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.
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.
Merged an overview thread and two different episode threads into a single thread for the whole season.
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
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. 
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.
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.
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.
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…
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.
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.
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.
Hey, give him a break! The “rules” for classic mystery stories hadn’t been worked out then.
That would be Basil of Baker Street
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?
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.
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”.
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.
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.”
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.
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.