All right guys, here I am, late to the party as ever. But my Season 2 has only recently arrived.
I will go on without spoiler tags, so if you haven't seen Season 2, don't bother!!!
Season 2 was even better than Season 1, which is quite an achievement. That's not to say that the Moffat-Gattissesque exaggeration did not apply, and the plotholes were even greater this time. "
Reichenbach Falls" had the best scenes and the greatest plot (Sherlock in court was THE BOMB), but also plotholes the size of England. These two guys NEED an army of script evaluators to tell them what just plain doesn't work!!! Instead, they run completely free. During production, no one has asked them: Why indeed did that girl cry when she saw Sherlock? How can a "genius" assume that computer programs, even the smallest, could be communicated by beating on wood (Moriarty wouldn't have been able to keep the rhythm - let alone arrive at one kilobyte of information in those five minutes AND drink that tea

)? If the uber-villain commits suicide out of boredom, wouldn't the viewer do the same thing? The finale setup also just doesn't work.
So although the best scenes are in Reichenbach, I actually liked Belgravia much better. Its ending was a massive exaggeration given Holmes' not exactly impressive infiltration techniques (I'm sure terrorists do not accept Mycroft's ID). But the psychology that was presented made sense to me, shed a lot of light on Sherlock's character without ruining the emotional ice-block that he is. If love works for that character, then like this. I hope Adler will return in one of the next three movies - but only one, please.
Watson was a bit underrepresented, though. The only real focus on the character in Season 2 was in Baskerville. John Watson "pulling rank", that was hilarious. Also, he could investigate a bit himself in that film. In the other episodes, he suffers from the "loyal companion" problem. His relationships fail because of Sherlock, he is always there for him, Watson is the blog writer, the go-between for the Holmes' brothers. That de-characterises him a bit, I feel. A little more focus on Watson's actual relationships - with his sister, for example - and at least a reference to his actual psychological problem of Season 1, the addiction to the thrill of the fight, would have been touches to get Watson through this series better.
The character that really gained in S2 was Mrs. Hudson. While she looked like an innocent, shocked bystander/old lady stereotype in Season 1, we feel that she is actually Sherlock's accomplice in Season 2. And Sherlock does love her somewhat; insults her regularly, but would never bear that someone else also insults her. Telling us that without her, England would fall. And when she gets tortured, Sherlock wants serious revenge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FitzoliverJ
What? Sherlock Holmes never dies, except in inferior pastiches.
|
Conan Doyle would have sighed at this. Oh, how hard he tried to kill Sherlock in Reichenbach so he could write more historical novels! But the public wouldn't let him. Ohhhh no.