For a little history of love’s most favorite day:
For anyone who hasn’t seen this episode of Sherlock, do not continue reading as there are major spoilers following the trailer.
If you liked this episode, please don’t read the following post. In the next few pages, I am going to shred it and if you loved the episode, my words will only upset you. However, if you do decide to read, keep in mind that everything being expressed is purely my opinion and for the most part, not shared by the majority of the Sherlock fans in existence.
In my last post on the Sign of Three, I started off by saying:
Unlike many series that have a tendency to drop off as time goes by, this show seems to be getting better with each new episode.
Unfortunately, I spoke too soon, but before I get into my complaints about this episode, I should probably start by sharing the parts of it that I did like. The funny, highly entertaining scenes and the great one-liners. Such as…
When John finds Sherlock in a drug den:
When Molly processes the drug test on Sherlock and finds that he tests positive:
I LOVE this part! I love Molly’s character development. I have been wanting Molly to do this for a long, long time. Ever since the very first episode of the first season when Sherlock treats her like the dirt beneath his shoes. He deserved it as much then as he does now.
The next scene I relished in this episode is when Sherlock finally loses it with Mycroft. I love the relationship between Sherlock and Mycroft, but it always rankled that Mycroft could be such a bully, coming around whenever he wanted or sending in his cronies to push Sherlock and Watson into doing his bidding. This time, it didn’t work.
When Sherlock and John break into Magnussen’s office:
When Sherlock accuses Mrs. Hudson of running a drug cartel:
When they go to Mama and Papa Holmes’ house for Christmas:
When Sherlock and John leave the Holmes’ house to find Magnussen:
And finally, at the end, when Sherlock falls into Magnussen’s trap and decides to take action, a move that is incredibly out of character for him, but at the same time will save the people he loves. This decision on his part is really less of a Sherlock move than it is a Kahn Noonien Singh move, but I still liked it because it was badass:
Now, everyone keeps talking about the humanizing of Sherlock. I don’t buy it. He has always been human. And even though he loves to claim that he’s a high-functioning sociopath, he isn’t. He is, and as we’ve learned, has always been surrounded by people who love him and whom he loves in return and loves deeply, enough to put his own life on the line again and again. And this is what we are seeing here at the end — Sherlock driven to extremes to save his family. As he says to the murderer in episode one of the very first season: “Bitterness is a paralytic. Love is a much more vicious motivator.”
Now, on to the more disappointing aspects of His Last Vow. I have to say that just by having watched the preview, I knew I wasn’t going to like this episode of Sherlock. Quite frankly, it paled in comparison to the previous ones and reminded me more of something that would come out of Hollywood, than out of Britain’s very refined and elegant cinematic culture. His Last Vow was less about mystery and crime solving and more about ostentatious flamboyancy and sensationalism, created to draw in as many viewers as possible.
The intelligent sophistication of the very first few episodes that we all came to love was completely gone in this one — the crime, the mystery behind it, the two detectives looking for clues and finally putting the puzzle pieces together. There was absolutely none of this. There was no puzzle to be solved and it left me wondering: where was the genius of Mark and Steven in this episode? What happened to it? It was almost as if the two of them got together and said: “I know. Let’s take all of our characters, except for John, and put them in the most shocking and out-of-character scenarios we can think of to attract attention!”
In my opinion, this episode was the product of a mediocre script that was redeemed only by the brilliant and convincing performances of the actors, all of whom should be given the awards they so richly deserve for carrying the season to completion.
And this isn’t even mentioning the many plot holes that made watching this episode like eating large and unpleasant portion of swiss cheese. For example, where were Magnussen’s bodyguards when Sherlock and John came to his house at the end? Why weren’t the two of them searched for weapons? Why didn’t Sherlock see into Mary during The Empty Hearse when she clearly showed signs of being who she was? Furthermore, why would Mary want to keep Sherlock around anyway when he was the most likely of people to discover her secret? And why didn’t Mary just knock Magnussen out and trust Sherlock would help her when he said he would? Shooting him was probably the worst thing she could have done in the circumstance. So unfortunately, there were just too many of these problems that didn’t add up and sadly made the whole episode feel too contrived.
But the biggest disappointment of the whole episode was Mary. I thought it was strange in the Empty Hearse that Mary knew immediately someone was sending her a skip code, but I dismissed this as something that maybe John had taught her or maybe something she just knew about from some previous experience, not at all expecting what that previous experience would be. So, when the mysterious female shooter turned around in the season finale and we all found out who she was, at that point, my willing suspension of disbelief could not handle it. It could not kick in and I was left feeling empty inside, like it was a cheap shot at shocking the audience just to create echoing gasps around the room. The only words that kept running through my mind through the entire scene was: “No, no, no, no, no, no!”
The writers basically took Mary, the best character of the entire show and just ruined her and they did it purely for the shock effect. This is not Doyle’s Mary and in my opinion, the writers compromised a great character for a WTF plot twist that was entirely unbelievable, extremely disappointing, and ultimately a poor choice for the show’s turn of events. Even the very emotional scene at the Holmes’ house where John forgives Mary, played out so well by the actors, might have had more of an impact on me if I could actually believe that Mary was an assassin with a dark and murderous past, but I couldn’t. The whole concept was just too outrageous.
As for Sherlock, although his relapse into drugs was not out of character and actually came from Doyle’s original story, as was his fake engagement to a woman to get close to the villain, I still found Sherlock’s fake relationship with Janine disgusting. And it seemed to be so disgusting, it even grossed out his best friend. At least his flirtation with Irene was smart and sexy, but his relationship with Janine was about as impressive as his relapse into drugs, even if they were both intentionally done for a case — a case involving a villain with whom Sherlock is so obsessed, he becomes perilously blindsided: Charles Augustus Magnussen.
I’d read so many rave reviews about this villain that when I actually saw the whole episode play out, I was left speechless, wondering how so many people could have gotten this so wrong. I thought: this is the villain that people are raving about? A creepy snake of a man who licks and flicks people and pees in fireplaces? A villain who takes Sherlock’s concept of a mind palace to an utterly ridiculous level and has absolutely no documentation or other evidence to back up his “knowledge”? And we’re really supposed to believe that he is the “Napoleon of blackmail”? Are you kidding me? Is this really the best villain they’ve got?
And Moriarity! Why o’ why are they resurrecting Moriarity? Can’t we just let him go? Do we really have to keep bringing people back from the dead? Can’t the writers come up with a real villain this time? You know, a scary one like Anthony Hopkins’ Hannibal Lector, or Heath Ledger’s joker, or even a villain like Jared Harris’ Moriarity would suffice. So far this show is woefully lacking in good villains and I’m wondering if maybe this is just a weakness of the writers. That they have trouble inventing someone who is so incredibly diabolical and frightening, it would actually equal the characters they’ve created who are “on the side of the angels”. Maybe they should give Stephen King a call and take a few lessons. But no, instead of doing that, they feel like they have to bring Moriarity back. I mean, if we’re going to bring back previous villains, let’s bring back Irene Adler, okay? Not Moriarity.
Don’t get me wrong. Overall, I love this show. It is really one of the only TV shows that I’ll watch. I think Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss are brilliant and so is everyone who puts their amazing talents into making it successful. But this episode left a lot to be desired and at this point, the only thing that will bring me back to the fourth and fifth seasons of Sherlock is the unique friendship created between John and Sherlock by two of the finest actors that Britain has to offer.
Thank you Martin and Benedict! Keep up the good work!
For anyone who hasn’t seen this episode of Sherlock, do not continue reading as there are major spoilers following the trailer.
Unlike many series that have a tendency to drop off as time goes by, this show seems to be getting better with each new episode. Everything about it is improving: the writing, the acting, and especially the camera work. Something I noticed about this show from the very beginning was how well the camera tells the story. Yes of course, the writing and the actors play a huge part in making the story come alive, but the camera adds so much depth and information that wouldn’t have otherwise been possible. If it wasn’t for the creative and brilliant innovations created by the show’s producers, we would never be able to see exactly what the characters are seeing and learning as the story progresses. I’m talking about the angles of each shot and the white subtext they throw into the scenes that makes everything click and come together. I’ve never seen that before on TV and I think it’s brilliant.
The writing in this show is also getting much more clever than the first two seasons. Added with the performances of the actors themselves who can say a thousand words in one expression, the Sign of Three I can say without a doubt is probably the most hilarious episode by far. Below are some of my favorite scenes.
Sherlock’s attitude toward marriage:
His obsession with protecting Mary:
His relationship with kids:
His reaction to John telling him that he’s his best friend and wants him to be the best man at his wedding:
His relationship with Mary:
Up until this point I really didn’t have a favorite character in the show. During the first two seasons, for me, each character was well loved on an equal level, that is, until Mary was introduced in The Empty Hearse. She is certainly now my favorite character, played beautifully by Amanda Abbington. I love how her character interacts with the two men in her life and doesn’t interfere with their unique dynamic, but instead enhances it. I love her relationship with Sherlock and the mutual respect and understanding shared between the two. I also love the fact that she is a woman and is naturally smart enough to see right through both of them in a heartbeat, just like a mother of two children would.
Sherlock, I think, understands this and instead of being threatened by it, as he would have been when we first met him in the Study in Pink, he accepts it and embraces her as a trusted friend. To me, this is a sign that his character is growing and maturing as time goes by. Because of his new experiences and certainly because of his close friendship with Watson, he is reaching a new level of self-awareness that becomes apparent in his best man speech where he says:
The point I am trying to make is that I am the most unpleasant, rude, ignorant, and all-around obnoxious arse that anyone could possibly have the misfortune to meet. I am dismissive of the virtuous, unaware of the beautiful, and uncomprehending in the face of the happy.
And things really do get ridiculous when Sherlock and John get drunk on John’s stag night and go “cluing for looks”. This part killed me. It was so funny:
And then… the hangover in jail, being bailed out by Lestrade:
But then the wedding day gets more exciting as they discover they have a murderer in their midst and have to solve yet another crime, all three of them this time:
And does the drama queen solve the crime? Of course he does and the show ends with an explanation of its title, The Sign of Three, which I originally and mistakenly took to mean the now crime-solving trio, Sherlock, John, and Mary. But no, the sign of three means something quite different:
When I saw this shot of Sherlock above, I couldn’t help but feel that Cumberbatch is not really acting here. His expressions can say a thousand words and the expression he has on his face in this scene is one of equal joy and sorrow. His look is expressing happiness for his friend, but at the same time you can see a deep sadness in it. What I’ve been trying to figure out is where this sentiment is coming from.
At first, I thought maybe it was Sherlock’s feelings toward losing his best friend to marriage and children, but then I soon realized that that couldn’t be it. He knows — he’s been assured by both Mary and John — that nothing will change as far as the crime solving duo is concerned. So what then is the source of his sadness? The only explanation I could really find is that it is a sorrow for something he has not yet achieved in his life. And if that’s the case, then this sentiment cannot be coming from Sherlock. After all, it was Sherlock who said during his speech:
All emotions, in particular love, stand opposed to the pure, cold reason I hold above all things. A wedding is in my considered opinion, nothing short of a celebration of all that is false and specious and irrational and sentimental in this ailing and morally compromised world. Today we honor the deathwatch beetle that is the doom of our society and in time, one feels certain, our species.
So this look — this sentiment of sorrow and regret — was a bit out of character for Sherlock, I thought, and cannot, therefore, really originate from him. It has to be a sentiment coming purely from the actor. What’s amazing about this is that this is the first time I’ve ever seen Cumberbatch slip up and impart one of his own traits to a character. I’ve never seen him do that before. And yet, the show and its characters in this last scene eerily reflect the real lives of the actors who play those characters, so I suppose it makes sense in a way. Maybe.
Finally, the episode ends with a very heartbreaking shot of Sherlock leaving the wedding reception early, all by himself.
If there is one thing I could wish for Sherlock at the very end, during the last season, when they decide to finish the show, it would be for him to meet (and fall for) the female version of himself. Someone unlike any of the other female characters he’s encountered. Thus, not a wicked sex kitten or a nerdy, awkward coroner. Someone just like him: cold, calculating, and callous. Someone who could obliterate him intellectually and see right through him in second, mercilessly vocalizing his habits, flaws, and his innermost desires and insecurities to the world. I would LOVE to see his reaction to someone like that. I would love to see how that would play out. But alas, I’ve heard that the show’s producers don’t have anything like that planned for future episodes. Too bad. That would make for a great show!
Tonight airs the final episode of the third season, His Last Vow. By watching this trailer below, I can see we are in for quite a bit of drama. I just hope we don’t have to wait two more years to find out how Sherlock fares this time.
If you haven’t seen The Empty Hearse, do not read the following post as there are major spoilers.
So it’s finally here! The Empty Hearse made it’s debut in America last night and I, like so many other Americans, was glued to the TV for 90 minutes, completely oblivious to anything in the world going on around me, even dinner. I have to ask myself, why did it take so long to get to America when it aired on New Year’s day in Britain and elsewhere around the world? And the only answer I can think of is that the British hate us. They hate us and they know their TV shows are better, so they rub it in our faces and make us wait 19 grueling days to find out what happens to our favorite crime solving team in London.
That’s my theory and I’m stickin’ to it!
But seriously, the first thing that came to mind while watching the first episode of season three was: “They must have so much fun making this show!”
The fun starts at the beginning when we see everyone’s reaction to Sherlock returning to London, back from the dead after two years.
Of all the characters, John’s reaction was quite possibly the best I’ve ever seen in TV history. I have to say I enjoyed Martin Freeman’s performance in this episode the most and I can safely say that both he and Benedict Cumberbatch were born to play these roles. They were brilliant and the two, along with a terrific supporting cast and brilliant scriptwriting, really make this show worth watching. It’s really too bad there aren’t more shows out there like it.
In the scene where John sees Sherlock for the first time since the funeral, Sherlock dresses up like a French waiter and thinks he’s going to play a funny joke by springing the news on John that he’s not dead, only to suddenly and shamefully realize that John’s not laughing. I almost felt sorry for Sherlock in this scene because he doesn’t really know what to do and he says the worst possible things he can say in the situation. He appears naked and vulnerable in front of his friend. He no longer has his protective walls around him. He can no longer use arrogance as a shield and it becomes clear as day that although he’s a genius, he’s socially retarded. Yet somehow the scene plays out well and ends up being hilariously funny. So without further explaining, I’ll let the pictures do the talking.
Benedict Cumberbatch said in an interview that he was worried about what the fans would think of his “new” Sherlock. He was worried about how they would take his performance (not that he even needs to care, but it says something wonderful about him as a person that he does.) I see now why he was concerned. Sherlock has changed. Although I really enjoyed the show and I thought Cumberbatch’s performance was brilliant, I have to admit that I did feel a bit of nostalgia for the old Sherlock. And I mean the Sherlock we see in the very first episodes. The withdrawn, aloof, and seemingly uncaring Sherlock. I actually loved him for his arrogance and his biting quips. They were hilarious!
“Don’t talk Anderson. You lower the IQ of the whole street.”
“Why?”, “Because you’re an idiot.”
“So you scratch their backs?”, “Yes, and I disinfect myself.”
“Brilliant, Anderson.”, “Really?”, “Yes, brilliant impression of an idiot.”
Unfortunately, in the Empty Hearse, Sherlock’s witty one-liners are few and far between. At this point in the story, Sherlock can no longer feign indifference to protect his secret — that he’s an idiot when it comes to human relationships. So his arrogance and insolence are somewhat gone, especially when dealing with John Watson. When he sees him again after two years, he reminds me more of Robert Downey Jr.’s Sherlock, especially in the restaurant scene above as he nicks people’s stuff to disguise himself. It was very much like in the movie, The Game of Shadows. He is also like Downey’s Sherlock in that he appears vulnerable and needy in this scene. He needs his friend to accept him again. He is no longer the independent Sherlock who can hide behind his walls. He has formed a bond with someone, someone he needs, and suddenly realizes how alone he is without him. So, in that scene, he steps out and shows himself publicly and in doing so, makes it glaringly obvious that he has no idea how to relate to people and their emotions. This facilitates Mary’s very insightful observation about him at the end of their night when she says: “Gosh, you don’t know anything about human nature, do you?”
And speaking of Mary, I thought Martin Freeman’s wife, Amanda Abbington, was beautiful and perfect in the role. They couldn’t have picked a better actress. The natural familiarity and chemistry between her and her husband (in the show and in real life) shone through brilliantly on the screen.
I also love the relationship the character, Mary, forms with Sherlock as she says to John in the cab: “I like him.” It’s very different from Guy Ritchie’s Mary.
Cumberbatch’s real parents were also perfectly cast as Sherlock and Mycroft’s parents in the show. Forget about nepotism. There was really no other set of actors who could have pulled it off as convincingly.
It was great to see more of Sherlock’s personal life come out in this episode — meeting his parents and watching him and his brother talk about their childhood as they play Operation.
What I found touching about Sherlock’s discussion with his brother is that through all of their intellectual garble as they analyze the hat, Sherlock can all the sudden see something about his brother that he never saw before, that is, before he met his best friend. Mycroft is lonely and doesn’t know it.
Despite all of these terrific aspects of The Empty Hearse, there were a few small disappointments. One of them was the relationship between Molly and Sherlock. I was disappointed that they didn’t end up together because you can tell that she really loves him. The scene below where she tells him she’s engaged was particularly heartbreaking.
I was really hoping they’d end up like this:
The picture above is not what really happened, by the way. It’s a scene from one of Anderson’s “how Sherlock survived” theories.
And speaking of Anderson, I have to say I was truly disappointed in Anderson and his whole Empty Hearse club. The fact that Anderson goes semi-insane, loses his job, neglects his personal hygiene, and starts a “how Sherlock survived” club was so ludicrous, I had a hard time watching.
This is Anderson? The one who hated Sherlock? The one who wouldn’t work with him in the Study in Pink? The one who conspired with Donovan to arrest him for attempted murder in the Reichenbach Fall? His total transformation was way too out of character (and where was Donovan in this show, btw? She was completely missing. Not that I’m complaining, but her absence went without any explanation whatsoever.)
I admit, I was worried something silly like this — Anderson’s side story — would be written into the show given the enormous amount of fame it has acquired. I was worried that it would get over-sensationalized and it did. But then again, maybe this is just the scriptwriters’ way of ridiculing the huge online world of Sherlock fan fiction and the insane media hype that has been built up so gloriously around it. That could be. Steven Moffat strikes me as the type of person who might do that.
The last little annoyance with The Empty Hearse was that we don’t really find out how he did it. Sherlock faking his death, that is. Toward the end, he gives Anderson a brief run down of events, but even Anderson admits that he is the last person Sherlock would tell and so we are left hanging with no real explanation. Even when John asks him at the end how he did it, Sherlock doesn’t give him a straight answer.
The only fact I got out of Sherlock’s explanations to his friends was that Mycroft was involved which sheds light on the out-of-character annoyance I spoke of in my last post on Sherlock. I had wondered about Mycroft’s involvement. I knew there had to be an explanation for his lack of empathy. It was too out of character for him. And there it was. So, I’m satisfied.
But after all this, my absolute favorite part of the show was the ending — the exchange between John and Sherlock. It was best part of the entire episode.
Thank you, BBC! Now I can patiently wait for the next episode: The Sign of Three.
I’m writing this post today because I feel like there is something that really needs to be said. Ever since October of 2011, I have been libeled relentlessly by several people, mostly book bloggers from Goodreads.com, because I spoke out against the author abuse I found running rampant on the site. For almost two years now, these people have been claiming I did and said things I have never done. I’m writing this post today to set the record straight. Below are two lists describing exactly what I have done and what I have not done. This is the truth about me.
These are the things I HAVE NEVER done:
- I have never attacked or harassed reviewers of my books.
- I have never published private information about another person, or “doxxed” them through unethical means.
- I have never attacked or harassed other authors, nor have I ever placed revenge one-star reviews on another author’s book or created fake accounts to do it.
- I have never created fake accounts on Goodreads or Amazon just to place five-star reviews on my own books and inflate their ratings.
- I have never bought reviews for my books.
- I have never review-swapped with another author.
- I do not run STGRB. I am not Athena Parker, or anyone else who is behind that blog.
These are the things I HAVE done:
- In October of 2011, I was perusing Goodreads reviews of a book I wanted to read by another author and found an extremely offensive, author-bashing review. I made a comment on the review that I thought it was inappropriate. I was attacked by a gang of Goodreads bullies. I stood my ground and defended my position. Afterwards, I wrote a blog post about my experience called Unacceptable Behavior.
- In February of 2012, I joined K.C. Neal’s Spread Love Not Hate anti-bullying campaign and wrote a post about the Goodreads bullies whom I had observed launch organized attacks on authors they didn’t like. I was again attacked and so were my books. They were showered with one-star reviews that were mostly about me and not my books. I left Goodreads shortly afterwards.
- During the summer of 2012, an author friend of mine was attacked by the same gang of Goodreads bullies, led by one of the ringleaders named Wendy Darling. When this happened, I wrote a blog post speaking out against what she did and reposting information about her that I had found in a blog post she had published. It was not private information. It was information that she had published about herself. All I did was repost it on my blog with a link to her post. I eventually took the post down, not because I was worried about being attacked (again) by the Goodreads bullies, but because STGRB eventually covered the whole story, only better, on their blog and were able to better inform many more people about Wendy Darling than I ever could since their blog has a much broader readership than mine.
- I have paid for reviews in the form of Bookrooster.com and blog tours with Premier Virtual Author Book Tours. In other words, I paid a third party a fee and they distributed my books to readers/reviewers/blog tour hosts who read them and wrote reviews for their blogs, for Amazon, and for Goodreads. Therefore, if there are several Amazon reviews on my books that are not verified purchases, that is why. In addition, my first book, The Raie’Chaelia, is also free on Kobo, on Amazon, and in my online bookstore. Therefore, purchase of that book is not necessary in order to read it.
- I left Goodreads in February of 2012 and I never intend to return.
- I have only ever responded positively to readers/reviewers of my books, either thanking them for their review or offering a refund if they didn’t enjoy them.
- I have only ever been supportive of other authors and have done my best to help them succeed.
For the past two years, I have been libeled, stalked, attacked, and threatened (by phone) all because I witnessed an injustice being done on a website (Goodreads) and instead of cowering in silence, I decided to speak out openly against it. I’m not the only one who has spoken out. Many others have as well. The fact that the problem escalated to the point where it was brought to not just national, but international attention and the fact that Goodreads had to act in order to correct it proves that I was right and that I’ve been a victim of bullying and abuse. I am tired of being targeted, especially by those who should know better.
That is all I wanted to say.
I absolutely love Neil deGrasse Tyson for what he says here. He is so right! If only we all had the luxury of doing what we love for a living, we’d all be considered brilliant visionaries. So true!
If everyone had the luxury to pursue a life of exactly what they love, we would all be ranked as visionary and brilliant. … If you got to spend every day of your life doing what you love, you can’t help but be the best in the world at that. And you get to smile every day for doing so. And you’ll be working at it almost to the exclusion of personal hygiene, and your friends are knocking on your door, saying, “Don’t you need a vacation?!,” and you don’t even know what the word “vacation” means because what you’re doing is what you want to do and a vacation from that is anything but a vacation — that’s the state of mind of somebody who’s doing what others might call visionary and brilliant.
~ Neil deGrasse Tyson