Sherlock

#1

INSANE SPOILERS FOR SEASON 3 FINALE BELOW

Really? Really? They'd better have a fucking good explanation for this. Moffat apparently cannot kill off anybody. This completely ruins "The Reichenbach Fall". And the episode was going so well! (Except for a few giant plotholes. Sherlock just willed himself to life? John forgave Mary far too easily.) Fuck, in two seasons Magnasson will probably be revealed to have faked his own death.

#2

Thank you for the incredibly large spoilers warning. I am posting without reading your comment. Sherlock starts in the states soon, so excited to see the new season!

#3

Hedgeowl wrote:Thank you for the incredibly large spoilers warning. I am posting without reading your comment. Sherlock starts in the states soon, so excited to see the new season!

The new season is a bit different from the last two. It's much more light and character driven. I personally prefer the earlier two season's style, but this new season is not bad by any means. And the finale is (mostly) fantastic.

#4

I genuinely love the show, but Moffat sucks at writing, tbh. He is misogynistic and cannot commit to anything. He does the same things in Doctor Who. I haven't yet watched the third episode, but was spoiled. (Don't worry, I don't really care after being spoiled for some of the last episodes of LOST--nothing matters).

#5

Dom wrote:I genuinely love the show, but Moffat sucks at writing, tbh. He is misogynistic and cannot commit to anything. He does the same things in Doctor Who. I haven't yet watched the third episode, but was spoiled. (Don't worry, I don't really care after being spoiled for some of the last episodes of LOST--nothing matters).

What? I agree that he cannot commit to anything, but misogynistic?

I'm in general kind of meh about Doctor Who. It really isn't my type of show. I watched most of the new seasons on Netflix last year, and while there are occasional flashes of genius, and a great episode, those are few and far between.

There are a surprisingly large amount of surprises in the finatle. Of the top of my head, I can already think of four. Unless you got spoiled on all of them, there's still a good chance you will be caught of guard on a few things.

#6

insertnamehere wrote:
Dom wrote:I genuinely love the show, but Moffat sucks at writing, tbh. He is misogynistic and cannot commit to anything. He does the same things in Doctor Who. I haven't yet watched the third episode, but was spoiled. (Don't worry, I don't really care after being spoiled for some of the last episodes of LOST--nothing matters).
What? I agree that he cannot commit to anything, but misogynistic?

I'm in general kind of meh about Doctor Who. It really isn't my type of show. I watched most of the new seasons on Netflix last year, and while there are occasional flashes of genius, and a great episode, those are few and far between.

There are a surprisingly large amount of surprises in the finatle. Of the top of my head, I can already think of four. Unless you got spoiled on all of them, there's still a good chance you will be caught of guard on a few things.

We'll see.

I'm waiting for the person who usually gives me a link to give me a link

Just one example of his misogynistic attitude would be this line from The Sign Of Three, "John, control your wife."
And no one says anything. Mary looks annoyed, but John doesn't. It was just something that could be said. And the same type of thing happens in Doctor Who in pretty much every episode. Companions are, once again, the accessory to the Doctor rather than characters. Moffat writes women as accessories and not characters.

#7

Dom wrote: Just one example of his misogynistic attitude would be this line from The Sign Of Three, "John, control your wife."
And no one says anything. Mary looks annoyed, but John doesn't. It was just something that could be said. And the same type of thing happens in Doctor Who in pretty much every episode. Companions are, once again, the accessory to the Doctor rather than characters. Moffat writes women as accessories and not characters.

Let me just play Devil's Advocate here, Sherlock says stupid shit like that all the time that he doesn't mean. John has become desensitized to the Sherlock-isms.
On Doctor Who, there was really only one companion who really stood out as being able to hold her own against the Doctor, Donna. But even before Moffat was at the helm, Rose and Martha always felt like accessories. This is one of the biggest problems with the show that I had. It's just kind of a misogynist show.

#8

INSANE SPOILERS FOR SEASON 3 FINALE BELOW thar

Misogynistic? Why is no-one bothered by the fact that Molly slaps Sherlock friggin' thrice in a row? If it were the other way around, well, you don't need me to tell you what the reaction would be. Molly slapping the shit out of Sherlock is just funny.

Butttttttttttttttt, I loved loved loved the way they built CAM and the portrayal was extraordinary. I just hated the fact that they had to kill him and the fashion in which they chose to do it. :\

#9

Lizzy wrote:Misogynistic? Why is no-one bothered by the fact that Molly slaps Sherlock friggin' thrice in a row? If it were the other way around, well, you don't need me to tell you what the reaction would be. Molly slapping the shit out of Sherlock is just funny.

Butttttttttttttttt, I loved loved loved the way they built CAM and the portrayal was extraordinary. I just hated the fact that they had to kill him and the fashion in which they chose to do it. :\

SPOILERS!

#10

Lizzy wrote:INSANE SPOILERS FOR SEASON 3 FINALE BELOW thar

Misogynistic? Why is no-one bothered by the fact that Molly slaps Sherlock friggin' thrice in a row? If it were the other way around, well, you don't need me to tell you what the reaction would be. Molly slapping the shit out of Sherlock is just funny.

Butttttttttttttttt, I loved loved loved the way they built CAM and the portrayal was extraordinary. I just hated the fact that they had to kill him and the fashion in which they chose to do it. :\

Well, apparently getting shot in the head doesn't kill people so he'll probably be back by s5.

#11

insertnamehere wrote:
Dom wrote: Just one example of his misogynistic attitude would be this line from The Sign Of Three, "John, control your wife."
And no one says anything. Mary looks annoyed, but John doesn't. It was just something that could be said. And the same type of thing happens in Doctor Who in pretty much every episode. Companions are, once again, the accessory to the Doctor rather than characters. Moffat writes women as accessories and not characters.
Let me just play Devil's Advocate here, Sherlock says stupid shit like that all the time that he doesn't mean. John has become desensitized to the Sherlock-isms.
On Doctor Who, there was really only one companion who really stood out as being able to hold her own against the Doctor, Donna. But even before Moffat was at the helm, Rose and Martha always felt like accessories. This is one of the biggest problems with the show that I had. It's just kind of a misogynist show.

While this isn't a Doctor Who thread I think the discussion on Moffat isnpertienent.
I absolutely disagree with your assessment of Martha and Rose. Women who fall in love can be well written women. Rose starts off as a shop girl who thinks nothing of herself. Her relationship with the Doctor teaches her she has inherent value. This continues after she leaves the Doctor and Rose even tells Donna that she is important. Martha is an medical student with a path in life who is swept up by a grieving Doctor. Martha doesn't learn that she important but rather to love herself. Martha leaves the Doctor when she does. She starts her own life and knows her love is as valuable as someone else's.
Moffat wrote Amy. A girl who waits for the Doctor because??? She is continuously referred to as a "girl" and Moffat's Doctor is not one that is humanist. He writes a Doctor who swaggers in and every woman swoons over him with no reason. He has a relationship with what seems to be three women at once and no one bats an eye. Amy doesn't do anything. Things happen to her. The Doctor usually a saves her. This was the opposite in the Russell T Davies Era. Add this to many lines that should be looked at with a glaring eye, Moffat is misogynistic.
In Sherlock this is less pronounced because the structures of the shoes are different but you'll notice that of the four main characters (Sherlock, John, Lestrade, and Mycroft) are men. The two female characters (Molly and Mrs. Hudson) serve traditional female roles. Mrs. Hudson is an essential housewife and Molly (through the first two seasons) is basically an assistant who fawns over Sherlock. There is the problem of the line I mentioned.
Now I haven't seen His Last Vow yet, but I'd love to address that episode later.
Moffat is a shitty writer that does great with short bursts like Sherlock. He does not give his characters consequences. No one dies, and when they do there is either no grief or there is a way out.

#12

I'm by no means an expert on Dr. Who, and this is a Sherlock thread after all, so I'm going to focus on the Sherlock part.

Dom wrote:In Sherlock this is less pronounced because the structures of the shoes are different but you'll notice that of the four main characters (Sherlock, John, Lestrade, and Mycroft) are men. The two female characters (Molly and Mrs. Hudson) serve traditional female roles. Mrs. Hudson is an essential housewife and Molly (through the first two seasons) is basically an assistant who fawns over Sherlock. There is the problem of the line I mentioned.
Now I haven't seen His Last Vow yet, but I'd love to address that episode later.
Moffat is a shitty writer that does great with short bursts like Sherlock. He does not give his characters consequences. No one dies, and when they do there is either no grief or there is a way out.

Sherlock, John, Lestrade, and Mycroft are all directly lifted from the canon. There's really only three recurring female characters in the ACD canon, Mrs. Hudson, Irene Adler, and Mary. They even added Molly Hooper, who is nowhere in the ACD canon, just so there would be more women in the show. Also, Mary is pretty much a main character now. On the topic of Molly and Mrs. Hudson, Molly moves on from Sherlock, get's a boyfriend, slaps Sherlock around a lot, and calls him out on his bullshit. You find out in the finale, and earlier in the third season, that Mrs. Hudson had an abusive drug dealer husband, that she had arrested, and moved on from. She also has her own interests, such as exotic dancing, which is clearly something she herself enjoys doing. Both characters have attributes that prove that they are more then just a flimsy sterotype, and that they each have their own interests and free will. I don't think I can say that about Rose Tyler.

#13

I've not seen that about Mrs. Hudson, the exotic dancing bit, I don't think. Nor have I seen Molly slap Sherlock around. Either way, Moffat is a misogynist in his writing on Who, whether it transfers to Sherlock is up for debate-- and a more intelligent one when I've actually watched the third episode of season three. But I will say Sherlock is less sexist than Doctor Who has become.

#14

Dom wrote:I've not seen that about Mrs. Hudson, the exotic dancing bit, I don't think. Nor have I seen Molly slap Sherlock around. Either way, Moffat is a misogynist in his writing on Who, whether it transfers to Sherlock is up for debate-- and a more intelligent one when I've actually watched the third episode of season three. But I will say Sherlock is less sexist than Doctor Who has become.

The exotic dancing bit is from episode three, but I'm pretty sure Molly has slapped Sherlock around in more then one episode. I just personally think Doctor Who is kind of a misogynist show in general, mostly in regards to the Companions.

**http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23** · #15

SPOILERS FOR HIS LAST VOW

OK, seriously, you can't assume that M is somehow resurrected means bring bak 2 lyfe. There's absolutely no way. So clearly he just had set up some elaborate plan before his death. Like he made the videos, and told someone who worked for him to release them when a certain event triggers (most obvious being Sherlock leaving). And my thinking is that whoever that someone is will become a new villain with their own motives.

---end spoilers---

As for the misogyny discussion, WATCH ELEMENTARY. ALL OF YOU. IT IS SO GOOD. In comparison with Elementary, which has prominent and badass female characters (as well as more POC characters), BBC Sherlock can be called misogynistic

But as for me, I LOVE both shows. It is possible to be a fan of both. Let me tell you, Elementary is AWESOME.

#16

nutella wrote:SPOILERS FOR HIS LAST VOW

OK, seriously, you can't assume that M is somehow resurrected means bring bak 2 lyfe. There's absolutely no way. So clearly he just had set up some elaborate plan before his death. Like he made the videos, and told someone who worked for him to release them when a certain event triggers (most obvious being Sherlock leaving). And my thinking is that whoever that someone is will become a new villain with their own motives.

---end spoilers---

As for the misogyny discussion, WATCH ELEMENTARY. ALL OF YOU. IT IS SO GOOD. In comparison with Elementary, which has prominent and badass female characters (as well as more POC characters), BBC Sherlock can be called misogynistic But as for me, I LOVE both shows. It is possible to be a fan of both. Let me tell you, Elementary is AWESOME.

How? Just because something has more POC characters or more women doesn't mean it's less misogynistic. I'd rather a character be included in a story because they are interesting, not because the writers want to fill up a bingo card so they can't be called racist. In my opinion, having a black guy in the show just for the sake of having a black guy, is more racist then not having one at all. I don't care how many POC or women are in the show, it's how they portray them is what I care about. And what do you mean, by comparison it's misogynistic? Stories serve different purposes and themes, and try to achieve different things. The new Robert Redford film where he's the only character who just tries to survive on a boat during a storm could be considered "misogynistic" compared to something like The Handmaid's Tale. They both have different themes, stories, and points. Comparing them on the grounds of which is the most pro-women, and then calling the other misogynistic regardless of the actual content of the story just squashes actual discussion, and is just frankly offensive to whoever worked on the "misogynistic" story.

#17

nutella wrote:SPOILERS FOR HIS LAST VOW

OK, seriously, you can't assume that M is somehow resurrected means bring bak 2 lyfe. There's absolutely no way. So clearly he just had set up some elaborate plan before his death. Like he made the videos, and told someone who worked for him to release them when a certain event triggers (most obvious being Sherlock leaving). And my thinking is that whoever that someone is will become a new villain with their own motives.

Did you see the after credits scene where the real Moriarty turned to the camera and said "Miss me?"? I feel like that's just confirmation that he really is back. I'm really disappointed with this development.

**http://www.last.fm/user/nutella23** · #18

insertnamehere wrote: How? Just because something has more POC characters or more women doesn't mean it's less misogynistic. I'd rather a character be included in a story because they are interesting, not because the writers want to fill up a bingo card so they can't be called racist. In my opinion, having a black guy in the show just for the sake of having a black guy, is more racist then not having one at all. I don't care how many POC or women are in the show, it's how they portray them is what I care about. And what do you mean, by comparison it's misogynistic? Stories serve different purposes and themes, and try to achieve different things. The new Robert Redford film where he's the only character who just tries to survive on a boat during a storm could be considered "misogynistic" compared to something like The Handmaid's Tale. They both have different themes, stories, and points. Comparing them on the grounds of which is the most pro-women, and then calling the other misogynistic regardless of the actual content of the story just squashes actual discussion, and is just frankly offensive to whoever worked on the "misogynistic" story.

Since you haven't seen it, no, they're not there just for the sake of being there. They're all incredibly developed characters. And sure, they're different shows. I guess Sherlock is sort of more true to the canon in some ways, whereas Elementary, for example, genderswaps a few major characters and makes other changes, but is still a really good adaptation -- it does a really good job of retaining stuff from canon and adapting it to a modern NYC setting. Maybe you could call it more experimental or progressive, because of the way it stretches the "Sherlock Holmes genre" into a somewhat less male-dominated realm. In any case, I'm not trying to put down BBC Sherlock, I really love both shows, and I do kind of judge the extreme-tumblr-social-justice types who refuse to give something a chance because they think it's misogynistic. But I have to agree with them on some of the reasons Elementary is such a great show. And it's a great show regardless.

insertnamehere wrote: Did you see the after credits scene where the real Moriarty turned to the camera and said "Miss me?"? I feel like that's just confirmation that he really is back. I'm really disappointed with this development.

I saw it, but I'm reluctant to interpret it that way. It's hard to say. But if he is back, there better be a DAMN good explanation, because there's no way he survived blowing his brains out.

#19

I am partly skimming this thread for fear of ruining everything, but here's my link contribution, now that I now who Moffat is. Sounds like a douche.

http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/steven- ... octor-who/

#20

Hedgeowl wrote:I am partly skimming this thread for fear of ruining everything, but here's my link contribution, now that I now who Moffat is. Sounds like a douche.

http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/steven- ... octor-who/

Steven Moffat was probably being cheeky and sarcastic on a lot of these. "“[shag] his way ’round television studios like a mechanical digger” is obviously not serious. One paragraph is the author being mad that her slash fiction isn't being legitimized by Moffat, and her anger at John being straight. She then criticizes Moffat for making a lesbian sexually attracted to Sherlock, and then get's mad because a straight man isn't.

Here's an example of the massive amount of paraphrasing in this article.

So I thought, use this massively exciting, rather handsome man who could see right through your heart and have no interest ... of course, he's going to be a sex god! I think we pitched that character right. I think our female fan base all believe that they'll be the one to melt that glacier. They're all wrong -- nothing will melt that glacier.

is turned into

Moffat is happy that while women may fuss about equal treatment, deep down all they want is to “be the one.”

The original quote is kind of offensive towards the female fanbase, but it's nowhere near as extreme as what the author said it was.

There are a few stupid things in there that are actually offensive, like this:

"Well, the world is vastly counted in favour of men at every level - except if you live in a civilised country and you’re sort of educated and middle-class, because then you’re almost certainly junior in your relationship and in a state of permanent, crippled apology. Your preferences are routinely mocked. There’s a huge, unfortunate lack of respect for anything male."

All I really got from that is that Moffat was in a bad relationship, and then apparently thought that all women were like this. Keep in mind that the article that quote is from 10 years ago, he probably got over it.

#21

I haven't seen Elementary, mostly because I'm not a big fan of Lucy Liu, but I'll probably give it a shot.

#22

nutella wrote:SPOILERS FOR HIS LAST VOW

As for the misogyny discussion, WATCH ELEMENTARY. ALL OF YOU. IT IS SO GOOD. In comparison with Elementary, which has prominent and badass female characters (as well as more POC characters), BBC Sherlock can be called misogynistic But as for me, I LOVE both shows. It is possible to be a fan of both. Let me tell you, Elementary is AWESOME.

I haven't yet seen the new sherlock. - So I snipped all that. But I have to say, I agree with LA. Elementary is very engaging! I like it a lot. I was unsure at first and just gave it a try and it grew on me. Like lots. I love so much about this show.

As for Moff. Well....he's Moff. He did some really great things with Dr. Who - that said, I think that most of the great things he does - writing wise are plot driven. And that's where "the problem that is Moff" comes into play. He's awesome at plot. He's the master behind such great Dr. Who episodes as Blink and The Girl In The Fireplace. They are VERY plot driven episodes. It worked when he wrote for RTD because RTD was so very CHARACTER driven as a writer. They balanced each other out.

linki - INH - I'm not a fan of her either, but she brings an intersting earthiness to the show. Also - what I like about Elementary, is that it does not at all hide Holmes' drug addiction. It plays on it. I do think that is a central part of Holmes and becoming a non-smoker is NOT the same as being a serious drug addict. This is coming from someone who a) still smokes and b) gave up more than one drug.

The problem with Moff is now, it feels like he lacks balance. He lacks the character side to work with his plot driven writing. He needs a RTD, tbh.

#23

bea wrote:
nutella wrote:SPOILERS FOR HIS LAST VOW

As for the misogyny discussion, WATCH ELEMENTARY. ALL OF YOU. IT IS SO GOOD. In comparison with Elementary, which has prominent and badass female characters (as well as more POC characters), BBC Sherlock can be called misogynistic But as for me, I LOVE both shows. It is possible to be a fan of both. Let me tell you, Elementary is AWESOME.
I haven't yet seen the new sherlock. - So I snipped all that. But I have to say, I agree with LA. Elementary is very engaging! I like it a lot. I was unsure at first and just gave it a try and it grew on me. Like lots. I love so much about this show.

As for Moff. Well....he's Moff. He did some really great things with Dr. Who - that said, I think that most of the great things he does - writing wise are plot driven. And that's where "the problem that is Moff" comes into play. He's awesome at plot. He's the master behind such great Dr. Who episodes as Blink and The Girl In The Fireplace. They are VERY plot driven episodes. It worked when he wrote for RTD because RTD was so very CHARACTER driven as a writer. They balanced each other out.

linki - INH - I'm not a fan of her either, but she brings an intersting earthiness to the show. Also - what I like about Elementary, is that it does not at all hide Holmes' drug addiction. It plays on it. I do think that is a central part of Holmes and becoming a non-smoker is NOT the same as being a serious drug addict. This is coming from someone who a) still smokes and b) gave up more than one drug.

The problem with Moff is now, it feels like he lacks balance. He lacks the character side to work with his plot driven writing. He needs a RTD, tbh.

I think Gatiss is helping him with that on Sherlock.

#24

insertnamehere wrote: I think Gatiss is helping him with that on Sherlock.

Gatiss needs to man up tbh. Moff needs a heavy hand to deal with.

Gatiss has been my fav part of Moff's Who if that means anything to anyone. :P

#25

bea wrote:
insertnamehere wrote: I think Gatiss is helping him with that on Sherlock.
Gatiss needs to man up tbh. Moff needs a heavy hand to deal with. Gatiss has been my fav part of Moff's Who if that means anything to anyone. :P

Matt Smith and Arthur Darville were my favorite parts. Has anyone seen Arthur Darville and David Tennant in Broadchurch? How fucking good is Broadchurch? If you haven't all ready, give Broadchurch a try. Fantastic show based around a murder in a small town. Those kind of shows are my jam.

#26

http://www.bbcshop.com/sherlockdontunde ... t/skap0011

On an unrelated note, you can buy a T-Shirt that reads "I Don't Understand" on the front, and "I Still Don't Understand" on the back.

#27

Hedgeowl wrote:I am partly skimming this thread for fear of ruining everything, but here's my link contribution, now that I now who Moffat is. Sounds like a douche.

http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/steven- ... octor-who/

T H I S

As for the discussion on race-- why is this a discussion? Are we seriously doubting that the BBC whitewashes? Are we seriously doubting that the BBC whitewashes when Sherlock features one black character who is literally characterized as the bitch of the cast?

The Syndicate

Sherlock

Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock

Re: Sherlock