Quote: Ben @ 9th January 2014, 7:19 PM GMT

They are, truly, the anti-you!

View original

Hes the anti me. And we're altogether coo coo cachoo!

Andrew Ellard's thoughts on last weeks Sherlock: http://storify.com/ellardent/twetnotes-sherlock-the-sign-of-three

Very much looking forward to tonight's finale, it's had a lot of good buzz and Moffat has yet to pen one of the dodgy episodes.

Quote: Lazzard @ 8th January 2014, 9:33 AM GMT

.

On a separate note, Alibi are showing them from S1Ep1 - watched the opener last night.
The difference is truly shocking.
They managed to weave in the beginning of the relationship - quite a lot of heavy lifting for the writers - but yet still have a truly tense plot running through the whole thing ie it mainly felt like you were watching a detective story rather than a human drama.

As an experiment I'm going to show the old ones to my girls (15) who've only seen the latest two - which they enjoyed.
Be interesting to see which they prefer.
My prediction is they'll go for the latest ones 'cos they're 'funnier'.

They think Merlin's great too.

View original

My faith is restored.
The both loved it.
" It's still got the funny bits, but the story's more exciting"

Out of the mouths of babes...

I love A Study In Pink - it is probably my favourite episode. As you say, characters and relationship established with minimum of fuss, interesting plot (there is something very sinister about people being forced to commit suicide), satisfying conclusion to the ep in its own right, but lots of plot strands set up for later episodes.

It is pretty much the perfect opener.

The only part I would quibble with is the length of time it takes Sherlock to work out the murderer is a taxi driver. I think it is obvious at the point he makes his "who do we implicitly trust, who can abduct people in broad daylight" speech.

Not particularly credible that he wouldn't have twigged at that stage.

But that is minor. The rest of it is great.

There would be less pressure on each episode of Sherlock if there were more of them. Always thought that 6 x 1 hour episodes would have been a better plan.

The Granada/Brett Holmes suffered from the short story adaptations being stretched from 50 min to full length versions.

True they could get writers who can write for the length. Not sketch writers and half hour narrative comedy/ kids writers. But then what would they be doing? I see the BBC has distanced themselves from the court case meanwhile quite emphatically.

I'd have Jed Mercurio, from Bodies and Line of Duty, writing Sherlock. And Doctor Who. But not at the same time...

What about Matthew or me?

Well, I thought you might be too busy...

Good start, didn't deliver. I thought they could have done a lot more with the Rupert Murdoch baddie. I really didn't get the sense that this was the person Sherlock hated above all others.

Too much arty farty cleverness and not enough compelling story telling. If you break the episode down into "what actually happened" the conclusion is - not much.

Since when did telling a good story become out of vogue?

Plus, leave Moriarty be. Find someone else.

Well that was dull. All that mind palace stuff was just the most interminable bollocks.

By far the best episode of the series, great vile villain, proper stakes. Enjoyed it.

That was pretty damn good.

Moriarty on every TV screen in the country was very shark jumping. And a bit Doctor Whoey.