Episode 4.0: The Abominable Bride (alias The Special)

[Slithytove]

Thank you for the link, Arcadia - that was an exceptionally good review by someone who clearly grasps the fundamental point of the episode, i.e. that it is ​Sherlock's ​interpretation of situations and people (including himself.)  So it doesn't matter if the explanation of feminism is a bit heavy-handed or the women look like they're in the KKK, or if Watson in 1895 should have known what a telephone is...

 

This isn't a portrayal of Conan Doyle's London, it is Sherlock's imagined London peopled by Sherlock's perception of his friends and enemies.  So, for instance, if Mycroft is greedy and immobile and has some sort of death wish, or John is the driving engine who makes Sherlock into a hero for public consumption but also insists that he lives up to the role, this isn't a distortion of the characters.  It is the way Sherlock thinks of them.  It also told us quite a lot about the way he sees himself - insecure about his own talents, tormented by the fear of weakness or error, struggling with guilt about his treatment of women, and reliant on John for support, perhaps even for survival.  I can't understand people who, having watched the previous series, found it baffling.  When you think about it, it was quite an illuminating episode as far as Sherlock's inner world is concerned.

 

 

 

[sittything]

How many of you who saw TAB in the cinema got one of these?  My cinema didn't carry them.  I saw NONE.  I had to get one off of Ebay.

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sherlock-The-Abominable-Bride-Regal-Fathom-Events-souvenir-ticket-3-D-Cumberb-/141887372850?&_trksid=p2056016.m2516.l5255

 

 

It's now at my desk at work with my Funko Pops.

[sittything]

I haven't really talked about the Special much, mostly b/c I think I'm still too hung up on the whole Mycroft caring thing so instead I just reblog Mycroft things on Tumblr to spare you all my effusive gushing.

[Inge l-w]

I have re-watched the unspeakable abomination of the Abominable episode ten times already! By rights, I should go on the Rant thread and let off steam there, but every single viewing brings a beloved quote back to memory, so I grab the relevant ACD story to read or the relevant Granada episode to watch, and calm down, simply enjoying the effortless grace and virtuosity of that series.

As a matter of fact, my Hampstead Heath friends (married couple) came for a conference, so I naturally put them up. We all watched the Special together, they not being fans of the modernised version, but no haters either, simply a neutral audience: they hadn't watched it at home on January 1st, so it was their first viewing of it: the lady, being on the squeamish side, covered her eyes each time the back of a blown-out head was seen (bride and Moriarty), they had no trouble following the back-and-forth; the husband remarked about Sherlock's swan dive that it reminded him of Crouching Dragon, but it was the lady's comment which revealed a whole new kettle of fish for me, while making ma petite Aurelie and the whole TJLC happy:"Somehow, he looks too feminine to be a real Sherlock impersonation." I was floored, mainly because I like BC as an actor, while she's a fan of MF, but %*#* it all to h*#%, she IS right!

[J.P.]

Watson mentions telephone contraptions which might mean the mobile phones. Even if Bell's telephone was popular already in 1895, a concept of carrying one in your pocket and being connected with internet must have sounded quite crazy. It sounded crazy 50 years ago! :D

[sfmpco]

Stumbled across this review of TAB, I think this is one reviewer who really "got" what the episode is about. I particularly like her summary at the end (possibly because that's what I got out of it too. ;) )

 

I can't believe we've stopped talking about this episode already, but I guess there's neither enough mystery to solve nor enough clues to the future to keep us speculating --- ???? Or maybe you've all just been too busy, like me! I've been meaning to rewatch it for days now but the dang real world keeps interfering.........

 

I totally agree that she got it.  So few people did.

 

I've seen the episode nearly 10 times, but I haven't watched it for a bit.  Been busy with my own writings, one of which is a complete breakdown and analysis of the episode.

[sfmpco]

Watson mentions telephone contraptions which might mean the mobile phones. Even if Bell's telephone was popular already in 1895, a concept of carrying one in your pocket and being connected with internet must have sounded quite crazy. It sounded crazy 50 years ago! :D

 

Telephones in 1895 were around but were extremely uncommon.  It really wasn't until WWI that they became much more widespread, partly out of necessity.  Even so, their use in private residences didn't really occur until after WWI although wealthier homes and the government had them.

[jadpdr]

But when Sherlock tells him about 'Jets' , the dear doctor doesn't question them beyond a puzzled "what?"

[Arcadia]

I haven't really talked about the Special much, mostly b/c I think I'm still too hung up on the whole Mycroft caring thing so instead I just reblog Mycroft things on Tumblr to spare you all my effusive gushing.

 

I may not speak for everyone, but I think a lot of us like effusive gushing! Well, about this show.

 

As you've no doubt noticed, I still don't trust Mycroft or think he's been good for his brother, but I'm willing to find out that he really has softened and is prepared to become a "proper big brother". But if they go that way, I'd also like to know why the change; is Mycroft really different, or is it just Sherlock's perception of him that's changing? Given his attitude on the plane, the latter doesn't ring true (yet), so I'd like to know what it is that prompted Mycroft to come out with the "your loss would break my heart" comment, and the "I'll always be there for you" remark. Because I sure as heck didn't see them coming!

 

Also, Sherlock himself was a bit more mellow towards Mycroft in TEH and even TSo3; where'd that guy go? He wasn't on the plane!

 

Which reminds me, I was thinking earlier that there was a line that bothered me, and it was in fact the "proper brother" line:

Shouldn’t you be off getting me a pardon or something, like a proper big brother?

 

 

I don't like what that implies ... that Sherlock thinks he was being treated unfairly, that he shouldn't have to take responsibility for what he did to Magnussen. I thought he was more of a man than that; but that line, and the way he said it, comes dangerously close to making him sound like 1) an over-privileged brat with no moral compass, and 2) he thinks that it is, in fact, Mycroft's job to get him out of trouble. Not your most mature moment, Sherly.

 

 

[Slithytove]

Regarding telephones...This is the 19th century in the imagination of a man who didn't know that the earth goes round the sun.  Wouldn't he have deleted most of the history he learned at school, including dates, as being irrelevant to the Work?

 

As for Mr Cumberbatch being too feminine to be Holmes...Well, admittedly he is beautiful, rather than ruggedly handsome, but he seems entirely masculine as far as I'm concerned!

[Arcadia]

[Van Buren Supernova]

I don't like what that implies ... that Sherlock thinks he was being treated unfairly, that he shouldn't have to take responsibility for what he did to Magnussen. I thought he was more of a man than that; but that line, and the way he said it, comes dangerously close to making him sound like 1) an over-privileged brat with no moral compass, and 2) he thinks that it is, in fact, Mycroft's job to get him out of trouble. Not your most mature moment, Sherly.

Not no moral compass, I would say different moral compass.

Well, we don't need to go into all that again, do we?

I suspect I'm using same brand of compass...

[sfmpco]

But when Sherlock tells him about 'Jets' , the dear doctor doesn't question them beyond a puzzled "what?"

 

Very simply because it's all in a dream and dreams don't have to make sense.  Also, the jet comment is Sherlock's real world seeping through the cracks.  Victorian Watson needn't question it because it is irrelevant to what Sherlock needs to work out in the dream.

[sfmpco]

Regarding telephones...This is the 19th century in the imagination of a man who didn't know that the earth goes round the sun.  Wouldn't he have deleted most of the history he learned at school, including dates, as being irrelevant to the Work?

 

I suspect that Sherlock occasionally spends time in the NSY archives looking at unsolved cases , and he's got a lot of cases stored up in his head.  That the earth goes around the sun or any other astronomical phenomenon are entirely irrelevant to his casework.  That doesn't mean he can't appreciate the stars, as he says.  London, however, undoubtedly gives off too much light pollution to get much of a view of the stars, just like any other major city.  

 

So he stores up old crimes both unsolved and solved as they are useful.  

 

As for Benedict, I have seen some photos where he looks very much like a suave movie star from the 40's, but they are rare.  He seems to have an eternal youth to him, but there's been quite a difference in just six years.  Darker hair matures him.  Lighter hair youthens him.  I prefer the darker hair.

[Arcadia]

 

I don't like what that implies ... that Sherlock thinks he was being treated unfairly, that he shouldn't have to take responsibility for what he did to Magnussen. I thought he was more of a man than that; but that line, and the way he said it, comes dangerously close to making him sound like 1) an over-privileged brat with no moral compass, and 2) he thinks that it is, in fact, Mycroft's job to get him out of trouble. Not your most mature moment, Sherly.

Not no moral compass, I would say different moral compass.

Well, we don't need to go into all that again, do we?

I suspect I'm using same brand of compass...

 

 

Okay, different compass ... but if it still leads to him acting like he thinks he deserves to be pandered to, I still find it a less than attractive quality. :P

[T.o.b.y]

I can't believe we've stopped talking about this episode already, but I guess there's neither enough mystery to solve nor enough clues to the future to keep us speculating --- ???? Or maybe you've all just been too busy, like me! I've been meaning to rewatch it for days now but the dang real world keeps interfering.........

 

You really think I'm done talking about this? No way... I'm just catching my breath a bit (and working...).

 

This isn't a portrayal of Conan Doyle's London, it is Sherlock's imagined London peopled by Sherlock's perception of his friends and enemies.  So, for instance, if Mycroft is greedy and immobile and has some sort of death wish, or John is the driving engine who makes Sherlock into a hero for public consumption but also insists that he lives up to the role, this isn't a distortion of the characters.  It is the way Sherlock thinks of them.  It also told us quite a lot about the way he sees himself - insecure about his own talents, tormented by the fear of weakness or error, struggling with guilt about his treatment of women, and reliant on John for support, perhaps even for survival.  I can't understand people who, having watched the previous series, found it baffling.  When you think about it, it was quite an illuminating episode as far as Sherlock's inner world is concerned.

 

Exactly. Precisely.

 

I have re-watched the unspeakable abomination of the Abominable episode ten times already! By rights, I should go on the Rant thread and let off steam there, but every single viewing brings a beloved quote back to memory, so I grab the relevant ACD story to read or the relevant Granada episode to watch, and calm down, simply enjoying the effortless grace and virtuosity of that series.

As a matter of fact, my Hampstead Heath friends (married couple) came for a conference, so I naturally put them up. We all watched the Special together, they not being fans of the modernised version, but no haters either, simply a neutral audience: they hadn't watched it at home on January 1st, so it was their first viewing of it: the lady, being on the squeamish side, covered her eyes each time the back of a blown-out head was seen (bride and Moriarty), they had no trouble following the back-and-forth; the husband remarked about Sherlock's swan dive that it reminded him of Crouching Dragon, but it was the lady's comment which revealed a whole new kettle of fish for me, while making ma petite Aurelie and the whole TJLC happy:"Somehow, he looks too feminine to be a real Sherlock impersonation." I was floored, mainly because I like BC as an actor, while she's a fan of MF, but %*#* it all to h*#%, she IS right!

 

I have never thought of Sherlock Holmes as being especially "masculine". He isn't much of a sexual being in the original, it doesn't even really matter that he's a man, except that a woman wouldn't have been believable in that role to an 1800s audience. Nowadays, I think he could be any gender.

 

The BBC Sherlock version does look slightly androgynous sometimes, especially in the first three episodes. I really like that look, actually. But I think from series 2 onwards, he became more buff and manly. Which is also fine. It's all fine. Just as long as he's still Sherlock.

 

But when Sherlock tells him about 'Jets' , the dear doctor doesn't question them beyond a puzzled "what?"

 

:lol: He's probably so used to hearing Holmes spew incomprehensible phrases, he doesn't bother to ask any further questions.

 

 

Shouldn’t you be off getting me a pardon or something, like a proper big brother?

 

 

I don't like what that implies ... that Sherlock thinks he was being treated unfairly, that he shouldn't have to take responsibility for what he did to Magnussen. I thought he was more of a man than that; but that line, and the way he said it, comes dangerously close to making him sound like 1) an over-privileged brat with no moral compass, and 2) he thinks that it is, in fact, Mycroft's job to get him out of trouble. Not your most mature moment, Sherly.

 

Mycroft does kind of bring this side out in him... I don't mind. I really liked that scene. I think Sherlock was just trying to annoy Mycroft and get rid of him for the moment, anyway.

[Van Buren Supernova]

Okay, different compass ... but if it still leads to him acting like he thinks he deserves to be pandered to, I still find it a less than attractive quality. :P

I concede with this one. Especially that I feel sorry for Mycroft on that scene.

[J.P.]

 

Mycroft does kind of bring this side out in him... I don't mind. I really liked that scene. I think Sherlock was just trying to annoy Mycroft and get rid of him for the moment, anyway.

... and above all to change the subject. In the airplain scenes he acts incredibly guilty, don't you think? Like a kid caught on a prank. He gets irritated when his strategy of playing his OD down doesn't work.

[Arcadia]

 

I can't believe we've stopped talking about this episode already, but I guess there's neither enough mystery to solve nor enough clues to the future to keep us speculating --- ???? Or maybe you've all just been too busy, like me! I've been meaning to rewatch it for days now but the dang real world keeps interfering.........

 

You really think I'm done talking about this? No way... I'm just catching my breath a bit (and working...).

 

Yay!!

 

The BBC Sherlock version does look slightly androgynous sometimes, especially in the first three episodes. I really like that look, actually. But I think from series 2 onwards, he became more buff and manly. Which is also fine. It's all fine. Just as long as he's still Sherlock.

I loved that slightly androgynous look too, I thought he was beautiful and rather ethereal. But I agree with the rest of it too ... he's more mature now, and that's fine.

 

 

Shouldn’t you be off getting me a pardon or something, like a proper big brother?

 

 

I don't like what that implies ... that Sherlock thinks he was being treated unfairly, that he shouldn't have to take responsibility for what he did to Magnussen. I thought he was more of a man than that; but that line, and the way he said it, comes dangerously close to making him sound like 1) an over-privileged brat with no moral compass, and 2) he thinks that it is, in fact, Mycroft's job to get him out of trouble. Not your most mature moment, Sherly.

 

Mycroft does kind of bring this side out in him... I don't mind. I really liked that scene. I think Sherlock was just trying to annoy Mycroft and get rid of him for the moment, anyway.

 

 

Oh, you're probably right. It's just part of a trend I sometimes think I see (or I think I sometimes see?) -- that Moftiss thinks it's okay for Sherlock to behave that way. That just because he thinks he's right, that's enough to justify any of his actions.

 

Still ... they have that wonderful line from John ... "but dear God above, you will hold yourself to a higher standard." I can imagine Greg saying something similar. So I guess Moftiss have some awareness that Sherlock's petulance is a Bit Not Good.

 

 

Mycroft does kind of bring this side out in him... I don't mind. I really liked that scene. I think Sherlock was just trying to annoy Mycroft and get rid of him for the moment, anyway.

... and above all to change the subject. In the airplain scenes he acts incredibly guilty, don't you think? Like a kid caught on a prank. He gets irritated when his strategy of playing his OD down doesn't work.

Good point as well. So maybe we were supposed to be angry with Sherlock for acting that way? Yeah, okay, I could buy that.

 

I guess my problem is, I still think Mycroft being able to "fix" everything is bad for Sherlock. It diminishes him if we always know big brother can get him out of any jam he gets into. Alas, I have to dash off to work soon or I'd try to explain myself better. Yipe, look at the time!

[T.o.b.y]

Oh, you're probably right. It's just part of a trend I sometimes think I see (or I think I sometimes see?) -- that Moftiss thinks it's okay for Sherlock to behave that way. That just because he thinks he's right, that's enough to justify any of his actions.

 

What Sherlock does and how he behaves is rarely okay. "Flawed" doesn't even begin to describe him. He's rude, sometimes deliberately hurtful. He lies to, manipulates and betrays nearly everybody who loves him. He kills people. He takes drugs. He steals. He got engaged to gain access to an office and he tries out dubious substances on his unsuspecting best friend.

 

While Doyle's Holmes was in many ways a good man and a moral, or at least an ethical, authority, Sherlock was right when he cautioned us not to make a hero out of him. I think this may be the greatest difference between the original and this modern version. But it's also one of the reasons why I like Sherlock better. I don't look to my favorite fictional people for guidance. In fact, when I get the impression that a character is being held up to me as a role model, I usually become annoyed.

 

We idolize Sherlock at our own risk. Like John, like Molly, like Lestrade, we are constantly disappointed. But like them, we love him (well, I love him) and we keep hoping that one day, if we're very very lucky, he will be good as well as great. But when that happens, the story will be over and we (or at least I) will be sad.

 

 

[Boton]

 

 

 

While Doyle's Holmes was in many ways a good man and a moral, or at least an ethical, authority, Sherlock was right when he cautioned us not to make a hero out of him. I think this may be the greatest difference between the original and this modern version. But it's also one of the reasons why I like Sherlock better. I don't look to my favorite fictional people for guidance. In fact, when I get the impression that a character is being held up to me as a role model, I usually become annoyed.

 

 

 

Well, I guess there's a point to be made here that every generation gets the Holmes it needs. 

 

Much like the portrayal of superheros, the portrayals of Holmes fluctuate over the generation.  I think we're in a period in which entertainment is being targeted largely to Generation X and to the Millennials, so roughly audiences under 55.  I think these are generations (especially GenX) who have a great deal of self-doubt and criticism, but who want to be told that they can still do something profoundly good or even heroic.  

 

To take another example, look at the most recent Star Wars.  After everything that Han and Leia and Luke have been through, they are clearly flawed and worn.  But they are still *our* heroes, and they remind us that, even if we can't be heros, we can be heroic.

 

I think it is the same thing with Sherlock.  Yes, he's clearly flawed, and he very obviously knows every one of his flaws and mistakes.  But he can still do things for the greater good, and he can still use his "powers" (of his intellect) to make things right.  That doesn't make his flaw OK, but I think many of us don't want his flaw negated.  We want to see that we, the viewers, are still capable of producing good in the world in spite of everything we've been through because Sherlock is capable of that, too. 

[T.o.b.y]

Well, I guess there's a point to be made here that every generation gets the Holmes it needs. 

 

Much like the portrayal of superheros, the portrayals of Holmes fluctuate over the generation.  I think we're in a period in which entertainment is being targeted largely to Generation X and to the Millennials, so roughly audiences under 55.  I think these are generations (especially GenX) who have a great deal of self-doubt and criticism, but who want to be told that they can still do something profoundly good or even heroic.  

 

To take another example, look at the most recent Star Wars.  After everything that Han and Leia and Luke have been through, they are clearly flawed and worn.  But they are still *our* heroes, and they remind us that, even if we can't be heros, we can be heroic.

 

I think it is the same thing with Sherlock.  Yes, he's clearly flawed, and he very obviously knows every one of his flaws and mistakes.  But he can still do things for the greater good, and he can still use his "powers" (of his intellect) to make things right.  That doesn't make his flaw OK, but I think many of us don't want his flaw negated.  We want to see that we, the viewers, are still capable of producing good in the world in spite of everything we've been through because Sherlock is capable of that, too. 

 

Yes... there's definitely something to be said for that. I do believe you are right.

 

However, Sherlock is actually beyond flawed. He's outrageous. I don't identify with that level of outrageousness, but I do hugely enjoy it. I often like him best when he's at his worst.

 

Yet I don't like Moriarty. Isn't that strange? But Moriarty doesn't have much of a soul. I can't feel with him or for him. He's just a monster, albeit an entertaining one. Sherlock is human enough to engage me emotionally, but crazy enough to take me to the pleasing realm of fantasy.

 

 

[Van Buren Supernova]

I had said looking at the details is questionable since it is supposed to be a dream or Mind Palace.

But.. S4 is so far away. :P

So....

 

● Sherlock didn’t fulfill his promise to Archie by not showing him what is inside the box. :P

 

● Is it feasible to use telegram for urgent matter at that time? I believe it should at least take a while…, unless of course the time had been factored in by the urgency. Although it’s hard to believe Mary had time to send telegram to ask for help and then waited at the confrontation place.

 

● Somnambulism and paranoia are correctly used for their time.

 

● The shooting of the bride. Long one.

She 'shot' herself, handling her gun upside down with right hand at very close proximity because of the length of the gun. On the real shooting, someone shot her at slightly further range in proper position.

There were many eye witnesses and I would like to think at that time, without proper forensic, physical evidences would be very important.

 

So there are too many things missed here:

-  the angle and impact of the bullet (self shooting with that position would probably create a different angle compared to straight shooting by someone else, proximity also matters). These two scenarios would certainly create different wound result.

 

- the blank shooting by the left hand. Blanks still do damage at close range, in this case, the floor of the balcony is close enough. Bullet casing, residue, damage, there is always something.  But maybe this can be ‘arranged’ by making her aim to an object that could contain all the evidences and get rid of the object later.

 

- dramatic suicide, people almost get shot, full attention to the street. Yet when Emelia walked out it’s life as usual, no attention, confusion, bystanders whatsoever.

 

 

● Talked about repetition before, like 'there is not a moment a lose', for that one we had the logical explanation that he is in the rush and reminds himself about that.

 

There is another repetition that catches my attention and I wonder if it has any significance.

 

After Eustache’s murder, regarding Miss Me in the stranger room.

Mycroft asks Sherlock: ”Where do you pick up these extraordinary expressions?” When Sherlock mentions crime scene. (maybe because this term is not used in Victorian time and it’s an indication that modern Sherlock is thinking?)

Then,

Sherlock asks Mycroft: "Where do you pick up these extraordinary expressions?" When Mycroft mentions pure reason toppled by sheer melodrama: your life in a nutshell.

 

Both in the same scene.

 

 

Thoughts?

Please be honest if this is unnecessary.

[Boton]

I had said looking at the details is questionable since it is supposed to be a dream or Mind Palace.

But.. S4 is so far away. :P

So....

 

● Sherlock didn’t fulfill his promise to Archie by not showing him what is inside the box. :P

 

● Is it feasible to use telegram for urgent matter at that time? I believe it should at least take a while…, unless of course the time had been factored in by the urgency. Although it’s hard to believe Mary had time to send telegram to ask for help and then waited at the confrontation place.

 

 

Please be honest if this is unnecessary.

 

Well, pulling an episode of Sherlock apart line by line and subtext by subtext is always necessary.  If it weren't, the creators would give us episodes more often.   ;)

 

For the first two, just to play devil's advocate about how "accurate" Holmes's mind is:

 

• We just didn't see Archie get to see what was in the box, any more than we got to see Archie get to see the pictures of the lovely little village of "beheadings" at the wedding. I'd like to think, in both cases, Holmes fulfilled his promise but with a rather edited selection of things.
• Although it seems pretty ridiculous that Mary could telegram for help, I do believe that would have been the fastest way to summon Holmes and Watson from a nearby town, and waiting at the confrontation site might have been the most logical thing.  Perhaps she telegrammed when she found out there was going to be a secret meeting, and many hours later Holmes and Watson got there in time to witness it.  Regardless, I've seen telegrams used as emergency communication in literature of that period, so Holmes's mind palace could accurately reflect what he has read about the period.

[Inge l-w]

Being Generation Y, (born September 1976), I can see that they target specific audiences for their own reasons, but after two unfortunate run-ins against Sherlock-merchandising, I have become especially leery of the creators' inmost thoughts and moral compasses! The Abominable episode was just one more step on the downslope which they hit upon with the beginning of S3: if Billy and Gene Wilder can make spoofs of Sherlock Holmes, so can we, and more stylishly, too, because we are Brits and they were just silly Americans, (OK, Billy Wilder was originally Austrohungarian,) seems to be their motto, and the devil take backstory, plot lines, ACD himself, if it's good for an insider joke!

Crime scene was regularly used by the Yarders, ever since New Scotland Yard was set up, following Sir Robert Peel's establishment of a regular police force in the 1850s. So, the repartee between the brothers looks like the usual Sherlock-Mycroft bickering, especially since it comes after the whole 'obliquity of the ecliptic' rigmarole.