Spoilers for the Sherlock special, The Abominable Bride.
Twenty-four hours after the Sherlock New Year’s special premiered Friday night, #Sherlock was still trending on Twitter. That one was obvious, for two (conjoined) reasons. One, Benedict Cumberbatch’s particular fame lives and breathes on the internet, specifically on Twitter and Tumblr. Two, the Sherlock special seemed especially designed to stoke the social media flames and appease the true-blue lovers of all things Sherlock and Benedict Cumberbatch.
For what it’s worth, I enjoyed the special. Then again, I’m a fan. I think Sherlock is arguably Bendy’s greatest role and I enjoy the nuances of his Sherlock-performances over the years. The writing on the special was for true-blue fans as well – you had to not only watch the first three seasons repeatedly to understand the references and callbacks (not to mention the plot), but you also had to be familiar with Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s canon.
I went into it thinking it was just going to be a straight-up, one-off, all-Victorian Sherlock. It was not. It was a continuation of Episode 3 of Season 3, and I’m still debating whether or not I think that was a lazy way of handling the Victorian thing. Like, was it lazy of Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat to write their way out of the Victorian situation by having the entire story as Sherlock’s cocaine fever-dream as he tries to work out how Moriarty could still be alive after he shot himself in the head? While writing that in stark black-and-white makes it seem like Gatiss and Moffat were actually pulling a “Who Shot J.R.?” moment (it was all a dream!!!!), I like the way they did it and I thought it was clever. Not the most clever thing in the world, but they handled it well.
Others disagree though. There was a lot of confusion and back-and-forth with fans and enemies alike. Some have said that Sherlock has lost its way. Some have said that Moffat & Gatiss are doing too much in the name of “fan service,” meaning that they’re more concerned with creating cool/sexy GIF-able moments than actually telling the g—damn story. I think both sides have a point – while there was something clever and interesting at the heart of The Abominable Bride, this actually doesn’t give me much hope for Season 4, whenever it does happen.
Yes we did #Sherlock pic.twitter.com/ikw72kdVpY
— Crime Solver (@ShezaHolmes) January 2, 2016
*Quietly implodes* #Sherlock pic.twitter.com/qeUgpabSLH
— BBC Three (@bbcthree) January 2, 2016
Did you miss #Sherlock #TAB see full episode here https://t.co/3tPhXhMqwc pic.twitter.com/zgYX5JLvWa
— Anything Cumberbatch (@Anythingbatch) January 2, 2016
Photos courtesy of WENN.
I thought it was truly awful, the story could have been done in a 10 minute episode and it was so self satisfying and smug. Also I don’t need Sherlock to explain feminism to me. However my boyfriend loved it and thought it was one of the best episodes. Who would have thought – Sherlock, splitting up couples since 2016!
I spent the first hour hating it, but the last 30 minutes just trying to catch my breath. I can sort of forgive the try-hard dialogue in the early scenes because it was **spoilers**
Holmes’s drug-infused impressions of how Watson writes, thus it wasn’t up to their usual standards of witty banter. But then it was like watching Fellini direct a remake of Trainspotting. What the actual f%&k was the point? Did they completely spoil the Moriarity cliff hanger? Or does none of this count in the “real” storyline? And will the series return as though this episode never happened?
Or more to the point, will the series return as if S3 never happened??
Please never mention Fellini again in the same breath as Moffat/Gatiss. Thanks. 🙂
Jokes aside, Sherlock is living proof of how tumblr/twitter can ruin a show.
Completely agree. We loved the first half, but when it got to the secret society in the church, it went down hill. We didn’t really like the flashbacks, they were unnecessary and confusing. We wanted it to only take place in Victorian London, and indulge ourselves in the beautiful sets and costumes. It was too erratic and when Moriarty came back, I literally rolled my eyes.
@hermia – Return as if S3 never happened? Like Bobby (Dallas) in the shower as if he’d never died? Yes, please. Just go back to detective work, sexy trench coats, and homo-erotic humor. I don’t care if it’s 2015 or 1885. Just stop the nonsense.
Great performances, enjoyed the first 1/3 of it very much, but then Moffat threw it all away with the laziest trope in writing.
Jesus wept.
Either make it a one-off historical special that’s a stand alone piece of work, or commit to giving us answers instead of pulling a bait n’ switch.
I didn’t even know this had aired.
I forgot it was on. I was expecting it to air the same day as Downton Abby. I remembered it was on at the end. So I’ll have to see it in a rerun.
Hated it. Thought it was the hottest of hot messes. I don’t think they even got the dialogue right, and I’ve always thought that was their strong suit.
I would bet that Moffatt and Gatiss are giggling about how clever they feel they are, and feeling very pleased with themselves. But honestly, if Benedict and Martin thought that was presentable, that’s sad. I wonder what they really thought of it.
I’m curious to hear what everyone here thought.
I totally agree with you, EC. Moffatt and Gatiss’ heads must truly be up their own arses if they think this production was even remotely good.
I think it’s more Moffatt than Gatiss, he’s ruined so many shows.
Loathed it with a passion, it was such self referential crap! I loved the first two seasons of Sherlock so much I managed to forgive them the third – which in reality was another pile of self-referential turd – but I can’t forgive them for this. Jeeeeez. they have carte blanche to do what they like, halfway decent budgets, a couple or several decent actors and all they can achieve is disappearing up their own orifices. Never again.
Everything everyone here said.
I think I am ready to jump ship, because I’m sure series 4 is going to be more of the same, only now with a baby added to the mix.
I’m glad I wasn’t the only one. I was bored and thought the plot moved in a circle. It doesn’t begin to compare with the brilliance of the first two seasons.
I’m not expecting as much from this show anymore. Not sure whether I’ll bother watching 4 when PBS airs it; depends on how many shows I have in my Netflix queue. Sherlock is no longer a priority.
Cumberbatch and Freeman will not object to any preposterous script as long as they get money and exposure out of it. I don’t know where people get these silly ideas regarding actors’ integrity. 🙂
It ultimately doesn’t matter if they object, they’re contracted. The UK is more of a “shut up and do your job actor” system anyway.
i loved it, ngl. the indie wire review and me agreed for once lol
much better than s3. i also didn’t expect for it to give away anything but figured out stuff for s4 and s5
I liked it up until the moment it was a fever dream. After that I no longer cared about the Victorian era. I wish they had saved that reveal for the last 5 minutes instead of doing it with 30+ minutes to go.
Also-had Sherlock had a drug problem at any point in the first 3 seasons? It felt like they just shoved it in for drama
His drug use has been mentioned several times over the past nine episodes.
Sherlock famously has a drug problem in the books, and while it’s not a huge theme in the series they mention it often enough to never let us forget. That’s a big part of why his brother has his actions monitored.
In His Last Vow Sherlock is found by John in a den, so yes, Sherlock has always been an addict.
I enjoyed it, right up to the last 15-20 minutes. Then it was just a hot mess.
Sorry, but I loved it. Perfect television for a cold, rainy, pitch black New Year’s night. Well written, well acted, well edited.
Loved it too and I make no apologies for it. Even though I am very much off the Batch, when we watched it last night I was reminded why this is his his best role to date and why I used to think he was the cat’s meow. And although Moffat makes a mess of the current Doctor Who, I though he and Gatiss did a great job on this. Obviously this is a minority opinion but I thought they left it both open ended enough for another season (which I now doubt we will ever get) or another one off or… Anything really.
Agree with your opinion on the current doctor Who – they are making a real mess of it! So annoying!
And yes, I liked the Sherlock episode last night. Not even sorry 🙂
Loved it too!
same!
Loved it too! I adore self-referential crap (so clever, so meta) and thought Martin Freeman nailed it in this episode. I love how crisp his Victorian Watson was in contrast with modern day Watson. I’m also glad that they brought up the drug problem – that’s an integral part of Holmes.
The crazy ritual scene was overdone, but I forgave it only because it felt like a callback to Young Sherlock Holmes, though without the Egyptian themes.
I don’t understand why people don’t like it.
Can you please just ignore the scene in the church and the “mansplaining”
It was an AMAZINGGGG episode
Omg the dialogues and all the references and all the characters from previous seasons in 1 episode!!
AAAAHHHHHH!!
It was just sooo good! I really don’t understand why people didn’t like it.
Even the Victorian part was done well. Mrs Hudson, omg, the funniest as always.
The old-style Sherlock theme, mind palace, and video editing (all that spinning lol)
Man, it was good!
Improvement on the last series, but I hated that, so I’m not saying much.
The first time I saw “A Study in Pink” I was amazed. Brilliant, bold, and funny. I was shocked at this Cumberbatch person, but hey-British. I fell in love with Sherlock Holmes all over again. Season 3 had some problems for me, yes. But like Kaiser, I’m a fan. I was excited about TAB, and yes, I knew that the ending was going to be a problem. But I enjoyed it all the same. And can I just say, no matter what Moffatt and Gatiss do, this acting cast always, always delivers. Oh, and of course, the incomparable Andrew Scott. His take on Moriarity is so unique. I find him terrifying.
Yeah, this Moriarty creeps me out.
Hated it – it was truly unwatchable. I could only view the first 10 minutes and had to shut it off – and I was a big Sherlock fan. I think the thing that made Sherlock work was its modern day presentation. This just came off as Panto. Maybe it was just my impression, but it seemed that the actors came off as embarrassed by having to be in this period piece.
I quite enjoyed it, and some of the repartee was very amusing. I have been a die hard fan for all the previous episodes, but I have to admit I started to feel a little like I could actually see the Moffat and Gatiss gears grinding behind the scenes, and that they are becoming a little too satisfied with their cleverness. It is the first time with this series, that I started to feel as if I couldn’t wait for it to be over, so I could make a cup of tea. I would NEVER have done that during past episodes. All the actors acquitted themselves well, and I liked the nod to “votes for women” etc, but I was aware through-out of Bendy “acting”, and found it quite distracting. I wonder if this role is starting to become old hat to him now? Overall it was sadly disappointing, close, but no cigar.
I think he reached his peak. We will always be aware from now on of BC acting. That’s what happens to some decent actors when they become famous: they start to rely on stock expressions and gestures.
I fell asleep.
*Boom*….mic drop!
Happy New Year, Lilac!!
Happy New Year, Boston Green Eyes!
If it had stayed a throwback Sherlock Holmes episode in the Victorian era, focusing on the ghost bride storyline, I would have loved it. But throw in the Inception-like Mind Palace thing and it came off as pretentious and self-serving. It answered no questions left from last season and seemed to be a stop-gap until we get season four, which I might not watch now. Moffat and crew have Jumped the Shark, for me at least, and I say this as fan of the ACD books.
I think they jumped the shark with S3, which – to be honest – was just a load of fan-fiction. It makes me laugh when Moffat says he doesn’t care what fans want: yeah, right!
S3 was so bad I was offended. The worst part was playing to the Tumblr fans. I despise that. It is insulting to mature adults who love Sherlock Holmes and who started watching this series because it was marketed to adults who love Sherlock Holmes. But the deeper BC fell down the “fandom” rabbit hole, the deeper the writers took the show down the same hole as if these ridiculous stans deserve the attention. I have no plans to ever watch this show again after S3.
This times 100.
I agree about the shark jumping. And I actually liked season 3. This was a self serving hot mess. I also think there’s a change in the Sherlock/Holmes chemistry with this one. Something was just really off.
My thought exactly. I thought the case was interesting, though I’d figured out the 2nd murder before the reveal and the coroner. The Moriaty stuff took me right the heck out of it. After that, I was done and was wishing the episode would be done as well.
People have been saying it jumped the shark after every ep from the end of Season 1 onward *shrugs*
Ratings were stellar and the critics were onboard, so it’s obviously safe for now. I’m guessing they’re still sticking to their 5-season plan.
I have to laugh at myself for knowing this but; JR getting shot was real. Bobby getting killed was the dream (yes he came back).
Anyway….I haven’t watched it yet, but I think I’ll wait til I’m utterly bored.
I’ve been a fan up until this point so, while I was watching it, I couldn’t decide if I’d just lost interest in Sherlock, or if the episode just sucked. I think it just sucked. Like a few other folks here have mentioned, I thought the Victorian-era gimmick was fun, but only until it was revealed that it was some overdose-induced dream. Then it got confusing — the back and forth thing simply didn’t work. By the end I wasn’t sure what the whole point was — Moriarty is still dead. I agree with the other person here who said this really just seemed like something to keep us interested until season 4 shows up. The most frustrating part of it all was that feminism was characterized as some sort of murderous cult with KKK-looking hoods. That there is enough to lose me as a fan for good.
@ Ruth
I actually thought the KKK-like hoods in the episode were a direct reference to the storyline of “The Five Orange Pips”, which appeared in the envelope to Lord Carmichael. I don’t think that was accidental but equating women’s lib with a white-supremacy group is extremely poor writing on Moffat’s/Gatiss’ part.
A giant letdown for me.
They could have had a nice little fun one off Christmas special for the fans, but Moffat once again is unable to resist turning it into an indulgent mess. The Vox review was SPOT ON. More fan wank, more pats on the back. More wringing the last bit of marrow out of Moriarty instead of trying to be less lazy about adapting other stories. And for the love of god-please quit bringing up Irene Adler-you has one chance with that story and you completely ruined it. The only fan sector more annoying than Irene/Sherlock shippers are the ones convinced Johnlock is an actual things the ACD wrote. And they managed to pander to both in this.
I expect this from Moffat, but I always gave Gatiss more credit for being clever than this.
It bums me out-I was madly in love with the first season and each series has gotten progressively worse.
it’s yet another variant of Moffat’s experimentation. He pulls similar things on Dr Who.
I prefer watching Jonny Lee Miller play a contemporary Sherlock. Much more interesting. Cumberbatch is just too sterile as Sherlock Holmes. He is a one dimensional actor who can only play bland posh types on screen. As boring as plain Cornflakes. If he was a colour, it would be beige.
@EM, a person after my own heart, I simply love Jonny Lee Miller’s interpretation of Sherlock, it is actually very witty, and the characters are very well drawn, with excellent writing to boot. I feel it is flying under the radar at the moment, and is an unrecognised jewel. Lucy Lui is a perfect foil to Sherlock, and all round the stories are intriguing. Don’t even get me started on John Noble, that man’s face would fit right in on Mount Rushmore.
Plus Aidan Quinn and Jon Michael Hill. And Natalie Dormer’s Moriarty.
And Rhys Ifans Mycroft.
I don’t think it’s an undiscovered jewel per se, it’s just a typical CBS drama that doesn’t stand out. I gave up on it last season, I’ve watched one too many dramas from them.
I get people compare the shows because hey Sherlock Holmes, but it’s apples to oranges.
I think Jhonny Lee Miller is an excellent and underappreciated actor. I’ve seen him in many things and every time he as different and very good.
Having said that I tried Elementary and didn’t like the show or the rest of the cast and couldn’t watch it.
I really enjoyed it, but like someone said above, I wish they’d saved the ‘this is a dream’ reveal for the last 5 minutes instead of the last half hour. And the Reichenbach part of the dream was ridiculous.
It had its flaws, but frankly, compared to the underwhelmingness that was series 3, it was much, MUCH better. (and I enjoyed what sounded like a little tip of the hat to the late, great Sir Terry Pratchett – ‘monstrous regiment’, anyone?)
Monstrous regiment actually comes from John Knox’s ‘The First Blast of the Trumpet against the Monstruous Regiment of Women’ (1558), in which he inveighs against female rulers (Mary Queen of Scots, her regent Mary of Guise, Mary of England.) I didn’t know that Pratchett picked up the name too! Moffat probably was making callbacks to both.
I agree with you: far better than series 3, but flawed.
Having Sherlock mansplain feminism to a room full of suffragettes (in purple hoods??) was a bit much, as was the idea that feminism is all about revenge, etc.
I thought the whole thing was beyond dreadful.
I absolutely know that these writers try to be more clever than they are, which is what causes these issues.
He was explaining it to Watson, not the women (they already know).
The feminism was presented as just and their only option (women being abused and having no say or control is referenced). There were militant groups back in the day. It’s not meant to be transported to today, as it only works as “how” of the crime in that time period.
But since it took place in Sherlock’s head, it’s also a commentary on how he sidelines and ignores women. Whether that means women characters will be better in S4, I don’t know.
But he was explaining it FOR women, leaving them solemn one-liners to confirm what Sherlock explained. Why couldn’t the women talk instead? In a dream, anything is possible, and if the commentary is that Sherlock is realizing his shortcomings in his treatment of women, then it would’ve been a far better way to remedy that.
maybe I am just on the dumb train today but i thought he was explaining it for himself and for watson, since it’s a case resolution, it’s handled like all the other case resolutions are–with sherlock explaining it. and of course he’s the focal point in his own mind, most ppl are
ultimately tho the whole episode is him trying to figure out moriarty’s death, plans and what he missed, that scene included
Ok, I’m not sure how to phrase this better to explain what I mean. Yes, he was explaining it for Watson, but he was explaining other people’s motivations. Why not let them speak instead, since they’re all standing around anyway?
I’m not buying the “focal point in his own mind” explanation, because otherwise, the whole episode would’ve been a monologue. But it wasn’t. There were deliberate decisions made about who is and isn’t going to speak, and I find the decision to speak for women in poor taste for a show that attempts to make a feminist point.
the whole episode was a monologue of sorts, i mean everything you’re seeing there is his impressions and his imagination of what other people say/do/think
the only real things you can label feminism is the acknowledgement of how some side characters are treated, but only if they get more in the new series.
the case resolution was outdated & handled like every other one in the series
I found the way the feminism storylines as done jarring and try too hard at times. But some movements of it where brilliant. The invisible non- talking women in Watsons’s stories and how all the men are annoyed when Mrs. Hanson stops talking in real life, or how the maid and other women are always asking Watson why they are not in his stories. I thought it was clever.
I tried and couldn’t watch his pale praying mantis face. I feel like women saying how they find him attractive really is the reason weird looking guys think they look good. They probably think they look better than Cumberbatch and that entitles them to be total overconfident jagbags.
I appreciate his politics but can’t stand his vacant eyes or face or head shape. Must go look at guys that are actually attractive. We women are setting the bar way too low.
I think jagbag is my new favourite word, thank you for that. I hope you don’t mind if I steal it, I promise I’ll give it back!
@ Priya
His odd face didn’t used to be so stark. He’s unfortunately aging badly. And to be honest, ever since the engagement/marriage debacle — in which he showed his true colors by constantly showing up to places looking bored, elitist, above-it-all, over it, and angry — it really has made his physical features look especially unattractive to me. Before that he at least had an adorable personality and sense of humor to off-set his looks. Now he just comes across as unlikeable on all fronts.
You do realize that not everyone defines weird or unattractive the way you do? So anyone could fall into your category of weird looking.
First all Spaniards enjoy bashing native Americans because Mrs Thor decides to party like it’s 1499, now all overconfident men are like that because they feel Sir Otterbatch is very much beneath them… Well, news flash: overconfident douches don’t need confirmation from anyone. And they probably think they look better than anyone you do deem to be hot anyway.
Not caring you don’t like BC, just having a big problem with your judgement that anyone looking out of the ordinary and with a shred of self confidence, would be considered an overconfident douche.
OT Big ol’ meh. Had the same thing someone else posted; I went to get some tea. Never ever had time for that during Sherlock…
Attractiveness , confidence and looks are only loosely relatated, and often are not related at all. For me there is no bar low or high as far as looks go. It is what is inside that counts.
There are plenty of good looking people who are not attractive because there is nothing behind their empty eyes and there are not particularly good looking people who are very attractive.
Additionally what is considered to be good looks is influenced by the society. If you look at faces of Romans or faces on medieval paintings you will see that they had very different standards of beauty.
@ Farhi: *claps* Well said!
The most beautiful people in the world are often not considered traditionally good-looking by the majority. Beauty goes much deeper than looks.
I just watched “Jessica Jones” and “The Danish girl”, and I find both Tennant and Redmayne to be far far more removed from mainstream attractive males than Cumberbatch, yet BC seems to be getting far more flack, even though all 3 have devout followings: I hear fans were going just as crazy at stage door when Tennant did a play in London…
Some Tennant fans can be positively rabid while others, like my co-worker, are sane, calm, and normal.
Far fewer fans stage dooring for Tennant but he has his obsessive fans too. One woman stage doored him literally every night.
I checked the BBCA schedule – no Sherlock. Totally forgot that it’s on PBS! Don’t know if I’m up for paying $10.00 for Tuesday night’s cinema showing.
You can watch it for free at any time on the PBS website. It is up on the website now (towards the bottom of the page) They usually keep videos up for a week. And they are re-airing it on the 10th.
Thanks. I’ll catch the rerun. I don’t have unlimited wireless, just pay by the GB, so I don’t do streaming unless I go to the lubrary and moo h off their very slow internet.
That’s not the full special – it’s a two-minute trailer. Just checked.
Also, why does everyone hate S3? I thought it was brilliant – particularly HLV. Unparalleled television. Better even than “The Sopranos,” I would argue. Although that’s heresy in some circles.
I liked s3
imo people think it’s a show that it isn’t for some reason, if that makes sense.
@MI6
I hated S3 because I felt it turned Sherlock around too quickly. I actually found episode 1 rather fun, even if it was pandering to fandom, but Sherlock warming up to Mary so quickly just seemed rushed to me, and a lot of silliness quite out of character: I would’ve accepted them down the road, but not happening all in the same 3-episode season. Sherlock’s aloofness was his trademark. Having him lose so much of it so quickly destroyed a lot of the show’s mystique,
Couple that with thin cases (the train plot being straight from V for Vendetta), and it accounts for my poor opinion of S3.
@Timbuktu: I appreciate your opinion and while I have to give it to you on the “V for Vendetta” train plot (another movie I love – I suspect that reference may have been deliberate, albeit a bit heavy handed) – the main focus of “The Empty Hearse” was Sherlock’s return. “Sign of the Three” was a joy from beginning to end – quick-witted and poignant in all the right places (I think the reason Sherlock warmed so quickly to Mary was that he unconsciously recognized a fellow “high-functioning sociopath” in her). Maybe if they’d had more than 3 episodes they could have expanded on that story arc, but I loved it. I can’t wait to see TAB next Sunday!
@J – we’re the two, then. And yes, it does make sense, indeed.
Watch it online, as most people do!
It’s on PBS on Jan10
Thanks!
It annoys me how long it takes between series because the writers, actors, etc are busy with other projects and then when they’re finally able to get them all together to film *one* special, they use that precious opportunity to create dreck like this.
It didn’t succeed as a Victorian Sherlock Holmes mystery: the Molly Hooper character was played and costumed straight from panto, Mycroft in the fakest looking fatsuit in the world, John Watson was very OOC, Holmes a pale Jeremy Brett imitation, hokey editing and the whole thing looked very cheap from the limited use of location shooting to the Reichenbach green screen. I mean, you could almost see the budget straining at the seams. The mystery of the bride started out intriguing but soon lost all its bite when it was revealed to be part of a narcotics-induced fantasy inside Sherlock’s mind palace (and don’t get me started on the scene where Holmes explains feminism to a room full of silent women. By the way, how does killing condescending and useless husbands and making it look like it was done by a ghost help the women’s suffrage movement in any way?)
But maybe the whole Victorian bit was *supposed* to be rubbish because it really served to help Sherlock solve the “puzzle” of Moriarty’s return. So, they spent 90 minutes to move the overall plot of the whole series a couple of minutes when Sherlock deduced what every viewer had already solved at the end of series three: Well, obviously Moriarty isn’t back because he quite clearly shot himself in the head in full of view of Sherlock (not behind a curtain with a bucket of blood) and therefore someone else must be using his image to spread terror once again. Bravo, Sherlock! Did you really only need a mixture of drugs and an elaborate solving of a Victorian crime to figure that one out?
And every character insight into Sherlock and his relationship with the other characters by way of a tour through his mind palace had already been done infinitely better in “His Last Vow” when he was shot by Mary and almost died. I would rather they had done a proper period mystery or moved the plot of the series significantly forward than going over that ground again.
I don’t think it was as much about figuring out that Moriarty really is dead as it was why Moriarty has such an effect on Sherlock. Dead or alive. The dream Moriarty represents the fear of being like Moriarty himself.
Just like he reflects how he treated Janine by putting her face with the women who were all mistreated.
It’s Watson that finishes off Moriarty and remembering Sherlock that he is not alone, that he does have a moral compass, not only Watson himself, but also his “inner” Watson (the dream Watson); his own good side. Now if you think of Moriarty as the bad side of Sherlock, Moriarty being alive or not doesn’t matter, what matters is, that the good side is there and it’s supported by friends. But that’s reading too deep into it of course.
I actually think it’s not only a good reading, but also a necessary one to appreciate and understand the episode.
I think that’s a perfectly plausible reading. But it still annoys me that they spent a whole mediocre episode to get that point across when we already learnt that Sherlock keeps Moriarty tied up at the bottom of his Mind Palace and Sherlock was only ready to ascend from that prison when he was reminded of John – his closest friend.
That’s what I’m saying about them covering ground they’ve already gone over. And even if they felt that Sherlock being in a struggle between good and bad was a salient point which really needed to be re-emphasised, they could have still created a better framing episode for that conclusion.
yep mieke how i read it also. he’s also trying to work out what he missed re-moriarty
What annoyed me the most was that the plot did not advance the story one single bit. Also, Sherlock didn’t look high AT ALL at the end of HLV; he seemed perfectly clean and it’s quite clear Moftiss thought about this silly plot twist later on. They are clearly just making it up as they go along, a thing I have always hated in TV series. The best (like Life on Mars-Ashes to Ashes UK) know exactly where they are going. I doubt I will watch S4, if there ever is one.
Twin Peaks got like that after awhile – What sh1t can we throw up on screen this week – really bad. By that time I didn’t care who killed Laura Palmer.
To be fair, I think Lynch was doing it on purpose as they forced a new series on him, so he kind of gave up on it. I loved the ending though.
This kind of convoluted real/unreal nonsense also killed THE X-FILES.
And it showed in the actors. Gillian Anderson and David Duchovny were miserable by the end and seemed to hate the show and each other. How low the mighty were brought! It was such a great show before it went off the rails. I can see the same happening with BC and MF.
…it kind of did advance the plot, hermia. Foreshadowed loads of stuff coming up.
“kind of” is the key word. I think people finally want more cases. They wasted season 3 going over the last episode of season 2 and dealing with Watson’s love life, now they wasted this episode to sort of answer 1 question…
Not perfect, but I enjoyed it. Moriaty’s gun on the tongue scene was one of the creepier things I’ve ever seen. But one question–why was Mycroft so grossly obese? Like they capitalized on it. Is it from a book? I’ve read very little of Doyle’s actual writings.
Previous Sherlock episodes mention that Mycroft used to be fat, it may be a callback to that?
It’s in the books.
I also think it means something, ie. something is killing him.
Yes, that’s more or less from the book. Mycroft is described as “built heavily and massive”, lacks all energy and ambition, loves food, is more clever than anyone else and won’t ever do anything on his own. That’s why he needs Sherlock.
It’s Sherlock’s dream; he emphasizes his big brother’s weakness.
Thanks! I should read them, I guess, to get the full effect.
I forgot this was happening. I barely remember the 3rd season with the exception of that first episode where they decided to raid Tumblr fan fiction and little bit of the last episode for that season as well.
Are they doing a 4th season?
I originally was quite pleased with this episode because it seemed they were getting back to solving actual CRIMES (instead of Sherlock coming back from the dead, John and Mary getting married, etc. Series 3 was a TRAVESTY.).
The mystery was a little thin for me in this one, even though the premise was interesting in the beginning, so I felt let down by that part.
I was also super disappointed that the Victorian-era thing was essentially just a dream sequence (call it a mind palace if you will, Moff, it’s still a dream sequence).
Nothing will ever be better than Series 2, for me.
I miss the murder mysteries too. They were never the best or most prominent part of the series, almost always second fiddle to crossfire wit and manic Sherlock. But now they take up so little time it’s almost not a detective series anymore. The most frustrating thing is how they often just reference the names of cases, cases which Conan Doyle wrote brilliantly about and they just namedrop them and move on to more gags. I want to see them play out!
Must say I enjoyed this episode anyway – they’re such good actors and work great as an ensemble. The costumes and hokey shout-outs to Classic Sherlock were a bit of holiday fun, watching Watson emote with his mustache made me laugh out loud. Not giving up on this series yet, just readjusting my expectations.
Seriously–if SHERLOCK just devoted itself to solid versions of the cases Watson only hinted at, that would be fine. Gatiss has done a slew of MR James adapations for Brit TV that were smart updates/solid retellings. It’s not like he and Moffat are first-timers at that rodeo.
Just……NO. Sherlock’s “Mind Palace” is not a good location for the episode. I was very disappointed and frustrated because it was so far off the normally good story-telling I had come to expect.
Can I also add that ‘And then there were none’, which aired on BBC as well, was heaps better than Sherlock? The acting (Charles Dance especially) was phenomenal and the writer didn’t mess much with Christie’s vision. The party scene was chilling and the flash-backs very creepy. All in all, a masterpiece.
I think Moftiss are equating self-referential drivel with clever writing. It ain’t.
The Christie was enjoyable. And Aiden Turner and his towel nearly broke Twitter. As someone not hugely invested in Sherlock,I found the Bride entertaining but not riveting by any means.
Re: ‘And then there were none’, I couldn’t agree with you more, Charles Dance was superb – helped by those wonderful hooded eyes. This is not to take away anything from the other actors who were all marvellous.
Thank you! I was saying to anyone who would listen that they should ignore the new Sherlock and go watch ‘And Then There Were None’, which was, admittedly, long but very suspenseful and intense. The period features were excellent and all of the ensemble cast fantastic.
Plus, in that there were twists right up into the final moments, whereas with the Sherlock special I guessed most of the major plot points shortly in, and the overall action of the episode did almost nothing to move along any narrative; someone tweeted ‘to summarize Sherlock; he got off the plane and into a car’.
Why do we have to ignore one show in order to watch another? We can’t enjoy both? God, some of you are so weird.
Er, two entirely different show types.
Sherlock’s not about the mysteries, imo. It’s not a ~serious drama~ either. That’s the appeal for me, it’s wild, entertaining, and different. If I want a serious drama, I’ll watch one lol.
@LIsa You seem like one of the stans they are writing for, so yeah, keep telling yourself it’s ‘wild and different’. It really, really, isn’t.
Twin Peaks S1 was that (to name one example), but Sherlock? Nope.
They had the total of one good idea (Moriarty as Sherlock’s alter ego) and they are flogging it to death and beyond.
I am a ‘stan’ because I don’t agree with you, seriously? This got a fair amount of rave reviews from real critics, I suppose they’re all silly dumb fans, too, then. Please save us from our obvious idiocy.
Sherlock is fun to watch and entertaining, yes. That is my opinion, just as you are entitled to yours, which I am capable of respecting. It’s fluff and fantasy with high production values, not an uber serious show, and there isn’t a lot of those on TV right now. What it is not trying to be is a serious mystery drama.
Oh dear, I loved ATTWN! A fantastic adaptation of my old most beloved Christie book, with a wonderful cast, including my very favorite actor under the sun (yes, Charles Dance), with beautiful cinematography and suspence that was done really, *really* well.
Turner and Gorman both surprised me with how good they were, Stephens delivered as he always does, and that Maeve Dermody I’m going to keep close tabs on, she absolutely knocked it out of the park.
As for Sherlock, well… I wasn’t expecting much after s3 (s2 being my favorite), but still I didn’t quite expect to be waiting for it to be over. Overall they made me a rather sad and disappointed fan.
The party scene on its own was worth all of The Abominable Bride.
I heard of it and I love the book. Is it available in the US or did it only air on BBC?
I’ve heard it’s gonna air in the States in April (on Lifetime, of all places).
But if I remember correctly, in Britain it’s going to be released on DVD in a matter of days, so… you know.
EDIT:
Oh and, uh… I just checked, it’s already on YouTube, so make of that what you will 😀
Thank you. I’ll check it out.
Thanks so much to you guys for the ATTWN heads-up. Just got through watching it and you were right–it was terrific. And unlike SHERLOCK, it used flashbacks and visual tricks to advance the story, deliniate characters, and keep the atmosphere oppressive instead of playing plot games. Excellent work.
It was, wasn’t it? Best television I’ve seen in quite a while.
“And unlike SHERLOCK, it used flashbacks and visual tricks to advance the story, deliniate characters, and keep the atmosphere oppressive instead of playing plot games.”
That is very well said. The comparison is unavoidable, and it only highlights the vast contrast between the two.
And it gave the viewer space to draw conclusions about the characters–conclusions that delivered the special hellish chill that made this so good. For example, the additional revelations about one of the leads and the culprit were a major gut-punch–even though I’ve read the book umpteen times. And it’s a shattering example of the old parable about Hell being a place where no one helps each other because they are basically too selfish/hungry/venal to do
so–and being stuck tormenting each other is their true dammnation. Sigh–just slammin’ work.
Loved it.
Quite enjoyed it. This one had the most references to canon as well.
This varied reaction is identical to the prior series, both 2 and 3. The only difference is this special fared very well with critics, whereas 3’s reception was more mixed in that regard.
Haven’t seen it and have no rush to but if what people are saying Moffat has ruined it, just in the same way he’s ruined Dr Who with his dodgy plots/dialogue.
For me it has been enough Moftiss-Sherlock for the next few years, thank you.
ATTWN was so good, what a nice surprise!
For me the best part was Mycroft, both versions. And his magenta tie was to die for.
To me it was the BEST episode to date. Lots of symbolism. And I loved how the used the time leap as part of his drug problem that they never really addressed up till this point. MYCROFT FAT SUIT = GENIUS
I thought it was boring.
I liked it. I wasn’t excited for a Victorian era episode, IMHO, so I was pleasently surprised when it went back to modern times. However, it was too Inception for my taste.
Seeing Moriarty is always great because the creepiest of them all, and we finally see Sherlock’s addiction first hand. But, why is Mary not pregnant in his Mind Palace? Are we going to delete that baby? Series 3 was so… OTT.
I felt like this episode was a long teaser for season 4, even at its worst Sherlock is great TV
I enjoyed parts of it…and parts of it I hated, especially Moffat likening the women’s liberation cult to KKK.
I loved it! Thoroughly entertained me and giggled everytime there was a gay (Johnlock) subtext scene. Thought Moftiss said they weren’t go there anymore but I guess that’s one way to fan the (fan’s) flames. That scene where Watson said that Holmes is flesh and blood, he’s a man, doesn’t he have urges, yada yada- if Holmes took one more step toward Watson- Tumblr would’ve collectively exploded.
I didn’t expect dead serious, Great Game style crime solving anyway since its premise is as a Christmas special. Those are often centered deep into the main character’s heart or in this case, his mind. if it’s a drama/detective show, the formula is usually to have a crime that touches to the main character’s personal life. The show’s title is Sherlock, afterall. What’s deeper than being inside his Mind Palace?
I agree that the Victorian period should have been self-contained and as a one-off. Although this was fun, delightful and totally serviced my fanning heart, I agree it didn’t go anywhere. If only, it robbed us of one episode for 2017. Now we’re just looking at two more episodes. Those better be tight, Mofftiss!
I thought it was horrible. I was supremely disappointed and even annoyed by the awful writing, plot and pretty much everything. I cannot believe it has come to this!
I saw TAB twice-once on the small screen once in the theater. I and my family liked it very much. I think the drug taking was more Sherlock knowing he was being sent on a suicide mission, then he used the high to suss out Moriarty, who’s still dead. It showed how the drugs made him vulnerable, but also showed Mycroft’s vulnerability where his little brother is concerned. BTW-I believe the ladies’ hoods are more medieval religious order than KKK.