What Series of Sherlock is Your Favourite?

[Carol the Dabbler]

Odd -- I've never noticed a stylistic difference, other than in the writing.  Could you guys give me some examples?

 

Happy to, but right now I have to do this that and the other thing, another FULLLLLL day tomorrow, not sure what I can do but yeah, you just challenged the art teacher in me, how can I refuse? :D

 

I ... take his statement about how when you take your own life, it won't be you who will miss it to be, finally, a full realization of how bad an idea it really was to fake killing himself before John in The Reichenbach Fall, even though that's never explicitly stated....

 

That last part especially, was what I thought ... the full import of his faked suicide didn't really hit him until Mary's death, and it hit him hard. Another moment when I just wanted to hug him...

Why, oh why do they make such a big fuss over so many things, but then fail to be the least bit obvious about something as important as that?  Must admit that I missed the point of the "take your life" scene (partly because I was half asleep, presumably, but still....).  Must watch it again.

[jadpdr]

After the train wreck that is TFP ( how appropriate of Moriarty to play the conductor! ), I wish they had stopped after S2. S3 tried to patch things up and went overboard with Mary and SoT, not to mention Sherlock Bl#%#% Holmes solving his problem by shooting it in the head, and S4 is, frankly, a Bond wannabe.

[Shadow Dweller]

IMO, S4 is so crude in almost all of its aspects it deserve to be the most lambasted season so far. Even the gestures of the characters looks jerky and overboard and this is from experienced actors who already proved they are capable to produce elegant performance. When it comes to being meaningful, small and subtle is better than ostentious. Keep the in-your-face moments for spare occasions else the result would appear as a failed parody of the earlier seasons.

[gerry]

For those that dislike season 4, why would you rate season 3 better? HLV is just as improbable as anything in season 4 with the CAM shooting, Sherlock getting shot and Mary being an assassin. That episode was beyond OTT in several aspects.

[Carol the Dabbler]

For those that dislike season 4, why would you rate season 3 better?

 

I wouldn't. In fact, I think I like S4 a bit better than S3. But I don't think either of them up to the standards set by S1 and S2.

[Surelock]

For those that dislike season 4, why would you rate season 3 better? HLV is just as improbable as anything in season 4 with the CAM shooting, Sherlock getting shot and Mary being an assassin. That episode was beyond OTT in several aspects.

 

Season 3 didn't feel as rushed and still had enough moments of levity and humanity that Sherlock is known for. 

[J.P.]

I love S3 and didn't like S4, but I'm not sure about my own objectivity. Watching S3-3 during one weekend didn't give me time to think, and having noone to talk about it - a opportunity to do so. Watched in one piece all seasons seemed quite consistent to me. Mary as assassin was a bit off, as well as the case in TSOT, but they still seemed to fit in.

 

As for the style of TST - I did think it's the visuals, like diffeent perspective and that blue, cold hues, but I did compare some shots from S4 and the older episodes, and there are no significant differences so far. What felt strange, is the intro, something they never did before, with a voiceover, that to me didn't even sound like Sherlock's voice. Also those blue water shadows on his face felt off, even if they used similar tricks before. Maybe it's the sound effect they used with the trick… thinking about it: maybe it's the sound that's different in the  whole episode?

 

And of course the changes on set that made no sense at all.

[gerry]

 

For those that dislike season 4, why would you rate season 3 better?

 

I wouldn't. In fact, I think I like S4 a bit better than S3. But I don't think either of them up to the standards set by S1 and S2.

Completely agree.

[J.P.]

Oh, and I remember that the rescue scene from ASIB was the most WTF moment, because it felt like from another story, more Indiana Jones than Sherlock. So the all over feeling of the series was quite realistic. And suddenly we have prophetic Sherlock, falling from the second floor, and the evil, mind controlling sis. And a non existent glass with logos freely floating in the air…

[Arcadia]

Odd -- I've never noticed a stylistic difference, other than in the writing.  Could you guys give me some examples?

Okay, you asked for it ... The Arcadian Lecture on Cinematic Style   Sorry for the delay ... what a week.

 

First, it might be good to bear in mind that I'm extremely visually oriented. So maybe this is stuff that only people like me would be bothered by. But bother me it does, and that's putting it mildly.

 

So ... when you get a chance, take a look at the opening scenes from these four episodes, and see if you see what I see. For best effect, try watching with the sound off, or really low. This is about what you can see, not what you can hear.

 

1) ASiP. (If you don't want to bother with DVDs, the first 30 minutes are here.)

 

Take a look at the first scene after the credits roll. As Moftiss has said, this is Paul McGuigan's contribution to the show; the first episode sets the visual style for the entire series ... and it's extremely cinematic. After the establishing shot of the city, the camera is immediately in motion, travelling with the actress rather than just showing her walk across the set. The spaces being filmed are layered; she disappears behind a pillar, her paramour is weaving through layers of people. There's a sense of place; you frequently glimpse the city through windows. Look how saturated the colors are; rich, complex darks contrasted by soft but bright natural light. Even when the camera is still, the p.o.v. keeps changing; extreme close-ups of the guy's hand, his eye, then a medium range shot from outside the building, then a long shot from inside looking out, where the camera lingers on the bleak abstract pattern, giving us a breather from all the motion as we transition into the press conference. But soon the camera drifts away again, across some more rich darks before settling on a trick shot of the mistress seen through a viewfinder, followed by a close-up of her tears that turn to rain.

 

This is complex visual storytelling; it expects the viewer to pay attention, to make connections between images, to intuit relationships, and above all, it shows the story rather than narrating it. The viewer's job is not just to listen, but to see and puzzle out what the visuals mean.

 

Watch any episode in S1-S3 and you'll see this cinematic style at work; camera movement, light effects, layering, focus changes, p.o.v. shifts, rich darks, high contrasts, trick shots ... whether it's John fighting with the chip and pin machine, or Sherlock facing down Moriarty on Bart's roof. (The latter consists almost entirely of moving, hand-held shots; some, rather impossibly, from somewhere out in the air in front of the building!)

 

Okay, now try comparing two similar scenes -- both are a hearing in a meeting room. One is the opening sequence from HLV (here), the other is the opening sequence from T6T (here). If you can, watch them at the same time, side by side, with the sound off. They're roughly the same length.

 

2) HLV opens with an abstract, diagonal  design of light and color; in art, diagonals always imply movement and is more dynamic than horizontals or verticals. This is followed by a series of other images that fade in and out of focus, and a rapidly shifting p.o.v. In the first few seconds alone there's a shot from under the glass table, one through the spectacles, one extreme close up of CAM, one from outside the room, one from above, and one from CAM's p.o.v. The camera is constantly moving, giving us glimpses of the actors and the environment, revealing the scene from a variety of angles and with multiple techniques. Shots alternate between extreme close ups and wide shots. Again the director is showing us pieces of the story, and letting us knit it together for ourselves. The darks are rich and contrasty, which is a sign of good technical control.

 

3) The first few shots of T6T, on the other hand, are almost completely static. The opening shot is a white sign with black letters. This is followed by four identical rectangles filled with videos. There is no depth, no compositional movement, just distant activity. This is followed by a motionless shot of the room and its occupants; the camera is locked down rather than dynamic; everything is dead center, the focus never changes. Once established, each character is shown from the same limited number of angles, there is no shifting perspective. We are given no sense of where this space is in relation to anything else. The darks are grey or blue gray instead of rich black. There's very little contrast, simply warm beige set vs. cool blue-gray attire. The set itself is virtually featureless, dull.

 

This is telling us a story rather showing us one. There's very little motion from either the camera or the actors, nothing interesting to look at. What you hear is more important than what you see. You could close your eyes and just listen to the dialog, and get the information you need to understand what's going on.

 

Does that make it "bad"? I don't know; personally, I find it uninspired and unworthy of the show; but more to the point, it's not the Sherlock style. It's Dragnet, or Mannix, or some routine movie of the week; but not Sherlock.

 

Is it intentional? I don't know that either, but if it is, then why in the very next episode are they back to their old form?

 

4) Take a look at TLD, (here) the scene right after the credits; once again the camera is moving; an establishing shot of London followed by a series of reflections, newsreels, more establishing shots, switches in p.o.v., more reflections, more focus changes, more rich darks, with pops of red, blue, green, rose. It's visually interesting; it's imaginative; it's technically gorgeous. It's Sherlock. If they are deliberately trying to get away from this look, then why show it again here? And if they didn't notice how "cheap" the other two episodes look by comparison, they don't belong in the business. It's. Just. Weird.

 

There's more, but this is too long already, I'll put it in another post.

[J.P.]

You already nailed it.

[Boton]

New to this discussion but let me start off with:

 

That was amazing, Arcadia!  Loved your analysis of the cinematic/artistic differences across the series.  That's something I don't know a lot about, but I love to learn.      

 

To answer the topic question, it is really hard to pick a series that I like the best, because I have favorite episodes in each.  I guess, overall, I like S1 best because it is the story of "how Holmes and Watson became friends," and I love a good "origins story."  But, S1 doesn't actually contain any of my very favorite episodes.

 

HLV is my favorite episode of the entire show (and possibly my second favorite episode of TV ever), so that makes S3 a strong contender, but I really can't stand TSoT, so the fact that I skip it every time I watch the series probably says something.

 

I honestly thought S4 held together for me as well as S1 did, in that it was a coherent narrative designed to tell a story across three episodes, so that was really good.  However, I haven't found myself rewatching it as a whole or in parts, mostly because I know where it ends:  everyone is happy and well adjusted and surrounded by friends and just.....yawn.  I don't dislike it, but the intense feeling of completeness is at once satisfying and off-putting, if that makes any sense.

[Arcadia]

Makes sense to me ... I like the ending, but I don't feel all that compelled to watch it again. And it's possible that HLV is my favorite too, even though I have huge problems with some of it. But for me, it has the most visceral emotional impact, and I like that. (A lot of that, by the way, is due to the way it's filmed.... ;))  A show very seldom does that to me. TRF did, but they kind of spoiled it for me with their "explanation." :(

[Carol the Dabbler]

Never listen to Moftiss's explanation of anything that you like.  They love it too, of course, but for totally different reasons.

[J.P.]

TSOT is very uneven. I found the parts about Sherlock preparing the wedding incredibly endearing, as much as the beginning of the speech, but then it gets too chopped and the "case" is a bit too weird. What really gets me, is the end sequence with the vow and Sherlock leaving the party.

 

Seriously, I cannot find a whole series or episodes being my favourites. It's more like great bits and pieces, and every episode has them.

[gerry]

Seriously, I cannot find a whole series or episodes being my favourites. It's more like great bits and pieces, and every episode has them.

I agree for the most part but I can't really find anything I like that much in TBB, HoB, T6T and HLV, which is why I've never watched them again.

[Arcadia]

If you don't watch them again, how do you know there's not something you missed that you will like?

 

TBB is still the least interesting episode to me, but John has some great little bits in it, such as him thinking of taking a picture of the code. Love Sherlock's flummoxed face at that moment. :d Not enough moments like that in S4, is there? :(

[Arcadia]

Never listen to Moftiss's explanation of anything that you like.  They love it too, of course, but for totally different reasons.

 

True, but the explanation I'm referring to is the one on screen, in TEH. Knowing that Mycroft, with his unlimited resources, was in on the subterfuge takes away the real drama ... for me. YMMV.

 

TSOT is very uneven. I found the parts about Sherlock preparing the wedding incredibly endearing, as much as the beginning of the speech, but then it gets too chopped and the "case" is a bit too weird. What really gets me, is the end sequence with the vow and Sherlock leaving the party.

 

Seriously, I cannot find a whole series or episodes being my favourites. It's more like great bits and pieces, and every episode has them.

 

That's pretty much the way I feel about it, except I know TSo3 is in my top tier ... I simply adore the non-linear storytelling. Also it's really funny.

[Arcadia]

To get back to my lecture ... since there doesn't seem to be any demand for it, I will spare you the angst of Round Two. :P But if I'd just waited another day or two I could have saved myself the trouble, because one of JP's links directed me to the blog by mid0nz, who knows a lot more about it than I do. She compares the two versions of ASIP, but the idea is the same ... cinematic vision vs. TV vision. I wish she would write about S4. Maybe she will.

 

I do quibble a bit with her placing so much blame on the camera; imo, a good artist knows how to use the tools s/he has to best effect. In other words, a good cinematographer will use a bad camera to better effect than a bad cinematographer will. But there's no denying the quality of a camera affects the range of photographic techniques you are able to utilize.

 

Anyway, part 1, & especially part 2, cover the importance of direction, editing and cinematography to the look of a production. Part 3 is about the music.

 

There's another look I'd like to talk about, but I've got to assemble my argument first. I know you all breathlessly await the results. :D

[J.P.]

We didn't say anything waiting for your next move in silent anticipation.

[Arcadia]

Uh huh. I think you're just stunned into silence by the brilliance of my observations. :p

[J.P.]

Also this. Yes.

[SherlockedCAMPer]

Definitely not breathlessly awaiting, but only because I can't hold my breath that long. Too much to do today.

[Arcadia]

Good thing too, Camper, as I have company and it may be awhile. Don't want anyone expiring on my account... :d

[J.P.]

No rush (said in Jim's voice)