Mattlocked wrote:

CarlPowers wrote:

....


That said,  I also don't really need to see another episode like this one again.  I enjoyed it immensely
*and* was frustrated,  in equal parts. I long for a good case,  and our solitary Sherlock back,
with perfectly articulated unspoken deep regard for John.  I'd love more of the crackling chemistry
between the characters, but with no further need to spell things out.   I'd like them to *show* what
happens in the face of danger, and not explain it anymore.

Yes. Right. Thumbs up.

thanks Mattlocked.    Which is why I adored the ending,   moving on,
from what came before...    whipping his
coat around him,   stalking out on his own.    Just the perfect
tone.    Any other ending would have bordered on sappy.   Back to business I hope!

Last edited by CarlPowers (January 6, 2014 9:23 pm)

I found this to be a nice 'edge' episode.  Enjoyable, but with no desire at all for a repeat viewing.
(Just like I would never want to repeat the experience or emotions of a good friend's wedding.)
I want to move on.

kittykat wrote:

I want to watch it many times 

^ 

You have a point there. I will watch it again and again. And the next episode might be very different. Maybe more different than we would care for. 

Jacco111 wrote:

You people should know your Canon better.

It's possible to express a differing opinion without being deliberately antagonistic

Re: Harry. John has a conversation with someone, possibly Mary, early at the reception saying that he did invite her but she didn't show. Then he commented that she and an open bar may not have been a good combo

Also, I could have lived without the vomiting whilst drunk. Also, why did they take a case when they were so inebriated? Surely she could have waiting until the morning? Seemed unrealistic. And for her not to realise they were drunk and insist on waiting herself seemed odd as well.

One of the reviews suggested Sherlock was played as a 'first time drunk' which isn't the read I got either, particularly with him attempting to keep them at a fuzzy happy level all night. It was John introducing shots into the beer that screwed them over.

Last edited by Wholocked (January 6, 2014 10:51 pm)

Mattlocked wrote:

Me too. But I don't need another one like this. It's enough to watch the current one ten times more. LOL

Same here. It's absolutely fine to have an unusual episode like this one among all other episodes (and TEH wasn't all that usual, either), but I really hope they'll give us more of the atmosphere and tone we know from Series 1 & 2 in HLV.

Well, watched it again yesterday, a few scenes even more than just once , and I came to the conclusion, that the only scenes I don't really need are at the beginning. Yeah, it's funny, this emergency call of Sherlock, but a shorter version, no xxx months earlier, would have done it too.

And as already mentioned I love this episode very much. But I agree with the opinion that one episode of this kind is enough for the show.

Last edited by gently69 (January 7, 2014 10:13 am)

silverblaze wrote:

I really liked the change of tone. After seven exciting mystery/thriller/horror episodes they can afford to do something different. Deepen the characters a bit, have fun with dialogues. It's not gonna stay that way, HLV is gonna be dark. Actually, I think they really had to do something like this or it would become repetitive. 

And is it just me or are the writers really showing off in this episode? The witty dialogues, the darker subtext, emotional without cheesiness. 

Ok, this is supposed to be a thread about things we didn't like. I'm failing at that. 

Right! I think the only thing I don't like about this episode is that I can't decide what I like more- the writing or the acting .

Well, the one thing about this episode that really irks me is when, after drinking the tea when John comes to visit him and ask him to be best man, the camera then shows us the eyeball swimming in the cup.  We'd already seen Sherlock holding the eyeball, then accidentally dropping it into the mug.  I thought showing the close-up was a cheap effect done for laughs, and it was not at all necessary for viewers to see the eyeball again.

SusiGo wrote:

Jacco111 wrote:

You people should know your Canon better.

So canon is a course of lectures? Silly me, and I thought ACD wanted to entertain his readers with intelligent fiction. 

I have to say I am a bit disappointed. I made an obvious quote (yes, the lecture one) and none of you seemed to recognise it. Then I said that you should know your Canon better, and still nobody got it.