For years I’ve heard Brits and Yurpeens laugh at how Puritanical we Yanks can be regarding our television viewing, so I was expecting rather more, given its controversy, than what was seen in Sherlock’s season/series premier: A Scandal in Belgravia.
Really? I mean, REALLY? More is shown on an ad here for a body wash that is shown at all hours of the day, yet you thought you’d dumped all your Puritans on us hundreds of years ago? REALLY?!?
edit: Nevermind, I’m an idiot.
Somebody help me out - is the second season/series of the BC present day Sherlock now being shown in the USA?
Maybe not, but one has his ways. 
Magical pixies came and placed it on you hard drive, huh? It’s been known to happen.
Oh, I don’t think any of us were under the impression that all the puritans had decamped to the Americas – they did raise an army of jackbooted skin-heads and take over the country, after all. We tend to notice that sort of behaviour.
The “controversy” over Sherlock is just the latest round in the popular press’s favourite game of “Bash the Beeb”. Around 10 million people watched the programme, and the BBC received no complaints. The Daily Malice ran an article about how shocking it was (amply illustrated by stills from the show, so that those who’d missed it could have a decent chance of being offended), following which the BBC received about 100 complaints – presumably from people who either hadn’t seen the programme, or hadn’t realised they should be shocked until the papers told them to.
The answer is that there was very little real controversy, it was pretty much cooked up by the Daily Mail which is a disgusting hypocritical shit-rag of the highest order that likes to fabricate outrage like this rather than than report on real news. Notice how they use the story as an excuse to reproduce stills from the “offending” scenes for the pandered minority to tut over in case they didn’t get to see them the first time. At the time of broadcast there were something like 100 complaints from 10 million viewers. It was nothing.
edit: Yeah, pretty much what WotNot snuck in before me and said there
I’ve not watched the series, but the watershed in the Uk is an attempt to make sure that television pre 9pm is viewable by children, and afterwards, its allowed to be pretty adult (real swearing, nudity etc).
If anything, in recent times theres been a push to shift the watershed later, programmes on after 9pm regularly are beeped for swearing, which annoys the hell out of me. So if anything, its got more conservative.
Also in the uk there seems to be rise of people ‘overly offended about everything’, often complaining about things they haven’t even see (recent Jeremy Clarkson joke on One show being a classic example). So I’d not call it puritanism, more ‘complainers without a cause’ (“What are you annoyed about?” “What have you got?”)
It’s nothing to do with actual controversy over what was on screen, and only to do with the Daily Fail’s routine attacks on the BBC. The Daily Fail hates the Beeb with every fibre of its being, and will never stop manufacturing stories to discredit and attack it.
It was an episode which broke the mould, one of the best I have seen for a long long time and I really doubt anyone was offended at the time of watching, they were too busy being blown away.
Typical Moffatt, nudity was entirely unnecessary to the storyline but he couldn’t help himself anyway. Ditto Buck House, and so much else.
If Dr Who is kids tv that some adluts can relate to, this is then teenagers version.
The actress shot the role in the nude, but well-placed knees & elbows hid any naughty bits from our eyes. I also enjoyed the cheeky scene of Sherlock in the Palace. However, the scene with the riding crop was really the most erotic…
Necessary? Nope, but quite tasty bits on top of a story that will be worth watching again. After I get my BluRays & can stop poaching via Tunnelbear…
In Canada…
Perhaps you haven’t seen it? The nudity is, in fact, part of the plot. It is the opposite of gratuitous, both in taste and necessity.
The Palace and some other locations not withstanding, has anyone else noticed how absolutely appalling the decorating is? Especially every square inch of 221 Baker St. Has Mrs Hudson not been told of how to strip wallpaper since 1972?
FTR, I love this version of her. Gets deeper into why she doesn’t toss Holmes out on the street.
So like, Austin Powers?
They do stuff like that on American TV, as long as you don’t see the actual nips or pubes, no one seems to care.
Mere nudity was only part of the story – there was prostitution, lesbianism, and sado-masochism, as well. :eek:
And people pretty much expect a Sherlock Holmes story shown before the family-friendly cut-off to be a bit more conventional. :dubious:
But even if you are OK with all that, there was still something to be outraged over. 
In the original story, Irene Adler bests Holmes, and he admires her ever after for it. 
In THIS version – he bests her, destroying not just kiddies’ innocence, but also the story’s iconic, enduring sub-text. :mad:
Remind me?
Should probably spoiler-box this stuff. But in anycase, there isn’t any “the story” here, the new Sherlock series takes some elements from the Doyle stories, but they aren’t really pretending to be re-tellings of the stories the episodes are named after.
Also, I don’t really care about what the BBC shows or doesn’t at what hour, but there were some raised eyebrows in the Cafe Society thread on the episode by our British Dopers, so apparently the episode was noticeably more raunchy then is usual at that timeslot. It wasn’t purely made up by the tabloids.
With pictures, so you can get outraged all over again?