Jump to content

Sherlock


Gigolo-Aunt

Recommended Posts

a lot of series have cliffhangers at the end of series. It is a valid way to keep the audience interested in shows.

 

Fair comment but when a new series starts new watchers must be able to "get into" the show relatively easy or new viewers will be lost - in more ways than one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 185
  • Created
  • Last Reply
BoJack Horseman

Fair comment but when a new series starts new watchers must be able to "get into" the show relatively easy or new viewers will be lost - in more ways than one.

 

Are you being serious?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair comment but when a new series starts new watchers must be able to "get into" the show relatively easy or new viewers will be lost - in more ways than one.

 

You're kidding, right? It's the first episode of a new series following an incredibly well-known cliffhanger.

 

"Just saw an episode of yon Dallas"

 

"Aye?"

 

"Aye. Shite"

 

"How come?"

 

"It was just about some lassie who'd shot some boy called junior or something. I think he had a hat. I'll no be watching it again anyway"

 

"Aye. Sounds shite."

 

Come on grumpy, play the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

rudi must stay

First time watcher of this series and it was a waste of time as far as I was concerned.

 

How can new watchers be encouraged to start watching a series like this when the main part of the programme is devoted to something that happened in a previous series.

 

I was disappointed too, they shouldn't have revealed how he survived

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I was disappointed too, they shouldn't have revealed how he survived

 

But is that how he survived or was he doing it to mess with the guy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

rudi must stay

But is that how he survived or was he doing it to mess with the guy?

 

that's how he did it i think. He spoke to that scientist to thank her for helping him, so it could well be what happened. Whatever happened, it was always going to be a disappointment

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just watched it. Pretty good. Not much story or working out as someone else said but still great. The comedy is pretty good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was fairly sure that the explanation Sherlock have was not the true method of faking his death.

 

Confirmed as far as I'm concerned with the question being raised again by John after Sherlock had explained to the other dude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alan Johnson
I was fairly sure that the explanation Sherlock have was not the true method of faking his death.

 

Confirmed as far as I'm concerned with the question being raised again by John after Sherlock had explained to the other dude.

 

That's exactly how I read it. Get the impression that they'll give another one or two 'decoy' explanations before Sherlock tells Watson the truth in the final episode.

 

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BoJack Horseman

That's exactly how I read it. Get the impression that they'll give another one or two 'decoy' explanations before Sherlock tells Watson the truth in the final episode.

 

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk 2

 

I don't think it will get brought up again. Maybe in passing, but we won't get a definitive explanation. I think the multiple theories thing in this episode was to show that it doesn't matter how he did it, and you'll never be satisfied with the answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

rudi must stay

 

 

I don't think it will get brought up again. Maybe in passing, but we won't get a definitive explanation. I think the multiple theories thing in this episode was to show that it doesn't matter how he did it, and you'll never be satisfied with the answer.

 

Why would he say anything then. I didn't like the scene he explained it much

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alan Johnson

 

I don't think it will get brought up again. Maybe in passing, but we won't get a definitive explanation. I think the multiple theories thing in this episode was to show that it doesn't matter how he did it, and you'll never be satisfied with the answer.

 

Yeah, I quite liked the idea of it not mattering. I just think that unless they came up with some other outrageous finale, it would be too tempting to resist coming back to it.

 

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

rossthejambo

 

 

 

I don't think it will get brought up again. Maybe in passing, but we won't get a definitive explanation. I think the multiple theories thing in this episode was to show that it doesn't matter how he did it, and you'll never be satisfied with the answer.

 

Yep that's exactly how I read it. I'd be surprised if they ever explained it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats wrong with the explanation he gave? Perfectly believable.

 

people want something unbelievable. too bad the show spells out that the nature of expectation breeds disappointment.

 

it's just a bit of fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep that's exactly how I read it. I'd be surprised if they ever explained it.

This

 

people want something unbelievable. too bad the show spells out that the nature of expectation breeds disappointment.

 

it's just a bit of fun.

And this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats wrong with the explanation he gave? Perfectly believable.

 

Didn't make sense for me. Why would he involve so many people in it, simply to fool John? He was coerced into jumping by Moriarty in order to save John and Una Stubbs, so if his brother had dealt with Moriarty's assassins, then there's no need for John to be in the dark at all. The people who needed to see him jump were the assassins, so the explanation needs to deal with that properly, not John.

 

I'd agree with others that it hasn't been explained yet, may never be. Loved the first wind up explanation with Derren Brown!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't make sense for me. Why would he involve so many people in it, simply to fool John? He was coerced into jumping by Moriarty in order to save John and Una Stubbs, so if his brother had dealt with Moriarty's assassins, then there's no need for John to be in the dark at all. The people who needed to see him jump were the assassins, so the explanation needs to deal with that properly, not John.

 

I'd agree with others that it hasn't been explained yet, may never be. Loved the first wind up explanation with Derren Brown!

not quite, he needed to be dead to go after the rest of moriartys network. This was hinted at/pointed out early on due to it being set 2 years after his faked death
Link to comment
Share on other sites

not quite, he needed to be dead to go after the rest of moriartys network. This was hinted at/pointed out early on due to it being set 2 years after his faked death

 

True, but if his parents and so many others knew, then what's John got to do with it. The explanation described would have been obvious to anyone standing around the scene who wasn't John (and therefore hidden by the Ambulance Station), so to pretend to be dead for the network's benefit this explanation isn't satisfactory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jamboinglasgow

True, but if his parents and so many others knew, then what's John got to do with it. The explanation described would have been obvious to anyone standing around the scene who wasn't John (and therefore hidden by the Ambulance Station), so to pretend to be dead for the network's benefit this explanation isn't satisfactory.

 

Wasn't it to fool Moriarities network so he can dismantle it (as he says earlier on in the episode.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't it to fool Moriarities network so he can dismantle it (as he says earlier on in the episode.)

 

Aye but the way it was described in the show would only have fooled John. Anyone looking from any other position would have seen that he was alive - doesn't seem very Sherlocky to assume that Moriarty would only have one person watching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye but the way it was described in the show would only have fooled John. Anyone looking from any other position would have seen that he was alive - doesn't seem very Sherlocky to assume that Moriarty would only have one person watching.

 

The staged death was never to convince the general public, the media reporting his death would do that and the little girl identifying him.

 

The point was he needed John to genuinely believe he was dead, so that it would not arouse suspicion. For example John may have tried to find Sherlock or confided in someone or show some sort of deviant behaviour that would alert Moriarty's netowrk that he may not be dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The staged death was never to convince the general public, the media reporting his death would do that and the little girl identifying him.

 

The point was he needed John to genuinely believe he was dead, so that it would not arouse suspicion. For example John may have tried to find Sherlock or confided in someone or show some sort of deviant behaviour that would alert Moriarty's netowrk that he may not be dead.

 

Then how do you account for his parents being told? I still think its unsatisfying to think that Sherlock has just assumed that Moriarty wouldn't have a second person watching, that doesn't work for me in what is generally quite a well thought out show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then how do you account for his parents being told? I still think its unsatisfying to think that Sherlock has just assumed that Moriarty wouldn't have a second person watching, that doesn't work for me in what is generally quite a well thought out show.

 

Regardless, it was a bullshit story to wind up/placate the fan club that tried to work out how he faked his death. He won't reveal how it actually went down. Check Rogers post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maiden Gorgie

Here we go. Been looking forward to this. Cmon Sherlock, make a shite day better

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A mystery would have been nice.

 

Well made, well performed and written but a bit lacking in crime.

 

The first episode of this series was the first time I'd seen it and I really enjoyed it, not so much this week though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I enjoyed it, I'm assuming a light hearted one to head into the 3rd where the reasons for Watson getting put into the bonfire will be revealed which will be a bit darker

 

Fingers crossed for a cliff hanger which will point to more getting made

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I enjoyed it, I'm assuming a light hearted one to head into the 3rd where the reasons for Watson getting put into the bonfire will be revealed which will be a bit darker

 

Fingers crossed for a cliff hanger which will point to more getting made

 

Everyone involved wants to make more, and certainly the beeb will be keen. It may just be that two year gaps are seen as short in the future. I can see this being the sort of thing that is continued infrequently till cumberbatch or freeman die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone involved wants to make more, and certainly the beeb will be keen. It may just be that two year gaps are seen as short in the future. I can see this being the sort of thing that is continued infrequently till cumberbatch or freeman die.

 

The problem is that both of them, Cumberbatch in particular, are now Hollywood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that both of them, Cumberbatch in particular, are now Hollywood.

 

Absolutely. Like i say, we may look back on 2yr gaps as short. Lots of very famous actors do stuff that is a lot smaller than flagship BBC shows however; all it requires is the will and I think that's there from the main actors and writers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TheMaganator

Tonight's was no better than ok. It was a bit of a non-episode.

 

Fine, if there are 10 episodes in a season, but only 3?...

 

Hopefully the next one is better. When's it on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

:really:

 

It has been nothing to rave home about. Without the acting and decent script (not story) it would be...Elementary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

It has been nothing to rave home about. Without the acting and decent script (not story) it would be...Elementary.

 

no, nothing to rave about. But one of the worst shows on telly?

 

And elementary is very decent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no, nothing to rave about. But one of the worst shows on telly?

 

And elementary is very decent.

 

I enjoyed the first two episodes but they are nowhere near as good as series one and two. I think the writers are concentrating on the relationship between Holmes and Watson a lot more in this series and this is getting in the way of some of the stories and the mystery solving. In the first two series the main component of the programme was the mystery but now it's the relationship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really. Although I don't watch much, writings been all over the place

 

Trust me, as erratic as it's been it's still better than 98% of the rest of TV.

 

Thinking about it, last night was probably too ambitious. It's a very tricky concept to pull off - effectively mixing a Proustian 'madeleine' style series of memories that culminate in the solving of a mystery in real time. This all needs to be carried by an entertaining narration and they also had to develop existing and burgeoning relationships. None of the parts were done particularly poorly, but as a whole it felt unsatisfying. I guess something closer to the straightforward linear narrative where they are brought a problem and solve it is going to be more productive.

 

However, they were trying something that was technically very difficult to do and still be fathomable. To have it remain intelligible, nevermind frequently entertaining, instantly places it above the vast majority of other TV, who struggle with even the most basic story telling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trust me, as erratic as it's been it's still better than 98% of the rest of TV.

 

Thinking about it, last night was probably too ambitious. It's a very tricky concept to pull off - effectively mixing a Proustian 'madeleine' style series of memories that culminate in the solving of a mystery in real time. This all needs to be carried by an entertaining narration and they also had to develop existing and burgeoning relationships. None of the parts were done particularly poorly, but as a whole it felt unsatisfying. I guess something closer to the straightforward linear narrative where they are brought a problem and solve it is going to be more productive.

 

However, they were trying something that was technically very difficult to do and still be fathomable. To have it remain intelligible, nevermind frequently entertaining, instantly places it above the vast majority of other TV, who struggle with even the most basic story telling.

 

I enjoyed it again, but agree with those who say it was perhaps a little ambitious and experimental for what is a three-part series.

 

We're two parts in, but there hasn't yet been a major mystery of the traditional variety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...