downloading it last night since I didn't record it when it aired, and I thought it was fun, but kind of weird. I guess I'll spoiler tag this...

Spoiler!

I guess I was OK with the whole "set in the past because it's in his mind" thing, but the resolution was somewhat unsatisfying. Did he solve the case (in his mind) or not? He thought he had it figured out, but then couldn't find the second body, but then that ended up being in his mind, so what actually happened? It just seems like it got a bit lost in its own plot device.

But whatever - it was still a fun watch, and I look forward to the next series.

[mnchiefsguy]

Finally got the chance to watch the special tonight.

Thought it was a bit confusing in parts, but was fantastic overall.

Definitely will be watching a second time to put all the pieces in place.

Can't wait for season 4!