BBC Sherlock Holmes Fans
"I'm not stupid, you know."
Sherlock; "What ever gave you that idea?"
Sherlock; "What ever gave you that idea?"
May 9, 2012 at 11:06am Edited
A critique (with spoilers):
The accidental self-inflicted death by boomerang. While it makes a good 'figure it out' quiz, really, it's not bloody likely.
If you're skilled enough to throw and return (which he must have been, or he would have lost the boomerang in the water he was throwing over), then he would have been starting to reach out for the boomerang to make the catch... or about to get out of the way. For the boomerang to hit him in the head when he turned around for an instant, it must have been almost back to him. Even if distracted, someone that good at the throw and return instinctively knows when and where the impact is going to be. You either stay in the concentration zone and grab the boomerang when you hear a loud noise, then check out the noise after, or you duck out of the way to look. At a minimum you put your hands up to protect yourself where the impact will be - that's a reflex.
As a good thrower, he knew the boomerang was about to be at his space, and approximately where. Even a loud surprising noise would be unlikely to distract him in such a way that he *surprise!* got a death knock on the back of his head. Reflexes would kick in when you know something is coming at your head... even if a loud noise distracts you.
Was this a nod to an original Doyle mystery, or a newly created one?
The accidental self-inflicted death by boomerang. While it makes a good 'figure it out' quiz, really, it's not bloody likely.
If you're skilled enough to throw and return (which he must have been, or he would have lost the boomerang in the water he was throwing over), then he would have been starting to reach out for the boomerang to make the catch... or about to get out of the way. For the boomerang to hit him in the head when he turned around for an instant, it must have been almost back to him. Even if distracted, someone that good at the throw and return instinctively knows when and where the impact is going to be. You either stay in the concentration zone and grab the boomerang when you hear a loud noise, then check out the noise after, or you duck out of the way to look. At a minimum you put your hands up to protect yourself where the impact will be - that's a reflex.
As a good thrower, he knew the boomerang was about to be at his space, and approximately where. Even a loud surprising noise would be unlikely to distract him in such a way that he *surprise!* got a death knock on the back of his head. Reflexes would kick in when you know something is coming at your head... even if a loud noise distracts you.
Was this a nod to an original Doyle mystery, or a newly created one?
Definitely a nod to an existing mystery. Irene Adler is the only woman Holmes ever fell for, and the Scandal in Belgravia plot is a classic, one of the most famous. She was a blackmailer, albeit not a dominatrix as far as I recall, and the person she was blackmailing was a male member of the royal family. She did escape at the end, and Holmes was pleased at that. He maintained a grudging respect/attraction for her as the only woman adversary who had been worthy of his notice.
Not sure I agree about the boomerang, maybe you are overthinking it? Although it's a little farfetched, we don't know he was good at throwing a boomerang. We know he was athletic and had just returned from travel overseas, but it's possible he wasn't quite an expert in this specific activity. He might have just bought the boomerang on his trip to Australia and be trying it out. Anyway, I found that puzzle a little bit of a red herring designed just to highlight the intellectual duel/attraction between Holmes and Adler. Slightly on the silly side, but in keeping with the original Holmes mysteries, I think. They were often rather silly in their extreme detail.
Not sure I agree about the boomerang, maybe you are overthinking it? Although it's a little farfetched, we don't know he was good at throwing a boomerang. We know he was athletic and had just returned from travel overseas, but it's possible he wasn't quite an expert in this specific activity. He might have just bought the boomerang on his trip to Australia and be trying it out. Anyway, I found that puzzle a little bit of a red herring designed just to highlight the intellectual duel/attraction between Holmes and Adler. Slightly on the silly side, but in keeping with the original Holmes mysteries, I think. They were often rather silly in their extreme detail.
PeggyC said:
Definitely a nod to an existing mystery. Irene Adler is the only woman Holmes ever fell for, and the Scandal in Belgravia plot is a classic, one of the most famous. She was a blackmailer, albeit not a dominatrix as far as I recall, and the person she was blackmailing was a male member of the royal family. She did escape at the end, and Holmes was pleased at that. He maintained a grudging respect/attraction for her as the only woman adversary who had been worthy of his notice.
.
Yep. The real Holmes story is "A Scandal in Bohemia"...one of my favorite Jeremy Brett episodes.
There was not a really good psycho killer in this one. Just that opening minute of moriarty . British actors are so good at playing sociopaths. I think that's what I missed in this episode. It seemed a bit flighty and lacking in gravitas. Loved the weepy housekeeper who pinched Irene's phone right under the CIA's nose. Want more episodes now!
May 9, 2012 at 3:22pm Edited
Such a great episode! Another classic Holmes reference was Sherlock complaining about John's blog entry for The Speckled Blonde (originally published as "The Speckled Band"). 
)
Here's a British Film Institute interview with the cast and writers after a screening of this episode. The volume is unfortunately really low, so you'll have to turn it up:
I wasn't impressed with Lara Pulver as the new Section Chief for the final season of BBC's Spooks (aka "MI:5" - check it out on Netflix) - I thought that she was detached and unengaging. She was the complete opposite here - really enjoying the role and providing an excellent match for Sherlock. She also certainly held my attention whenever she was on the screen (ahem)...
) Here's a British Film Institute interview with the cast and writers after a screening of this episode. The volume is unfortunately really low, so you'll have to turn it up:
I wasn't impressed with Lara Pulver as the new Section Chief for the final season of BBC's Spooks (aka "MI:5" - check it out on Netflix) - I thought that she was detached and unengaging. She was the complete opposite here - really enjoying the role and providing an excellent match for Sherlock. She also certainly held my attention whenever she was on the screen (ahem)...
Isn't that the greatest name ever??
This show is so perfectly cast and so well-written. It's a force of nature.
This show is so perfectly cast and so well-written. It's a force of nature.
His names sends me off in fits of giggles every time I say it. But I do love the actor. I was shocked to see him with straight blond hair in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. Wow.
Ah, you're right about the title! I'd forgotten it was Bohemia. I need to start watching these on a bigger TV, BTW. On our little screen I keep missing fascinating tidbits from their computer and smart phone screens.
Esiders said:
PeggyC said:
Definitely a nod to an existing mystery. Irene Adler is the only woman Holmes ever fell for, and the Scandal in Belgravia plot is a classic, one of the most famous. She was a blackmailer, albeit not a dominatrix as far as I recall, and the person she was blackmailing was a male member of the royal family. She did escape at the end, and Holmes was pleased at that. He maintained a grudging respect/attraction for her as the only woman adversary who had been worthy of his notice.
.
Yep. The real Holmes story is "A Scandal in Bohemia"...one of my favorite Jeremy Brett episodes.
Ah, you're right about the title! I'd forgotten it was Bohemia. I need to start watching these on a bigger TV, BTW. On our little screen I keep missing fascinating tidbits from their computer and smart phone screens.
OK, Question re: Hounds of Baskerville. Did the car(s) on the hill have only one headlight?
My 15 year old was watching with me and she knew all about the "Mind House" technique from a teacher at Columbia. I love it that Holmes went to a "Mind Palace"!
My 15 year old was watching with me and she knew all about the "Mind House" technique from a teacher at Columbia. I love it that Holmes went to a "Mind Palace"!
KMK, I was asking the same thing about the cars! I thought that detail was a little odd and unnecessary. And of course Holmes goes to a "Mind PALACE." What else? 
I actually felt this one was just a tad slow compared with the others, but I still love it.
I actually felt this one was just a tad slow compared with the others, but I still love it.
May 14, 2012 at 3:34pm Edited
I liked it, but I thought the original Hound of Baskerville story was tighter and more interesting.
Some great lines, though: "You took THAT on the Tube?" "Well, none of the cabs would pick me up."
"Stop being all cheekbones and turned up collar" (or something like that...)
I missed it last night (although I saw it already via bbc). Full episode replay available on PBS:
http://video.pbs.org/video/2232302066
http://video.pbs.org/video/2232302066
kmk said:
"Stop being all cheekbones and turned up collar" (or something like that...)
Yes, and then Sherlock indignantly denied it! the interplay between Holmes and Watson is great. But I think this plot strayed farther from the original Doyle than the other episodes have, and perhaps that was part of the trouble for me. 
Did anyone else think it was odd that Watson lied to Holmes at the end about Adler? Wouldn't Watson, of all people, know that you cannot lie to Sherlock?
I'm a huge fan of Steve Moffat's writing. Watson and Holmes is almost as good as the Doctor and Donna.
I'm a huge fan of Steve Moffat's writing. Watson and Holmes is almost as good as the Doctor and Donna.
You mean in last week's episode? I think Watson feels a bit protective of Holmes at times because Holmes cuts himself off from people and doesn't appear to care for anyone (except Watson) and then he became so obviously vulnerable to Irene Adler. But you're right... you would think he would know better than to try to lie to Holmes.
May 14, 2012 at 7:04pm Edited
Haven't seen Baskerville yet.
But from the previous ones, I just wish Watson was written (or played) with a little more 'oomph'. He doesn't really have to be a total pushover, or a guy who pretends his idea is going to be any good... because by now he should already know that he deduces things incorrectly each time.
Watson could be more likable and humorous rather than somewhat pitied.
But from the previous ones, I just wish Watson was written (or played) with a little more 'oomph'. He doesn't really have to be a total pushover, or a guy who pretends his idea is going to be any good... because by now he should already know that he deduces things incorrectly each time.
Watson could be more likable and humorous rather than somewhat pitied.
May 15, 2012 at 4:39am Edited
This series has some sparkling writing and even some of the special effects are not too distracting. But for pure atmosphere, it does not compare to the Jeremy Brett series, IMNSHO. It absolutely does read like Dr. Who on a 7% solution--when Holmes went into the "mind palace" I have expected a Tardis to appear and whisk him away.
(eta): The Hound of the Baskervilles is one of the more difficult Holmes stories in the original canon, and I think they made a valid effort on this one but fell short. Kind of like watching a modernist version of one of the Richards or Lear--when it is well-done, it is off-the-charts memorable (like the Patrick Stewart version on a few years ago). But when it falls short, you feel a bit short-changed.
(eta): The Hound of the Baskervilles is one of the more difficult Holmes stories in the original canon, and I think they made a valid effort on this one but fell short. Kind of like watching a modernist version of one of the Richards or Lear--when it is well-done, it is off-the-charts memorable (like the Patrick Stewart version on a few years ago). But when it falls short, you feel a bit short-changed.
Sprout, that's kind of Watson's whole reason for living, isn't it? to be Holmes's less intelligent foil?
Now that I think about it, there are strong similarities between the relationship between Watson and Holmes and those of the The Doctor and any number of Companions.
Now that I think about it, there are strong similarities between the relationship between Watson and Holmes and those of the The Doctor and any number of Companions.
May 15, 2012 at 7:39am Edited
PeggyC said:
Sprout, that's kind of Watson's whole reason for living, isn't it? to be Holmes's less intelligent foil?
Maybe, but I think Holmes would still shine strongly against a Watson who acts a bit more intelligent and self-confident (I mean, he is a doctor.) I always thought it would be more appealing to have a Watson who gets us half-way there - the halfway that we should see as the reader, and then Holmes would get us the rest of the way to the conclusion. Then Watson represents the reader.
Instead, Watson seems to cluelessly stumble around with theories that you know are completely wrong, get pushed around by Holmes, and it just looks like a pattern of an uneven and somewhat dysfunctional relationship. What does Watson have that makes him more than just a replaceable go-fer to Holmes? It's not clear to me in this series.
By the same token, what does Holmes have that makes Watson put up with his B.S.? What does Watson really get out of it? Observing brilliance in action isn't enough of a thrill for most people to put up with that kind of abuse...
May 15, 2012 at 7:54am Edited
I haven't read the books in decades, but my vague recollection was that Watson was acting in more of a 'doctor' capacity and was more checking on (and only eventually living with?) a Holmes who wasn't quite as 'normal' as the one we see in the TV series.
Saw the series a while back :::cough:: streaming......and love this show.
This Sunday's finale is going to be quite epic.
x
This Sunday's finale is going to be quite epic.
x
Hold on to your hats - here comes the American remake, starring Lucy Liu as Dr. Joan Watson (yes, really):
I actually think this American version has some potential... I hope so, and I hope they do more than THREE FREAKIN' SHOWS A SEASON. 
Not a fan of the whole Joan Watson thing and the show seems, at least from the preview, like it's trying to do the same thing as Sherlock...but, in Nyc...doesn't seem to offer anything new 
In order to add a comment – you must Join this community – Click here to do so.
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
"I've never begged for mercy in my life."
"Twice."