What do people think of the second season of Elementary? I’m enjoying it a fair bit, overall, but I feel like it walks a fine line between its mysteries being intricate and interesting; and being ludicrous and silly. A few times I think it’s really stumbled over that line, particularly this week’s episode (with the bite marks and dentures). 4 or 5 episodes back there was one with a paleontologist committing murder and destroying a unique fossil because it MIGHT provide evidence to challenge a theory of dinosaur extinction that he championed. Umm, yeah.
All of that said, I think the writing, acting, and production values are generally excellent. I really enjoy Holmes and Watson… it’s a unique and distinctive take on the Sherlock Holmes mythology. It’s not as stylized and flashy as Sherlock on the BBC, but it’s more grounded and believable.
Thoughts?
I’m enjoying it well enough, but it lacks a story arc. There was a little something with his brother, but IMO they should be pushing that forward, even if just a hair, every episode.
Yea, the animal cast members are the unsung heroes of the series. Clyde nails every scene he’s in.
The second season has been dragging in the second half, IHMO. The writers seem weirdly focused on giving Watson a different dark back-story every week, none of which have been particularly interesting, and trying to shoehorn them into the mystery of the week have made the already kinda ludicrous mysteries even more hard to swallow.
I think it’d be more fun if they just have Watson be an ex-Doctor that likes to solve crimes. She doesn’t need to be haunted by the ghost of her schizo-dad one week, her druggy boy friend the next, or her possible murdering surgery teacher the week after that.
But other then the Watson stuff, the shows remains fun.
I actually like that. As an older viewer, I remember when you didn’t have to have an overarching story. You could just have episodes. The current trend of HAVING to have a story arc, whether the show needs one or not (see: Beckett’s mother arc in Castle) I feel can limit a show. I’m glad Elementary doesn’t have one (or at least, they don’t seem to. Depends on what is going on with Mycroft.).
I enjoy the show as entertainment that doesn’t require my full focus. It’s a crime procedural with generally good performances, likable characters, amusing dialogue, and not completely awful cases of the week, great for having on while I relax browsing the internet or such.
What holds it back most, in my opinion, is that the writers just seem kinda lazy with their research and willingness to go along with the commonly accepted cliches of criminal investigation. I’m happy to go along with Holmes’ deductions even when they strain credulity because they’re usually interesting and the whole appeal of the character is that he’s preternaturally good and noticing such things. But when all the characters treat polygraph tests as if they’re actually meaningful barometers of truth instead of tricks to get gullible criminals to confess, well, that just reminds me that I’m watching somewhat hacky TV writing. The fact that every case has to be about at least one murder also reminds me that I’m watching generic crime procedural plotting.
Basically, I’ve been enjoying it enough for what it is, but it’s disappointing in that it feels like it could be a lot more.
I’m still really liking it, really liked the whole Bell arc so far (up to: his rejoining party/coffee with Sherlock thing - we’re a few episodes behind). Just had to groan at “Hound of the Cancervilles” though. Boo! Hiss!
The Mycroft storyline would be cool to pick up again. I’m sort of assuming it was something like MI5 or something he was talking to, before, not their Dad, based on what he said. Also not likely to have been Moriarty. Anyone have any other ideas?
I’m still enjoying it, but it’s unfortunately gotten to the “Which non-suspect character will actually turn out to be the murderer?” guessing-game point. Which they’re apparently intentionally subverting - don’t tell me we weren’t supposed to assume the dental assistant was the murderer the instant he was introduced. But yeah, bring back the Mycroft story line.
The biggest thing I’ve noticed about this show is that it’s really not a procedural at all. It’s more like a character study of Holmes, Watson and a few others, and they just happen to solve crimes in between growing as people.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that - I think the four leading actors of the show do well with what they’re given, and I’ve enjoyed watching the show since the first episode.
But I will never think this is going to be a “solve the mystery before they do onscreen” show like so many of the police/detective shows that have been in the past.
That’s absolutely true - they’ll often/usually introduce new information during the reveal, (like the ear episode) that would have been absolutely vital to solving the mystery.
I’m an (somewhat) older viewer too, so that’s not the delineation. First show I can remember with a story arc was the anime Star Blazers back when I was still in single digits (1974). I felt that made it so much better than every other show I was watching (pre-cable, single digit age) at the time. Chalk it up to personal taste rather than age.
I don’t need an overarching story that dominates every episode, like Lost. Just a little tidbit that pushes towards a climax at the end of the season. The first season had Moriarty - many stand-alone episodes interspersed with story arc episodes often enough to keep one focused on the big bad (similar to early seasons of The X-Files). This season has…Mycroft? Sherlock’s father? Maybe? I don’t know.