'There's something about Mary'- Sherlock, the end.

Well, here we are. After all this waiting and anticipating we have what appears to be the end of 'Sherlock'.
Not Sherlock Holmes, just Sherlock.

For better or worse, there it is.

And over the last week our so we have had a bunch of "Sherlockians" telling us if it was good or bad. Most just stating their own opinion, others telling us we are wrong if we don't agree with them. And if not telling us we are wrong, they at least try to but us in that 'old school' 'closed mind' category of Sherlockian.

We have been told that the key people involved are "Artists". And that 'Sherlock' was art.

Well, like with all art, and many artists (whether other people claim them as such, or it is a self given title) there is good art and bad art and using the often used quote, "Art is in the eye of the beholder."

While not being 'bad' art, it is not museum worthy.

For me 'Sherlock' is a show that did not meet up to its potential, nor do I think it achieved what it set out to do or could possibly have done. (It is not good when before you see they final episode they have to have a piece telling you why it was made the way it was.)

The first year suggested hope and potential, and while there were a few bright spots along the way it never dazzled as it should have. All the makings were there, but the light never came on all the way.
Wonderful actors playing the key roles. Wonderful sets and locations. The budget to go along with it.
Source material with infinite possibilities, and what at first appeared to be writers who loved the source.

As I said way back in 2010 when it all started, Martin Freeman and Benedict Cumberbatch are two of the best things to happen to Sherlock Holmes in a very long time. Their talents and skills can not be over looked as very good choices to play Holmes and Watson whether in a modern era of 1895.
They had the theatrical flare to pull off the larger than life characters they were asked to play.
And time after time they did that. But they were never allowed to complete that portrayal throughout the series run, at least not for me.
These remain two of my favorite actors in this day and age and I look forward to seeing their other works.

But when it really comes right down to it we have to decide if these portrayals of Holmes and Watson come close to matching the images we have created in our, using a much over used phrase of late, 'brain attic'.
If we take a still photo of these two actors as Holmes and Watson it is easy to imagine both as those to Canonical individuals.
But once Cumberbatch's Holmes goes into his 'highly functional sociopath' portrayal the bubble bursts for me.

The enjoyment of the Canon for me is the individual cases that Holmes is asked to solve, with just little pieces of back story thrown in to create a bigger image for us over time.

While many of the Canon based cases are mentioned in 'Sherlock' most it seems,  just like 'Elementary' is accused of doing, are thrown in as Canonical bait to keep us biting.

I don't want my Sherlock Holmes to be a murderer or a high functioning sociopath.
I don't want my Mrs. Hudson to be the ex-wife of a drug dealer.
I don't want my Mary Morstan dying in this show just so she can compete with Ethan Hunt in Mission Impossible Six or what ever.
I don't want my Mycroft to be as dumb as he turned out to be.
I don't want my Holmes to be related to James Bond.
I don't want my Sherlock Holmes to come from a family more dysfunctional than the Adam's family.

Unfortunately for all that was great, yes I said great, about 'Sherlock', there was just as much that wasn't.

We hardly ever witnessed Sherlock doing good. And, again for me, Canonically Holmes in the end was about doing good.

While we are all left to decide for ourselves what is good art we must also realize that we get to chose who we think good artists are.
And please artist's either use brushes or finger paints, not both.

Why did I title this essay 'There's something about Mary."? Well because I thought she delivered the best line of the whole series, all four years.

I will do my best to quote the whole thing here at the end.

She said;

"A junky who gets high on solving crime.
A doctor who never came home from the war.

Well you listen to me.
Who you are doesn't really matter.
It's all about the legend, the stories, the adventures.
The last refuge for the desperate, the unloved, the persecuted.
There is a final court of appeal for everyone.

When life gets to strange, to impossible, to frightening there is always one last hope.

When all else fails, there are two men sitting arguing in a scruffy flat, like they have always been there and they always will be the best and wisest men I have ever known.

My Baker St. Boys.

Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson."

This should have been the guide lines for 'Sherlock' all along.
This is the path they should have gone down modern era or not. Using cell phones, the patch and texting.

It's a bust!

It's speculation time.
I must admit I am not one to follow closely the news about upcoming episodes of 'Sherlock'. Feels to much like watching the news and the info you really want is not till the very end of the broadcast.

That doesn't mean I don't catch some of what is going on.

Two of the upcoming episodes have supposedly been named and the names released to the public.

They are; "The Lying Detective" and "The Six Thatchers".

While the web site, The Blog of John Watson has already done a piece on a broken statue mystery, we probably should not expect that to be the same story coming to us as "The Six Thatchers".

And, it would be very un-"Sherlock" to allow 'The Six Thatchers" to follow to closely the story line of "The Six Napoleons."

So what else could it mean?

Are Thatcher look-alike's being knocked-off?
Are roofing thatchers being knocked-off? Perhaps due to a thatcher strike.
Is there really something hidden in statues of the former Prime Minister? Probably something like a flash-drive or clues to who Moriarty really is.
Or maybe clues to when Natalie Dormer is coming back to 'Elementary'? (Oh, please, Oh, please, Oh, please!)
Or are six people being targeted, belonging the an organization called 'The Thatchers'?
Or (which is more than likely) am I not even close to what it could be?

What do you think?

Can 'Sherlock' survive without B.C.

Usually I cut and paste pieces at times here and link a credit to the source.
But this one was so badly written I thought I would just post the question brought up in the piece instead.
With all the talk that the principles are all to busy to continue their output for 'Sherlock', the question was asked; "If Benedict Cumberbatch does not return again, can the series survive without him?"

While replacements have at times worked, such as Batman, Jack Ryan and our own Watson from the Granada series, Capt. Kirk, etc., it hardly, to me, seems likely that another actor could take over from the fantastic job Benedict Cumberbatch has done. His performance is so nouanced that I can't imagine a replacement

What do you think?

Oh, . . . that's too bad.

Lefty Critics Rail at 'Sherlock' Creators for not turning Holmes and Watson into a Gay Couple

By Ian Miles Cheong|3:23 pm, August 12, 2016

The creators of Sherlock, the popular TV series starring Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman, have come under fire from social justice warriors. The show’s main creators, Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat, have refused to ship its two main characters, Sherlock Holmes and John Watson, into a gay romance.

The entire phenomenon rose on Tumblr and Twitter, where a large number ofSherlock fans came up with a hackneyed theory that the intent of its creators was to transform Holmes and Watson, who have consistently been portrayed as heterosexual since their creation by Arthur Conan Doyle in the 19th century, into homosexual partners.

Speaking at the recent San Diego Comic-Con, the showrunners Moffat and Gatissrepudiated the theory. While answering questions about how to address minority representation in shows like Doctor Who, which Moffat also showruns, Moffat said that it is important in his shows to not come across as “campaigning” for homosexuality and simply present it as a normal fact of life.

“You don’t want it to be campaigning. You don’t want to be table thumping about it. You don’t want to essentially tell children that there’s something to campaign about,” he said. “You want to say this is absolutely fine and normal. There is no question to answer. You want to walk right past it, in a way. You don’t want to… If you say, as sometimes other kinds of literature or movies might, we forgive you for being gay. You’re just saying you’re gay and it doesn’t matter. There’s no issue.”

Moffat immediately segued into Sherlock, where he expressed his exasperation with a vocal segment of the fanbase for often twisting his words and insisting Sherlock is gay.

“It is infuriating, frankly, to be talking about a serious subject and to have Twitter run around and say, ‘oh, that means Sherlock is gay.’  Very explicitly it does not. We are taking a serious subject and trivializing it beyond endurance.”

It’s at this point that Gatiss, who is gay, explained that while there’s always a possibility that Sherlock Holmes might be gay, it isn’t what the show is going to run with.

“I’m a gay man. This is not an issue. But we’ve explicitly said this is not going to happen—there is no game plan—no matter how much we lie about other things, that this show is going to culminate in Martin and Benedict going off into the sunset together,” said Gatiss.

“They are not going to do it. And if people want to write whatever they like and have a great time extrapolating that’s absolutely fine. But there is no hidden or exposed agenda. We’re not trying to fuck with people’s heads. Not trying to insult anybody or make any kind of issue out of it, there’s nothing there. It’s just our show and that’s what these characters are like. If people want to do that on websites absolutely fine. But there’s nothing there.”

Gatiss went even further and asked fans not to tell them what to do with the show. “It’s our show, they’re our characters, they do what we want them to do, and we don’t have to represent absolutely everything in that 90 minutes. It’s impossible,” he said.  “And it would kill it. It would be deadly to it.”

Moffat echoed the statements of the show’s co-creator and added that all the demands to make Holmes and Watson gay were detrimental to gay representation. “What they did was scale back that conversation and make it about something extremely silly,” said Moffat. “And that’s not helping anyone.”

After the interview went live, fans reacted in disbelief and claimed it to be a hoax, prompting Gatiss to take to social media and verify that the interview was real. His words were poorly received by self-proclaimed social justice warriors, who called his decision “unkind.” They argue that homosexuals will not have proper representation in media until Sherlock Holmes and John Watson have sex on TV.

This isn’t the first time creators involved in Sherlock repudiated such theories. Last year, actor Martin Freeman, who plays John Watson, said in an interview that the detectives were “not actually fucking. It’s possible for people of the same sex to have a deep friendship without being attracted to each other.”

His statement got him in trouble on Tumblr, where an older post that had labeled him a “potential rapist,” a “racist” and a “homophobe” picked up steam. The post was on the popular “your fave is problematic” blog.

At the end of the day, it’s up to Sherlock’s creators what they wish to do with the story, and it’s good that they’re sticking to their guns instead of giving in to outrage.

source

What does the future hold?

Benedict Cumberbatch talks future of 'Sherlock'

Series 4 of BBC show is expected in 2017

LUKE MORGAN BRITTON, 4TH AUGUST 2016

Benedict Cumberbatch has addressed uncertainty over the future of Sherlock.

Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman started shooting the new series in May, joined once again by Amanda Abbington as Mary Morstan, as well as by a new villain played by Toby Jones. 

Cumberbatch joined Abbington plus the show's co-creators Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss for a panel at Comic-Con in San Diego last month (July 24), when he was asked how long the show could keep going for.

"We’ll see. We’ll see how this series lands," Cumberbatch responded, as reported by Collider.

"It’s been great fun to come back and do it. How it will continue in the future, who knows? It’s not just about what any of us want. It’s about what’s actually right for the show, to be honest, and that has to be judged very carefully."

Cumberbatch continued: "Think about the very limited but classic British output of certain shows, and there aren’t that many of them. It’s a painful thing to say, but maybe Series Four is it. Who knows? I don’t know. I don’t want to say this is it because we have too much fun doing it. But generally, we have to see how this lands."

"And the actors aren’t the only ones who are busy," he added. "Mark and Steven are pretty tied up. Mark is an actor, as well as a producer and writer. It’s all of us being stretched in different directions. Also, this has run longer than most American series. You don’t want to compromise it by continually doing it, just because we could carry it on. There’s lots of stuff to weigh. It’s not just about what we want to do. It’s about what’s right. We’ll see. Really, we will have to see. No one has decided on it, so there’s no yes or no to an end or a beginning."

Steven Moffat went on to say: "We have to take it one season at a time. We don’t know what the future will be, and it’s not entirely down to us. Hopefully, we’ll do more. I find it hard to imagine that we won’t. But in terms of a specific plan, there are ideas that we haven’t gotten to yet."

During the panel, Abbington told fans of the new series: "It's really dark. It's the darkest Steven and Mark have written."

The BBC has previously revealed that series four will begin with Cumberbatch's title character "back once more on British soil as Doctor Watson and his wife, Mary, prepare for their biggest ever challenge - becoming parents for the first time".

Cumberbatch and Freeman returned in a one-off special, Sherlock: The Abominable Bride, on New Year's Day this year. The special attracted an audience of 11.6 million viewers, making it the most-watched programme of the 2015-16 festive season.

The show's last series, which also consisted of three episodes, aired in 2014. Cumberbatch and Freeman first played Doyle's iconic characters in 2010 and each actor has won an Emmy for his performance.

source

What Doctor Strange & Sherlock Holmes Have In Common Will Get You Excited For Benedict Cumberbatch's Next Role

COURTNEY LINDLEY

3 days ago ENTERTAINMENT

The time has come for us to start getting really excited for Marvel's upcoming film Doctor Strange. I mean, you know, if you weren't already. During San Diego's Comic-Con panel, an all new Doctor Strange trailer gave us a more in depth glimpse into the mind of Stephen Strange, aka Sorcerer Supreme, aka the titular superhero. But something about Doctor Strange's personality might come as a shock to those who aren't well informed of his character, and it also might remind you of someone. If you ask the actor who plays Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch), then the newest Marvel superhero happens to share a personality trait with Cumberbatch's other well known character: Sherlock Holmes. That's right. Two pretty dissimilar characters — Doctor Strange and Sherlock Holmes — share one pretty specific trait.

When Collider asked Cumberbatch what people would find surprising about the upcoming film, the actor's answer had to do with some of Stephen Strange's particular qualities. He said:

"Quite how much he suffers and how extraordinary his willpower is. I think that's his main superhero trait, is that the guy is sort of unstoppably stubborn. He won't cease. And that's great, because you see this character really go through the grinder. It's non-stop punishment for this dude. What he has to become and how quickly he's tested in the new arena that he becomes this person is so violent, so sudden, so non-stop, and psychologically brutal as well as physically very very brutal. It's a huge character arc. So I think that might surprise people."

Doesn't "unstoppably stubborn" seem like a familiar characteristic of Sherlock? What about this concept of "not ceasing"? While Stephen Strange and Sherlock Holmes couldn't be more different in terms of how they solve things (Sherlock is ruled by logic, where Strange has mystical, magical powers), I deduce that Doctor Strange and Sherlock Holmes are not so different after all. Which makes Benedict Cumberbatch all the better to nail the role. And the film? All the better for it.

Sherlock would likely laugh at Doctor Strange's source of power. Like the Cloak of Levitation that allows him to fly or the Eye of Agamotto that he wears around to protect himself from illusions. But like Sherlock, Stephen Strange has endured what Cumberbatch calls "non-stop punishment," and that's part of what makes him so compelling. After he injure's his hand in a car accident, his career is over and he must find a way to get his abilities to back. If Cumberbatch is able to bring the kind of pathos to Strange as he brought to Sherlock, then this will be another character of his we soon won't forget.

source

Will both 'Toby's' appear in the same episode?

I just couldn't do it. . . .

I was going to post some recent pictures of Benedict Cumberbatch as Sherlock for the up coming season.
But I chose not to get drawn into all the tease that goes on with each upcoming season, however far apart they are.
I am going to wait for something definite. Or maybe not.

Because I am hoping Brad will put something in his bottle. . . .

Sherlock & Watson
Recipe by Kenaniah Bystrom, bar manager of Essex

2 ounces American single-malt scotch or Highland scotch
1/2 ounce earl grey syrup
1/2 ounce freshly squeezed lemon juice
2 dashes Scrappy’s cardamom bitters
1 lemon twist, for garnishing 

For earl grey syrup:
Boiling water
1 bag of earl grey tea
16 ounces honey  

Source

Well maybe it will finally be cleared up once and for all . . . . .

Just a snipit.  . . .

Important New Season

"Sherlock" Season 4 will become very pivotal for the entire franchise as a lot of previous characters will return along with a possible love interest for the main protagonist. Fans are curious as to who this love interest might be as Sherlock's last romantic partner, Irene Adler, appeared two seasons ago. They continue to question if Adler might also be part of the rumored characters to return this season.

While there has yet to be any official release date for the series, "Sherlock" Season 4 is expected to hit the small screens this January 2017.

Source

The case of the rugged rogue? Benedict Cumberbatch sports some heavy stubble as Sherlock Holmes in a stark contrast to the character's usual clean shaven look

By JJ NATTRASS FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 06:25 EST, 1 June 2016 | UPDATED: 06:27 EST, 1 June 2016

He's busy filming the much-anticipated fourth series of the BBC's hit-series, Sherlock.

But Benedict Cumberbatch's roguish detective appeared to have lost his razor during his latest escapade, as the cast and crew of the detective drama filmed scenes in South Wales.

Shooting scenes in Cardiff City Centre, the 39-year-old actor sported a heavy layer of stubble as he filmed scenes alongside two elder gents - presumably integral to the plot of the episode.

Whilst the actor's dark brown locks were styled into Sherlock's trademark tousled sweep, the famous detective's usually clean shaven features were coated in a heavy layer of stubble. 

Clad in full-costume, and sporting the character's well worn great coat, a navy shirt, dark trousers and black Oxford shoes, Holmes was instantly recognizable amide the hub-bub of cast and crew.

However, it seems that the latest shoot for the series sees Sherlock at his wit's end, as the appeared slightly weary and exhausted - something further emphasized by his loose stance and open-neck shirt.

Chatting away to the crew in-between takes, the actor looked to be searching for the right inspiration to take into the scene.

Clutching a bundle of pink papers in one hand, presumably his lines, it appeared that Benedict was intent on delivering a stellar performance on camera.

And it seems that the actor was facing off against one of Sherlock's numerous enemies, as he appeared to have a tense showdown with a man in a white suit.

Looking slightly insidious, the suited individual stood out from the crowd thanks to the lime green shirt and cravat that he teamed with the cream two piece.

The blonde actor was seen facing off against Benedict in Mount Stuart Square, with the two actors mirroring each other's stances perfectly.

And it seems that it was all hands on deck, as the actors were joined by numerous members of the cast and extras, as well as a heavy contingent of crew. 

Filming has continued at full-pace following Sherlock co-creators Steven Moffat and Gatiss confirmation that the show was returning in April - following the New Year's special earlier in the year.

In a statement, Steven and Mark said: 'Sherlock series four - here we go again!

'Whatever else we do, wherever we all go, all roads lead back to Baker Street - and it always feels like coming home.

'Ghosts of the past are rising in the lives of Sherlock Holmes and John Watson bringing adventure, romance and terror in their wake.

'This is the story we've been telling from the beginning. A story about to reach its climax.'

Benedict said he was 'thrilled' to be back as the detective.

He said: 'I can't wait for everyone to see season four. But you will have to wait... though not for long... And it will be worth it.'

Series four will return to BBC later this year with three feature length episodes. 

Source

You heard it here first. . . or second. . . . or third. . . but you did hear it here.

'Sherlock Season 4' Release Date, News & Update: Benedict Cumberbatch Bare In Morocco? 'Harry Potter' Actor Is Legendary Villain In S4

By Zee Mara, Parent Herald | May 26, 12:57 AM

"Sherlock Season 4" will reportedly take the adventure to Morocco as lead star Benedict Cumberbatch chases up clues and mysteries. Also joining Holmes' world is "Harry Potter" actor Toby Jones turning villainous in "Sherlock Season 4."

A New Location For 'Sherlock Season 4'

According to Metro, fans can hope to see Benedict Cumberbatch take time to frolic in the sands of Morocco as production for "Sherlock Season 4" progresses. What clues or character(s) will lead the "Sherlock Season 4" storyline to Morocco are kept secret - for now.

Scenes in colorful Morocco for "Sherlock Season 4" is a welcome change from the English-situated earlier episodes of the series. This makes for easier expectation build up on "Sherlock Season 4" topping "The Abominable Bride" special.

Some are even wondering if Benedict Cumberbatch will do a Tom Hiddleston-type baring in Morocco between takes for "Sherlock Season 4." Or if detective Holmes himself will have to do something similar well within the "Sherlock Season 4" plot.

Legendary Villain For 'Sherlock Season 4'

CinemaBlend points out that "Sherlock Season 4" definitely will have a meatier addition in Toby Jones. "Sherlock Season 4" is not the first time Toby Jones, Benedict Cumberbatch and John Watson actor Martin Freeman will be associated.

Like Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman, "Sherlock Season 4" villain Toby Jones also played a Marvel character. Citing CinemaBlend's highlight, "Captain America: The First Avenger," "Captain America: The Winter Soldier," and "Agent Carter" all had the "Sherlock Season 4" villain play evil Hydra scientist Arnim Zola.

Deadline reports that Steven Moffat promised that Toby Jones will definitely play one of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's classical villains in "Sherlock Season 4." Fortunately, there's a fine list of villains to guess from while "Sherlock Season 4" details remain under wraps.

'Sherlock Season 4' Release Schedule

Toby Jones, Martin Freeman and Benedict Cumberbatch will be rejoined by Amanda Abbington, who plays a very pregnant Mary Watson in "Sherlock Season 4." BBC is expected to release "Sherlock Season 4" in 2017.

Update, Update. . . that got you all excited didn't it? Always on the alert for breaking news, that's us.

Toby Jones to star as Sherlock villain

Toby Jones is to play a villain in the fourth series of BBC One's Sherlock.

Jones will join Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman in the second episode of the new three-part series. Filming began on Monday.

Jones said: "I'm excited and intrigued by the character I shall be playing in Sherlock..."

The show's co-creator Steven Moffat said: "Delighted to have Toby Jones on board, bringing to life one of Doyle's finest villains."

Co-creator Mark Gatiss added: "We're thrilled to welcome one of our finest actors to the Sherlock family. I know Toby will embrace the part with true relish!"

It was announced last month that series four will begin with Holmes (Cumberbatch) back on British soil, as Doctor Watson (Freeman) and his wife, Mary (Amanda Abbington), prepare for parenthood.

Source

P.S. His father was in Young Sherlock Holmes and 'The Return of Sherlock Holmes, Wisteria Lodge' as well as 'The Case Book Of Sherlock Holmes, The Last Vampire'.

You heard it here first. . . unless you have other sources for your new;)

Sherlock series 4 cast: Toby Jones joins Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman

The new series has finally started filming, with fans promised “ghosts of the past” and a baby on the horizon

Sherlock series 4 has landed its first new cast member, in beloved Brit actor Toby Jones. 

The actor, who often sports supporting roles in huge franchises such as Harry Potter, Captain America, and The Hunger Games; now joins the BBC 1 drama, Radio Times reports. "I'm excited and intrigued by the character I shall be playing," the actor stated. 

He'll join the returning Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman, alongside Amanda Abbington, Una Stubs, Rupert Graves, Jonathan Aris and Louise Brealey; with his character making an appearance in episode 2 of the new series, though his identity so far remains mysterious.

Series co-creator Stephen Moffat hinted, "Delighted to have Toby Jones on board, bringing to life one of Doyle's finest villains"; with fellow co-creator Mark Gatiss adding, "We're thrilled to welcome one of our finest actors to the Sherlock family. I know Toby will embrace the part with true relish."

READ MO

Knowing only that Jones is playing a famous Arthur Conan Doyle villain opens up a whole number of possibilities, considering the author's own Holmes had a knack for making enemies. Could he be the sinister Austrian murderer Adelbert Gruner? Or smuggler John Clay? 

Or could he somehow be connecting back to Moriarty, with the hint that "ghosts of the past rising in the lives of Sherlock Holmes and John Watson" possibly signaling some sort of return for the villain? We'll have to see when the series finally airs, with reports claiming with "near certainty" it will debut on New Year's Day 2017.

Credit where credit is due.

Was it, and I quote from Brad, a ". . .male-dominated Sherlockian culture" back in the day?

Well, sure it was! Remember, 'back in the day' society was still very use to private clubs that catered to a certain audience.

Probably most, defiantly many would have been like the Diogenes Club, you hung out with those of like mind. If you loved fishing with a worm and cane pole, you probably would not join a fly-fishing group as it were.

Mostly male represented activities would be run mostly by males. Likewise, mostly female represented activities would be run by mostly females.

It wasn’t a matter of whether that was fair or not, it was just the way society was. And thankfully that is changing.

And since Holmes and Watson were, well, male, it would seem most likely that, well, males would form a club about them.

While there have probably always been men who have wanted to join a Jane Austin club, it is true that there have always been women who enjoyed the stories of Sherlock Holmes.

Put since, up till recently, society has usually separated the genders in clubbable situations; Sherlockians groups have mostly been male dominated by males.

But for at least as long as I have been a Sherlockian (the late 70’s) there have been very knowledgeable and active women in Sherlockian society. But still a limited number compared to now.

And that brings up two good points.

One; How much of this surge in female Sherlockian popularity is because of how handsome Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman are and the fact that ‘Sherlock’ is set in modern times?  And how fashionable the coupling of these two is with this modern incarnation of that dynamic duo.

Second; how much of this new mass female participation will survive when the show comes to an end?

I am not against a group of men, or women, who chose to want to hang out in groups with only their own gender. And I also am okay with groups that want to remain exclusive. . . even if I don’t want to belong to any of them.

And I am equally glad of the contribution women make to the world of Sherlock Holmes.

But I think, in a while, when all the fascination over ‘Sherlock’ goes away we will see, once again, a decrease in female participation.

I do however hope that is not the case because they have so much to offer.

Now, actually running a Sherlock Holmes club. . . . . . ;)

'Sherlock' and whales . . . . . . I mean Wales.

Set to film in Wales?

Elementary S4E9 - 'Murder Ex Machina' - Falling into stride

This episode involves the murder of a Russian crime boss, a valet and the murders themselves.

This episode also suggests that at least for this year 'Elementary' as found itself a comfortable routine and is staying the course.

Although there are still at times hints of outlandish behavior from Miller's Holmes, for the most part it is kept in check.

The plot had some good turns in it, and the observation of some of the clues were Sherlockian like.

The side story involved Holmes' father getting in touch with Joan seeking her professional advice.
Joan deduces that there is more to it than that.

I enjoyed the line from Holmes's father about Holmes' eating habits and the reason he eats.
The observations on the effects of street lighting on the color of cars was good.
That scene also showed Holmes' knowledge of his city, much like the Canonical Holmes does of London.

This is the second or third episode this season I believe where Joan is not in on the conclusion of the case. While Canonically Watson is present in most, he usually only takes the roll of observer and not fellow detective. Is this 'Elementary's' attempt to put more emphasis on Holmes skills as an individual and not a team.

It will be interesting some day if an annotated 'Elementary' is ever produced to see how many of the plot lines involve industrial espionage. The plot line is starting to get a little over used.

One good discussion point that could come out of this episode is how timely were the topics in the cases of the Canonical Sherlock Holmes. Doyleockian, would do you say?  We know some were definitely; submarines, international interests, etc.
Many of the topics in the cases on 'Elementary' can often seem to be covering things recently in the news. The remote control of cars computers was a topic not to long ago on one of the hour long news programs.

It was nice that there was at least one wild car ride to make the guest from 'Dukes of Hazard' feel at home. Although he was not in that scene.

As has been a problem with this show all along is how to bring in things we expect from a Holmes like character without out making it a costume drama involving deerstalkers and capes. And without making it seem a copy of other adaptations of Sherlock Holmes. Miller can obviously not be Brett and he has to also avoid coping things seen in 'Sherlock'. I think the show is getting better at it this year, but is still not quite there.

For all the above reasons, having still enjoyed the episode I can fairly give this one;

I hate the phrase 'Mind Palace' - my thoughts on The Abominable Bride

During my second viewing of "The Abominable Bride' I tried to mark down each time I went from liking the episode to not liking it by placing a little tick in one category or the another on a note pad.
I soon found that the categories were keeping pace with each other as I went back and forth.

This exercise had started out as an attempt to find a different way of examining the episode that may not have been done before.

Most times when we watch a TV show or movie, or for that matter, when we see a play or read a book, we find that we either like it or we don't. Many times we can still like something while finding something in it that we don't like, but still on the whole giving it more thumbs up than thumbs down.
Example for me, the first Lord of the Rings movie.

And the opposite can also be true. We can on the whole not like something while still finding something within that we do like. Example for me, The Hobbit movies.

I did not finish my second viewing with my little list of check marks. I found that once, after the first viewing, we learn the whole episode was just a trip into Sherlocks 'Mind Palace' the experiment was a waste of time.
One can hardly find fault with the episode if it is just viewed as a trip into Sherlocks unconscious mind. Most of us have had dreams that make no sense or that can be taken many different ways by whom ever may wish to interpret them. They could just be the result of a little under cooked beef or a tiny bit of mustard.
And just like with Sherlock, must of the times when we visit our 'Mind Palace', the journey ends right before we get where we really would like to see it go;)

The check list attempt actually proved rather disappointing in that for every time I was starting to like the show I would end up equally let down by some turn of event.
While one mount enjoying the dialog, the next disappointed in a flip response or an out of character turn of phrase.

In my post on Jan. 13th I asked the question; "Without a Clue, Part Deux"?  And while 'Without a Clue' at times tried to have serious side to the story most of it was clearly played for the humor.
As has often been the case with 'Sherlock', we are never clear which way it wants to lean and for me is not pulling either one off as well as I would like. 
Most times when fun or funny things happen in our lives they blend in with our 'story line'. And in most dramas when humorous occasions happen they in no way attempt to confuse the fact that we are watching a drama.
'Sherlock' is always blurring those lines in an almost slapstick kind of way. (Many may find that appealing.)
Again, the episode took place in his 'Mind Palace', so we can hardly fault it for being confusing.
Any attempt to navigate my 'Mind Palace' would be equally confusing.

I must admit that I fall into the camp of "hoping for a Victorian Sherlock Holmes tale starring Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman" to hold us over till the regular series gets filmed again. But I fear, which my be fair, that this episode left a lot not caring if the show continues, but okay if it does.
The story arc was not advanced. Mostly it was just about putting a teaser out there again, like they have been doing for the last couple of years.

There were some wonderful nods to the Canon, the Granada series and Paget drawings.
The sets were wonderful. And I was not bothered by the flash back scenes from 221B to the crime scenes. It was inventive and worked okay with that part of the story.

Much of the dialog was witty and very inventive. It was mostly appealing if you accept the story line as, once again, taking place in a 'Mind Palace'

I found the scene where Watson first finds Holmes in the morgue rather disturbing and once again seems to prove that the producers want to prove Holmes is indeed a sociopath.

I have never liked the portrayal of Moriarty in this series and believe that portrayal only adds to the sociopath explanation.

While we have come to expect a deerstalker making an appearance in most Sherlock Holmes adaptations, it does not suit the Holmes in 'Sherlock'. Something about it always looking to new or to pressed. I think it can also be said about the Iverness.

I have never considered myself a 'scholaly' Sherlockian. I don't put myself in those ranks.
I would rather find a beer connection in the canon than spend time researching find out how old the pig would have to be for the harpoon to go in so far in BLAC.
I find myself more likely to read The Strand than the Baker Street Journal.
I read the stories more for the atmosphere than for trying to add stuff to my 'Mind Palace'.
And while I am at it, I must admit that it was only after reading several other reviews that I actually caught some of the things they talked about. Many of them I agree with, some I do not.

But it was not until I watched 'Elementary' this week that I really realized what it was that I really did not like about thiss episode and in some ways 'Sherlock'.
I have come to realize that the Holmes in 'Sherlock' is not someone I would really like to meet.
I find his character a little disturbing and very borderline. Where Canonically, as well as in 'Elementary', we see the relationship between Holmes and Watson as good for one another. In 'Sherlock' I can see the relationship dragging Watson down.
Brett as Sherlock Holmes did not suffer well fools. Cumberbatch's Holmes would rather make someone feel the fool.
There is a manic quality to 'Sherlock's' Holmes that seems un-fixable or un-changable or lacking in the ability for growth. He seems damaged beyond repair many times.

It may be a product of our time, the anti-hero being the hero. The more damaged you are the more appealing you become as the hero.

As has been the case since the early episodes, The Abominable Bride was written for the fans of 'Sherlock', not the fans of Sherlock Holmes.

And although 'Mind Palace' is a historical phrase, when used as it is in 'Sherlock' it appears more Fanfic than Sherlockain.

But with all my complaints about the show, I still think Cumberbatch and Freeman are two of the best things to happen to Sherlock Holmes in a very long time. And I still enjoy the show for it's 'Playing the Game' exercise.

I do not however consider this episode to be a respectful nod to the Canon of Sherlock Holmes.

But I can only fairly give it;

To bad it wasn't Elementary:)