Sherlock "The Abominable Bride" Review: The Boys Have Still Got It

Sherlock 2016 Special: "The Abominable Bride"

There were several questions that arose in the lead up to the anticipated but shrouded in secrecy debut of Sherlock's "The Abominable Bride," the series' first new adventure since 2014's "His Last Vow." For instance, would the episode's Victorian era setting be reasonably explained or would we just have to accept it as whimsy? Would this episode be a one off or act as a bridge connecting the season that preceded it and the one that's set to begin filming later this year? More specifically, would it feature or shed a little light on the ongoing plot involving the possible return of Andrew Scott's Jim Morarity, who appeared to blow a hole through the back of his head at the end of Season 2 but whose return was teased at the end of Season 3? By the end of "The Abominable Bride," which was 90 minutes of pure indulgence on the writers' part, we're able to answer these questions fairly easily, but as usual, there was much more going on than what appeared at first glance.

What was eventually revealed to be an Inception-like story within a story within a story, the special opened in the 19th century, with a reimagining of Sherlock and Watson's first meeting before jumping ahead to where the men currently are in their relationship, meaning Sherlock was still solving unsolvable cases while Watson continued to write about them (this time for the Strand, a.k.a. the magazine in which Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories originally appeared), unintentionally neglecting his new wife in favor of aiding Sherlock. It isn't hard to imagine a version of this story in which the series abandoned logic and the events that came before and fully embraced its new era, but luckily for us the series' bones remained in tact when it jumped backward through time and only a few things shifted to accommodate the jump, like Molly Hooper dressing as a man in order to have the same job in the 1800s as she had in the 21st century (something Watson picked up on but Sherlock did not because although he's hyper observant with details, he's not able to pick up on the humanity of it all).

When it initially appeared the only explanation we'd be given for the Victorian setting was the word "alternatively" appearing on the screen prior to the opening scene, it was more than a little concerning, to say the least. Fortunately, the episode's central mystery featuring a woman who'd killed herself and later appeared to have returned from the grave to murder her husband and a slew of other men, was eventually revealed to be nothing more than a dramatization of an old case from the 1800s that Sherlock conjured within his mind palace as a means of dissecting the potential ways in which it was possible that Moriarty had somehow survived his own gunshot wound to the head. Once it was clear that everything we were seeing was the result of a drug trip and actually taking place inside Sherlock's mind palace while he was still on the plane we saw in the Season 3 finale, "The Abominable Bride" took on a new light and I was able to fully appreciate it as an episode of Sherlock and not an hour-and-a-half of the writers' indulging in their own desire to see a more traditional version of the Sherlock character until Season 4 is released.

One of the things that originally made Sherlock so appealing was its updated and modern setting, and although it was enchanting to see Benedict Cumberbatch don the more traditional Holmes imagery for the better part of the episode, knowing that there was a reasonable explanation (reasonable for Sherlock, anyway) for the special's time jump gave the entire 90 minutes some credibility that it wouldn't have had if the episode ended up as the stand-alone special it was touted as. Although the series still functions as a procedural, with Sherlock investigating a new case per episode, it has also had an overarching narrative since Season 2, and by drawing parallels between the Emilia Ricoletti case and Moriarty's supposed resurrection after his death in "The Reichenbach Fall," the special episode fell right into place as the bridge that would connect Seasons 3 and 4. 

It also confirmed that Moriarty was truly dead, which relieved some of the pressure that's been building since 2014. Sherlock revels in its "gotcha!" moments and its striking ability to make hairpin turns, but bringing Moriarty back from the dead after already having had to concoct a ridiculously complex scheme to resurrect Sherlock last season would have been asking too much for a series that already pushes the limits of credibility. Having confirmation that Sherlock's archenemy really did die that day on the roof kept the series from leaning too far into the realm of disbelief, but the setting within Sherlock's mind palace also provided a stage to bring the character back without having to really resurrect him. Your mileage will likely vary, but as a fan of Andrew Scott's interpretation of the character, I was delighted by this "return" and found that he again delivered Moriarty's special brand of creep with aplomb. It was the show's way of indulging in its fantasies while still remaining grounded in reality, but the drug-induced trip inside Sherlock's brain also allowed the series to once more pay homage to The Final Problem and the events within that saw Sherlock and Moriarty fight beside the waterfall. Instead of both men plunging to their deaths, however, in the version of the story that existed within Sherlock's mind palace, Watson, who also exists there, arrived to help defeat Moriarty's ghost. 

Moriarty, whether alive or dead, represents Sherlock's failures and even in Sherlock's mind palace, a place of his own design, his ghost nearly defeated our titular hero. Part of Sherlock's downfall in Season 2 was that he became obsessed with proving that Moriarty was more than mortal, that he was an unnaturally skilled criminal mastermind with incredible power rather than the truth: that he was just a man. Sherlock's inability to accept that someone could not just exist on his same level, but possibly defeat him, makes him his own worst enemy, and the problem wasn't resolved when Moriarty put a bullet in his brain, as it reared its ugly head again in the shape of Magnussen in Season 3. Convinced Magnussen possessed a physical vault beneath his house that contained tangible evidence that Sherlock could use to prove his guilt in a string of blackmail incidents, he failed yet again when it was revealed Magnussen had his own mind palace, one stronger and deeper than Sherlock's ever was.

This is twice now that Sherlock has faced off against his foes and technically won, but lost himself in the process. Forced to disappear for years after Season 2, he was then exiled to Eastern Europe on a suicide mission in Season 3 after killing Magnussen. Moriarty's potential return, which nearly undid him here, also saved him by halting that trip and bringing him back to London. But the confirmation that Moriarty is dead does little to quell any fears we should have because it's possible the character is even stronger, even more dangerous in death. So long as Moriarty was alive, he was mortal and could be killed, but you cannot kill an idea, or the ghost of an idea. The longer it's allowed to permeate, the more powerful it becomes as it seeps into the pores of society like a ghost story that's passed on from one person to another until it ultimately takes on a life of its own. 

Sherlock may have sort of solved the case of the Abominable Bride when Mary led him to an old church and a meeting of a secret society of women who used the name and imagery of the dead Emilia Ricoletti to take down the men who'd wronged them and oppressed them, but it was once again blown up by Moriarty. And his legacy has the potential to do plenty more damage, despite the fact the ghost in Sherlock's mind has been quieted for now. As Sherlock said, the man may not be alive, but he is back and we have no idea what's to come and who and what we're up against. But as we saw in his mind palace, so long as Sherlock has Watson by his side—and make no mistake, he's always there—he's strong enough to defeat whatever's coming. But only if Sherlock allows him to help.

While most of "The Abominable Bride" revolved around Moriarty's haunting of Sherlock and how he viewed the ghost of the man who nearly defeated him, it was also a look into how Sherlock views himself and those around him. Within his mind palace, we could see that to Sherlock he has become the version of himself that exists in Watson's stories, a man who's clever but detached, a man who has no time or desire for human connections beyond the ones he's already got with Mycroft, Mary, and Watson. In the episode's best scene, set during a stake out, mind palace Watson attempted to probe Sherlock the way the real man would, asking what or who made him into a man without emotions, without human impulses. Sherlock insisted that no one made him, that he had created himself, before once again referencing Redbeard. It hinted that a deeper dive into Sherlock's history and psyche is potentially coming in Season 4, and there's no doubt that Sherlock is at its best when it's peeling back the layers of its hero to explore the complicated human within. It's why, despite however confusing "The Abominable Bride" was at times, it was also a necessary story that had to be told before we could move forward.

I flip-flopped a lot during the 90-minute special, but in the end I think it proved that there is still life left in Sherlock, and that the chemistry between the show's two leading men is still there. It acted as an extended epilogue of the prior season, but it could have just as easily been the first episode of Season 4. By airing it as a special between seasons, it allowed the writers to confirm what co-creator Steven Moffat has already said—that Moriarty is truly dead—while also setting the stage for what's to come. With only three episodes per season, every minute counts, and having this extra installment to answer lingering questions before presenting new ones was a good use of the show's time. We had to explore and confront the remnants of Moriarty that lived on in Sherlock because to leave them unchecked would have left him open to further manipulation, would have made it easy for him to fall prey to his own worst enemy for a third time. But although the voice in Sherlock's head that shouted out his insecurities and doubts has been muffled, a specter of Moriarty now hangs over London, and it doesn't matter if what's happening is the culmination of a longterm plan that Moriarty put into place before his death or the work of someone who's picked up where he left off, it's going to be every bit as dangerous, and it's probably going to be just as thrilling to watch.

Do we really have to wait until 2017 for Season 4?



JOHN WATSON'S BLOG

– The "alternatively" explanation was the most Moffat thing that's ever happened, right? I'm so glad there was a reasonable explanation for the Victorian setting, because that half-assed hand wave was not going to cut it. Even if the drug-induced trip to the mind palace was a little crazy, it at least wasn't "this is a thing that maybe could happen."

– Between this episode and Doctor Who's focus on stories and memories this season, Moffat sure is obsessed with being a storyteller these days. I can't say that I mind the overlapping themes because I've enjoyed the finished products, just wanted to point it out.

– Were you bothered by how on-the-nose a lot of this episode was? I was shocked when they hauled out the "Elementary, my dear Watson" line for a number of reasons, but to be honest, I didn't mind how much the writers relied on source material or our expectations for Sherlock Holmes. It could have felt lazy, but to me it came off as the writers paying respect. (Okay, except maybe the elementary line. I'm torn on that one.)

– Seeing the way Sherlock viewed his brother in his mind palace, as an overweight man who would eat himself to death just to win a bet against Sherlock, was quite interesting. In fact, seeing how Sherlock viewed everyone in his life was quite interesting.  The appearance of minor people in Sherlock's life also popping in to play different versions of themselves in the Emilia Ricolleti case was a nice way to show just how many people he's touched, however positively or negatively their connection was.

– I know I should address the women and their movements against oppression in this episode, but the subject deserves more attention than I can give it here in this review. I don't want to say it feels like a direct response to claims that Moffat is a misogynist, but it does sort of feel like it was constructed to combat said claims. That's all I'll say about it for now, but if I find the time, I may try to dive a bit deeper into it later.


Comments (183)
Submit
Sort: Latest | Popular
Jan 27, 2016
Although it was an easy case to solve I feel the episode was more about Sherlock and his Mind Palace. It really was confusing but still necessary to make us understand the complexity of the character.
And it was so nice to see Moriarty again. Love that character that gives the push to Sherlock. He is is equal when it comes to cleverness. And the fact that Sherlock put him in is Mind Palace proves that he needs it
Wish I had a Mind Palace like him (without the drugs)
Only bad thing about this series is the wait
Reply
Flag
Jan 26, 2016
I've got to say I loved the episode and am eagerly awaiting the new episodes.

Did anyone notice that in the coach on the way to get to Mary, there is one flash of Watson as the modern Watson? Sherlock isn't looking at him but he does react to the voice.
Reply
Flag
Jan 25, 2016
This was an amazing episode. It was thrilling to see the past and present connect. It was all in Sherlock's mind. Awesome. And what a way to introduce Season 4....
Reply
Flag
Jan 21, 2016
A sensational episode, certainly the best since Season 2. Like everyone else I was prepared for a standalone illogical non sequitur so I was very pleasantly surprised. Although the case was low stakes in the end it was the meatiest and most satisfying for ages and the indulgences in the source material were much appreciated. And I'm very relieved that Moriarty's dead. I don't think I could handle more of him. Now I'm excited for Season 4.
Reply
Flag
Jan 12, 2016
I was all for allowing this episode to be a standalone "What If?" type of episode. But when it was revealed that this entire thing was a construct in Sherlock's mind palace, I was incredibly impressed with the writers. I should have expected something like this from these awesomely clever writers. Makes me even more excited for the eventual series 4.
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 11, 2016
Since everything that happened was a construct of Sherlock's mind palace, it made it all the more interesting that somewhere in his conscious or subconscious, Sherlock suspects that Mary has worked for (or is still working for) Mycroft. I know that it was a way for the past setting to incorporate Mary's history, but remember that her history was primarily as an assassin (and likely CIA at that), not just an agent. Mycroft's assignment involved no killing, which implies that her interaction with him was after she gave up the role of assassin.

Of course, whether it's real or just an assumption in Sherlock's psyche remains to be seen, but it does cast "His Last Vow" in an even more interesting light (and explain some of the stretches near the end).

(That scene almost made me begin to wonder if they were going to have the Moriarty "Miss me?" incident turn out to have been staged by Mary (with or without Mycroft's foreknowledge) as a means of rescuing Sherlock from his doomed exile. I'm really glad that did not pan out!)

1
Reply
Flag
Jan 08, 2016
I was completely prepared for this special being wholly unattached to the modern narrative, so I was extremely pleasantly surprised and consider the whole thing to be much better than I thought it was before the reveal. Really awesome. I don't love the actor who plays Moriarty, so for that reason and for the realism aspect, I suppose I'm glad he's truly dead. On the other hand, it's always nice for our hero to have an arch-enemy, so he will be missed. (Though I guess the point at the end was that although he's dead, we won't be missing his influence at all!)

Shit, what a tease this was. I can't wait for the continuation!
2
Reply
Flag
Jan 06, 2016
Awesome. Honestly, I fully expected the episode to be completely one off and taking place in its' own universe. But making it the result of an epic drug experimentation was perfect considering who the character was and went a long way to rationalize why he would be dreaming/etc. so much. The effort to create two universes and then slowly reveal much of the old school universe was symbolic of what he was trying to figure out in the present was a brilliant move. Had no idea they would even attempt to move the current storyline (Moriarty's return) forward in any way. Loved how they managed to work in a social commentary about feminism too as well.

Shocked that Moriarty is dead: Seemed inevitable that he'd be back; isn't that a staple of most Holmes adaptations? Trying to go the more realistic route seems like it could be the best decision. We'll see.

Sherlock's projections of everyone in the universe: I know Mycroft is supposed to be larger in the stories but damn! I suppose it's the result of a sibling rivalry. Molly has never been that extroverted on an episode before.

Loved the old school references: Sort of reminded me of how they did it in the current Bond series. Sherlock keeps a picture of Irene in a locket. Sherlock name drops Gregson. Moriarty here is a professor. My favorite reference was the decision to stage the end of the episode at The Reichenbach falls. Even though they had already adapted that scene from the novel using an urban environment, I immediately wanted to see that once I realized it was possible.


More+
2
Reply
Flag
Jan 05, 2016
I had the chance to see the episode on the big screen (since it had a limited cinema release here in the UK) and I really enjoyed it. It didn't advance the overall story much, but I think it was funny, interesting and gave us a fix while we are waiting for the next season of the show. I'll definitely watch the episode again with the revelation that it was all in Sherlock's head in mind.
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
A great episode agree with the review a bit like inception and had a trait of Moriarty playing the joker in Batman even through death he left a legacy. Great acting from the cast and nice use of the Victorian setting I really liked Mycroft lard ass character nice comedy moment .

Moriarty popped up although Andrew Scott tends to go a bit hammy in the performance but he is still good. So will Sherlock be given that pardon after last season when he killed of Magnuseum . Looking forward to the next season , wondering if Steve Moffat is leaving Doctor Who does that mean he dedicating more time on Sherlock ?
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
I enjoyed it. Very solid.

I laughed throughout the re-imagining of their introduction, as well as the intro credits being redone. It was a hoot seeing Molly appearing in drag: at first I thought it was just a cheeky explanation for her to show up at all, but then when Watson pointed out she was in costume (so she could work in a Man's World) I thought that was fantastic.

Mrs Hudson complaining about her lack of lines, then not saying anything as a form of satire and protest.

The case itself was solid, though predictable.
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
I hoped the episode would possibly provide some clues about Moriarty, little did I expect it would be front and center. So hooray.
I loved the "classic" version of Reichenbach falls, complete with actual dialogue from Doyle, if I'm not mistaken ( who sounded intentionaly and hilariously fake in Cumberbatch and Scott's mouths ) , and the jab at how Miss Hudson is portrayed in the novels.
So, best plot since a while ( I didn't dislike season 3, and absolutely loved the wedding episode, but boy were the cases weak, particuraly the "Empty hearse" one ).
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
Also, unfortunately I was watching on my small screen while in bed.

Did Irene show up towards the end, when Sherlock was confronting the group of Suffragists? I know Molly and the maid were there, but didn't know if Irene showed up at all (other than the locket).


Reply
Flag
Jan 06, 2016
Irene wasn't in it, just her picture in the locket. Janine was one of the women pretending to be the bride though.
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
As much as people like to talk both good and bad about Mofatt, it's important to note that this episode is credited to Mark Gatiss and Mofatt, with Gatiss getting listed first. I'd imagine that that means that he did more of the story than Mofatt. Consider that when talking about the story.

All in all, it was a GREAT special. And I loved how they handled the Timey-Wimey aspects!
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
Kaitlin, I got to thinking about what you said about some of the more obvious references to the source material, "Elementary" and such. As much as it may be reverence for the source material, I think it goes back to what you were saying earlier about Sherlock's views of himself. The character Holmes creates for himself in his mind palace is more an avatar of Watson's character, Sherlock Holmes, than the man himself. The source material is narrated by Watson, so Watson's blog in the series probably closely reflects the language of the novels. Therefore, it stands to reason that this Victorian Holmes would use the old "Elementary" stand-by and others for that reason.

I hope this makes sense. It's late and words have stopped making sense to me...
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
As usual, I always have a lot of fun watching this series. There are so many little pleasures in the dialogue, transitions, cinematography and characters (especially Mrs. Hudson).

BUT, I had issues with the the flow / pacing. The story got very fragmented from the moment Sherlock first woke on the plane onward. The fragmentation hampered the momentum and made the entire episode seem to slow down near the end.

The three act structure is good at creating driving momentum in a story --It can make a 3 hour movie feel like 30 minutes. I'm not a slave to that structure, but abandoning it can hurt the pacing - as it did here.
1
Reply
Flag
Uma
Jan 04, 2016
I was disappointed that it was once again Moriarty showing up as the villain. I don't love the actor who plays him and I don't find him particularly engaging or charismatic. There are definitely other villains to choose from the Sherlock Holmes novels, maybe it's time for them to move on from Moriarty.


1
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
The funny thing that tenchnically the villain was actually Sherlock, or rather his self-doubt manifesting itself via Moriarty)))

If/when they do move on I hope it will be more logical and elaborate than the brilliantly acted, unbelievable mess that was Magnussen (imho).
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
Dear Uma, using any other villain in this episode instead of the one haunting Sherlock's mind would completely miss the point of the episode, that made kind of a bridge towards the next season.
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
I despise this show, because it's so utterly stupid - while trying to be "smart". They want to go "the new and improved way", yet they fail miserably at every step... I think it was the first episode, or something, where they threw a laptop into water and "the hard drive was destroyed". Impossibly retarded show and an embarrassment to the actors - who seem to take it all in stride (not even going to start with the audiences - lmao).
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
Erm, I swear I'm not trying to nitpick, but when did the laptop thing happen? I honestly am curious and wrecking my mind, but I don't remember that...
Surely not in the pilot and first episode (nothing water related there), the second was a museum/urban setting and the third had a USB drive thrown into a swimming pool, and that's the entirety of the first season.
Am I missing something?
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
*no surprise, since it's a British production (just look at Doctor Who - that's much, much, worse, lolz)
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
Your review brings to light an interesting interpretation of how Sherlock seeing Moriarity as more-than ultimately is the fly in his ointment, that's a good take and I hadn't really felt that during the episode.

I kind of liked the episode, but felt jerked around by the "it's all a dream" parts when we got close to crossing from one world to the next, it took away the weight of events. Also, I felt a schism in the writing between moments that felt authentic and lush, and other moments screaming to look clever and fresh without really carrying the concern for that depth - it was no surprise to learn that it was written by two people (*cough* or that Moffat was one of them *cough*). Did I like the episode? After reading your review, I'm not sure.

Moriarty on the screens is a distraction, a way for someone (Irene Adler?) to drag Sherlock back to London, perhaps with something else in mind. I was disappointed the episode neither answered that question nor dealt with any of the events from the season finale when Sherlock murders a guy. I dunno about a ghost of an idea though, making Moriarity into a legend seems like it's asking way too much, legends are hard to make these days with so many voices added to the din, so many factcheckers digging and scratching and even lying their way through.

Other notes...

It's only a reimagining of Holmes and Watson's first meeting insomuch as Holmes in A Study in Scarlet is testing blood for blood drop analysis, not beating corpses for bruising. In every other way, it's true to the Conan Doyle fiction and the show is ultimately the reimagining, which is an ouroborus of a statement.

The idea of Holmes not noticing Molly Hooper in drag is ludicrous, she has bone structure, eyes, nose, all feminine telltales that the real Holmes would have picked up on, but the writers need us to believe their Holmes misses because of humanity. This is one of the frustrating things about Sherlock, the writing gets shallower and shallower to facilitate the scripts, setting it further from the source material.

The damned deerstalker hat was really too much, moreso even than corpulent Mycroft. Those flights of fancy were a lot to ask. Oh, except that "elementary, my dear Watson", that broke me because IT MADE NO SENSE IN THAT CONTEXT.

I don't really care for Andrew Scott's Moriarty, not just because it's so far off from the original, but it feels like a character on a page rather than rounded, three-dimensional being. His constant quirks and quips and flirts and mania seem like they wouldn't take him far in the world of crime, much less to the top of that world in a manner that would be inconspicuous. Also, his Irish accent feels too street, rather than someone who has refined himself. Scott's character is more a riff on the Joker rather than Professor Moriarty, the Joker isn't known for his depth or believability.

I
would have been happy had this been self-contained without a hint of connection to the show. It was well-produced on that side of things, and the meta wasn't too much (except for Mary Watson, ugh).

Moffat is hitting a midlife crisis and seems to have no human events beyond his nose that he can draw from anymore. He's like Chuck Lorre right now, except without the clever vanity screens or background in music.

The Five Orange Pips was a fascinating Doyle tale, and I'm sorry they gutted it here for a story about suffragettes, those were separately interesting ideas but having purple KKK references was too muddled and sloppy. I wouldn't be surprised if you were right that this was a meta way of Moffat refuting claims, and yet... this very episode I think doesn't even pass the Bechdel test.

Holmes thinking Watson cowardly to the point of running away from his duty felt roughly on par with utter nonsense.
More+
2
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
About Sherlock not noticing Molly : well, I felt that victorian Sherlock was a bit less clever than our usual Sherlock ( I don't remember exactly, but at some point, IIRC, Mary or Watson picks up a clue before he does ) ... if that's how he views himself, maybe he's more insecure than he lets on ?
I agree that Scott's Moriarty is more Joker than Moriarty ( Magnussen was closer to Doyle's Moriarty ), but even if you think he was two-dimensional, well, he was just a figment of Sherlock's mind, so I can live with it for once.
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
I agree with a lot of what you've "said" even if it didn't detract from my viewing enjoyment apart from:

The idea of Holmes not noticing Molly Hooper in drag is ludicrous, she has bone structure, eyes, nose, all feminine telltales that the real Holmes would have picked up on, but the writers need us to believe their Holmes misses because of humanity. This is one of the frustrating things about Sherlock, the writing gets shallower and shallower to facilitate the scripts, setting it further from the source material.

The whole thing is that there is no Molly, there is only Shrelock both reflecting on how he's ignored her for ages (he doesn't see the obvious, just like in ASiB he didn't deduce her feelings, in this case he doesn't "see" that she's a woman here) and the person she is: someone strong and capable (equal to a man especially in period like that), someone he keeps overlooking and underestimating and who should by all rights resent him.
In the show timeline this is a Sherlock who sees in himself failure - he's failed with Moriarty, he's failed to deduce Mary, he's failed with Magnussen (don't worry, Sherlock, that was just the illogical script. not you). Molly is yet another example he thinks about.

It was a psychodelic episode that gave us 99% of Sherlock (and the things he observes, the hints of things to come), there is literally no new information and instead it's all things Sherlock already knew but had to process. This was Sherlock processing those things and, imho, it was quite obvious in first 7 minutes that it was a dream/drug vision - they've used so much anachronistic language that was typical to modern Sherlock it was impossible for it to be anything else.

Holmes thinking Watson cowardly to the point of running away from his duty felt roughly on par with utter nonsense.

Now that I didn't get either as of yet.
More +
2
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
That's an interesting theory, too meta for me, or rather, too meta-within-meta since the whole Victorian storyline is already meta. Your point is clearly conveyed, if that was the episode's intents then it failed to convey it clearly. Also, I take issue with Sherlock considering his ignoring of Molly, that's awfully self-aware in a manner not befitting his personality. And drug trips aren't so on-rails, few drugs help focus, most remove it, and too much of any certainly destroys it.

That said, if your interpretation is correct, it suggests "someone" Sherlock knows is being overlooked as the culprit behind the Moriarty broadcast. (*Someone would be Adler.)
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
As a casual Sherlock watcher (I've seen 2-3 episodes total, none in order), I happened to run across this on Masterpiece... and loved it! I thoroughly enjoyed the whole what-is-real-what-isn't aspect, and I found it very interesting the conversations he created in his head with other people (Watson and his brother, especially).
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
I watched it and I liked it generally enough, because I like the show... and I'm glad that it wasn't a one-off special that had absolutely nothing to do with the show's canon and was just making a special for the sake of having something new out since it's been so long. Other than that, I didn't really much care for it. The mind palace (horrible horrible name) stuff just came off even more pretentious than normal which is probably on purpose since it's in his head, but it didn't make me like it more and the story was just meh to me. The modern stuff that actually continues is part of the canon could've easily been put online like some of Doctor Who's prequels.
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
The term "mind palace" has been around for centuries. It was a medival method of filing.
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
that doesn't make it sound any less ridiculous lol
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
It's more interesting to watch the second time around, when you realize that all the characters are not just caricatures of how Sherlock views the people in his life, but actually just different facets of Sherlock's mind. For instance, Mycroft gleefully and calmly killing himself just to win a bet... Which Holmes brother does that actually sound like? Sherlock is happily willing to gamble with his own life time and time again. He knows that on the path he's currently taking, he only has a few years left, but feels compelled to continue anyway. And if you swap the food for drugs, then the analogy becomes even clearer.

Also, every time Sherlock (or one of the other characters in his Mind Palace) gets into a too emotionally taxing conversation, the discussion suddenly gets cut off by a break in the case.

Sherlock’s Victorian Mind Palace was a way not only for Sherlock to work out a (less personally-involved) case similar to the one he is working on now, but is also a way for him to analyze his emotions: all of his fears, worries, doubts, jealousies, inferiorities, and loneliness. And only after he is able to beat his demons is he able to put emotions aside in order to successfully work on the case currently at hand.
More+
2
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
I have been watching Sherlock series. I have watched all seasons' all episodes many times and still can't stop myself. It is such a thing. And I observed the major reason behind this is the presence(or the awareness of the presence) of Jim Moriarty (especially because) played by Andrew Scott as the one undefeated by our hero, thus, the closest to him.
And I am extremely disappointed by the idea that 'Moriarty is truly dead.' I just can't take it. It's like against the laws.
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
"Every time you fail, every time you're weak, there I am !" I don't think, not for a minute, that we're done with the mind palace version of Moriarty just yet.
Not to mention the twisted scheme the actual one ( if I undestand correctly the ending ) cooked before he died ...
Reply
Flag
Jan 09, 2016
But, actually, I really want him to come alive as Sherlock did. After all he's always one step ahead of Sherlock.
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
I never watched any of Sherlock's previous seasonal episodes before "The Abominable Bride". This special introduced me to such a great series that I had to definitely check it out! The entire cast especially that of Benedict Cumberbatch & Martin Freeman was simply astounding! I cracked up and impressed with not only imagery but plots as well. Being a True Blue Yankee American, I will admit that BBC (all affiliates) & ITV great quality scripted shows. American TV Market has been crushed by Reality TV & that of Marvel/DC Comics (in which I am honestly ALL IN for by the way). I am now a fan!
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
This is not only the best review of Sherlock's episode written in all media around the globe in the last few days, but one of the best reviews I have read in TV.com in a long time. I mean a very long time.
And I wish all people in Britain who had watched the episode could/ would read this review because only here I have seen the understanding of how this episode connects seasons 3 and 4. I have twitted it forward to the BBC.
About this: is Moffat a misogynist? I know he and BBC had being criticized and without getting into a big debate i think that woman had being given clear leading roles in the last seasons. Who was the real leading person, Billie Piper as Rose or David Tennat as The Doctor? Martha, River Song, Donna, Clara and last Maisie Williams/ Ashildr are examples of strong written leading woman rolles and I kind of liked her better in Dr Who than in Game of Thrones.
But yes, this is a discussion to maybe leave it for later. Now I will enjoy the episode when watching it for the second time (BBC iPlayer).
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
Just a little thing... Billie's Rose, Martha and Donna were written by Russel Davis.
IMHO, Moffat is good at writing women he doesn't particularly care about/doesn't develop to the point of obscene. Sally Sparrow, Sally Donovan, Molly Hooper are good female secondary characters.
Instead Amy seems strong and driven and yet she is the girl who was defined by her waiting for the Doctor all her life, no job, no aspirations and her love for Rory questioned for a whole season, Clara is a Mary Sue if there ever was one and River... oh, how I hate that River Song became an archaelogist because she wanted to chase the Doctor through history. Very independent from the male lead, yep.
BBC's Irene Adler is a travesty, and Mary is a River Song without the redemption.

Moffat isn't accused of misogyny because he doesn't write female characters, it's the fact that they follow a script that will always make them ninja-like warriors that are unexplicably reliant on the man despite how awesome they are "supposed" to be.
ACD's Irene is The Woman who defeated Holmes and solved her problems on her own, not relying on a man. BBC's Irene is defeated by both Moriarty (she's under his thumb) and obviously Sherlock, and ends her episode with being portrayed as a Damsel in Distress ready to die.
But wait, her Prince arrives to save her...
Yep, not sexist at all to transform a character like that.
Let's add to that the fact that Moffat's Irene is a vile character who actually sells the man she "loves" for personal gain, knowing full well what she's dooming him to, while ACD's Victorian period Irene was a woman who was better than the male hero and also happily in love with a whole different guy. She had her own agenda and she achieved her goals by being brave, smart and awesome. It's a pity that Moffat had declared ACD's Irene boring and un-feminist.

Sorry for disagreeing way too much, but you can't just defend someone like that and say, "but let's not debate, okay?".
More +
2
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
I have no problem with Mary. OK fine she was an assassin which isn't the best job title for a resume.

But outside of wanting to kill Magnussen (who probably deserved to die) and shooting Sherlock in a non-critical spot she's been quite normal. Watson is apparently into danger and fine with people with sociopathic quialities, so they work out well together.
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
But outside of wanting to kill Magnussen (who probably deserved to die)
I know people who say that Mary wasn't in the wrong wanting to shoot Magnussen, an unarmed man on his knees, because he deserved it, just like John did to Jefferson Hope. It's not the same - John saw Sherlock and the cabbie and didn't do a thing until Sherlock, the moron, went to kill himself. John killed to protect, Mary wanted to kill to make sure her secret stayed safe.

shootng Sherlock in a non-critical spot

The heart is a non-critical spot. Wow, just... I think you've made everything perfectly clear with these words alone.

she's been quite normal


What's wrong with lying to your "beloved" husband about being an assassin for hire (even if former)? Lying and then saying it's totally his fault he didn't figure it out sooner, what a moron. She never once said she was sorry, after deceiving him for the entirety of their relationship, silly me, that totally okay.
Also, she met him when he was grieving for Sherlock (the freaking season begins with them at his grave), but sure, she'll risk killing him (she'll technically kill him because his non-critical organ stops), knowing full well what that will do to John instead of clocking Magnissen in the head and accepting Sherlock's help. Perfectly normal.

Oh, oh, let's remember also the fact that she reached Magnussen in a high tower, presumably climbing to it (injuring her supposed frined in the process) while pregnant.

I don't want to know what you consider out of the ordinary if this is normal for you.

Besided, if this is your logic, that Mary is freaking normal before the reveal (and surely after), then how the f**k can you say that John knowingly chose her to be his wife because he knew, with his psych-ey senses, that she was a danger addicted megalomaniac?
John, who's all about protecting people and honesty (if he can), would go along splendidly with this selfish, lying creature?
I think we're watching different shows.
Thank goodness
More +
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
@kanniballl, A) I can invent all sorts of things happening off camera. What we know for sure is that he was threatening to reveal her secret, not her life. In fact, her dying would go against CAM's plans.
Also, was Mary part of the audience with that shot revealing Magnussen as the man behind John's kidnapping? Otherwise how did she know? Oh, right must be the power of Mary Sue.
B) So Sherlock flatlined just for the laughs. Gotcha.
C) If you think she's not mean (I thought being a remorseless assassin would qualify, but, hey what do I know) or controlling (the woman who "walked" Sherlock and John in TSoT), I don't know what else to say.

Wow, someone is rather blind.
That's okay, to each their own.
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
Wow, someone is rather touchy.

A) Magnussen was a tyrant that ruined many lives and was controlling the government. Likewise he was threatening HER life previously off-camera. Magnussen was far more dangerous than a guy sitting across a table with 2 pill bottles.

Let's not forget he also tried to have John killed... had Mary been 2 seconds later in reaching Sherlock he'd be dead or at least burned all over.

B) If Sherlock was shot in the ACTUAL heart, he would be dead. I believe Sherlock commented that her aim was precise enough to be scary enough without being deadly.

C) By normal I mean behaving normal. She's not a cold sociopath like Sherlock, but rather normal behaving. She's not controlling or mean or anything of that nature.
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
This comment has been removed.
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
I loved it. Watched it twice already. It was good to have Moriaty back albeit being it just in a dream. I just do not like waiting till 2017 for the new series...
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
After the letdown that to me has been season 3, my enthusiasm was positively lackluster. Christmas special? Fine. Season 4 in 2017? Meh, there will be better shows 'till then.
But I loved the Special!

Beware, here be SPOILERS!

Yes, at first I thought the repetition of events was lazy and the evidence that it's a rehash of Inception-style Matrix glaring, BUT... it was fun. It was fun, and funny without being 100% fanservice like The Empty Hearse, it gave us some answers, it gave us heartbreak (so, am I right, or at the end of s3, Sherlock borded the plane and kinda tried to kill himself, while reading about his and John's adventures, then got the call and ODed? Merry Christmas!). It gave us very little John, it basically gave us little else but Sherlock's psyche, but it was interesting to see how he percieves John, himself and the people around him on the different levels of his consciousness.
The Ricoletti story was almost an afterthought, just like the Mayfly man, and I get how someone might hate the episode for it, but there was also the more evident raising self-awareness this time. Mofftiss themselves say Sherlock isn't a detective story, it's a story about a detective, you know?
And boy, there were so many promises in the Special, that I can't even.
Mary mourning her marriage? Mycroft dying? The mystery of Janine (I'm sorry, it's an episode about the power of women, but you don't bring The Woman, instead giving one line and a VERY visible shot to someone who we were supposed to think was nothing but a very suspicious prop back in s3. Oooookay)? Andrew!!! We're told he's dead and can come back any time we want - stress, near death, Mind Palace. Yay!
Considering the rehashing of ASiP, I'm pretty sure we were just told that Moriarty has a twin - ACD had two Jameses (can I spell it like that?), John is always right, just like in ASiP, when he had the Cab number and Sherlock dismissed it. Pity that the murderer was the owner of that same cab. Oh, well, not suspicious at all...

So, yeah, I can go on and on and on and on... I adored it and this episode restored whatever faith in the show had been broken by The Empty Hearse for me.
I can't wait for season 4!
More+
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
I loved it! And I for one absolutely hate dream sequences. So that's a first for me then. But i expected nothing less from Sherlock! This was as good as the other seasons for sure. Can't believe we had to wait so long and now again another year. But it is all worth it isn't it!
And who would say season 2 was so so? Episode 2 of season 2 is one of the best hours of television i have ever seen (and that's a lot!)...
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
i agree with everything you say marlon, except I think that season 2 episode 1 , the scandal in belgravia irene adler episode is without exception , the best episode I have ever encountered. All of sherlocks obsessions are all in the same episode, the actual structure of the episode is flawless. the scenes in buckingham palace are hysterical. irene is beautiful , and quite clever. the best tv show i have ever seen
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 09, 2016
Oh, yes, i think i made a mistake, it so is episode 1 of season 2!!
Thanks for that!
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
I was awed by the amazing styling of some scenes into the original drawings of Sidney Paged. Especially striking, imo, were those at the end - by the waterfall and in the window (the last scene). Lovely, just like re-prints in the Wordsworth Classics :)
2
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
This was way better than the disappointing series 3.
2
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
Agree! Great special episode and way better than season 3. And wtf - ofcourse Moriarty is dead - there are too many stupid fans of this show, who needs special explanation to understand this jeez... Some of them even think that Sherlock is Moriarty and the last was always creation of his mind - there should be law against such people - they shouldn't be allowed to watch something different than reality shows.
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
I have a question I've never watched Sherlock I've been postponing it, but can I watch Sherlock :the abominable bride as a standalone episode or are they connected?
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
You can watch it alone but many things will appear to be very odd if you do. I recomend you watch the series first. I am a huge fan of the original Sherlock Holmes and in my opinion, no one plays Sherlock better than Jeremy Brett in the 80's series. However I do like this modern Sherlock series too and I like Elementary. I can't stand the Robert Downey-movies. I think you should watch the series first. If you don't there are some huge spoilers in the recap in this episode.
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
I really like Jeremy Brett's portrayal, but I find the scripts uneven. Some are amazing, but some are pretty weak. Plus it's a pretty forgettable Watson.

My favorite is the Basil Rathbone ones, but I'm nostalgic that way.

BTW: I just saw the old Roger Moore movie Sherlock Holmes in New York. The mystery was ok, but the melodrama was ridiculous. I do not recommend it.
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
The Jeremy Brett stories are close to the original Conan Doyle stories.
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
I watch Elementary and only mildly enjoy it. But to do even that, I had to stop thinking of it as a Sherlock Holmes story.

Nothing about Elementary's portrayal of the characters comes remotely close to Doyle's vision. So, to enjoy the show I had to consider that these people were all just coincidentally named the same as those of Doyle's but are not actually those characters.
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
I really like Elemantary but I also, like you, don't really think of it as Conan Doyles stories. But I do find the series quite smart and I really like the non romantic Watson/Holmes relasionship. The ønly thing I could do without is that they made Moriarity into a woman and Irene Adler doesn't exict.
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
Thanks a lot I will watch the series first ,I also love the series of the 80's it was the best
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
Well, now we know where most of Moffat's time has been spent the past couple of years. Well done. (And thank you thank you thank you again, Mark Gatiss, for refusing to budge on the Doctor Who/Sherlock crossover idea.)

Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
So exactly why was Sherlock receiving messages from moriarty while he was on the plane if he is actually dead..who was sending those message? Also the chemistry between Andrew Scott and Benedict Cumberbatch is undeniable, no wonder there is so much slash fiction with the two of them. http://i.giphy.com/yN5iNInqSKMV2.gif
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
Well, that's the mystery (the messages from Moriarty). We were left wondering if he's really dead. This ep has Sherlock convinced he really is but that he set things in motion to continue the legend of Moriarty, even after death.

"He's most certainly dead. More importantly, I know what he's going to do next." - Sherlock Holmes.
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
I liked it. I tend to be in the minority and really like Mary and don't understand at all why people don't. It rings of pure misogyny to me. The kind of misogyny that people accuse Moffat of.
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
Or maybe cause she's a terrible character?
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
Yes, it must be that we hate women; and not that the character is an utterly ill fit for the series, a nonsensical Mary Sue of a character with great mysteries and skills who is up and murdering people to keep her secret.
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
Good for you. As a woman who absolutely hates BBC's Mary (and adores Amanda and ACD's Mary) I can tell you it doesn't have to be misogyny.
What I expected was a lovely, quirky Mary, what I got instead was not only a psychopath,, but a remorseless one as well (how many times did she say she was sorry to John for deceiving him? Wait, nevermind), one who could kill the bff of her "one true love" (and whether you believe her and Sherlock's BS that she was "helping" by shooting him in the heart, she still killed him, he flatlined and that's death). Yet she still claims to love him. Riiiight, I wonder what she'd do to John is she didn't.

Mary is not one of the good guys on this show, the actress herself says "Mary is f*** psychopath", and I easily get liking a villain, but make no mistake, liking Mary is liking one of them instead of one of the heroes,
Perfectly okay.
Now, what I don't get is how people claim that she's not a villain and a wonderful person, about someone who, I'm still convinced, will be revealed as BBC's version of Sebastian Moran.

Erm, happy 2016! :)
More +
3
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
I'm sure it's a very good review (I love you, Kaitlin), but I haven't read it. The wife and I will watch it after dinner. Just wanted to see how people liked it, and didn't really encounter any spoilers here. Seems most people liked it. It's been a long time...
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
So, all the fuss was over a story that turned into a none story of a massive promo for more, er, stories! But didn't they pretty much already cover all that in the let's catch up beginning?
For goodness sake, it's Gatiss' Mycroft job to torture and tease Sherlock and not turn into his heartfelt carer. With respect, sod off Abbington.
There were some nice lines in it but it felt a bit too circular overall. In fact, the new BBC trailer which includes Sherlock, Watson and Luther and (even) Stella Gibson is more of a ponder. Link-& BBC Drama

Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
No - actually the case was there (the case with the bride) - and it was solved - the perpetrator was the wife (and the feminist army lol). And then there was made connection with the contemporary episodes (the dream plot) which was smart and well done, because otherwise the idea about victorian episode without any connection with the rest of the show is very inappropriate. The point of the second part was to SHOUT OUT that Moriarty is dead - when you shot yourself in the head in front of other person, you ARE DEAD no matter what.
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
I got the impression it was a real, historical case that was unsolved. Sherlock solved it in his fantasy trip. And, it gave him clues as to how to solve the Moriarty conundrum.
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
yes - he dreamed (or daydreamed, or imagined - it's all the same) about real case and he inserted himself, Watson and the rest of the gang in the story.
OT I hope that we will see the bride and Watson's maid again in different roles. I really like these actresses in Jekyll & Hide.
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
Ok, so I guess I should start off my mentioning that I was not a fan of series 3, and I wasn't really a fan of this episode either. I think I'm extremely critical of the show only because I am a die-hard fan of the first two seasons. The writing was crisp, the cases were brilliant, the cinematography was unbelievably amazing.

Series 3 was disappointing for me because I thought the cases relied too much on coincidence, there was far too much fanservice and ridiculous humour. I was also not a fan of how much Sherlock had changed. While this episode did do a little to remedy some of the things I hadn't liked about series 3, it still proved to be convoluted. A drug-induced dream sequence!? REALLY?

While I appreciated the parallels, the look into Sherlock's psychology and the nod to the reference material (not to mention John finally outsmarting Sherlock with some deductions), did they really need a gimmick like that to explain to us that Moriarty wasn't alive?

Don't get me wrong, the acting is still fantastic and I'm looking forward to series 4, but the writing since series 2 has felt lazy to me, and the cinematography a little too (but I guess I'm missing director Paul McGuigan). There are just too many unanswered questions and I feel like I'm expecting something from this show that I just don't seem to be getting anymore.

I've waited two years between each season - I don't need to know why Sherlock is asexual, nor do I want to see him spiralling down into addiction. All I want is what we were already getting in series 1 and 2, but the way we're going it doesn't seem like it's ever going to be up to that standard again.
More+
3
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
I actully found series 2 to be very weak. Si weak I almost did't bother with series 3. For me, series 3was the best. episode 1&2. Loved Mary!
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
Awsome christmas gift.. I enjoyed it very much.
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
I suppose it's appropriate that I'm conflicted about this episode of a show I'm largely conflicted about as a whole.

Cumberbach is great and the style and direction of each episode might be the best on television. But where this, and most other BBC shows let me down is in the writing. Not the dialogue, but the paths the stories take. I frequently feel like they try to one up themselves to the point where things get ridiculous.

Let's be honest, 90% of this episode was a dream sequences. Does anybody really like dream sequences? Especially one this long with the first half of it under the guise of making the viewer believe that what we were seeing was actually happening.

It also revolved around the singular point of contention for me about this show...Moriarty committing suicide to "one up" Sherlock. It was a preposterous idea then and no less absurd now. Asking the question of whether or not Moriarty was truly dead just further reminded me of being upset at his death in the first place.

I'm also not a big fan of Watson playing stooge of a sidekick, but this time it was done intentionally, so that's okay with me.

The whole Moriarty aside, this was another master pieces of acting and direction and did its job for me of raising expectation of the show's return.
More+
2
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
I normally don't like dream sequences - I loved this one because of the fascinating insight it provides into Sherlock's psyche - it's not just a cheap plot device to roll back everything that's happened - it's a deliberate exploration of the lead character and his point of view (wrapped in a madcap Victorian adventure fantasy, but still).
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
I'd completely agree with you and take no issue with the episode at all were it not for the intentional ambiguity over whether or not what we were seeing was actually happening. Maybe I was a little slow, but until the first time Sherlock "woke up" in the airplane, I thought this was either a one off period episode or (something the BBC is partial to doing), drastically changing the rules and expecting the viewer to just "go with it".

If something other than just, "Alternately" indicated that what we were watching wasn't real, I could and would have enjoyed the 1st half MUCH more.
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
I do understand what you mean - the genius thing is, the WERE indicators that it wasn't real - but you only really realize it upon re-watching.

Sherlock's monologue while Mary and John are arguing in the beginning is clearly about delving deeper into the Mind Palace, as is every mention of "going deeper", as is the reference to "him" and not "her", the list etc. and especially every "slip up" like Mycroft reffering to "a virus in the data"...
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
You're right, and if this were on any network other than the BBC, I would have taken all the little hints as an indication that there was something deeper going on. But I've been burned too many times with shows drastically changing the rules from one season to another with little to no explanation of how we got from there to here that I could completely see them taking Sherlock back to the old days but keeping various aspects of modern times.

None of that is to say that they were "wrong" in their approach, but for me, it was never going to play out as intended.
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
Well, I do like dream sequences
4
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
That's okay. The world needs weirdos too :)

Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
Exactly :-)
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
Well this turned into the biggest Lock-cock-tease till the new season begins. It was great but I want more now !!!
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
A friend of mine told me this was on PBS. Love to see this.
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
Uh, the "episode" is on TV.com. Although admittedly, the summary and cast sections aren't updating on the main page even though it's been 10 hours since I submitted.. But the Notes and Quotes are there.

Do the reviewers have trouble finding specials? The same thing happened with last week's Doctor Who Xmas special.
1
Reply
Flag
Staff
Jan 03, 2016
It's a weird issue with the way our system works to associate reviews to episodes. Sometimes the episode doesn't appear in the list. I have no idea why.
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
Thanks for the info. You might have someone look into it from Development. The episode has been up for a week or so: it's not like it's a last-minute add-on or anything.
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
Excellent episode, just loved it! Of course, I took it to be a "real" Victorian one-off - until "fat Mycroft" said something about data and viruses.
With hindsight, however, one needs to ask: what was the point of the whole mind-palace exercise? To confirm that someone whose brains have been blown out is irrevocably dead? And that if a dead person seems to re-appear you need to look for whoever wishes it to appear that way? Seems a bit banal.
Still, lots of nice things in here, especially the meta-level ideas about perception and reality.
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
As Kaitlin explained, it was so we could get a graps at how Sherlock sees or feel other people in his life.
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
After hearing the story behind the whole Bride strategy, I started imagining all the hooded women breaking into song. Goodbye Earl to be specific.

I know, I know...the older I get, the more dated my cultural references become.
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
My cable company provided DVR stopped recording well before the ending. Apparently, it was scheduled for 90-minutes so that's when it stopped but it was significantly longer, apparently. Now I'll have to wait until Jan 10 to see the repeat as I can't find it on VOD anywhere. Infuriating.
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
I had the same problem, but was able to get another episode 3 hours later. The episode is oddly 93 minutes. So only a few lines of dialogue were cut off by my DVR. But I don't know if for some reason yours cut off sooner.
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
This felt like typical Moffat where it starts off really interesting, then falls apart by the end. I would've enjoyed it more if I'd stopped watching when Sherlock woke up the first time.
2
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
It wasn't great, but it wasn't bad either. It was simply meh. And please stop making Mary part of the plot. She ruins the parallel Holmsian universe they've created.
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
Still suffering from that New Year's hangover I see...
2
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
Yeah, but it could be worse. I could be you.
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 05, 2016
You had to look up proletariat, didn't you...
Reply
Flag
Jan 05, 2016
OK, Abuelito, I give up. I gave you the whole night, and that was the best you could do. I'm sorry, but sparring verbally with you is like shooting fish in a barrel. Since all you ever wanted anyway was the last word, you can have it. But listen, try to do better than the one sentence boredom you've come up with so far. Here, I'll show you.

Love the pics of House, Gramps. You probably relate to him (a legend in your own mind and everyone hates you too).

Or, I see you're a fan of Agent Carter. Is it nice to watch something set when you were in your twenties?

Or, hmmmm, hotwebcamgirls is following you. Well, no problem. I'm sure that's the best you can do.

Anyway, take care. FTW.

Flag
Jan 05, 2016
Right, kiddo. Because if I used Sherlock Holmes, I must've been born in 1856... Logic is such an elusive quality among the proletariat.
Reply
Flag
Jan 05, 2016
Proletariat?!!! ProleTARiat?!!! Bwahahahahaha. What, did they teach you that word while you were hiding under your desk during the Cold War drills? Well, I'm heading out for the night, Grampa. I can play some more tomorrow. Proletariat. WERE you born in 1856?
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
From your extraordinarily thin skin, I can see you were picked on as a child. I didn't mean to bring back memories of all those swirlies and the time the cheerleader kicked your butt for trying to go to the homecoming dance.
Reply
Flag
Jan 05, 2016
Good lord, you really DO have to have the last word. Well, back in your court. Hey, I found the reference for your screen name. So given your attempt at humor, I take it your were in high school in, what, the 60's? You need to up your game, gramps.
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
Overreact much?
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
Well, I see you're one of those trolls that has to have the last word. So I guess the ball's in your court. You know, you may not want to engage in a battle of wits. You appear to be unarmed.
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
Mycroft is going to die ;_ ;

The whole Mycroft is getting fat in the mind palace is a unconscious notion that something is not right with his brother. I think.
This later is confirmed in the real world "you put on weight, that waistcoat is clearly newer then....."
And after the second wakeup moment when asked if he is all right, "offcourse I am, why wouldn't I be" and looks at Mycroft who now stands behind Mary who speaks.
And then the ominous words from Mycroft to Watson:"look after him".
And just after that the Mycoft notebook notations: Redbeard (Sherlocks DEAD Dog).
Or is it all; a Scarlett Roll Mops, a red haring.

We will have to wait until 2017
Great episode, but Scandal in Belgravia is still the best in my opinion.

5
Reply
Flag
Jan 04, 2016
It's of course another nod to the original Conan Doyle stories where Mycroft was enormously fat... But there could be more to it than that. It certainly seemed to imply that some of Mycroft's actions are self-destructive.
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
Agree about Mycroft!
Do you think that maybe that Sherlock "recognizes" in his mind palace that his brother Mycroft is dying or will die in real life? I felt that it was something very specific to dismiss as a bet in his mind palace.
Last season it was about Mycroft not being alone or lonely. Which could have alluded to him being gay or in love with a woman, but not pursuing the romance.
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
I believe in real life, the brothers are bad in feelings and Mycroft " Don’t get involved." warning is probably about the other Holmes Brother and what happend to him. Moffat is famous for laying seeds that sproud later on. There was that treadmill scene of Mycroft in "The Sign of Three" also about his growing midsection.
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
I Still found the episode pointless despite the good explanation of it all being in his 'mind Palace'
the latter half was much better than the first half - I just wasn't feeling the Victoria Era part of it but at least it was creepy at times

i am glad they didn't pull the 'Moriarty is alive' thing, as much as i love him, i think it would have cheapened the 'Reichanbach Falls' if both Sherlock AND Moriarty lived

Definitely the weakest episode of the series - let's just hope series 4 is worth this long wait - because The Abominable Bride definitely wasn't

Oh and BTW, have no clue why so many dislike series 3 so much - every episode was a 10 for me - unlike the other 2 series were both the second episodes were an 8 - but opinions and all
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
I haven't watched it yet, but I will after dinner. I just like watching these guys do their thing. They're not all great, but they do entertain.
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
Oh i admit it was entertaining - it is Sherlock after all - seeing Benedict and Martin acting together is definitely a treat - but it was definitely my least favourite episode so far
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
Well, different milleages. I think this episode is one of the best in the entire series, while season 3 is weak.
2
Reply
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
The Sign of 3 was much better than this one
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
Well, not for me. I think the Sign of 3 was the best of its season, but still weaker than s1, s2 and this episode.
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
It's a pity I can't "like" your comment multiple times. I agree 100% with you, S3 ws a letdown and TSoT was the least disappointing of the three. The Special was in a whole other league)))
1
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
What? The Blind Banker and The Hound of Baskervilles were much worse than any episode of series 3 - especially Sign of 3
1
Flag
Jan 02, 2016
This might sound a little bit weird, but watching Sherlock kinda feels like watching Hannibal to me. I just... enjoy it. It's like a a special feeling idk. And I guess there are similarities if you think about it.

Anyway I was totally confused during the episode. The whole back and forth between the two periods just totally lost me. There's a few details I didn't quite get but I guess that's part of the "experience".

It's interesting that you mentioned the "elementary" line, I loved that to be honest. I can see why some people might not, but I like a reference to the original. (Also sort of agrees with my Hannibal comparison..or maybe not)


Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
I actually thought about that too! Hannibal also talks a lot about his mind palace.
1
Reply
Flag
Jan 03, 2016
Both are based on novels and are set in the modern world, the relationship between Hannibal and Graham v. Sherlock and Moriarty, plus the whole visual aspect of both shows! I'm glad I'm not the only one haha!
1
Reply
Flag
Load More Comments