Sherlock: The sign of three

My wife and I were not in the least bit happy with last night's Sherlock. I say this to point out that despite the strong and negative reaction this ep has elicited from some quarters, these opinions are being rejected out of hand by certain people on the grounds that we are not the show maker, we don't know what we're talking about, what do you mean you didn't like Sherlock? it was brilliant?! We have not allowed our inner child to be more free and unchain the character from the genre. Apparently only other official script writers are allowed to point out that for a 90 minute script there sure was an awful lot of filler, at least three writers help coble this together and linked up poorly and that it took 25 minutes for any kind of mystery to occur and the final solution to the bleeding obvious puzzle made no sense. If you even allow for 15 minutes to elapse before you tune out of boredom, frustration or indifference, that's still 10 minutes longer than the most patient person would of watched.

What then unfolded was a Children in need special (that's telethon filler for those not from the UK) that ran long enough to cover 5 years of Terry Wogan taking cheques from runners for Pudsy. I know Gattis and Moffatt and that guy they were covering for were trying to be clever. And it was , in bits, but not for a full 90 minutes. In fact one of the biggest reasons those of us that hated it were unhappy was that despite at least staying somewhat in character, the ep was in the time slot that normally is reserved for Sherlock the Mystery drama thriller. I might have been ready to forgive even this if the story , such as it was, wasn't so disjointed and incoherent in it's dipping from one genre to the next, at one point becoming a BBC3 drunken youths special revelling in intoxication past the point even Packet of crisps would have gone. If you spent most of the film going WTF and hoping it might start eventually being something, it was for about 5 minutes then went back to utter confusion despite a brilliant portrayal of a socially awkward genius that would have worked if you had wanted to watch Big Bang doing the long awaited Penny Leonard wedding.

I would even  have forgiven it even if it was shit if it was one of  6 or even 12. The fact there is but one more ep left in this series means that there is a 50 50 chance the next one will be as bad or worse or marginally better or effing brilliant. I don't like those odds when deciding to choose something to watch. To mention a mates comment, three slots a year are too valuable to waste on fluff like this. We chose it to avoid all the comedies on the air at the time, we wanted drama, there had been no particular warning that it would be anything but a drama only to become a Colin Firth spectacular available on DVD for free in next weekends Daily Mail. Of course we were going to be confused and eventually angry. But just try saying that in front of some people....

And what kind of people are we that we deserve censure? The kind of people that watch a wide range of programmes and cultural content, we consider ourselves relatively open minded and intelligent only to be routinely treated to a  hyperbole of terms regularly used to suppress any difference of opinion that doesn't show due deference to his holiness The Lord Thy God Steven Moffat. How often have we or even you, yes you been right all along, totally fact based, completely sure of your information  only to be told by these wise things that they were sure you're wrong and anyway they know better. This happened several times to my wife with Doctor Who and the keepers of the faith. When rumbled by the Who docufilm confirming my wife's assertions, these people just pretended like they knew it all along, enough to make you scream.

A prime example  is this most recent quote from a Who blogger that has more than once pushed his weight around talking long enough to insure nobody else gets a word in edge wise lest he be proved at fault. But, and this is really important, this blogger thought it was great. And he, also, thinks that anyone that didn't think it was great is bloody stupid. Not just a little bit stupid but what-little-brains-they-have-dribbling-out-of-their-ears stupid. And, I don't want to talk to them. I mean, there are, of course, also people who believe NASA faked the moon landings and the world is run by giants lizards. They're also quite vocal on the Internet, I've noticed. And, are also worth ignoring.

I bet even Moffat has been heard uttering the words "I don't think it was that good" or "I might have done this better if ...." , "Boss I need more time to fix this awful script". But with people like the above rapping the fingers of those of us who do in fact know, have information and are used to a certain level of quality, we are either rendered mute to avoid offence or pretend to be overjoyed just to keep the peace.
    

The fact is that even producers of big shows with big ratings can and do get it wrong, these people are doing a job, for big money, but if they do it less well than they did it last week, we may not watch next week. And if enough people don't watch next week and the week after, programmes get cancelled. That's why those of us who watch and have opinions matter, and why those of us who write for those who watch, must pay heed to those opinions. Treating the big shots like they are infallible, leads to massive egos and even bigger divergences from the norm, whatever the norm is. By setting the bar as high as Gatiss and Moffat did with the first three eps, they opened themselves up to us saying " That sucked, I hated it because.." and they have to listen.

There is another big lie out there. Calling somebody a creator when they have only taken over an existing project that has a history and reasonable expectations, justifies them making wholesale changes to something and expecting the fan base, the network and the advertisers to go along with what ever personal project they have. Add to that the real risk that when you take on another giant like Sherlock and try to make two quality programmes at the same time, you will likely start to get sloppy on both and confuse the two shows for the same thing  when they are not.

This has now occurred and some of us have had the temerity to say so. I love Doctor Who, I love Sherlock, but if this is the future, we should prepare ourselves for the time when both are gone for good. I for one will no longer bother with Sherlock , we can only pray the combination of Peter Capaldi and a more focused Who crew will produce something  that vaguely resembles a story as they aren't now saddled with nearly as much work.

Oh and Happy 160th Birthday Sherlock Holmes, I was hoping for a better present but there wasn't anything nice in the shops so I got you this Tardis usb hub, hope you like it. 

Sherlock: The Great Game or Moriarty revealed

Tonight's third and final Instalment of  the current run was as per usual, brilliant. Holmes chases after one distraction after another designed to keep him from solving the case most important to the the British Government. Based on The Bruce Partington Plans and borrowing liberally from a few other stories, the episode takes you from one squeaky bum moment to the next. It even makes you think the unthinkable. It was in a word, Effing Brilliant. ( ok  that's two words).

The introduction, finally, of Moriarty was not unexpected once you realized the three films were one story in three parts. Well played and paced, the story takes you where expected it to go, but still one found it incredibly fascinating. And just when you thought. "I got you rumbled Moffat", the story takes another layer away. It is our habit when we watch telly to chat a bit during the boring bits or when we'll learn nothing new. During 90 minutes we were continuously surprised by the twists and turns. Do not take your eyes off the screen for a second lest you miss a detail.

If one could define in a sentence the point of the story, it would be thus. Holmes and Moriarty are two sides of the same coin. Both massive intellects that find life in stimulation , intrigue and mystery. Put another way, human life and emotional attachment is worth less than the details of the game. If I had never watched these stories and only ever read the original ones, I would have come to the same conclusion. The fact that the Lord Thy God Moffat managed this without falling into the usual traps most telly producers of the modern era have, elevates the man to a club of writers we should all aspire to. In lesser efforts, the characters become two dimensional creatures whose sole purpose is to speak the lines of the author. Moffat and Gatiss, we mustn't forget Gatiss, create people, men and women who are more than mere Auton like shells with a limited shelf life. We met tonight people who would otherwise be interesting, people who if you knew them , we would want them to live. But in the telling you see just how detached both Holmes and Moriarty are from the mundane reality that Watson and Lestrade live in. Even the beautifully crafted and acted Mycroft has a certain air of elevation above the ordinary, he is first and foremost concerned with the defense of the realm, the loss of the submarine plans now updated to be rockets, over the loss of a single human life.  And yes he's right, for that one life is nothing compared to the thousands a rocket would kill. To call Holmes cold and heartless is of course incorrect.  He is just his brother a few years younger. Sometimes you need to rise above the mundane to discover the greater good. For example, the Curie's work on radioactivity eventually killed them both, but we have much to thank them for. Would they have been more concerned with a safe boring life, we would still not have pasteurized milk.

So if Moriarty is the evil yang to Holmes good Ying, is he equally noble in the pursuit of his craft? I would suppose so, and yet he does come off as bit mad. Would you have expected anything else? And yet you still believe that below the thin Vermeer of comic lunacy, there lies a real person waiting to be explored in future episodes.  I doubt we'll see the last of him nor can we say we know all there is to know about him. Thank God there will be at least 10 new stories coming soon to a telly near you.

One great line from the ep is " I'd be lost without my Blogger (Boswell)". Just one of many bits and pieces in the many layered dish that is The Great Game.  Sherlockians, Holmesians, fellow enthusiasts, a few things to look forward to when watching this highly entertaining ep.  A number of things are said that should make you run for your copies of Holmes to find the reference, there are at least 5 clear ones I counted and most assuredly more. I won't tell you what they are, and what's more if you don't get them I promise not to blow up your Gran.

In the grand tradition of The Strand, the story leaves us wanting more and anticipating greatness. The New Cumberbatch Holmes tonight did one other thing I thought would take longer, he took possession of the role as much as any person can. Or should I say , he allowed the ghost of Sherlock Holmes to posses him completely. The coming series will, if it continues to maintain the high standard of story telling, humour suspense  and believability despite the occasional mustard applied in some scenes, will be a massive success that will launch the new Holmes and Watson into the realm of Legend.

Finally, I must look at this as a stand alone story. Would I have watched this as a single film and enjoyed it? Emphatically yes. It gathered you  ever so gently and then took you hostage till the very last second of the credits.  Well done BBC for taking this story on, may you keep taking such decisions regardless of what the Condemns and certain Labour people think.  Were it not for the current set up, the English speaking telly world would be a poorer place.

Sherlock: The Blind Banker or Holmes meets Rathbone

Tonight's instalment of Sherlock did not disappoint. It was a combination of the old Basil Rathbone thrillers with a healthy dose of Cannon and Fu Manchu thrown in as well. Holmes and Watson are on the trail of killers who leave messages in an inscrutable ancient text. If like me, you are familiar with certain classic methods used in the original Holmes stories you would be on the lookout for the code in question before our stubborn young Scotland Yard man could say Valley of Fear. From the creepy museum at night to the stage show later on, Moffat and Gatiss turn on the B movie charm. I could have watched it in Black and White it was that good.

I'm trying hard not to give the story away, so suffice to say that the apparent suicides are anything but. A number of people die in the pursuit of a stolen object. Said dead people are clearly somehow connected. Will Holmes figure it out before too many bodies drop? You'll have to watch.

What was particularly enjoyable, was the sense of humour developed in the story and Holmes himself. The story has a number of moments where they play silly buggers with Watson. If we're lucky , he'll get the occasional ritual humiliation and mistaken identity that will get him in the kind of trouble he doesn't seem to mind. Watson, having found a live wire to live with , he now sets about moaning throughout the entire ep that he's tired and hungry, clearly not so tired or hungry he won't give up the chase. Good man John, just the kind of companion you want in a crime fighting sidekick. I suspect, dear readers, he won't be alone for long, Watson has discovered the lovely Sarah whom he immediately fancies something rotten. Will they or won't they? wait till you see their first date. I doubt most relationships would survive such an encounter, but it worked in Young Sherlock Holmes so why not here.  The perils of Pauline sequence is well put together and has some story telling element, unlike many which serve only to titillate. Watson and Sarah will have a healthy onscreen fling that will either end in her eventual demise or Watson marrying her.

I did mention Holmes and humour, In this outing, Sherlock engages in some gentle flattery. He presses the buttons of his lab partner who had tried to get his interest in episode one. And there are loads of apparently inadvertent japes aimed clearly at Watson. Holmes delights in getting Watson wound up over things trivial and dangerous. For example, he only opens the door of the girl's flat when it's too late for Watson to help, but two things have occurred, Watson's words are taken out of context and Holmes rather than admit he could have asked for help, pretends that nearly being strangled to death is nothing special.  Earlier in the ep, Holmes allows Watson to think nothing is amiss and  maintains the fiction he has in fact been sat there doing nothing all afternoon. In the closest thing to a nod to Clouseau and the man servant fight meets anonymous Bond villain moment, Holmes is cool as a cucumber when Watson comes home from having been in a row with a computerized till. Take my card he says, never letting on he was in a fight minutes before.

Sarah, who we meet properly for the first tonight runs the practice Watson has stepped into. Much like the Victorian Watson, this Watson is a stand in for people on hols and frankly would make a rubbish regular doctor. Sarah spots this from the first but hires him anyways. They seem made for each other and her reactions later on  belie a more complex person seeking an escape form the mundane. One hopes she makes the cut and appears in the new series.

Ah yes the new series. In case you haven't been reading the news, or missed the flurry of sqeeeing at the BBC. They have ordered a full series of 10. Word has it it will begin filming soon and be on screen as soon as a spot can be found for it in the rotation. I'm sure that won't be a problem at all.  Ratings for the first ep were through the roof and even the most hard bitten curmudgeonly critic was quickly on board. Sherlock is coming and you need to make room for all the DVDs.

So how was this episode as a story? Even if you strip away all the identifying markers that say Sherlock Holmes, you end up with a well acted story that drew you in and made you jump when it wanted you to jump, laugh when it wanted you to laugh. You knew some of the baddies were going to be a bit old school and some of the good guys were going to be just a tad twatish, but it worked. Mixed with humour, was fear and tension. You knew people might get hurt and you cared, you knew yet others would die , but you hoped somehow they might avoid a grisly fate.  For what could easily be a formulaic box ticking exercise, The Blind Banker turns into the sort of fun 90 minutes you don't often see anymore.