The Mycroft twist was very good.
I correctly guessed the murderer's trade while Sherlock was standing over the dead woman pontificating, & that's not because I'm brilliant, but because it was bleedin' obvious that someone in that trade was the most likely suspect.
I liked it apart from the sound. Could be because we get our TV via a cable, but in parts it was very difficult to make out what the actors were saying. Obviously, turning it up helped, but then it'd switch to the next scene and our ear drums would be imploding.
This is Doctor Who without space aliens.
No, but I think it isn't blatantly obvious in that (unlike this one), & I don't think the idea of crime by that particular group was so high profile back then. This time, the slowest cop should be wondering why nobody has started checking the obvious, let alone Holmes.I correctly guessed the murderer's trade while Sherlock was standing over the dead woman pontificating, & that's not because I'm brilliant, but because it was bleedin' obvious that someone in that trade was the most likely suspect.
Hmm, I'm not sure this is a fair criticism - iirc Holmes doesn't suss whodunnit that quickly in the original A Study In Scarlet either.
d.
It was pleasant enough viewing but I rather think it will head in the same direction as many other series in that only 'special' people will be able to follow the stories and 'get it' after week 3 or 4....and they will snigger at people without piss-stained trousers and a cupboard full of pot noodle and a 'girlfriend' with a permanently open orifice. Oh how clever.Crikey noodles - sounds like you need to escape from the weight of those chips, or change your newspaper, or eat more sugar to sweeten up?
Hmm, yes - Matt Smith would have made an excellent Sherlock. And Benedict Cumberbatch a fine Doctor Who.
d.
And I'm surprised nobody has said 'The Princess Bride (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUee1WvtQZU)' yet?
Hmm, yes - Matt Smith would have made an excellent Sherlock. And Benedict Cumberbatch a fine Doctor Who.
Andy,
What is googlefight?
I liked it apart from the sound. Could be because we get our TV via a cable, but in parts it was very difficult to make out what the actors were saying. Obviously, turning it up helped, but then it'd switch to the next scene and our ear drums would be imploding.
I thought so too. I had had my finger on the volume control for most of the programme. ::-) Why do they do this? If you want to hear the dialogue, your neighbours get the music basting through the walls too. >:(
I'd have enjoyed that more had my PVR not omitted to record the first eighteen minutes ???Mine didn't record any of it as BBC1 appeared to have dropped out of its sphere of consciousness so I've just watched it on iPlayer.
Oooh that was rather good. Probably developing a crush on Sherlock. :DI'm not. I'm going for Watson.
Table for four?
Probably developing a crush on Sherlock. :D
The writers did a fabulous job of getting the audience inside the head of a genius. From the text-on-screen ...[assuming you mean text messages:]
Probably developing a crush on Sherlock. :D
He has a face like an uncooked doughnut, according to the Evening Standard critic.
Hope his helps.
He's only shocking if you don't think that way yourself. If you do, you're wondering whether you ever do the right thing trying to be more 'normal' to other people. ...
He's only shocking if you don't think that way yourself. If you do, you're wondering whether you ever do the right thing trying to be more 'normal' to other people. ...
Presumably if you do think this way, then you spend most of your life wondering why other people are doing what they do anyway. ;D
I still enjoyed it, but I know the original novels and stories well, so I'm too aware of how similar and different they are to be able to make a fair judgment.
Having said that, Moriarty was the least frightening villain since Frank n furter.
That was good tv that was. Moriarty did remind me of Father Noel Furlong, Graham Norton's character from Father Ted ;D
My first sentence refers. In the novels and stories where he briefly appeared, Moriarty did possess physical charisma, and was more than just the power behind the scenes. IIRC, Conan-Doyle took pains to make it so.
To me proper whodunnits are logic problems with lots of red herrings thrown in, but with Holmes much of the deduction depends on the encyclopedic catalogue of knowledge in his head - he has access to a load of info that the average viewer doesn't, thus we don't have the same opportunity to solve the mystery as, say, Poirot (sp?) does.Totally agree. Fortunately, I'm not a real murder mystery fan, so this doesn't bother me! I just like being dazzled by his mental gymnastics, and the clever tricks in the plot (leave a body on top of a train - neat).
But then again, I often find Holmes disappointing. I always watch them expecting a good juicy whodunnit. But the thing about Holmes is that it often isn't really proper whodunnit stuff, like, say, a Christie is. To me proper whodunnits are logic problems with lots of red herrings thrown in, but with Holmes much of the deduction depends on the encyclopedic catalogue of knowledge in his head - he has access to a load of info that the average viewer doesn't, thus we don't have the same opportunity to solve the mystery as, say, Poirot (sp?) does.
Lowlife type: "I were going...."So that's just 2 of us that noticed it ...
Sherlock: "It's was. I was going..."
It somehow made me feel right at home.
Lowlife type: "I were going...."So that's just 2 of us that noticed it ...
Sherlock: "It's was. I was going..."
It somehow made me feel right at home.
That scene was funny, and clearly put in entirely for comic relief.
I too noticed it and found it amusing...
I too noticed it and found it amusing...
Mrs MV was in stitches: it's usually me shouting stuff like that at the telly :)
Lowlife type: "I were going...."So that's just 2 of us that noticed it ...
Sherlock: "It's was. I was going..."
It somehow made me feel right at home.
That scene was funny, and clearly put in entirely for comic relief.
I too noticed it and found it amusing...
Did they forget to put a story in? Enjoyed it but it was 90 minutes of subplot.
Meh, style over substance. I preferred the book.the book was far too long and was lacking in charismatic actors. Give me the TV version!
A key part of the original plot was that Irene Adler could pass herself off as a man... The Crying game managed to do it, but that was the cinema.
A key part of the original plot was that Irene Adler could pass herself off as a man. I don't think I've ever seen character in a TV drama pass themselves off as someone of the opposite sex, without instantly realising that it was another character in drag.An excellent demonstration of why slavish adaptations of books are not usually the best ones.
The Crying game managed to do it, but that was the cinema.
This week's looks much better
"But Holmes!", Watson exclaimed, "How could Moriarty have escaped from a locked prison cell under the eyes of six policemen", run naked though central London, get to Exeter in time to kill Lady Ainsleigh, then return to London, sneak back into his cell without anyone spotting him, all within two hours?"
"There are some things", said Holmes with a distant look in his eye, "we shall never know".
I agree that Holmes' ignorance of things computer-technical is out of character.
In case anyone else (well it's bugging me) is pondering how SH escaped certain death my hypothesis is that he jumped
In case anyone else (well it's bugging me) is pondering how SH escaped certain death my hypothesis is that he jumped(click to show/hide)
In case anyone else (well it's bugging me) is pondering how SH escaped certain death my hypothesis is that he jumped(click to show/hide)
P vs NP
P vs NP isn't cryptography geekery, it's general knowledge!
Anyway, it were Mollyarty wot dunnit.
Not even the 'tache jokes were upto scratch.
[Still not as bad as Dr Who!]
OK, I'll give the writers an excuse - they were too distracted by bringing him back to life to put a proper story together. Normal service resumed ASAP >:(
This seems to be the Moffat way now - all character development, very little actual story.Very true.
(but I think Gatiss wrote this one? Perhaps Moffat sticks his oar in rather too much ... )
I got bored with it very quickly but Dez kept watching it. The worst thing about it was that the music was horribly intrusive.In which case you definitely won't like Dr Who!
We really ought to get together and do something about this. Licence-payers against overly intrusive music!
I thought it was mostly reasonable. Definitely better than the most recent Dr Who. Was it me who was confused by them talking about the district line and then going on about the bit between westminster and St James Park (which is the Jubilee line, which does have interesting alternative tunnels but not as interesting as the bakerloo line there.)
I thought it was mostly reasonable. Definitely better than the most recent Dr Who. Was it me who was confused by them talking about the district line and then going on about the bit between westminster and St James Park (which is the Jubilee line, which does have interesting alternative tunnels but not as interesting as the bakerloo line there.)
No it wasn't you that was confused by the tube switches: -
http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/the-london-underground-lines-in-sherlock-are-all-wrong
I got bored with it very quickly but Dez kept watching it. The worst thing about it was that the music was horribly intrusive.In which case you definitely won't like Dr Who!
We really ought to get together and do something about this. Licence-payers against overly intrusive music! Hmm, might need a snappier slogan ...
the bit between westminster and St James Park (which is the Jubilee line,
Moffat and Gattis made their names in quirky comedy - they're playing to their strengths here IMO.
I must admit Press Gang almost totally passed me by! It's always been the thing that launched the career of someone I'm watching in something else - Sawalha, Dexter etc ...
My favourite Moffat thing was Joking Apart (when Robert Bathurst still looked young).
Coupling was okaaaayy ... but I've never really appreciated Jack Davenport, so it was a bit wasted on me.
I missed out on Joking Apart because it first aired at a time when I was watching very little TV (I was a student). Coupling I quite enjoyed - despite Jack Davenport. Like a British Friends but funnier and not as annoying (deliberately contentious statement).Pretty fair comparison! Friends could be bloody funny, but BOY could it be annoying (I think the writing peaked in S1). Again, the focus was too much on an unfunny central character - Ross in the case of Friends. IIRC the welsh guy was the best thing in Coupling, but it's been a while.
Did Coupling steal the 3boys+3girls setup? Or did Friends steal it from somewhere else? (These things are rarely original I know ... )
I don't know how you don't notice someone stabbing you
I don't know how you don't notice someone stabbing you
Serious injuries can be remarkably painless, especially when they coincide with something sufficiently distracting (usually a non-serious injury, admittedly, but I can imagine someone trained to ignore random itching could also ignore a neat stab wound). If you've got through life without discovering this, then you're winning.
I'm with geraldc upthread: Elementary is just as good (better in fact :demon:).
As was the Granada series, the Hammer film, SH22 and Basil The Great Mouse Detective.
I think that even if you didn't notice the pain of the needle, you'd notice the assailant initially trying to push the weapon through your thick leather military belt.Many military belts have holes along their full length.
I sort of agree that a certain amount of suspension of disbelief is required, yet the whole premise of Holmes is that everything is the ultimate in logical reasoned deduction. Least ways it used to be back in Rathbone's day (who of course, is still the best - not as moody as Brett maybe but at least he didn't put you to sleep :P).
I'm with geraldc upthread: Elementary is just as good (better in fact :demon:).
I think this was in fact a webbing belt by the look of it. Not sure if that would be easier to penetrate with the skewer. It would need to be very tight indeed though and would certainly look a bit odd. I am going to try it out on my brother though to see if it works.I think that even if you didn't notice the pain of the needle, you'd notice the assailant initially trying to push the weapon through your thick leather military belt.Many military belts have holes along their full length.
I sort of agree that a certain amount of suspension of disbelief is required, yet the whole premise of Holmes is that everything is the ultimate in logical reasoned deduction. Least ways it used to be back in Rathbone's day (who of course, is still the best - not as moody as Brett maybe but at least he didn't put you to sleep :P).
I think that even if you didn't notice the pain of the needle, you'd notice the assailant initially trying to push the weapon through your thick leather military belt.Many military belts have holes along their full length.
I sort of agree that a certain amount of suspension of disbelief is required, yet the whole premise of Holmes is that everything is the ultimate in logical reasoned deduction. Least ways it used to be back in Rathbone's day (who of course, is still the best - not as moody as Brett maybe but at least he didn't put you to sleep :P).
Did anybody spot that the actors playing Sherlock's Mum and Dad were actually Timothy Carlton and Wanda Ventham, Benedict Cumberbatch's parents?
I was quite enjoying it for the first half an hour or so, up to the point where Sherlock noticed the big toothy fish in the harbour and got his water skis out... I don't mind that they've made Mary more of a character than she was in the books, but what they've made her is just silly.
The last hour seemed to go on for an eternity.
Troels made a great Bad Dude though.
WT actual F?
As I said last night in reply to someone considering wheter or not it had jumped the shark: It was more of a Sharknado. (And I mean that in a good way, I just had higher hopes after last week's episode.)
WT actual F?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumping_the_shark
Oblique reference to the scene in Bad Dude's apartment with Mary.
The bit where... <spoiler snipped>
The bit where... <spoiler snipped>
Oh, I quite liked that. It was fun. I was thinking of the revelation about a certain character's past.
Further trivia: I believe they're still "living in sin", but have now married on screen 3 times!Did anybody spot that the actors playing Sherlock's Mum and Dad were actually Timothy Carlton and Wanda Ventham, Benedict Cumberbatch's parents?
Mary (Amanda Abbington) is Martin Freeman's other half in real life too.
MilvertonMagnusson was good and would also have made an excellent job in the original setting.
It's a modern caricature of the original Conan Doyle stuff. Obviously the original was written as being bang-up-to-date too but the makers of this re-take knew perfectly well they could not match Conan Doyle on his own turf and went off at a tangent. A good try but of course not in the same 'League'. The terminator-like thought 'screens' are way out of date and might be fine for a robot but the human brain simply doesn't work like that. Not even if you are Sherlock Holmes. Unless of course he is later revealed to be an android*.
MilvertonMagnusson was good and would also have made an excellent job in the original setting.
* a possible explanation for the re-appearance after the fatal leap. Military grade or a re-build.
Incidentally, for a modern update of Holmes, I don't think you can do better than Bert Coules. He adapted many of the original stories for radio but then also wrote some more of his own, fleshing out some of the many cases mentioned in passing in the original books. He uses the original characters in the original setting but there's definitely a modern sensibility to his work.
Also, Clive Mereson, who plays Holmes in the Coules radio versions, knocks Cumberbatch into a cocked hat.
the two things (recent TV and Coules' radio stuff) are very different beasts.
Your brain doesn't work that way. I'm not sue mine does either but then, I'm not Sherlock Holmes. Some folks branes may work that way. In fact most folks branes may work that way and the fact that yours and mine don't may indicate that we are androids :D
Your brain doesn't work that way. I'm not sue mine does either but then, I'm not Sherlock Holmes. Some folks branes may work that way. In fact most folks branes may work that way and the fact that yours and mine don't may indicate that we are androids :D
The visualisation thing? My brain does that very strongly in at least one context: Vision Mixers. Multiple sources through multiple layers to multiple outputs simultaneously, along with auxiliary outputs and Digital Video Effects layers. Some of the layers are re-entrant into other layers, others are cut through by the use of 'key' signals which partially split layers. Transitions can be between sources, or layers, or a mixture of both.
After many years working with these and setting them up for use, I find myself 'looking' at them with a distinct mental picture of signal paths and layers which I can't adequately describe to other people - it just 'is'. The brain-training period for this is approaching 26 years.
Branes. Go figure.
It's a modern caricature of the original Conan Doyle stuff. Obviously the original was written as being bang-up-to-date too but the makers of this re-take knew perfectly well they could not match Conan Doyle on his own turf and went off at a tangent. A good try but of course not in the same 'League'.
The terminator-like thought 'screens' are way out of date and might be fine for a robot but the human brain simply doesn't work like that. Not even if you are Sherlock Holmes. Unless of course he is later revealed to be an android*.
It's fan fiction, from one of the strongest fandoms there is. The whole point is to do something differently, exploring the characters and settings. It's just like all that slash you probably don't read on the internet, but by a couple of established TV writers with a stonking great budget.
It's fan fiction, from one of the strongest fandoms there is. The whole point is to do something differently, exploring the characters and settings. It's just like all that slash you probably don't read on the internet, but by a couple of established TV writers with a stonking great budget.
Yadda yadda baby yadda yadda bathwater...
It's fan fiction, from one of the strongest fandoms there is. The whole point is to do something differently, exploring the characters and settings. It's just like all that slash you probably don't read on the internet, but by a couple of established TV writers with a stonking great budget.
Yadda yadda baby yadda yadda bathwater...
???
Last episode I watched was Sherlock in name only
Last episode I watched was Sherlock in name only
I've never read any Sherlock Holmes so I can't compare it with the books.
Surely the "originals" have been done to death though, and there's no point re-hashing them yet again.
Sherlock seems to be a blend of Conan Doyle's Holmes with Douglas Adams' Dirk Gently, and with lots of money thrown at it.
No bad thing in my book. I've found the last two episodes to be genuinely exciting and interesting.
Clear Jimmy Savile references throughout (to help create a true monster I expect).
Surely the "originals" have been done to death though, and there's no point re-hashing them yet again.
No bad thing in my book. I've found the last two episodes to be genuinely exciting and interesting.
I'll probably get round to watching them at some point but there's too much other stuff on the telly to keep up with - some of which isn't entirely derivative of old ideas...
As a finale, that left something to be desired :(
http://newsthump.com/2017/01/16/missing-persons-case-opened-after-sherlock-writer-vanishes-up-his-own-arse/