Wednesday 15 January 2014

TV: Did You Miss Me? Sherlock Series 3

Spoilers galore here.  If you haven't seen all of Sherlock Series 3, go away.

Sherlock came to the end of its third series last Sunday, and it’s proved to have got a more mixed reception than the previous two.  Perhaps this is inevitable given the enormous weight hanging on it.  After the massive cliffhanger at the end of the second series – Hashtag Sherlock Llives! - two years of theories have built up and everyone has been waiting to see how it was done.  Something else missing was the constant threat of Moriarty – his non-presence was a presence in itself, whereas in this series the story arc that Mrs Watson turns out to be a bit of a wrong ‘un didn’t really stick.  But there’s also been plenty to enjoy; it’s just felt less flowing than previous episodes.

The big question on everyone’s lips was: ‘How did Sherlock survive?’  And it wasn’t really answered, which wasn’t necessarily a bad thing but felt like a bit of a let-down after two years.  Probably the point being made with all the ‘fake resolution’ set-pieces was that any answer that the programme provided would be torn to bits by fans (just as Anderson immediately starts picking holes in Sherlock’s own version of (his)story), and that’s quite an amusing conceit.  But (and I’m sure this isn’t actually the case) it came across as though the writers had written themselves into a bit of a hole and couldn’t find a good way of getting out of it.  That’s an uncharitable take, but it’s a fact that lots of people seem to have found it a cop out.  Personally I think it trumps the lazy explanation Conan Doyle himself gives for Holmes’ survival in the books and it says interesting things about cliffhangers – do we enjoy coming up with our own theories more anyway?  The resolution to the first series cliffhanger was quite weak (Moriarty is about to shoot Holmes and Watson…  and then has to go and take a phone call) – perhaps we shouldn’t get hung up on them?  This would have been easier if the mystery in this first episode had been compelling, the episode felt more like a postscript to the second series, with the mystery a B-plot in its own story.  It did feel like an episode that didn't want to live up to expectations, and so it didn't.

The second episode, ‘The Sign Of Three’ was controversial amongst people online  (it might have been just as controversial with nonline people as well but I’ve not met anyone in the flesh who hated it as ferociously).  This was Sherlock as Rom-Com, and whether that sounds like a criticism or compliment depends on what you want out of Sherlock as a show.  If you are after solid police procedural (and to be fair, that is Sherlock’s remit), you wouldn’t have enjoyed this episode very much.  The crime business was mainly saved for the last third of the episode, most of the rest being taken up with comedy set-pieces. 
Not a scene from 'Love, Actually...' Honestly.
Luckily this is one of Steven Moffat’s strengths and I thought it worked as entertainment very well.  It didn’t necessarily work as crime drama, but this brings us back to having to think about why we like Sherlock.  I like Sherlock (and I’m talking generally here, not just the Cumberbatch incarnation) because he is so odd, detached and yet in the thick of life, someone hard to empathise with as a reader/viewer because empathy is alien to the character.  If I was only interested in seeing how the mysteries are solved, I doubt Holmes would have held my attention for as many years as he has.  Crime solving was not always heavily emphasised in the original stories – murder features in a significant minority of the books and some of the stories have no crime at all.  The crime solving aspect of the stories is a large part of the enjoyment of the stories but for me it’s not the most important.  So it’s fun to see this character taken right out of his comfort zone.  Holmes is a character who feels at odds with the fact that he is, in fact, a human just like us, and part of the appeal is seeing how he reacts compared to those around him.  Most of the time he is used to being the man with all the answers.  Dropping him in to a Richard Curtis Rom-Com (or, with the stag-do scenes, an episode of Coupling) puts him into a situation where everyone else is much more clued up than him; and inverting the natural order of things can be a refreshing way to look at a character.  And while I wouldn’t claim that the crime plot was one of the better ones, I rather liked how all the disparate elements came crashing together at once.  You couldn’t make a show out of it, but it’s fun to do once in a while.   

‘His Last Vow’ was back to normal(ish) for the series.  After the first week dealt with Sherlock’s resurrection and the second was a genre-bending curate’s egg, this was back to the usual territory.  Moffat and Gattis are still brilliant at bringing old things up to date – Wiggins, Sherlock in a crack den etc – but the best thing in the episode was Charles Augustus Magnusson (nee Milverton).  A genuinely disturbing villain, giving even Moriarty a run for his money, CAM has been changed from a fat, smug, gloating blackmailer into an emotionless, softly spoken, deranged one. Coming across like a weird cross between Julian Assange and Steve Jobs, he was particularly unpleasant and seeing him miming away in his own mind palace examined the nature of blackmail – it doesn’t require evidence as long as the threat of evidence existing is enough.
The reveal that Mary Watson isn’t all she seems didn’t particularly do it for me (as story-arcs go the Mary Watson one has felt pretty inconsequential) and the cosy Christmas scenes were pure padding.   But the  direction of the scene where Holmes is shot is fantastic.  And the climax, where Sherlock reminds us all that he is a psychopath, not Doctor Who, and ends the game with cold blooded murder is a brilliant reaffirming of this version of the character . 


And then the series ends exactly like the last one did, a cliffhanger with a seemingly dead character coming back to life and us lot trying to figure out how exactly for two years.  It’s been an up and down series, sometimes over-reaching or feeling unsure of its footing and at other times fully on top of its game, sometimes fluctuating between the two states within the same ten minutes.  But it has retained its own identity and has proved it can still be completely compelling if not as compulsive as before.  Another series will have to up its game and be more consistent in order to keep its fans sticking around but for now...  
Hashtag Moriarty Lives!


8 comments:

  1. This is going to be a long comment, so please forgive the extent and bluntness of any disagreements to your criticism.

    First episode - spoilers, all three explanations for how he survived the fall were taken from Sherlock fanfiction theories. So instead of laziness, they're more of a love note to only the most creepy and obsessive of fans (no, I'm not proud that I recognized them).

    Second Episode - I often think of the show as dark drama meets police procedural/mystery with a dash of comedy/bromance, so I agree that the rom-comness was odd. More off-putting for me was the character bleed during the best man's speech. I felt like I was watching Matt Smith's Dr. Who. Similar body movements and more intensely, the dialogue was Whovian. I am 80% sure that, "Is that clever? Why is it clever?" which Sherlock says in this episode is a direct Who quote. An easy writer mistake when one has so much on one's plate, and still a good line. What can I say, I like the writing in general.

    Third Episode - Totally agree about the excellence of the baddie makeover, and like the added media critique/nature of information commentary. Love the mind palace stuff and the getting shot. I especially love that he 'keeps' a copy of Moriarty in his brain. However, I really felt that Magnusson beat Sherlock the 'legitimate' way through crime and manipulation, while Sherlock was 'reduced' to violence. Now if all the characters were American, I think Holmes would have shot him earlier. Then again, if all the characters were American, Sherlock would rot in jail for shooting a powerful man in front of a bunch of government agents - we're all about nepotism and connections so long as it follows procedure. Anyways, could not be happier about M coming back.

    Thanks for the blog post! It's a relief to talk about this show as it has not reached the audience here yet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Regarding using fan fictition though... Couldn't it be argued that that's a form of laziness by ducking out of writing something that'll surprise them by letting them write your show for you? That's complete Devil's Advocate stuff - I know it was done with love - but I don't think it's too much to want something from the show we couldn't have just read online!

      The Doctor Who thing is a fair point to make - the Mark Lawson article I referenced in last week's Doctor Who post expresses similar concerns. Something tells me Capaldi's Doctor will be very different to Smith's, so perhaps the disparity between the two characters will become greater.

      This leads in to my take on shooting Magnusson - it shows that he isn't a normal 'good guy' action hero in the way that Doctor Who is. He's playing a game with a different mindset - one that happens to coincide with what we expect of a traditional hero most of the time but not always. Doctor Who is meant to be anti-violence but when all's said and done, Sherlock's an expert in guns and the situations he's in tend to involve more immediate violence. Though still shocking, it doesn't seem as out of character when he resorts to it.

      Talking about what the show would be like if all the characters were American - what's Elementary like? :)

      Delete
  2. I was reading an interview with Moffat talking about making a Sherlock movie and it made me realise why I think there is such a tear through the fandom in this run. As far as I'm concerned, and I think it's probably the same for a lot of fans, Sherlock isn't a TV series which could spawn a movie. It already is a series of movies.
    As an episode in a TV show The Sign of Three made perfect sense. Delving into the characters and trying a different format. All TV shows do it occasionally and to great effect. However, as a film in it's own right, it was atrocious. You wouldn't make a Marvel movie that was just Iron Man and Bruce Banner going on a pub crawl, but that plot might actually fit into Agent of SHIELD quite well, because our expectations change with the medium they are delivered in. I absolutely despised The Sign of Three, but if a season of Sherlock was 6 episodes long, each of 45 minutes, I'd probably have loved it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely agree with the movie angle - I think the first two series were overall stronger for feeling more like a series of movies. I think having a 'wildcard' episode and complex story arcs is something that works in Doctor Who a thousand times better (compare and contrast 'The Lodger' with 'The Sign Of Three'...)

      Similarly, with story arcs they work much better as a slow-burning thing - spread out over 6 (or indeed, 13) 45 minute episodes. When the story arc was much simpler - Moriarty is coming and will be dangerous - it didn't interfere with the film style storytelling. But when it gets more complex the arc is being dealt with at the expense of the main plot. I would have had more development of the Magnusson plot and not bothered with the 'Mary Was A Wrong 'Un' business at all. If it had been Lady Whatever shooting Magnusson it wouldn't have been as much of a twist but would have been better for the episode.

      The books weren't a serial but a series of different adventures. I think this series they tried to make it a mixture of serial and series and that's why I think it was a mixed end result.

      Delete
  3. Touche. Hmm, I'm enjoying all this Sherlock talk! All my writer friends have seen the new Sherlock, but no one I know strictly socially, so it's been a treat. No, I have not seen 'Elementary' because in addition to being a Sherlock knock-off it's got Lucy No-Talent Lu in it. But if we're being nationalist, I have been watching Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones, Orange is the New Black, and House of Cards. I also indulge in the occasional True Blood, but it really dropped in quality after season 2. In all fairness, Breaking Bad and Sherlock are tied for most recent favorites.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I saw the first episode of Elementary and although it didn't seem to be appalling, it had nothing whatsoever to do with Sherlock Holmes apart from a few names. It just seemed like another in the trend for 'Kooky Maverick Cop' shows over the last few years; Dexter's a psychopath, then there was one who I think could see dead people, another who was a maths genius or something. Elementary just went for 'Quirky Brit'...

      I have a confession - I've never seen Game Of Thrones, and have never heard of Orange Is The New Black! I liked Breaking Bad but have only seen the first series so need to do some serious catching up. The first series of House Of Cards was brilliant - is the next series out over there yet?

      My main problem with keeping up with American shows is that there are so many episodes and so little time! But I do my best :)

      Delete
  4. Game of Thrones is a mania here. We have premier parties and cook themed dishes for it (Strawberry & Rhubarb Galette for the 'Red Wedding'). Orange is the New Black is another netflix original, so you might get it if you get House of Cards. It's got strange lesbians and a character from the very worst parts of Tennessee in it (try not to think less of Tennesseans, it will be difficult if you watch the show). The final season of Breaking Bad premiered here last year. It was a thing of beauty, but yes, lots of episodes. House of Cards is coming out soon, but I'm not sure when.I put a lot of shows on in the background while I clean, cook, or do tedious edits. I 'see' a lot more stuff that way because it's almost a radio drama for me. I'm all about dialogue anyway. Have you read any of my stuff, yet, or too busy?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Still not read it - to be honest it only came in relatively recently because I rarely have wi-fi turned on the Kindle! I'll get back to you though, promise...

      I'm quite often the same with some programmes, but then there was stuff on HoC where it was really good to see the acting - Stamper especially was good at creepy looks!

      Something you definitely can't do that kind of stuff with is the Scandinavian police things, do you get many of them over there? Also Borgen, which is a political drama?

      Delete