Side Effects (aka Collateral Damage) of "Sherlock"

[bronzeblues]

Eurus  needs cell from which she can't escape from. The whole Holmes family must lack a glass-seeing gene. Because it says Eurus locked Mycroft in her cell.. the one without the glass. 

[Carol the Dabbler]

Presumably there used to be a glass wall -- it would have made no sense to build the cell without it -- but then Eurus had it removed.

[bronzeblues]

2 hours ago, Carol the Dabbler said:

Presumably there used to be a glass wall -- it would have made no sense to build the cell without it -- but then Eurus had it removed.

Of course she did. With all the cameras around and guards as well. I am still astounded with the quality of that episode I have to say. One of the main beefs I have is turning Mycroft in an imbecile. I was always a fan of his reserved and obviously very intelligent demanour. 

[Carol the Dabbler]

2 hours ago, bronzeblues said:

One of the main beefs I have is turning Mycroft in an imbecile.

He must have caught what Sherlock had in T6T.

As for the cameras on Eurus's cell, she presumably had them switched to replay while the remodeling was being done.

[bronzeblues]

3 hours ago, Carol the Dabbler said:

He must have caught what Sherlock had in T6T.

As for the cameras on Eurus's cell, she presumably had them switched to replay while the remodeling was being done.

Eurus probably switched the cameras off with her will power. After all, that's what all REALLY SMART people DO. 

[Arcadia]

18 hours ago, T.o.b.y said:

Makes total sense to me. I still argue though that the message isn't that simple on Sherlock. Love was not all that Eurus needed. She's still just as messed up as before and still a huge liability in a high security prison. 

As for Sherlock, according to the original stories, Holmes has a "great heart" hidden behind a "great brain". And that combination is what makes him a hero. There are plenty of other geniuses in the stories, but they are either villains or Mycroft. (Who btw did not go out with Lady Smallwood in my headcacnon). 

The finale was a little ham fisted but I don't think it negates the other episodes and it certainly doesn't make Sherlock an ordinary person. 

I love that they didn't have him ride off into the sunset with anybody but put him back at Baker Street where he belongs, eternally solving crimes and having adventures with his totally platonic but also totally indispensable comerade, partner and colleague. 

I know it's corny but whatever. I love the final montage. I had to leave Doyle's Holmes to an uncertain future in WWI, retired, alone, keeping bees. You know how much that sucked? An awful lot, that's what. This ending was way, WAY better. 

Thank you, Toby!  

Eurus not only had glass keeping her in her cell; she had a heavy metal locked door with guards outside. I'm guessing Mycroft wasn't as good at "persuading" them to let him out as she was. He probably forgot to bring them cake. 😛 

[J.P.]

I also like the final montage. The mix of awful and awesome pieces in S4 left me totally confused

[bronzeblues]

That final montage with Mary's narration has to be the most smug, self-congratulatory pat on the back I have ever seen. 

[T.o.b.y]

2 hours ago, bronzeblues said:

That final montage with Mary's narration has to be the most smug, self-congratulatory pat on the back I have ever seen. 

Well, yeah, they had finished an overall pretty successful project and probably did feel celebratory writing it, I imagine. I don't see anything wrong with that... I would have preferred a different narrator or no narration at all, but oh well. My personal preferences are hardly relevant in a writers room. 

I did like the overall "fanboy" vibe of the final episode. It seemed to scream "Sherlock Holmes is awesome and this was so much fun!", and that's how I feel. 

[bronzeblues]

22 minutes ago, T.o.b.y said:

Well, yeah, they had finished an overall pretty successful project and probably did feel celebratory writing it, I imagine. I don't see anything wrong with that... I would have preferred a different narrator or no narration at all, but oh well. My personal preferences are hardly relevant in a writers room. 

I did like the overall "fanboy" vibe of the final episode. It seemed to scream "Sherlock Holmes is awesome and this was so much fun!", and that's how I feel. 

Yeah, well, they took the whole "fanboy" thing way too far starting with TEH and reached truly astonishing fanfiction levels with TFP. We shouldn't overlook the fact that great PR did a lot of heavy-lifting for this show. Even when it was way better than season 4 it wasn't the greatest piece of human making the world has ever seen and THAT'S PRECISELY the way it was dubbed. 

During series 4 I constantly had the feeling nobody involved with the project still had the heart to do it. I felt it was a bit like "Do we still have to do this?" "Yeah, I guess..." 

[Carol the Dabbler]

I just hope they've gotten all that out of their system, and are ready to do some actual updated Holmes stories again, as they've been implying.

[bronzeblues]

4 hours ago, Carol the Dabbler said:

I just hope they've gotten all that out of their system, and are ready to do some actual updated Holmes stories again, as they've been implying.

As a Bond fan, I've already been in a situation like this before. The writers misunderstanding the novels in the first place coupled with their promises of "updating" them. It never goes well... The only difference is I don't disapprove of the main actor in Sherlock. 

[T.o.b.y]

Why do you think that they misunderstood the Doyle stories and novels? 

My impression of the show is that the writers didn't only read them pretty thoroughly, they also liked them and had similar thoughts about them as I did. To me, part of the fun of BBC Sherlock is that I see it as a long, gleeful, definitely toungue in cheek but always affectionate, running commentary on the Sherlock Holmes stories and fandom. It's like sitting down with the friends I never had in a comfy corner, munching popcorn and talking nerdy about the things we read. 

Maybe your understanding of the originals is just different? 

I like them and I love Holmes, but I never felt particularly reverential about them. Imho, you can tell that Doyle wrote them for money and didn't really care too much. I suspect that they're worth way more to the generations of readers than they ever were to him. Didn't he actually say that other creators could kill Holmes off or marry him to anybody for all that he cared? 

If you expected a classic mystery / crime drama, I am not surprised that Sherlock doesn't fit your bill. But the good news is there is plenty of that out there. I personally am more interested in quirky characters that I can love, a few good laughs, plenty to think about, emotional engagement and a few nice visuals. 

I got all that and more from Sherlock. Maybe my love for this series means I have bad taste, in which case, so be it. There's precious little on television that works for me, most of the bigger, popular shows are either too violent or too bleak or have no character I feel a connection to or all of the above. 

[bronzeblues]

2 hours ago, T.o.b.y said:

Why do you think that they misunderstood the Doyle stories and novels? 

My impression of the show is that the writers didn't only read them pretty thoroughly, they also liked them and had similar thoughts about them as I did. To me, part of the fun of BBC Sherlock is that I see it as a long, gleeful, definitely toungue in cheek but always affectionate, running commentary on the Sherlock Holmes stories and fandom. It's like sitting down with the friends I never had in a comfy corner, munching popcorn and talking nerdy about the things we read. 

Maybe your understanding of the originals is just different? 

I like them and I love Holmes, but I never felt particularly reverential about them. Imho, you can tell that Doyle wrote them for money and didn't really care too much. I suspect that they're worth way more to the generations of readers than they ever were to him. Didn't he actually say that other creators could kill Holmes off or marry him to anybody for all that he cared? 

If you expected a classic mystery / crime drama, I am not surprised that Sherlock doesn't fit your bill. But the good news is there is plenty of that out there. I personally am more interested in quirky characters that I can love, a few good laughs, plenty to think about, emotional engagement and a few nice visuals. 

I got all that and more from Sherlock. Maybe my love for this series means I have bad taste, in which case, so be it. There's precious little on television that works for me, most of the bigger, popular shows are either too violent or too bleak or have no character I feel a connection to or all of the above. 

Well, you may see it as some kind of tongue in cheek commentary on Sherlock and fandom but from what I read Moffat(and Gatiss to a lesser degree) saw it as some invigorating work of art that no one should have anything against. I mean, how dare they criticise the episode with Sherlock's lunatic sister that is imitating Anthony Hopkins but in the end just needed a hug??? 

As for the quirky characters you love this show for. Sorry, but I don't see any. This Sherlock is not autistic or whatever adjective has been thrown around. He simply acts as an unpleasant jerk for most of the time. The writers also ask of me to be extremely charmed by him despite his behaviour. Practically every other character there exists to react on something related to Sherlock. John here has little to no agenda.He's there to comment how amazing Sherlock is and sometimes he's also there to be saved by Sherlock. Molly... pure idealization of a fangirl.I know many see themselves in Molly. I don't. Maybe that's my problem. I can say they did a decent job of writing Mycroft... until the last episode that is. I felt he was the only character whose "incredible Holmes geniusness" wasn't brought to the point of caricature. The acting though has always been better than the writing quality of this show deserved. 

[Arcadia]

2 hours ago, T.o.b.y said:

Why do you think that they misunderstood the Doyle stories and novels? 

My impression of the show is that the writers didn't only read them pretty thoroughly, they also liked them and had similar thoughts about them as I did. To me, part of the fun of BBC Sherlock is that I see it as a long, gleeful, definitely toungue in cheek but always affectionate, running commentary on the Sherlock Holmes stories and fandom. It's like sitting down with the friends I never had in a comfy corner, munching popcorn and talking nerdy about the things we read. 

Maybe your understanding of the originals is just different? 

I like them and I love Holmes, but I never felt particularly reverential about them. Imho, you can tell that Doyle wrote them for money and didn't really care too much. I suspect that they're worth way more to the generations of readers than they ever were to him. Didn't he actually say that other creators could kill Holmes off or marry him to anybody for all that he cared? 

If you expected a classic mystery / crime drama, I am not surprised that Sherlock doesn't fit your bill. But the good news is there is plenty of that out there. I personally am more interested in quirky characters that I can love, a few good laughs, plenty to think about, emotional engagement and a few nice visuals. 

I got all that and more from Sherlock. Maybe my love for this series means I have bad taste, in which case, so be it. There's precious little on television that works for me, most of the bigger, popular shows are either too violent or too bleak or have no character I feel a connection to or all of the above. 

Same here.

[T.o.b.y]

2 hours ago, bronzeblues said:

Well, you may see it as some kind of tongue in cheek commentary on Sherlock and fandom but from what I read Moffat(and Gatiss to a lesser degree) saw it as some invigorating work of art that no one should have anything against. I mean, how dare they criticise the episode with Sherlock's lunatic sister that is imitating Anthony Hopkins but in the end just needed a hug??? 

Where did you read that? Do you happen to have a link? I know Mr Moffat can come across as a little irritating in interviews. I don't read or watch too many of them. I know that when I did, I sometimes found myself very surprised by some of the things he said and wondering whether he had actually watched his own show lately. But that didn't dampen my enjoyment of the show itself. 

[J.P.]

Bronzeblues, I start to wonder why did you bother to watch the whole series if it's so bothersome.

[J.P.]

Back to the actual topic of this thread.

I still watch Dr. Who (and I think I could recognize Steven's episodes without looking him up). And I TLOG became a piece of my mental furniture too.

The side effect of those shows contaminating my brain are those crossover designs, that I hope are funny not only to myself

[bronzeblues]

2 hours ago, J.P. said:

Bronzeblues, I start to wonder why did you bother to watch the whole series if it's so bothersome.

Funny thing is, it wasn't that bothersome when I watched it. 

The only episodes I was actually appalled with from the start were TEH, T6T and of course TFP. After that I started to look back at series as a whole and realised it was never as good as I thought. 

[Arcadia]

And now you're on a mission to save the rest of us from our delusion?  

4 hours ago, J.P. said:

Back to the actual topic of this thread.

I still watch Dr. Who (and I think I could recognize Steven's episodes without looking him up). And I TLOG became a piece of my mental furniture too.

The side effect of those shows contaminating my brain are those crossover designs, that I hope are funny not only to myself

Okay, JP, I recognize the cross-reference from mind palace to Tardis. (And be at ease … I laughed. ) But I don't think I get the first one. Is that, perchance, a TLOG cross reference? Because I've never seen TLOG.

[J.P.]

It's a reference to probably the most recognizable image from TLOG.

[bronzeblues]

No, Arcadia, I really am not. 😁😁😁

[Carol the Dabbler]

On 9/6/2018 at 5:59 PM, J.P. said:

It's a reference to probably the most recognizable image from TLOG.

Ah.  I was wondering too.  (Had seen or at least heard that RV slogan, but didn't make the connection.)  It was funny as a Sherlock standalone, though.

[J.P.]

Of course on TLOG the art of not leaving is of the very cranky (and literal) way.

[Arcadia]

Okay, here's a side effect … every once in a great, great while I get to feel smug because I got something right. I've said I few times that I thought from the beginning that the overarching goal of "Sherlock" was to show him evolving from "great man" to "good man" … and now I have proof! (Sort of.) From the 2015 Comicon ...

MOFFAT: "so we did try and make sure he [Lestrade] was actually rather wise and we gave him that beat in the first episode where he says “Sherlock Holmes is a great man and one day if we’re very lucky he might be a good one” which is the arc of the series.  (Emphasis mine.)  

Of course, that won't stop us from arguing whether or not they actually achieved that goal.... 😛