“As a rule,” said
Holmes, “the more bizarre a thing is the less mysterious it proves to be. It is
your commonplace, featureless crimes which are really puzzling, just as a
commonplace face is the most difficult to identity.”
--Sherlock Holmes, “The Red-Headed League”
“In Just-
spring when the world is mud--
luscious the little
lame balloonman
whistles far and wee”
spring when the world is mud--
luscious the little
lame balloonman
whistles far and wee”
--An except from e.e. cummings
Austin:
Lately when I've been talking to
people, they ask me about Elementary. They are daunted by the lengths of
our blog posts and they want the short version. So here's the quick version of
my thoughts: This is the best episode of the show. It is still quite bad. I
believe it will continue to get better and worse at the same time.
This is the first episode not written by the creator and instantly
there's a difference. Sherlock and Watson feel like people. Their relationship
actually exists. There is ebb and flow. It's still not perfect, but they have
at least acknowledged that Watson needs to serve a purpose. Right now she is a
good listener. They still really need to give her a way to help with the
mystery, but at least Sherlock likes having her around for a reason. I
liked them doing squats together, I was amused by their first dialog together
in the cold open and dammit Leigh, I laughed when Sherlock said "You, me,
Agnus" at the end.
"How difficult is it to scrapbook, Sherlock" "It's Preschool, my dear Watson." |
That said, the rest of the mystery is a complete and utter mess. The
case is a bit odder, but still not worthy enough for Sherlock Holmes. They have
a villain (a TV clichéd villain, but a villain) who is actively trying to make
the case harder to solve which is key. But the quirky elements of the case (The
goddamn balloons, the captor twist, avoiding public interviews) were all quirky
for Law and Order, not Sherlock Holmes.
On Tuesday, we handled uber-quirky for Sherlock Holmes. Red-headed
people being brought in to copy the encyclopedia all to distract people from
the real crime. This is still just a standard and often very boring case.
During a few moments, I was engaged thanks to Jonny Lee Miller. When Adam asked
if he would be forgiven, Sherlock's answer is great. That was a really good
(still obvious) moment.
But what the hell is going on for the rest of the story? A kidnapper
steals children and leaves behind a bunch of Thank You balloons. He's been
doing this for 7 years. This seems like a standard CSI episode.
That's fine! Just take an episode premise like that and turn it on its head
when you have Sherlock Holmes leading the investigation. Don't just plug in his
character into the formula; have him run around the formula skipping steps and
having fun.
At this point, the formula is really showing its problems. The cops
serve no purpose. In fact, it's a major plot point that not being a cop is more
effective. In a worthless scene of showing their large cop set, Sherlock begs
Gregson to let him interrogate Adam. It ends with Sherlock saying he needs ten
minutes. Gregson stands in the elevator and says "You get five!" as
it closes. Dumb. But it's dumber when Sherlock starts his five minutes and
nobody is even watching him. Gregson walks in during it which makes me ask 1)
Why the hell did he even go to a different floor? II) If you were so
opposed to him interrogating your subject, why did you let him start without you?
I have many
more plot holes that bugged me, but I can save those for later. My question for
you Leigh is a big one. What does the show wanting to focus on? Is the
Sherlock/Watson relationship their main focus or is it the mystery of the week?
From this episode and your choice of the two, could the show be on the verge of
improving or getting worse?
Leigh: This is definitely the best episode so
far. I think it has finally reached the level of mediocrity that American
viewers love. Criminal Minds, Bones, Law and Order, CSI, NCIS, all of
these shows tell us that Americans love standard mildly interesting crime
dramas.
There
are so many cliché moments that I started counting them. Okay I didn’t but I
did over-dramatically groaned when they happened. “You get 5 minutes,” an
investigator lying about their past to get a suspect to talk, the suspect
making a fatal mistake in the end. All of it is clichéd. I feel like if I were
playing a drinking game using crime drama clichés, I would’ve been drunk about
1/3 of the way through. (Future note: Make a crime drama cliché drinking game.)
While reading Holmes stories, we expect the unexpected. We want to be shocked
and surprised. We want to be confused. We want Sherlock to make it all make
sense in the end. These episodes so far have been none of these things. They
are mediocre and this is not a compliment.
"Our drinking is the drinking game." "Drink!" |
I think
this show is trying to do too much and doesn’t know how to do it. Other shows
have shown us that they can be about the mystery of the week and the
character’s relationships. Elementary seems to be trying this but
falling short. IT IS GETTING BETTER, before I get yelled at by everyone on the
internet, BUT, it’s still falling short. Yes, the interactions with Watson and
Holmes are better but I still don’t feel like Watson is needed. Holmes said in
this episode that she is little better than a phrenology bust, in more words.
He said in the past he used prostitutes to talk to. What makes Watson
different? She’s getting paid to be there? –shrug- I got nothing else. She has
a wealth of medical knowledge that isn’t used. I could tell that the huge scar
on the guys back meant he had massive surgery. Thank you, Captain Obvious.
She’s basically there to tell the audience what they can see for themselves or
things they already know from watching a myriad of other crime dramas.
Stockholm Syndrome is not an uncommon thing for crime dramas. Crime dramas, in
fact, LOVE Stockholm Syndrome. Having Watson explain to the audience what Adam
was experiencing just seemed like the writers realized she needed more dialog
in this episode than what they had given her. And as a surgeon, why is she
interested in psychology and past crimes? Why would she follow the Balloon Man
(WORST NAME FOR A BAD GUY EVER) story unless she had some sort of connection
with it? Make it a friend’s kid that was the second victim or something. Give
her a reason to do the things she does!
So three
episodes in and Watson is still terrible. Why don’t they fix her? What could
they do to fix her? Also, Holmes’ dad has been mentioned in every episode. When
can we expect him and who would your dream cast for him be? If you say anyone
other than Stephen Fry, you’re wrong.
Austin: If the
show made up its mind on what it wanted to be about, I would excuse it for the
half its failing on. If it wants to be serious about the relationship between
Sherlock and Watson, make that the focus and the mysteries secondary. If it
wants to be a mystery show first, they really have to make the mysteries
worthwhile. Them being this lazy with the mysteries is not acceptable if they
consider the cases to be this important of a factor. It's not just that they
are too familiar, but they are taking way too many story shortcuts.
The cops tell the parents about the dangerous deal to get back their
daughter? The media is reporting on an immunity deal that isn't even signed
yet? Lawyers are that dumb to create an immunity deal that quickly? Sherlock and
Watson both happen to have been focused on this Balloon Boy case that he
somehow couldn't solve all those years ago? The evidence that Sherlock is
looking at in his box is just pictures?
They have to actually be able to tell a mystery. Once again we had
an episode of Sherlock not being clever. There is never any setup for his
reveals. They are essentially cheating. I'll let them have one wine bottle
reveal every once in awhile, but nothing this regular. All of the clues for the
affair weren't shown to the audience. We weren't given any information about
the old cases. Even when he stayed up all night to find the Balloon Man, his
clue (He works at night!) is magically solved off screen. Personally I would
have focused on him regularly picking up doughnuts, asked Adam more about that
and surveyed the area of who routinely picks up doughnuts in the area that fit
the description. But then again, I'm no Holmes.
This is just a bad mystery show. Terriers was a
FANTASTIC show that did a great job with its mysteries of the week because it
was a show that knew the genre very well and often surprised the audience by
taking the less obvious path. As a show about these characters, I think there
was serious progress this week where I actually found Watson to be a person and
Liu's performance to be....dare I say it......better.
Oh and
Richard E. Grant needs to play Sherlock's dad. Accept no substitutes. Don't
believe me, watch Withnail and I immediately.
One was in Doctor Who, the other is about to be in Doctor Who. That is a statement that applies to every British actor alive. |
Leigh: I think the biggest plot hole that I had
a problem with this episode was the FBI. Early in the episode, Sherlock
mentions that the FBI was on a trail when they looked at the exterminator
employees. Why didn’t the FBI show up again when there was another child
missing? I don’t know if this is protocol but I do know that it is TV Police
Drama protocol. That’s what happens. A serial killer starts killing again? A
kidnapper starts kidnapping again and opens an old case? The FBI busts open the
NYPD doors and piss off all of the cops working on the case and eventually
fumbling it up so badly that they lose the bad guy. This is what TV crime
dramas have taught me to expect. The FBI is mentioned but that’s it and for something
as serious as a serial kidnapper/killer getting another victim, I expected them
to show up. Also, the FBI could’ve solved that case. Maybe that’s why they were
purposefully left out.
My mom
brought up a good point about Elementary. She said, “The problem is
Sherlock isn't as special anymore. There are too many imitators, The
Mentalist, Psych, etc. There has to be a great plot, fantastic
acting and enough hints for viewers to get it after the big reveal.” Of course
these are all things I’ve said before but the first point is the one I’m gonna
focus on now. This Sherlock isn’t special. He isn’t super intelligent. He isn’t
four steps ahead of the audience and the police and a step ahead of the
suspect. In this episode he is almost beaten by the suspect. I feel that this
show could be made better simply by changing the characters names. If it were
Steve Howard and Jenny Washington solving crimes and kicking a drug addiction,
I think the show would work much better.
I feel
though if this show stopped trying to develop the mystery aspect (because I am
HOPING that they’re trying at least) and just made it about the characters, we
would end up with something that neither of us wants. Sherlock Holmes is about
solving mysteries no matter how frivolous or off the wall they are, we saw that
earlier this week with the Red Headed League. If we take away the mysteries
from Sherlock Holmes we end up with a jackass and his best friend talking about
how the jackass should stop doing drugs. If we took the mystery out of Elementary
or just didn’t make it the focus, it would be about Sherlock Holmes and his
sober companion, who might actually begin to be growing on Holmes, talking
about being an addict and eventually having sex. Yuck. That just isn’t a show I
want to watch. That’s why I stopped watching Bones. It stopped being
about the mystery of the week and started being about Bones and Booth boinking.
Unlike the rest of the population that seems to be enraptured by even the
slightest mention of sex, I am an adult and understand that it’s something that
people do sometimes and that it doesn’t make for very good plot points in a
series, unless one of the people dies during and it is happening in Edwardian
England.
The new original Booth and Bones |
In the
next book review we discuss that it isn’t always step-mothers who are evil and
that all step-parents should be treated with suspicion because what's family
without a little suspicion? Also! If you want to read a long but don’t have
access to a copy of the Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, NEVER FEAR! Thanks to
the wonderful website, Project Gutenberg, it is available to you fo’ free!
[Project
Gutenberg link: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1661] So now
you don’t have a reason to not read along! Go! Educate yourself!
And now Austin
Lugar with the last word.
Austin: Squats
Not much to go on this week, as I don't have access to the episodes to watch them. From what you're saying this is still a whole lot of limp-wristed flailing in the general direction of a real mystery; it's been kicked down the rungs to hit the lowest common denominator, but the lowest common denominator is down there so low that you can't have a mystery anymore. It still sounds like they're trying to spoon-feed the viewing population an easily digestible version of Sherlock. "Here, have this bland porridge of a mystery. Don't worry, everyone can figure out whodunit and how, we made it so everyone can have some." It's boring and drab and so base that it gets my hackles up.
ReplyDeleteGood for Watson that she gets some more characterization, but this is what? Three episodes in? Little late, don't you think? It'd be like if Frankenstein was wandering around fretting over the moral obligations of applying the lightning to the Creation for three movies instead of doing what every mad genius does: throw all the switches and damn the angry mob; this is science b*tches.
So a bland response to a post that, while entertaining, is about a bland mystery. I'm more starting to see this show as a sad commentary about the state of society and the educational system. The public cannot be given a true puzzler, something that may actually induce thought beyond "will they or won't they sleep together?" (p.s. that's not a mystery, it's gossip). The public cannot be shown that the police can be a little fallible (it's all or nothing in shows like this, have you noticed? They're either super-cops, or keystone cops, but nary a soul in between; feel free to prove me wrong). And heaven forbid the public be truly challenged to think about the other dynamic that seems to be going on in this episode: Holmes is an addict and functions on different levels when he gets or doesn't get the drugs he's after; so how does that make you feel about drug use? Instead they're going to focus on the relationship side of things because it's easily digestible gossip.
I'm about to talk about food again, I can tell. I'm going to get breakfast to spare you from any more references to comestibles.