'An Unnatural Arrangement' - Season 2 Episode 6 of Elementary - A review

Every one had plenty to do in this episode, even Gregson and Bell.
The episode opens with Holmes and Watson at the police departments holding cell. Instead of a morgue this time, Holmes is using the holding cell to further Watson's observation and deductive skills. (I wanted to know about the Yorkies!)
While there, Watson is asked to help investigate a case an officer is having trouble solving involving robbed falafel sellers. Eventually Holmes solves the case without talking to Watson first, causing a minor rift between the two. (At least, it turns out,  Holmes was not sleeping with the falafel dealers, right Snarky Tour Guide?)
The episode then moves to a scene of a woman coming home to find a killer in her house. She escapes her killer, wounds him in the process and calls the police as he flees. We come to find out she is Detective Gregson's estranged wife. Apparently the killer was out to get her husband, which we soon find out is not the case. The case soon involves antiques, army buddies and murder.

Although this episode lacks deductive investigations to the degree most of us Sherlockians would like, I think it was a very well acted episode, involving all the key players to a degree that had not happened yet.
One of the problems this show is always going to have is that what we have come to expect as Holmes' gift and talents; his observational skills and deductive powers, are now common procedures we see in most police procedural's and it is going to be hard for the writers to come up with believable and amazing things for Holmes to catch.  (Not that they shouldn't keep trying!) Any show like CSI , Bones or The Mentalist are now using coroners and crime scene investigators, and dare I say it, consultants in a way that was sort of developed and invented by Holmes (Doyle).
It will be hard for any writer to give a modern Holmes something that has not been done. Sherlock is getting away with it by;
One, not having as many episodes.
Two, covering up the cases with off-the-wall personalities and quirky over the top performances.
And three, making the cases more psychological  than criminal.
Four, Benedict Cumberbatch
Just my opinion. (But I still love the show).

But now, back to Elementary.

Canonical connections I found were;

- Holmes' comment on the human condition being found in the holding cell is kinda of reflective of Holmes comments in the books about flying over London and lifting off the roofs and peering inside.
- Holmes' comment on Watson helping on cases the cops are stuck on
- Holmes observations about Gregson's wife perhaps no longer loving him by his (Gregson's) habits being different than they once were. This comes from BLUE. (She gets a dog, instead of a goose!)
- Watson coming up with the wrong answers looking at the same clues as Holmes
- wounds and tan marks indicating a deployment to Afghanistan (We were wondering how they would get that one in when not having Watson there.)
- of course, the curious incident of the dog in the night
- reference to unsolved cases
-and when Holmes brings out the trunk at the end and gives it to Watson reminds me of this image in MUSG
And although he doesn't say they are unsolved, he does state they are his older cases before Watson came along.

(What a great image! Look how youthful they look.)

I hope I missed some more that buddy2blogger or someone else will point out.







In this episode we once again see a Holmes that is becoming, thanks to Watson, more 'human'. A softer Holmes who is more aware of his affect on other people, but still not sure how best to handle it.
Watson is still holding her ground, but also notices the change in Holmes. I am liking the more 'human' Holmes.

Another thing I think Elementary is doing well, is filling in the gap in Watson's life from the time she fell from grace as a doctor until the time she either goes back to doctoring or completely becomes his partner.
In the canon, again because of the format of one case, one story, Watson does not need to explain to us what he does, other than going to his club and betting, when not involved with Holmes. Eventually, in the Canon, Watson goes back to work and gets married and we can better imagine what takes place in his life between cases. But for the first few years, we get little detail. (Even in the Brett series, we see little of Watson's life out side of Baker St.)
At the end of two years of Elementary the show will have covered almost as many cases as appeared in written form, and as viewers, we expect more back story and growth from the characters.
With that said, the show may not be filling the gaps in Watson life the way we would like, but they are filling in the gaps. Again, Playing the Game.

Both Gregson and Bell have become a little deeper, especially Gregson in this episode. And I think that makes the show more appealing.

I liked this episode, so, out of a possible five, in am again giving it.

If my mind had anything to say about it - an essay

Which actor best portrays Sherlock Holmes? Stating the obvious, that depends on who you ask. And until science makes it possible for us to clone parts from all our favorites, it will probably always remain so. And even then, we would probably all pick different parts. (And we could let the BSB's have first pick of some of the left overs, if you know what I mean.)

On a recent post, James made a comment about Brett that I found rather interesting.

He said,"The problem with Brett is great performance calls attention to itself." and he added, and I am not sure if this was about his Brett comment, or all Sherlockian actors, "It is rare that I feel like I am watching Holmes. Most of the time I feel like I am watching an actor make interesting choices in how to interpret Doyle's character."

And as with many of James comments, it got me thinking. ( I know, . . but I'll be alright).

Our minds are such that when we read a book, any book, we form images of what is written. Whether it is dialog or scene description, some parts of what we have seen some where else starts filling in those descriptive words. Many sort of images form those pictures. Illustrations we have seen. Photos. Things we have experienced in the real world. Even if the book is a mundane mathematical book, well at least mundane to me (and usually way over my head), we form some picture in our mind as to how it would appear if it were presented to us, not in written form, but as if it were in front of us. Whether that math problem be displayed  on a caulk board, computer screen or tablet, or piece of paper, our mind picks some way to display it to form an image unlike how anyone else would display it and one we are comfortable and perhaps familiar with.

Surely, again maybe stating the obvious, the same should be said for Sherlock Holmes. 

For many of the early readers who first experienced Holmes from early illustrations by likes D.H.Friston or Sidney Paget, those drawing played a big part in how they saw Holmes.

For Americans we could also add F.D. Steele to that list of image makers.

And than along came actors portraying Holmes on stage and screen and for the next hundred plus years we have had many images to chose from. And depending on who you saw first, or who had the greatest impact or presence we all end up with 'our' image of Holmes.

And for the most part, no matter who we accept, none of them are quite perfect. Everyone one of them have something that is just not quite Holmes. Except, maybe, Brett. Just my opinion.

Let me explain, please.

My first Holmes was Rathbone, and still is one of my favorites. The only thing that spoils Rathbone for me, is the material he had to work with and the Watson they gave him. As with Brett, there probably is a big crowd of people out there that wishes, somewhere in time, that both Brett and Rathbone are being allowed to do a complete series of all the canonical stories, just the way they were written.

I have not seen all the Rathbone Holmes movies. Like James, I like my Holmes in Victorian England. So I have never been comfortable watching him chase Nazi's. I don't want Holmes, until very late in his life, to be driven around in a car.

But with that said, Rathbone had a strong enough presence for me to fill, for many years, my minds image of Holmes when I read the stories. And still competes with Brett, sometimes winning, for that roll still.

But Brett for me was the first actor that made me take a look at the kindness and humor that could be Sherlock Holmes. And his portrayal  even made me notice it more in the books, or at least chose to interpret it that way.

What I found interesting about James' comments, "The problem with Brett is great performance calls attention to itself.", is that I had never looked at it that way, and I can now see why he feels like that.

To say the least, Brett could at any time be reserved as Holmes or flamboyant, all within the same scene.

He could be mocking and uninterested. But behind it all, I always sensed a little twinkle in his eye, suggesting, as Holmes, he knew the effect he (Holmes) was having on people around him.

Addressing James' comment, I think Bretts performance of Holmes was one of the first times we saw a really animated Holmes. A Holmes personality that was acted out, and not just a personality described on a page.

I think in other actors we saw a possibility of that, but never a complete creation.

There have been other actors who I have enjoyed in Holmes shows or movies, but none of the others have taken over, for me, the image that plays when I read the books. And I think that is how a performance, portrayal or image should be judged. When you read the stories, who comes to mind? Is it a Paget or Steele drawing, or is it some actor? Or have you created someone completely yours?

RDJ, although a great actor, I don't think will form many peoples mental image of Holmes. (Although Law will probably be debated about as Watson, for good reason.)

Same goes for Jonny Lee Miller. As much as I am having fun with 'Elementary' and Playing the Game, Miller will never be Holmes.

We could also argue about how good Peter Cushing was for many years as Holmes..

I love Benedict Cumberbatch as Sherlock, but wonder, and fear, if the writing, the time period, the slapstick, and the irreverence will only leave him represented as 'Sherlock' and not Sherlock Holmes. And since we will never see him in a period Holmes piece, we may never know. (And I love all his other work also, so as not to be seen as picking on 'Sherlock')

Time has probably eroded many great former Holmes actors from filling the modern viewers (readers) image of Holmes, and that is to bad.

But, for now, Brett forms most of my image.

James, who forms, for you, the image of Holmes? Is he any one actor or image you have seen, or is he wholly of your own creation? Which ever it is, I am sure it is great.

And thanks for making me think about it.

Seven Degrees of Sherlock Holmes - #26 - Ken Berry, also a Disney Connection again.

Song and dance man who came along a little after the big song and dance movies, so his talent was never really appreciated as much as it could have been. But none-the-less, he has done all right for himself.

Ken Berry - 1933 - of 'F' Troop fame

was a regular in the short run series about WW2, "Twelve O'clock High" - 1964-1967

starred actor Robert Lansing - (1928 - 1994)

who also starred the another short run TV show - 'The Man Who Never Was' - 1966

which also featured Murray Hamilton - (1923 - 1972)

who took part in the James Garner film, 'Darby's Rangers' - 1958

which also featured the well connected Sherlock Holmes actor, Reginald Owen - (1889 - 1972)

who we know played Watson in 1932 and Holmes in 1933

So there you have it,. . . . wait!

Or we could just link Ken to Leonard Nimoy (1931)

who did a national tour as Sherlock Holmes in the 1970's

under who Ken Berry served, in the early 50's, while in the Special Services Corp while in the army.

• Ken Berry (1953–1955), dancer, actor, singer, was in the Artillery and Special Services divisions at the close of the Korean War. Rank of corporal.
• .
• Leonard Nimoy, actor, writer, film director, poet, musician, and photographer was in the Special Services division and was sergeant over Corporal Ken Berry.

source, wikipedia.

Now,. . . So there you have it, there you are.

Four generations. First time since Sherlock Holmes was around.

Four Generations

Elementary Episode #5 - Season 2 - 'Ancient History'

Those critics who were finding Watson's (over?)involvement in the solutions of the cases should be somewhat silenced a bit by this episode. Although still well involved with case and story line, Holmes did the brunt of the work.
Lots of twists and turns in this episode, and I found the ending a little disappointing. I did however like the episode, with only a few minor distractions.

Holmes is short on meaningful work, and is not interested, seemingly, in a case Watson brings him.
His connections at the morgue allow him to check out bodies for crimes maybe missed by the authorities.
He finds an accident victim who has injuries unrelated to the accident and decides to investigate.
The victim turns out to be an ex-hitman who's method of killing was garroting, deduced from the injuries on his hands.
The story then goes from murder to self-defense and involvement with the Russian mob.

The canonical connections I found were;

- Of course, the use of bee's again.
- Holmes finding some cases beneath his abilities
- Holmes becomes a recluse and a homebody, with dark moods when not involved with a case
- a long time between cases
- his ability to be tender towards the opposite sex when the need requires it.
- Deducing that the truck had not moved because there were no tracks after a recent rain storm
- his comments about his abilities being superior to the police's (Marshall's)
- his knowledge of tobacco
- a reference to authorities missing clues that may otherwise indicate a crime
(an addition) - buddy2blogger made some great points about VALL

I think there were some nods to BRUC in that the injuries of the accident masked the crime.
I am still working on a SECO connection, it just isn't coming together yet. Maybe having someone's past play a part in the crime. But that happens in several cases.

Although I found the ex-prostitute killing her ex-hitman husband to avoid losing her elder-care business sort of a weak ending (probably because it seemed the actress did such a good job of playing innocent), but if you look at SECO and other cases, avoiding a scandal about ones past is a common theme. But then again, why involve people who ruined your life in the murder of your husband. Arguable points all.
I didn't buy the repentant hit-man line much either, to Road to Perdition for me. But if nothing else, just like in the Canon, we find a case is sometimes much more mundane in it's conclusion that we might expect, or even hope for. Of course in BLAC, we found a former criminal turned good accused of a crime he did not commit.

Although I think the sex part with the best friend was played for humor, it does sometimes seem like Miller's Holmes has a new addiction.

I am hoping they will continue with Watson starting to write down the cases, which they left out this week.

I also think they found a good balance for Watson's involvement in this episode.

I did however enjoy the show, and for that reason I again give it . .

out of five.

An important number!

'We are delighted to have you as a Charter Member. You are our 100^th' 

From the John H. Watson society

Seven Degrees of Sherlock Holmes - #25 - Disney version - James MacArthur

Since we took a break at Disney for the week, it seemed only right. . . . 

One of my favorite Disney actors and Hawaii Five-0's 'Dano' James MacArthur - 1937-2010

was in Disney's 1958 Light in the Forest - 

which also featured Disney alumni Fess Parker - 1924 - 2010

who also participated in 1952's Springfield Rifle - 

which the great Lon Chaney Jr.1906 - 1973

who also took part in 1952's The Black Castle

Which starred 1939's Sir Henry Baskerville Richard Greene -

There you have it, there you are.

Here are my comments to Starky Tour Guides rant about PBS. . . since he hasn't accepted my comments for a while.

'You probably hate puppies and kittens also.
Why blame PBS for providing something people want?
Why not blame BBC America for not providing it sooner?
Yea, it sucks to have to wait, but isn't that someone else's fault, not PBS? You think they own that big of a share in the production?

Well, at least we have Elementary till then.'

Elementary Season #2 - episode #4 - 'Poison Pen' - a review

Just returning late last night from vacation and trying to get back into the swing of things, Holmeswise.

The past comes back, in a way, to haunt Holmes.
When becoming involved with a new murder, Holmes comes across someone from his past.
What turns out to be a possible return of a past murderer soon turns into copy cat killing.

I thought it was a very good story and well acted with some good twists. And, I find surprising, I was a little more comfortable with Watson's involvement, which I will go into more in a bit.

The connections I found were these;

- Tracking down the make of clothes to where they were made. (Holmes often uses a persons clothing to solve crimes or identify where someone works.)
- Deep knowledge of past criminals and cases.
- Knowledge of poisons and how they mix with other liquids.
- A connection to what got Holmes started on his life of fighting crime as in Gloria Scott. ( It is interesting to note, depending on the year you believe GLOR took place, that Holmes was the same age when introduced to his career, 15. )
- His boxing ability.

I think this episode was a step up from the last couple and I did enjoy the twists and turns.
I think the time restraints don't allow for some of the development I would love to see take place, but that can't be helped.

What I am however finding interesting; some of the biggest complaints about the show, from some reviewers, especially Starky Tour Guide, is that the show is filling in many of the things, in the writers opinions, that Sherlockians have made their reputation on. In other words Playing the game.
While not all well regarded, and those not so well regarded, have not made there name on playing the game, many have and still do.

Part of playing the game is about coming up with explanations for Holmes and Watson's behavior and personalities and filling in detail about their past. And many noted Sherlockians have made their Sherlockian reputations by doing just that.

So, although we may not like how the writers in Elementary are playing the game, I think they are at least being faithful to the game. I think in this episode with the connections to GLOR, they did a pretty good job. They not only brought in the modern theme of bullying and how it can affect ones life, but also how it has changed over time and why Holmes may have developed an interest in the martial arts.
As we are aware, conditions especially in British boarding schools were probably pretty hard on any one that was a little different and out of the norm.
I don't understand how some people can find high Sherlockian Scholarship in BSB's discussion of their Sherlockian fetishes while finding fault in the flaws of Holmes as done in Elementary. While we all may find some of the traits not to our liking in the TV Show, they are, after all, just Playing the Game.

As to Watson and why her continual increase in involvement doesn't bother me as much as it once did;
I think if Watson doesn't become more involved the show would have a tendency to be 'dumbing' down the character. We all believe Watson to be smarter than the one played by Nigel Bruce, but do we also only want Watson to be capable only of a certain amount of growth. If we assume Watson is not going to pick up much by working with Holmes, then are we not assuming she is not as smart as we would like to think? "You know my methods Watson! Use them."
 We can't have it both ways. Canonically, Watson as just a biographer worked wonderfully because he could frame the stories in such a way as to make Holmes appear to be that much smarter and the format worked well for that approach.
But so much more is expected of doctors now a days, and I don't think an unthinking biographer would hold up well in modern stories.
Can it be taken to far? Sure. Will it be? Maybe.
But remember, although Watson found the tablet, Holmes put her on the trail.
I think we would grow tired of Watson just following Holmes around astounded all the time with a blank look on her face. Instead we have a Watson who is smart and capable of growth.


I will try to come back and fill in a few more thoughts once recovered from fifteen hours of driving, but for now (and I haven't got my pipes handy) I give this episode four (found them!)

out of five pipes.

Elementary - season Two - episode three a review

We are at the house of mouse and on the road so this my not be as good as I like posting from an ipad.

'We Are Everyone' a review.

I found the strength of the episode the same; good acting by the leads and some good dialog.
The weakness's were also the same, and that for me right now is Watson becoming the detective.
aim sure that is because Lucy Liu would not have signed on to be just a side-kick. The case, although timely was not perhaps best suited for a holmes story.

As for the references I came up with. . . . .

I liked the fact that Holmes would not start the case till his Boswell was present

It started Baker St. and the client met them there. .   Well their flat.

Holmes' disinterest in the regular police forces findings by dismissing Bell with a "I vaguely recall . . ."

Reminiscent of Hound when they followed the client from 'Baker St.'

Holmes stating to Watson that she had a 'closer to a productive thought than you (she) realized'.
I believe that was a reference to Watson not being the light, but maybe the spark.

Holmes staying up all night to work in a case, which has been used before.

Where our two heroes were un-done by the hackers felt a little like Moriarty's spider web, a reference to his (her) reach.

I may fill in more when I get to a better computer.