The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > Cafe Society

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 10-05-2012, 10:07 AM
Folacin Folacin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
It doesn't enthrall me, but it's certainly my best choice for the time slot.

And I agree that that was a new plot twist. I was actually
SPOILER:
assuming another half-sibling as the killer,
so them using my assumption to spring the trap was fun.
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #102  
Old 10-05-2012, 10:18 AM
DMark DMark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Just saw episode two.
Why do they even bother with any Sherlock references?
Other than the lead character copying the frantic speed of the BBC Sherlock, it has absolutely nothing to do with Sherlock Holmes.
Watson is nothing more than a high priced babysitter, wanting to spend more time with her ex-boyfriend.

The show is more of a "Castle out of rehab" meets "Mentalist on meth" than Sherlock Holmes mysteries.

The actual plot and crime of this week? Meh...no worse than other cop shows, but certainly nothing all that clever either. You didn't need to be a genius to mutter "No shit, Sherlock..." as it was solved.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 10-05-2012, 10:23 AM
twickster twickster is offline
Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 38,055
Mod note

DMark, I moved your post from last week's thread to this week's thread.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 10-05-2012, 01:02 PM
Infovore Infovore is offline
Confusing the polarity
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Somewhere fictional
Posts: 8,618
I'm still enjoying it. I agree that it doesn't really need to be Sherlock Holmes (and doesn't really feel like it is) but I kind of feel like I'm watching a younger version of Gregory House and that's okay with me. I know House was patterned on Holmes, but this Holmes seems patterned on House.

I was proud of myself for catching on that
SPOILER:
the scene in the hospital room was fake and meant to encourage the killer to take the "window of opportunity," though I didn't figure out the induced-coma thing.

I plan to continue watching. Couldn't stand the ex-boyfriend, though. I hope he doesn't stick around long.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 10-05-2012, 01:14 PM
bup bup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
I saw from a mile away that
SPOILER:
the hospital scene at the end was a fake, a trap. I can't believe the doctor didn't also. That he and the evil sister fell for it was disappointing.

On the other hand, that other twist got me, and I thought it was cool, if somewhat unbelievable. Hey, not all of ACD's stories were that believable either.

Still like it, still not bitter that they call them Holmes and Watson, because they obviously are, just they've been played with. Holmes liked the cocaine, too. And played the violin. And had some sort of personality disorder.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 10-05-2012, 04:12 PM
Irishman Irishman is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Yes, that was disbelief suspension challenging.

Last night's episode was a little obvious. The woman in the coma committed the murder. Her doctor was her boyfriend, and he was inducing the coma medically. All so she could kill off the illegitimate half-siblings who could inherit some of the family fortune if they became aware of their father's identity through some miracle.

More interplay between Holmes and Watson, with Holmes continuing to be a dick. Going on and on about her sex life like that is not endearing. And Hollywood, get a clue, women can masturbate, too.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 10-05-2012, 06:49 PM
twickster twickster is offline
Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 38,055
Note: There's a new thread for the second episode here.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 10-05-2012, 09:56 PM
C K Dexter Haven C K Dexter Haven is offline
Right Hand of the Master
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Chicago north suburb
Posts: 15,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishman View Post
More interplay between Holmes and Watson, with Holmes continuing to be a dick. Going on and on about her sex life like that is not endearing.
We stopped watching at the point that he burned the violin. Irishman: "not endearing" wins my award for best litotes of the week. Congrats!

As I said in the other thread, I don't mind revisions and updates and different takes. (I loved the movie WITHOUT A CLUE where Holmes is an actor and Watson is the brilliant one.) The problem with ELEMENTARY is that Holmes is entirely unlikable. The real Holmes had a drug problem, OK, because he got bored when there was no mental stimulation. But he was in a middle/upper class setting. This Holmes is a low-life druggie. He interrupts an AA meeting to stand up and yell. He's rude to everyone -- the real Sherlock may have been curt from time to time, but rarely outright rude.

If this was a totally new detective (a la Monk), I'd have no problem watching. As Sherlock, it leaves me very antagonistic and annoyed. Yeah, he's basically a dick. The real Sherlock could be annoying; the BBC SHERLOCK is definitely annoying because of his know-it-all attitude; but he's pleasant and courteous and polite, and NOT just a dick.

Last edited by C K Dexter Haven; 10-05-2012 at 09:57 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 10-05-2012, 10:44 PM
Folacin Folacin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by C K Dexter Haven View Post
The real Holmes had a drug problem, OK, because he got bored when there was no mental stimulation. But he was in a middle/upper class setting. This Holmes is a low-life druggie. He interrupts an AA meeting to stand up and yell. He's rude to everyone -- the real Sherlock may have been curt from time to time, but rarely outright rude.
Not that the show doesn't have some problems - bu he's not a low-life druggie - he's staying in the worst of his father's NYC properties. And his father can afford to pay for Watson to be a live-in warden.

He was consulting with the London police when something in his personal life apparently caused him to fall deep into a drug habit (that's an assumption on my part - we don't know that he was shipped across the pond for treatment, but if Dad is that wealthy, he likely was to avoid scandal).
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 10-05-2012, 11:44 PM
Irishman Irishman is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by C K Dexter Haven View Post
We stopped watching at the point that he burned the violin. Irishman: "not endearing" wins my award for best litotes of the week. Congrats!
I like winning. What do I get?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Folacin View Post
He was consulting with the London police when something in his personal life apparently caused him to fall deep into a drug habit (that's an assumption on my part - we don't know that he was shipped across the pond for treatment, but if Dad is that wealthy, he likely was to avoid scandal).
Something involving a woman, it appears, given Watson's deductions about his obvious intentional crassness.
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 10-06-2012, 11:21 AM
MaxTheVool MaxTheVool is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 8,912
I give it a solid B. Entertaining enough that I was happy watching the episode without getting bored, Holmes-like enough that I don't feel outraged that they're using the name, but not transcendent or amazing.
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 10-06-2012, 01:11 PM
WordMan WordMan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxTheVool View Post
I give it a solid B. Entertaining enough that I was happy watching the episode without getting bored, Holmes-like enough that I don't feel outraged that they're using the name, but not transcendent or amazing.
I agree. I'm with it so far. Lucy Liu is dressed in a distracting way for the role, but I'm okay with that - although it keeps a threat of Holmes/Watson hook-up a bit too close to the surface. Still Eww.
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 10-06-2012, 01:34 PM
Khadaji Khadaji is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Southern Pennsylvania
Posts: 21,601
Yeah, I'm not loving it, but I'm not hating it. I do feel like they have strayed too far away from what makes Sherlock, Sherlock. I'll watch a few more, but so far I'm underwhelmed.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 10-06-2012, 02:31 PM
C K Dexter Haven C K Dexter Haven is offline
Right Hand of the Master
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Chicago north suburb
Posts: 15,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishman View Post
I like winning. What do I get?
Your name gets inscribed on the bronze plaque in my office headed "Litotes of Wonderment"... and you should be receiving an offer soon in email for a free case of Viagra.
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 10-06-2012, 06:17 PM
Johnny Q Johnny Q is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishman View Post



Something involving a woman, it appears, given Watson's deductions about his obvious intentional crassness.
I wouldn't be surprised if Irene Adler was involved in some way.
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 10-06-2012, 08:38 PM
well he's back well he's back is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
just popping in to say I'm very impressed with Jonny Lee Miller's acting. nice surprise. and I'm not finding Lucy Liu annoying as I thought I would. I'll keep watching

Last edited by well he's back; 10-06-2012 at 08:40 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 10-06-2012, 10:28 PM
RealityChuck RealityChuck is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Schenectady, NY, USA
Posts: 35,354
Not very impressive. The "revelation" was so blatantly obvious that Holmes seems like quite a dolt not to figure out that the woman's story in the group session was the answer immediately, but she kept talking and pounding home the point for everyone to get. It was far more House than Holmes.

The crime was unimaginative, too, and the cops were pretty stupid to insist that the neighbor was the killer for so long. There was a lot of handwaving, but there was plenty of reason to believe he didn't do the murder.

There is next to no chemistry between the leads, and Lucy Liu acts lobotomized. She's a great, fun actress, but has nothing to do and is so subdued as to be deadly dull.

This isn't my first pick for the night, or even the time slot, where the excellent Scandal is turning out to be the best dramatic show on network TV right now.
__________________
Author of Staroamer's Fate and Syron's Fate, now back in print.
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 10-07-2012, 07:03 PM
Alice The Goon Alice The Goon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Did anybody else watch this? I saw the premier last night. I liked it a lot, although I did find quite a bit of his deductions a bit far-fetched. But Johnny Lee Miller does have a good stage presence, I find him sexy, and I find the chemistry between him and Lucy Lui to be interesting. I will watch it again.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 10-07-2012, 07:45 PM
Ethilrist Ethilrist is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lantern View Post
With the right actors and writers I think the Sherlock Holmes concept could work in practically any setting. You could probably do a great Sherlock Holmes in King's Landing. You could do a Sherlock Holmes in the Stars Wars Universe. It's all about the execution so I would wait before making up my mind about this one. I rather like the idea of a female Watson. One of my all-time favorite films: His Girl Friday was a remake where a male character became female to great effect.
Heck, I remember reading a series of children's books which was Sherlock Holmes as a mouse, living in the walls of 10 Baker Street.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 10-07-2012, 08:47 PM
dropzone dropzone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
Posts: 22,761
Quote:
Originally Posted by dropzone View Post
I'll give "Elementary" a shot.
I gave it two shots. First was okay, second a snooze, and I've never had the appreciation for Lucy Liu's acting or, um, physical presence that others have.
Reply With Quote
  #121  
Old 10-07-2012, 08:52 PM
obfusciatrist obfusciatrist is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
I've had enough of the lead character. He was cool in House, grew a bit tiresome in Lie to Me and I find I'm over him in Elementary.
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 10-08-2012, 08:44 AM
ftg ftg is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Watched the 2nd episode, so I had to infer the backstory about drug rehab, needing a minder, etc.

Some good, some bad. Interesting-ish plot and all. But it kept falling into same-old-same-old stuff. E.g., the "outside expert" gets called in immediately on a seemingly routine case. Why does this keep happening? (Especially on shows involving the FBI where there is no obvious federal jurisdiction.) Wouldn't the NYPD do some basic investigation for a while before admitting they are stuck and then the Troubled Genius gets called in? I know, TG needs to be at the crime scene before they haul away the body, but at least give some sort of excuse for why this is a Special Crime worthy of needing the TG.

Holmes seems to take things at face value and not question obvious difficulties with those face values. Contrary to what his character should be.

Plus it had a "gotcha" solution. I.e., a key fact Holmes used to solve the case wasn't really available for the viewer to note. The rules of mysteries are that all the key puzzle pieces are known to the viewer/reader so they at least have a chance to guess at the solution.

The Holmes/Watson theme is largely irrelevant. They could have used other names and another instrument and had the same story. Clearly going with "Sherlock Holmes" just to grab viewers.

Oh, and they introduced a "new" stock character in this episode. The detective who is the opposite of Holmes but makes significant eye contact with Watson. Oh yeah, that's original.
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 10-08-2012, 12:00 PM
twickster twickster is offline
Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 38,055
Mod note

I've merged the overview thread with the threads for each of the first two episodes in an effort to reduce confusion about where to post.

twickster, not just an Elementary viewer but a Cafe Society moderator
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 10-08-2012, 12:02 PM
Leaper Leaper is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: In my own little world...
Posts: 9,135
Quote:
Originally Posted by ftg View Post
Plus it had a "gotcha" solution. I.e., a key fact Holmes used to solve the case wasn't really available for the viewer to note. The rules of mysteries are that all the key puzzle pieces are known to the viewer/reader so they at least have a chance to guess at the solution.
Thank you! God! I can't even look at 99% of the so-called "mystery" section of bookstores anymore because this has fallen by the wayside!

I'll stop now before I go into my full-fledged rant. Back to the topic at hand.
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 10-08-2012, 12:16 PM
simster simster is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 6,757
on the gotcha - if it were introduced fully early on - folks would complain it was too obvious - I don;t see a way for it to win.

Ultimlately, its not a mystery show - its a crime drama - if it were overly predictable, it would be boring - I am hoping they can psych it up enough to keep it interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 10-08-2012, 06:42 PM
GuanoLad GuanoLad is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Where the wild roses grow
Posts: 19,664
Perception has the exact same dynamic, but does it better, with more charismatic leads. I'll give Elementary one more episode, but I don't think it has much of a chance of winning me over.

Last edited by GuanoLad; 10-08-2012 at 06:42 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 10-08-2012, 07:03 PM
Tangent Tangent is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
See, I feel the opposite way. I didn't find either lead character in Perception very interesting, and I am a fan of Rachel Leigh Cook. I think Johnny Lee Miller and Lucy Liu have better chemistry.
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 10-08-2012, 07:18 PM
Ethilrist Ethilrist is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
I've certainly watched worse cop shows and enjoyed them. Plus, Lucy Liu is considerably hotter than I remember her being earlier in her career, but maybe I should get out more...
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 10-08-2012, 07:32 PM
Roadfood Roadfood is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
I gave it two episodes, now it's off my list. The characters are boring. Holmes and Watson just constantly bicker. Why do TV writers think that that's the only way that a male/female partnership can be? And the old saw where our hero is brilliant and always right, but the police are too dumb to ever accept what he says, has been done to death. Holmes' deductions are uninteresting. It's just another cop show straining really, really hard to be different, and failing.

ETA: "Perception" is far more interesting.

Last edited by Roadfood; 10-08-2012 at 07:33 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 10-08-2012, 07:40 PM
simster simster is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 6,757
re: Perception -

Truly if there was ever a show that had a singularly perfect single season - I think this is it - while I enjoyed the show and parts of it - the season finale nicely bookended it and they should leave it - we know he continues his work solving cases - and we have his full functional backstory.

They will just ruin it to keep it on the air - or so I fear - plus the gimick will now clearly be a gimick, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 10-08-2012, 07:49 PM
dropzone dropzone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
Posts: 22,761
I always disliked the ACD stories because he loved to use the gotcha, IIRC. At least that was my objection when I read them. He was no Agatha Christie.
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 10-09-2012, 09:08 AM
StarvingButStrong StarvingButStrong is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Hey, give him a break! The "rules" for classic mystery stories hadn't been worked out then.
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 10-09-2012, 11:27 AM
MaxTheVool MaxTheVool is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Posts: 8,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethilrist View Post
Heck, I remember reading a series of children's books which was Sherlock Holmes as a mouse, living in the walls of 10 Baker Street.
That would be Basil of Baker Street
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 10-19-2012, 04:16 PM
Irishman Irishman is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Watched episode 3. This one seemed creative to me, storywise. Spoilers.







I didn't anticipate the bad guy was the first abductee. They did it well, relying on Stockholm Syndrome without actually naming it by name, letting the audience infer while having the characters play guessing games. They gave us the same clues Sherlock got but did it sublely enough that it was easy to miss. I saw Sherlock looking at the window and remembered discussing cutting his hand but not the specific thing about "my room".

I also liked the element of finding the loophole in the Immunity agreement. The killer masterminded 6 abductions and 5 killings, but can only be prosecuted for the one abduction and killing that he did not do in concert with the other suspect, who was his own abductor. But he gets a bit of play back at Sherlock by stating that he was abducted and it's only one instance and he can work the jury.

One question I did have about that. My question is a legal question. Is there a way to mention the immunity deal and the conditions of his actual involvement in the sentencing phase? I don't think they can mention it during the trial itself, because it would be prejudicial. "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, we're persuing one count of kidnapping, and first degree murder. But just so you know, the accused has an immunity deal to cover his involvement in 5 other abduction cases where he worked in concert with another man, so just keep that in mind." But at the same time, once they convict and it moves to determining punishment, can't they bring that up as a condition for consideration?

My thinking is that the defendant will try to bring up his state of mind and condition of having been abducted as mitigating factors, he was "brainwashed", etc. Is it possible for the state to call in Sherlock as a witness to refute those claims? To present the rest of the circumstances? Or is that verboten because it is additional material not in evidence from the trial?


Quote:
Originally Posted by ftg View Post
Plus it had a "gotcha" solution. I.e., a key fact Holmes used to solve the case wasn't really available for the viewer to note. The rules of mysteries are that all the key puzzle pieces are known to the viewer/reader so they at least have a chance to guess at the solution.
What was the info not available to the viewers? They showed us the doctor at the hospital, they mentioned that she had told her sister she had a boyfriend that was a doctor, they showed us the coma was real as a misdirect, but Sherlock had his insight when another woman was talking about her own life and using her doctor boyfriend. (That was a rather House moment.) They gave us the scene in the hospital room where Sherlock has his rant after ensuring the doctor was in the room.

They have a really tough challenge of giving the clues but keeping them subtle and giving enough misdirects to keep the mystery.

I liked the third episode better, but I'm concerned by the preview for next episode. The plot involves apparently Sherlock being abducted and Watson and the cops having to find him. That the writers have jumped to such a stock plot, and so early in their series run to boot, it does not speak well of their ability to have creative mysteries. This is usually reserved for, at the earliest, the season finale, to create that extra tension. Doing it right out of the gate is pretty lame, for such a heavy cliche.
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 10-19-2012, 05:06 PM
jackdavinci jackdavinci is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
I generally liked the episode but the gotcha was severely flawed. All he has to do was claim that the kidnapping was orchestrated by Balloon guy and simply carried out by him. That is just as much "in concert with".

I was also irritated by Sherlock pronouncing it "in consort with".
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 10-19-2012, 07:00 PM
Edward The Head Edward The Head is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Somewhere in time
Posts: 5,743
I liked the mystery well enough, but og Holmes and Watson do not get along like I think they should. He's too much of a prick to her. I actually don't have a problem with female Watson like I thought I might, but I don't like their interactions. I think I'll keep it on the DVR for now.
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 10-20-2012, 03:21 PM
Misnomer Misnomer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 6,834
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackdavinci View Post
I was also irritated by Sherlock pronouncing it "in consort with".
I just watched the episode a couple of hours ago, and thought the word he was using actually *was* "consort."

Consorting with someone and acting in concert with someone are not the same thing. It never occurred to me that he might have been saying "concert."
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 10-20-2012, 04:33 PM
Ethilrist Ethilrist is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Okay, having him pull clues and tidbits out of thin air is getting to be irritating.

Lucy Liu still gorgeous, so I'll keep watching. And, when he pointed the knife at her, I totally wanted her to go all Charlie's Angel on his ass.
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 10-20-2012, 05:17 PM
Terminus Est Terminus Est is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The tropics
Posts: 5,091
I rather liked this last episode. The psychopath kid was rather chillingly and effectively portrayed. For a moment, I thought they were setting him up to be some sort of Moriarty (i.e., an continuing villain). Given the clues with the bad back and the wording of the immunity agreement, I figured out how Holmes would be able to get the kid for at least one murder; props to the writer for giving the audience that at least.
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 10-26-2012, 02:37 AM
Snooooopy Snooooopy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Jacksonville, N.C.
Posts: 9,836
That's interesting. I didn't actually know that eating heroin was a viable option. I guess I figured it'd get all chopped up by stomach acids. I kind of wonder what it tastes like.
Reply With Quote
  #141  
Old 10-26-2012, 03:43 AM
well he's back well he's back is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
I'm still really enjoying Jonny Lee Miller , He's very good.
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 10-26-2012, 04:09 AM
running piglet cheese running piglet cheese is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
I don't like that Lucy's character always assumes that Sherlock has or will regress into drugs. She would be very irritating to me if she were my "valet". And blabbing to the police detective was a little premature IMO.

I loved that he refused to dig his own grave. I've always wondered why more people in movies/shows don't refuse. Was caught off guard at the murderer's identity, thought maybe the head guy faked his hospital stay somehow.

Aaron was a douche. Who gets upset for someone checking you out online in this day and age? Too many creeps out there. Don't know if I want him to come around or not.
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 10-26-2012, 07:58 AM
D_Odds D_Odds is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Queens
Posts: 10,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snooooopy View Post
That's interesting. I didn't actually know that eating heroin was a viable option. I guess I figured it'd get all chopped up by stomach acids. I kind of wonder what it tastes like.
I have no idea whether or not eating heroin is a viable option, but I wouldn't trust a TV show's take on the subject (unless it is Mythbusters, and I really doubt they'll take this one on).
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 10-26-2012, 01:04 PM
Irishman Irishman is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
This episode had some good parts and not so good parts. Like I said, it seems desperate to have the "hero gets kidnapped" story so early in the flow, but the whole episode wasn't wrapped up in that. And there was at least a neat use of the story. I love how the criminal trapped Sherlock by using his ego and desire to show off against him. "You were so eager to tell me that you figured it out that you followed me alone into an empty parking garage." Taze.

Used the Taser= tranquilizer gambit. *sigh*

I spotted both that the boss would be the one who looked guilty, and that it was actually the secretary, before those were revealed. The boss when Sherlock was doing the rundown on the board naming the prior deaths, and then immediately after the boss said it, I knew it wasn't him, and knew it was the secretary.

I agree that Watson went to the cops way too soon, and blabbed about his history way too soon. She thought he relapsed, not that he'd been abducted by a serial killer.

I did like that Gregson already knew Holmes' secrets, and was respecting his privacy.

I didn't figure out the stuff with Aaron, the date guy, didn't peg to his lie, but did spot her rebuff of the kiss. But I did know when he was married that there would be some convoluted explanation for it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by running piglet cheese
Aaron was a douche. Who gets upset for someone checking you out online in this day and age? Too many creeps out there. Don't know if I want him to come around or not.
I think the reason he was upset was not that she ran an online check, but she spotted he was lying. That ability to catch you in your deceits is something you want them to have to learn/earn, if ever. White lies happen, things you don't want to get into or avoid, and you'd rather get to them on your own terms than have them spotted and the issue forced.

But I doubt Aaron will be back. He was a one-off plot point. He blew her off, and she stated she wasn't really looking for a boyfriend.

Last edited by Irishman; 10-26-2012 at 01:05 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 10-28-2012, 10:24 PM
Ethilrist Ethilrist is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
I wonder if they're going to keep using the timing of hospital stays to establish alibis or guilt? Because two times in a row is one too many.

And for a guy stocking his love shack with food, that was way too much food. He had like a week's worth of food there, and he'd have to be eating dinner there all the time. He'd need to worry a lot more about salad that's gone bad than salad with peanut oil in it.

And I really really liked that, at the end, he was practicing picking handcuffs with his hands behind his back. "Must do this faster next time..."
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 10-28-2012, 11:49 PM
StarvingButStrong StarvingButStrong is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
And peanut allergies are to the PROTEINS in peanuts. Peanut oil should be perfectly safe to eat. Or rub on your skin. Or whatever.
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 10-29-2012, 12:33 AM
Tangent Tangent is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
^Really? I've always heard people with peanut allergies saying they had to avoid anything cooked in peanut oil.
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 11-09-2012, 09:31 AM
twickster twickster is offline
Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 38,055
Question about last night's show -- the sweetener in the gas tank. Wouldn't it have dissolved? I'll admit I have never thought much about the sugar-in-a-gas-tank "prank," but what thought I've given it involved the sugar dissolving.

Also, even if it didn't dissolve, would there be enough left to be found on the beach? Aren't we talking maybe a cup or two of sugar? or whatever sugarlike substance it was? Or do you have to fill the tank? How do you fill the tank if there's gas in there?
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 11-09-2012, 09:37 AM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by twickster View Post
Question about last night's show -- the sweetener in the gas tank. Wouldn't it have dissolved? I'll admit I have never thought much about the sugar-in-a-gas-tank "prank," but what thought I've given it involved the sugar dissolving.

Also, even if it didn't dissolve, would there be enough left to be found on the beach? Aren't we talking maybe a cup or two of sugar? or whatever sugarlike substance it was? Or do you have to fill the tank? How do you fill the tank if there's gas in there?
Wasn't it sand in the gas tank?
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 11-09-2012, 09:43 AM
running piglet cheese running piglet cheese is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Yeah, twickster. That confused me too. They showed the sugar in the tank as this muddy residue, but the sugar on the beach was crystalline like real sugar/sand.

Watson is really bugging me. She acts more like a bitchy wife than a concerned healthcare worker. That guilt trip/pouty act of hers would totally turn me off to open up to her and I like talking about my feelings. And then, when Sherlock opens up in his limited way, she continues to complain and bitch that it's not enough. Try a little empathy and trust, woman!

I personally liked the prank he pulled on her. She deserved it. And as he said, "You should have trusted me."

This week's story was too convoluted for me. It started off nicely unconventionally, but then went totally into bizzaro land. Still like the characters though.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.