Radio Times Favorite Sherlock Episode Vote

[SherlockedCAMPer]

So all 9 episodes are listed and you get 1 vote per episode.  You can vote either up or down.  Have fun

 

http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2015-01-09/what-is-the-best-sherlock-episode

[Arcadia]

Impossible, I say!

[SherlockedCAMPer]

Impossible, I say!

 

That's why I voted up on all of them.  I couldn't decide at all.  My Bio proves that I can't decide on a favorite.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I'd be perfectly happy to declare a favorite, but that doesn't mean that I want to downgrade the other eight.  Alex already voted, and he says this is NOT one of those things where you can vote over and over, so I don't want to go there till I decide what I want to do.  Guess I could just vote my favorite(s) up and ignore the others?

 

Or else vote my favorite(s) up, vote my least favorite(s) down, and ignore the middle bunch?  Yeah, I think that makes the most sense.  But I still have no idea how to compare Series 3 to the others.  *sigh*

 

[Arcadia]

I found my tendency was to vote up the ones that were down, and vote down the ones that were up, in a puny, futile effort to make them all come out about even.

[Bubu]

Wow, I'm quite surprised that the whole 3rd season is at the bottom, especially HLV. I find it absolutely brilliant. TEH is really funny and TSoT is just beautiful -- I can't say how much I love the speech.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Maybe a lot of people are like me -- having trouble comparing S3 with S1&2 -- feels like apples and oranges.

 

[Arcadia]

Yes, I was somewhat surprised by that too. I wonder if the 2-3 wait between seasons makes a difference .... I didn't have the wait, because I only found it like 6 months or so before 3 aired. Still getting used to the first 2 when 3 aired, and wasn't involved in any of the speculation. I'm of two minds whether to be involved in the speculation now, frankly. It's fun, but I don't want it to spoil the show for me by setting up expectations. Sigh, what to do, what to do...... (busily goes to read the theories thread... )

[Arcadia]

 Yeah, I think that makes the most sense.  But I still have no idea how to compare Series 3 to the others.  *sigh*

Because it's stylistically different, you mean? Or because of all the unanswered questions? Or something else?

[Bubu]

Yes, I was somewhat surprised by that too. I wonder if the 2-3 wait between seasons makes a difference .... I didn't have the wait, because I only found it like 6 months or so before 3 aired. Still getting used to the first 2 when 3 aired, and wasn't involved in any of the speculation. I'm of two minds whether to be involved in the speculation now, frankly. It's fun, but I don't want it to spoil the show for me by setting up expectations. Sigh, what to do, what to do...... (busily goes to read the theories thread... )

Hm, perhaps... I started watching Sherlock when it was already all out. So the speculations and the waiting isn't (well -- wasn't) something that I've dealt with. 

And I feel the same way about the speculations and the "setlock" and everything -- it's something new to me, and I was like "I don't want to see anything before it's officially out" and yet, there I was on the 6th of January like

 

:D

[Arcadia]

 

Yes, I was somewhat surprised by that too. I wonder if the 2-3 wait between seasons makes a difference .... I didn't have the wait, because I only found it like 6 months or so before 3 aired. Still getting used to the first 2 when 3 aired, and wasn't involved in any of the speculation. I'm of two minds whether to be involved in the speculation now, frankly. It's fun, but I don't want it to spoil the show for me by setting up expectations. Sigh, what to do, what to do...... (busily goes to read the theories thread... )

Hm, perhaps... I started watching Sherlock when it was already all out. So the speculations and the waiting isn't (well -- wasn't) something that I've dealt with. 

And I feel the same way about the speculations and the "setlock" and everything -- it's something new to me, and I was like "I don't want to see anything before it's officially out" and yet, there I was on the 6th of January like

 

:D

 

I know, it's like some kind of addiction! You know you shouldn't, and yet, you tell yourself just a little bit won't hurt and besides all the other kids are doing it .... :D

[Carol the Dabbler]

Yeah, I think that makes the most sense.  But I still have no idea how to compare Series 3 to the others.  *sigh*

Because it's stylistically different, you mean? Or because of all the unanswered questions? Or something else?

 

I'm not sure. I do think it has a very different feel, so that could certainly account for at least some of it.

 

But my quandary could also be (partly?) due to all the pre-S3 speculation and immediate post-S3 dissection. Even though I had seen S1 and S2 when they were current, I didn't find any forums till a couple months after watching S2 -- so I'd had time to digest the first six episodes on my own. I had my own personal opinions. I saw S3 in a far different context, and I do think that made a difference in how I received it.

 

I am seriously considering staying away from the S4 threads from the time the episodes are aired until I've had a chance to watch and digest them. The only downside I can see is that I'd effectively miss out on the discussion, because I'd be so far behind. Hmm -- if anyone else is thinking of doing that sort of thing, maybe we could wait till we've all digested the new episodes, and then have our own latecomers discussion (no early birds allowed!).

 

I wonder if the 2-3 wait between seasons makes a difference .... I didn't have the wait, because I only found it like 6 months or so before 3 aired. Still getting used to the first 2 when 3 aired, and wasn't involved in any of the speculation. I'm of two minds whether to be involved in the speculation now, frankly. It's fun, but I don't want it to spoil the show for me by setting up expectations. Sigh, what to do, what to do...... (busily goes to read the theories thread... )

Hm, perhaps... I started watching Sherlock when it was already all out. So the speculations and the waiting isn't (well -- wasn't) something that I've dealt with.

And I feel the same way about the speculations and the "setlock" and everything -- it's something new to me, and I was like "I don't want to see anything before it's officially out" and yet, there I was on the 6th of January like

 

:D

 

I had a long wait between all the series, and that actually turned out well, I think. I had time to digest each series before the next one came along. I don't think I had a real problem with the speculation and the minor spoilers either -- they just kept me interested. We had no idea how any of the Setlock spoilers tied into the plot, so seeing them was sort of like seeing a trailer. (I'm glad I didn't see any major spoilers, though.)

 

As I said above, I think the major problem for me was jumping into the extremely lively discussion of the new episodes before I'd really had a chance to digest and analyze them and form my own opinions.

[Arcadia]

 

 

Yeah, I think that makes the most sense.  But I still have no idea how to compare Series 3 to the others.  *sigh*

Because it's stylistically different, you mean? Or because of all the unanswered questions? Or something else?

 

 

I'm not sure. I do think it has a very different feel, so that could certainly account for at least some of it.

 

But my quandary could also be (partly?) due to all the pre-S3 speculation and immediate post-S3 dissection. Even though I had seen S1 and S2 when they were current, I didn't find any forums till a couple months after watching S2 -- so I'd had time to digest the first six episodes on my own. I had my own personal opinions. I saw S3 in a far different context, and I do think that made a difference in how I received it.

 

I am seriously considering staying away from the S4 threads from the time the episodes are aired until I've had a chance to watch and digest them. The only downside I can see is that I'd effectively miss out on the discussion, because I'd be so far behind. Hmm -- if anyone else is thinking of doing that sort of thing, maybe we could wait till we've all digested the new episodes, and then have our own latecomers discussion (no early birds allowed!).

 

Interesting. I went looking for a forum -- or something -- because I just felt so confused about what I'd just seen, but I think I puzzled over it on my own for about a month. And of course I had zero expectations, not having digested the first 2 seasons yet. In fact, I still don't think I've digested them, y'all keep coming up with stuff I've never noticed! (That's partly intentional ... I've made a point of not watching them too often after the first engorgement ... I don't want to get so familiar with them that they start feeling stale.) At any rate, I notice a difference, but not so much as you, I think. Not so much that I can't compare them, anyway.

 

I don't know what to think about skipping the discussion. In part it depends on how I feel about the episodes; if I'm as emotionally distraught (!) as I was after HLV, I may need some time on my own to wrestle with it. Although I suspect curiosity would get the better of me pretty quickly.

 

If I think the thing is absolutely brilliant in every way I'll probably be on here 5 seconds after it airs. If I have "issues" I'll probably watch it 5-6 times first. Then again, maybe not! I don't know, I've never been through something like this before!

 

After that it will depend on what tack the discussion takes. If I feel like it's ruining it for me, I'll probably drop out of it for awhile

[Carol the Dabbler]

I don't know what to think about skipping the discussion. In part it depends on how I feel about the episodes; if I'm as emotionally distraught (!) as I was after HLV, I may need some time on my own to wrestle with it. Although I suspect curiosity would get the better of me pretty quickly.

 

If I think the thing is absolutely brilliant in every way I'll probably be on here 5 seconds after it airs. If I have "issues" I'll probably watch it 5-6 times first. Then again, maybe not! I don't know, I've never been through something like this before!

 

After that it will depend on what tack the discussion takes. If I feel like it's ruining it for me, I'll probably drop out of it for awhile

 

Maybe that's what I shoulda done after S3, drop out temporarily. I certainly thought about it. The discussions were pretty heated for a while (though reportedly only "warm" compared to some other sites), and I just wasn't having any fun.

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

Well, darn -- I finally made up my mind how to vote, and the polls are closed already!

 

Anyhow, here's how it turned out (from "worst" to "best"):

 

 

9.  "The Empty Hearse"

8.  "The Sign of Three"

7.  "His Last Vow"

6.  "The Blind Banker"

5.  "The Hounds of Baskerville"

4.  "A Scandal in Belgravia"

3.  "A Study in Pink"

2.  "The Great Game"

1.  "The Reichenbach Fall"

 

 

The spoiler box is for those of you who would like to think what order you'd put them in -- before you read the fan consensus.

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

The surprising thing about that ranking is that I'm not surprised -- gratified, but not really surprised, because that order makes nearly-perfect sense to me.

 

Apparently I'm not the only who wishes S3 had been more like S1 and S2.  Don't get me wrong -- I like the episodes, but they feel like a different show (maybe even three different shows), and I like the other show better.  Hopefully Moftiss will take this vote to heart -- but if changing the show is the only way they can keep enjoying what they're doing, then I suppose it's either that or nothing, and hopefully it won't get to the point where I'd actually prefer the latter option.  (I might have placed "Sign of Three" ahead of "Last Vow," but that would depend on my mood.)

 

"Blind Banker" is of course no surprise, due to the weak plot.  I believe that "Hounds of Baskerville" could have been much stronger if they had merely shortened the John-as-lab-rat scene to make time for Sherlock to flash us back to our first sight of Dr. Frankland, letting us see that he had come out of the leaky-pipes room wearing a gas mask -- but as it stands, I agree it's a bit weak.  "Scandal in Belgravia" is a clever episode and technically very well done, but it's something like S3 in my opinion -- not quite the same show.  "Great Game" and "Study in Pink" are both so beautifully done that I'd have a hard time choosing between them -- I would have put "Pink" first simply because it's our introduction to this wonderful universe, but "Game" has all those terrific cases, so that's fine.  And "Reichenbach" is such a captivating story with three tour-de-force performances that I can't imagine putting any other episode first.

 

[Arcadia]

Whereas I, on the other hand, am a bit shocked. I thought S3 was brilliant, whether it was like the rest of the episodes or not. I mean, it was just really, really good filmmaking. But the whole season was less straightforwardly told than the first 2, and I guess I can see how that could be offputting to some people. Huh. Too bad, because it's my impression they want to experiment even more in the future, not less. Although maybe they could get away with more experimental filmmaking if the plots themselves were more solidly constructed. People need something to hang onto in the midst of change.

 

Other than (reluctantly) putting Banker and Hounds at the bottom, I have no idea how to rank the rest of them. Scandal I still think is the most visually arresting episode; Vow jerks my heart out the most; The Fall is the most iconic; etc. And TSo3, so far, bears up the best under repeated viewings, every time I watch it I love it just a little bit more.

[T.o.b.y]

I agree with the top 3, that's for sure, though I wouldn't rank them in that order myself. And The Empty Hearse comes last for me as well. I understand why not so many people voted for The Sign of Three - I love it, but I see what might bother other viewers. The only real surprise for me is how low His Last Vow ranked. Behind The Blind Banker? Really? Wow. I mean, I like The Blind Banker just fine, but I always thought that was the least popular episode of all, and I would have expected His Last Vow to be much more universally appealing.

 

As for The Hounds of Baskerville, I think this is one of those you can only really appreciate if you're familiar with the book and so realize what a brilliant adaptation it is.

[joanneta1]

The surprising thing about that ranking is that I'm not surprised -- gratified, but not really surprised, because that order makes nearly-perfect sense to me.

 

Apparently I'm not the only who wishes S3 had been more like S1 and S2. Don't get me wrong -- I like the episodes, but they feel like a different show (maybe even three different shows), and I like the other show better. Hopefully Moftiss will take this vote to heart -- but if changing the show is the only way they can keep enjoying what they're doing, then I suppose it's either that or nothing, and hopefully it won't get to the point where I'd actually prefer the latter option. (I might have placed "Sign of Three" ahead of "Last Vow," but that would depend on my mood.)

 

"Blind Banker" is of course no surprise, due to the weak plot. I believe that "Hounds of Baskerville" could have been much stronger if they had merely shortened the John-as-lab-rat scene to make time for Sherlock to flash us back to our first sight of Dr. Frankland, letting us see that he had come out of the leaky-pipes room wearing a gas mask -- but as it stands, I agree it's a bit weak. "Scandal in Belgravia" is a clever episode and technically very well done, but it's something like S3 in my opinion -- not quite the same show. "Great Game" and "Study in Pink" are both so beautifully done that I'd have a hard time choosing between them -- I would have put "Pink" first simply because it's our introduction to this wonderful universe, but "Game" has all those terrific cases, so that's fine. And "Reichenbach" is such a captivating story with three tour-de-force performances that I can't imagine putting any other episode first.

This is a case where I definitely agree with Carol the Dabbler and not Arcadia, which is not a good start, since I have already asked the latter to be a friend on this forum.

For two years, friends and colleagues were raving about this wonderful new 21st century re-think of the whole ACD concept, and I studiously avoided it, until one exasperated friend gave me Series 1 on DVD. After watching the whole thing through one rainy weekend, I went on Amazon.uk to order the other two and then watched end-to-end for as long as I could keep awake.

Quite frankly, Series 3 is starting to sink under it own weight, or seems to be propelled forward by the momentum gathered in the other two, which were crafted more carefully, more considerately for the main characters and the potential viewers. The only reason I like TEH more than the other two in Series 3 are the sequences between Sherlock and John ("why do you never call the police?") from the restaurant encounter to the final conversation at the foot of the stairs. And as for HLV, I have already said that to make Sherlock a killer was not a brilliant way out, not to mention that it goes directly against ACD, who once wrote to his brother in law E.W. Hornung (Raffles forever!) "You must not make the criminal a hero" and in this particular episode the hero is made into a criminal! So, well done to all those who managed to vote, the result may make the dynamic duo of screenwriters less cavalier in their treatment of an iconic partnership.

[Arcadia]

This is a case where I definitely agree with Carol the Dabbler and not Arcadia, which is not a good start, since I have already asked the latter to be a friend on this forum.

No worries, I like you just fine anyway! Besides, I don't respond to friend requests, but it's not because I don't want to be friendly. I don't know why I don't respond, really. I just never have, here or anywhere else, and probably never will. But I'm flattered when people send the request.

 

And as for HLV, I have already said that to make Sherlock a killer was not a brilliant way out, not to mention that it goes directly against ACD, who once wrote to his brother in law E.W. Hornung (Raffles forever!) "You must not make the criminal a hero" and in this particular episode the hero is made into a criminal!

Amen to that! I totally love many, many things about HLV, but that's the one thing I can't quite accept. No, scratch that ... I've accepted it. But in order to do that, I've had to distance myself from the story; I have to watch it from the outside, if you see what I mean. Whereas my preference is to watch (or read) a story from the inside, as if it's actually happening. But to really immerse myself in a story, I need to be able to identify with the protagonist.

 

HLV is still one of my favorite episodes because I love the acting and the music and the cinematography, and I love the depth of emotion it generates, but I find myself pulling back from identifying with the characters. Because I really can't identify with someone who would shoot an unarmed man in the head. Cognitively, I understand the reason, but the rest of me simply recoils. And I hate that, I don't want to recoil from Sherlock, I want to be right there with him (in spirit if not in the flesh). But ... oh well. Sigh.

 

I guess TRF almost has to be at the top of the list simply because of the iconic battle between Moriarty and Sherlock. But I really can't rate the episodes, I love them all!

[Carol the Dabbler]

Quite frankly, Series 3 is starting to sink under it own weight, or seems to be propelled forward by the momentum gathered in the other two, which were crafted more carefully, more considerately for the main characters and the potential viewers.

I think "crafting" is the main reason I like "Sign of Three" better than "Empty Hearse." They're both kinda heavy on the humor (albeit very nicely done humor), whereas I come to Sherlock looking for -- hmm, what DO I come to Sherlock for? not just the mystery, drama, and suspense (though I do tend to go for a good mystery program) -- OK, something like this: mysteries involving fascinating characters, with a judicious leavening of intrinsic humor. As I was saying, "Sign" in particular is more like leavening with a judicious sprinkling of mystery, but its intricate plot line is beautifully crafted -- unlike "Hearse," where it's hard to tell the true from the false and I still can't figure out when/whether Sherlock is supposed to have given Anderson that explanation. (And as for "Last Vow," my reaction is still "Whuhh?!"

 

The only reason I like TEH more than the other two in Series 3 are the sequences between Sherlock and John ("why do you never call the police?") from the restaurant encounter to the final conversation at the foot of the stairs.

Can't argue with you there -- though they have some very nice moments in "Sign" as well.

 

And as for HLV, I have already said that to make Sherlock a killer was not a brilliant way out, not to mention that it goes directly against ACD, who once wrote to his brother in law E.W. Hornung (Raffles forever!) "You must not make the criminal a hero" and in this particular episode the hero is made into a criminal! So, well done to all those who managed to vote, the result may make the dynamic duo of screenwriters less cavalier in their treatment of an iconic partnership.

I think making Mary into a whatever-she-is/was bothers me even more -- though I'm still hoping for a future revelation that she was in some sense on the side of the angels, rather than simply killing anyone her employer told her to kill.

 

I'd have preferred for Sherlock to defeat Magnussen in a more subtle way, but he found himself between a rock (Magnussen) and a hard place (fulfilling his vow to his friends), and had to make an impossible choice. I suspect that the original Mr. Holmes might have done likewise in the same circumstances -- not saying that I agree completely with Moftiss's interpretation of that scene in "Milverton," just that I think Holmes was capable of such a thing under certain circumstances, and of course Watson would not have written it up that way.

 

... I don't respond to friend requests, but it's not because I don't want to be friendly. I don't know why I don't respond, really. I just never have, here or anywhere else, and probably never will. But I'm flattered when people send the request.

Hey, I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one!

 

I developed that policy on Facebook, after receiving a friend request from someone who had accidentally registered in my high-school class on Classmates.com. Our entire "relationship" consisted of me emailing her to see if maybe she'd attended a different school with a similar name.

 

HLV is still one of my favorite episodes because I love the acting and the music and the cinematography, and I love the depth of emotion it generates, but I find myself pulling back from identifying with the characters. Because I really can't identify with someone who would shoot an unarmed man in the head. Cognitively, I understand the reason, but the rest of me simply recoils. And I hate that....

Yes, I agree on that point. I've never much identified with Sherlock, more with John -- but I have some difficulty doing that in this episode. I feel really, really sorry for John, but I have trouble actually sympathizing with him, though I'm not entirely sure why. So I'm left watching the episode through the wrong end of the binoculars.

 

[joanneta1]

To cut straight to the chase, Mr. Holmes would have found a way (as this one did in H of B on his second visit there) to have a deep scan of Appledore Towers done to ascertain the location of the vaunted vaults and not simply charged in like a battering ram at the gates, by doing a "deal with the devil" after ascertaining that there was actual, hard copy evidence and not just a very good memory behind Magnussen's ploy. He would have made sure that no one else could trace Mary and her Mrs. Smith persona before tackling Magnusen. As it is, he may have committed wilful homicide to little effect. If Mary has her whole past on a USB stick, it is a near certainty that her past employers and even some of the families of her victims are searching for her, so his assurance to John "Tell Mary she's safe now" holds about as much water as the Fall, which was not credible in the first place. It is an occasion where "You are slipping" applies to the writer of the episode, unless it is part of a very bloated red herring indeed.

[Arcadia]

I think "crafting" is the main reason I like "Sign of Three" better than "Empty Hearse." They're both kinda heavy on the humor (albeit very nicely done humor), whereas I come to Sherlock looking for -- hmm, what DO I come to Sherlock for? not just the mystery, drama, and suspense (though I do tend to go for a good mystery program) -- OK, something like this: mysteries involving fascinating characters, with a judicious leavening of intrinsic humor. As I was saying, "Sign" in particular is more like leavening with a judicious sprinkling of mystery, but its intricate plot line is beautifully crafted -- unlike "Hearse," where it's hard to tell the true from the false and I still can't figure out when/whether Sherlock is supposed to have given Anderson that explanation. (And as for "Last Vow," my reaction is still "Whuhh?!"

Aha. Now there's a huge difference right there; I don't think I'd care that much about the show if it weren't for the humor. Maybe that's one reason S3 works better for me than for a lot of other people. Not much on TV makes me laugh, but Sherlock does, and I can forgive a lot when something makes me laugh. And there's a sweet goofiness to a lot of Sherlock's scenes in the first two episodes of S3 that, frankly, send me over the moon for him.

 

 

And as for HLV, I have already said that to make Sherlock a killer was not a brilliant way out, not to mention that it goes directly against ACD, who once wrote to his brother in law E.W. Hornung (Raffles forever!) "You must not make the criminal a hero" and in this particular episode the hero is made into a criminal! So, well done to all those who managed to vote, the result may make the dynamic duo of screenwriters less cavalier in their treatment of an iconic partnership.

I think making Mary into a whatever-she-is/was bothers me even more -- though I'm still hoping for a future revelation that she was in some sense on the side of the angels, rather than simply killing anyone her employer told her to kill.

 

 

HLV is still one of my favorite episodes because I love the acting and the music and the cinematography, and I love the depth of emotion it generates, but I find myself pulling back from identifying with the characters. Because I really can't identify with someone who would shoot an unarmed man in the head. Cognitively, I understand the reason, but the rest of me simply recoils. And I hate that....

Yes, I agree on that point. I've never much identified with Sherlock, more with John -- but I have some difficulty doing that in this episode. I feel really, really sorry for John, but I have trouble actually sympathizing with him, though I'm not entirely sure why. So I'm left watching the episode through the wrong end of the binoculars.

 

 Yes, yes, yes. As I was reading your comments I realized that I have the same problem with Mary's actions that I do with Sherlock's ...  except that she's not a main character, so it's not that hard for me to step away from her and still enjoy the show. But somehow I got distanced from John in HLV too, and I'm not sure why. It's not because he took Mary back into his life; I was touched by that. Ahh... Wow. I just realized. It's the whole "addicted to danger" nonsense. I don't identify that with John, and it makes him seem less real to me. It's just one more thing that tosses me out of the moment when I'm watching; everyone's saying "you're addicted to danger, John" and I'm sitting there going, "What! No he isn't, he's the sane one!"

 

To cut straight to the chase, Mr. Holmes would have found a way (as this one did in H of B on his second visit there) to have a deep scan of Appledore Towers done to ascertain the location of the vaunted vaults and not simply charged in like a battering ram at the gates, by doing a "deal with the devil" after ascertaining that there was actual, hard copy evidence and not just a very good memory behind Magnussen's ploy. He would have made sure that no one else could trace Mary and her Mrs. Smith persona before tackling Magnusen. As it is, he may have committed wilful homicide to little effect. If Mary has her whole past on a USB stick, it is a near certainty that her past employers and even some of the families of her victims are searching for her, so his assurance to John "Tell Mary she's safe now" holds about as much water as the Fall, which was not credible in the first place. It is an occasion where "You are slipping" applies to the writer of the episode, unless it is part of a very bloated red herring indeed.

One of the things I DO like about the HLV plot is that I think it was meant to show what could happen when Sherlock is over-confidant. We goldfish think he rushed into Appledore in a foolhardy manner, but I'll bet he thought he'd been very thorough and clever in his planning. I also think we were meant to see what can happen when he lets emotions rule his head. Although several people think he was in control of his emotions the entire time, so I'm uncertain about that last point.

 

I don't know, I'm not convinced yet the writers are slipping. I genuinely think the 3rd season included some experimentation on their part, and I like that even if I'm not always fond of the results. And I do think there are some red herrings in there somewhere -- or at least, some things left to be revealed. So I'm waiting until season 4 to decide whether I think they're slipping or not.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I don't think I'd care that much about the show if it weren't for the humor. Maybe that's one reason S3 works better for me than for a lot of other people.

I may have inadvertently overstated my case -- I actually would not care AT ALL for Sherlock if it weren't for the humor. I HATE shows that are all seriousness. But on the other hand, unless a show is an out-and-out comedy, I generally prefer that the humor not be the focus of an episode. That said, I think I prefer the humor of "Sign" over that of "Empty Hearse," even though there may be more of it, simply because it's more intrinsic.

 

... I have the same problem with Mary's actions that I do with Sherlock's ...  except that she's not a main character, so it's not that hard for me to step away from her and still enjoy the show. But somehow I got distanced from John in HLV too, and I'm not sure why. It's not because he took Mary back into his life; I was touched by that. Ahh... Wow. I just realized. It's the whole "addicted to danger" nonsense. I don't identify that with John, and it makes him seem less real to me. It's just one more thing that tosses me out of the moment when I'm watching; everyone's saying "you're addicted to danger, John" and I'm sitting there going, "What! No he isn't, he's the sane one!"

That's at least part of the problem for me as well. Poor John -- as a war veteran and a doctor, he's accustomed to danger and horrendous situations, which means that (unlike the great majority of people) he's capable of associating with people like Sherlock and and Mary, and being their friend, and enjoying their adventures. From their point of view, I can understand how that translates into him craving the danger itself -- they're projecting their own attitudes onto him. What's most painful to me is that John seems to swallow the idea. Maybe once he recuperates from the events and revelations of "Last Vow," he can get his head together well enough to see that they're mistaken, and tell them, "No I'm not addicted to danger, you idiots -- I tolerate it because my best friends are addicted to it."

 

I'm not convinced yet the writers are slipping. I genuinely think the 3rd season included some experimentation on their part, and I like that even if I'm not always fond of the results. And I do think there are some red herrings in there somewhere -- or at least, some things left to be revealed. So I'm waiting until season 4 to decide whether I think they're slipping or not.

Me too, though I think Series 3 didn't just "include some experimentation," I think the basic concepts and plot structures were experimental -- and I hope that the results tell them what they need to know. I too am hopeful that some of the weirdities were some sort of red herrings, and that things will make far more sense once those have been explained.

 

[T.o.b.y]

That's at least part of the problem for me as well. Poor John -- as a war veteran and a doctor, he's accustomed to danger and horrendous situations, which means that (unlike the great majority of people) he's capable of associating with people like Sherlock and and Mary, and being their friend, and enjoying their adventures. From their point of view, I can understand how that translates into him craving the danger itself -- they're projecting their own attitudes onto him. What's most painful to me is that John seems to swallow the idea. Maybe once he recuperates from the events and revelations of "Last Vow," he can get his head together well enough to see that they're mistaken, and tell them, "No I'm not addicted to danger, you idiots -- I tolerate it because my best friends are addicted to it."

 

Not sure if this discussion should stay in this thread, but you can move it if you like, Carol (do we even have a thread where we discuss John's character? If not, how did that happen?)

 

Anyway. I'd like to disagree, a bit.

 

First of all, I understand why you may not like the idea of John being an adrenaline junkie, but what makes you think that was not the writers' intention? It's part of the very first episode. Mycroft telling John his therapist is wrong, that he misses the war, that his psychosomatic symptoms are better when he's under stress. Sherlock curing the limp with a good chase after a killer, throwing themselves into traffic on a busy street included.

 

I always thought that was why John is so drawn to Sherlock's company, Sherlock takes him back to the battlefield, in a way. He is his new "commanding officer", as Sherlock puts it in The Sign of Three.

 

Now, I have no idea whether this is in any way plausible psychologically. Maybe actual war veterans are considering to sue the BBC for giving people false ideas about their problems, who knows. But the show is not really realistic when it comes to psychology. (Sherlock's personality, I still maintain, is not really possible in real life).

 

All I can say is, it makes sense to me. If John became habituated to dealing with life-or-death situations on a daily basis, then of course he'd have trouble adjusting to a life where ones greatest worry is an overflowing trash can. It must take quite some emotional adapting to live in a war zone, and no wonder he couldn't just adapt back and tone himself down again.

 

What I think is interesting about John is that this seems to bother him. While Sherlock's attitude seems to be "F*** normal", I think John would really like to have an ordinary life and be an ordinary person. But he can't. He thought marrying Mary was a step in the right direction until the big reveal in His Last Vow. Poor John.

 

I like John this way. I've never thought of him as "the sane one". But then, I'm drawn to characters who are messed up in some way. They're just more interesting. Besides, I think I've got a few screws loose myself (in different places though), and I find it comforting when fictional characters aren't entirely sane and normal.