Sherlock

[sugarhyped]

@Lucrece

See i just pretend everything from the point where she said Moriarty helped me onward wasn't a part of the episode. What would you think if that last 5 minutes didn't exist?

I'd say it was a great episode otherwise. I do agree with your comments about Adler (I blame Moffat) being ruined but I enjoyed the episode a lot as a whole and it was way better than guy ritchie's movie so...

[Lucrece]

Well, Guy Ritchie's "Hollywood era of 300-fying everything for insecure teeny-boppers and their manchild guardians" version of Sherlock can make even a high school interpretation of Jane Eyre look like a masterpiece.

[Hawknc]

Liked the finale, hated the Irene Adler episode. They destroyed the character.

The point of Irene Adler is that she's the one that outwitted Sherlock and got away. She didn't fall in love, or let any admiration for Sherlock get in the way of her schemes. And in the modernization she was given a getwaway as a means to appease but it falls flat when the character ends up defeated, and in the predictable "silly women and their emotions" fashion, with Sherlock saving her from decapitation on top.

Really? This is a woman who has made her way through the world prior to meeting Sherlock, survived a meeting with Moriarty, and she needs Sherlock's protection? What did she do when she didn't have her smartphone's "protection"? She went out and got it. So what prevented her from getting "protection" again?

And then the writer commented on the Adler episode, and it all fell together. It wasn't about Adler so much as using her character as a fucking "I'm not gay" reassurance plot device for Sherlock Holmes. To which I'll respond, if you don't fucking want your character's sexuality confused, skip the fucking hojay dialogue of prior episodes and the constant references to their being mistaken as a couple alongside domestic squabbles. Don't fuck up Irene to clean up the mess you made before.

And would a sexually ambiguous Holmes be such a fucking departure from the character? They made him a freaky oddball pseudo-scientist, for fuck's sake. Obviously, though, this all goes back to the Guy Ritchie conflict where the copyright holder got pissed off with speculation that Holmes might be featured homoerotically, saying it totally warped the character. Given that she was so offended before, it wouldn't be a surprise if these writers have had to make concessions as well to maintain permission to use the character.

They could've just kept Holmes asexual and not made the one female intellectual heavyweight into yet another almost as good as the male protagonist but ultimately vulnerable female romantic interest.

P.S. Andrew Scott better have pulled a Moriarty stunt to Sherlock's own. He's too sexy to depart the series. I swear that cute receding hairline gives me the vapors.

Sexism would be a trait of Moffat's not unique to Sherlock.

[Gellert1984]

Sexism would be a trait of Moffat's not unique to Sherlock.

I'd argue a lot of that article.

Some examples:
'"masculine" reason over pesky "feminine" emotion'
except that he's in love with her to and since he's never really faced his emotions he has a great deal of difficulty dealing with them.

'An insufficiently stimulating case will be summarily dismissed as "boring".'
Which causes him to miss things, in two episodes he's seen dismissing cases that, later, its pointed out to him are actually way more important than he initially gave them credit for.

Re:adler;'in Moffat's hands, less a matter of brains, and more a matter of knowing "what men like" and how to give it to them'
She wielded sex like a weapon and juggled international secrets to protect her chosen lifestyle. I'll admit I don't much care for the character but I wouldn't say moffats Adler is some sexist idealised woman. Mrs. Hudson on the other hand...

What I really didnt like about that ep is they seem to abandon her character's most likely actions in order to shoehorn in Moriarty. Why would Adler go to a consulting criminal? Why bother coming back from the dead?

Also 'Despite identifying as a lesbian' She's bisexual, not a lesbian.

[Lucrece]

Adler seemed like she could be an independent contractor to Moriarty, but aggravatingly enough they made her subordinate. Let's not forget it was Adler who truly foiled Holmes and Moriarty and Holmes were more of an even match, so if anything one would think she'd be an exceptional being just like them and not just an above average one.

Also, the lesbian with the exception for the right man is a tired trope. I almost wish she wasn't even a lesbian given the stereotypical sexualization she was given. I'll admit not wearing anything was a clever plot point. But beyond that she quickly became a tool rather than a character.

I don't even get the need for one big bad eclipsing all others. Why can't the hero have different but still interesting and competent adversaries encountering him in his adventures? Why can't there be more than one worthy match? That's not often how real life works.

[mr-mitch]

Let's not forget it was Adler who truly foiled Holmes and Moriarty and Holmes were more of an even match,

She used her breasts. That's cheating.

[Magnanimous]

I love this fandom so much.

Spoiler:

[SlyReaper]

Spoiler:

So Holmes told Watson to keep standing in a very specific place, and that place just happened to be behind a shorter building so he wouldn't see Holmes hit the ground. I'm pretty sure that'll turn out to be important. There was also an open-top garbage truck right next to where he fell. My new theory: he arranged to have that garbage truck parked there with bags full of cotton in the back, and jumped into that. Then before Watson could run around the smaller building, he hopped out onto the pavement and splashed some fake blood around. The cyclist was only there to delay Watson long enough that he could pull that off.

[Lucrece]

Tricking Watson was besides the point, because who he really needed to trick were the snipers, and he had no idea where they were holed up or what line of sight they had.

[Magnanimous]

One important part of Sherlock's "death"... Remember the little ball he was throwing around?

[Angua]

One important part of Sherlock's "death"... Remember the little ball he was throwing around?

My boyfriend used to do that with a rolled up piece of paper. Awesome use of gifs though!

[eSOANEM]

One important part of Sherlock's "death"... Remember the little ball he was throwing around?

Taking a pulse at the wrist is unreliable even at the best of times (I don't think anyone's ever picked up my pulse from my wrist) without being concussed or having the person hold a ball in their armpit so it probably wouldn't have been particularly necessary. Also, how would Sherlock have known which wrist John would go for? Or were the passers-by/homeless network under orders to direct him to a particular arm.

[SlyReaper]

Tricking Watson was besides the point, because who he really needed to trick were the snipers, and he had no idea where they were holed up or what line of sight they had.

He'd know where all the good sniping spots were though. This is the same guy who, from memory managed to pinpoint a single location based on local geology. And remember he chose the building to meet Moriarty on.

[Gellert1984]

Tricking Watson was besides the point, because who he really needed to trick were the snipers, and he had no idea where they were holed up or what line of sight they had.

He'd know where all the good sniping spots were though. This is the same guy who, from memory managed to pinpoint a single location based on local geology. And remember he chose the building to meet Moriarty on.

There are other factors to consider as well of course. Mycroft indicated each assassin to be working independantly, so there would be no spotter. I've never known a marksman to use such a low level of magnification that s/he could reasonably view Holmes while keeping a track on Watson. As such, the sniper could only keep a watch on Watson and would be reliant on visual cues as to what was going on.

Sherlock only had to trick Watson into believing he's dead.

[eSOANEM]

Tricking Watson was besides the point, because who he really needed to trick were the snipers, and he had no idea where they were holed up or what line of sight they had.

He'd know where all the good sniping spots were though. This is the same guy who, from memory managed to pinpoint a single location based on local geology. And remember he chose the building to meet Moriarty on.

There are other factors to consider as well of course. Mycroft indicated each assassin to be working independantly, so there would be no spotter. I've never known a marksman to use such a low level of magnification that s/he could reasonably view Holmes while keeping a track on Watson. As such, the sniper could only keep a watch on Watson and would be reliant on visual cues as to what was going on.

IIRC, when the sniper is showning packing his rifle up, it looks like he was watching Holmes but that, from his point of view, the truck would still have obscured the landing so Holmes' fall would have tricked both the sniper and John.

[Sprocket]

this confirms my suspicions about matt smith having a similar vibe to benedict cumberbatch http://airlockalpha.com/node/7655/sherl ... r-who.html