[ SECRET POST #2862 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2862 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 042 secrets from Secret Submission Post #409.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - random textless image ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Sherlock

[(Anonymous)]

(Spoilers)

I watched this a while after the fandom. The thing that bothered me more than anything else was the way the villain won in the end. He was a great villain in that I just wanted him to be brought low -- to have him experience what he was doing to everyone else. But Sherlock never defeated him. He never found a clever way to stop him. Killing him just wasn't satisfying because Sherlock only did it because he had no other way to stop the villain. That isn't what I expect from Sherlock.

That was what disappointed me more than anything.

Re: Sherlock

[(Anonymous)]

Is that Charles Augustus Milverton? Didn't he get shot by someone else in the books? One of his victims?

Re: Sherlock

[(Anonymous)]

I've never read this story. I don't think I should have to to be able to enjoy the TV show. It should be able to stand on its own, and it didn't here. It did not provide a satisfying conclusion for me.

Re: Sherlock

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, he did get shot by one of his victims in the book. And I agree with OP that Sherlock should have outwitted him rather than shot him.

Re: Sherlock

[(Anonymous)]

Holmes never found a clever way to defeat him in the original story, either. He was resorting to breaking and entering to get materials Milverton was going to use for blackmail, but then one of Milverton's former victims up and shot the guy and took care of the problem.

Re: Sherlock

[(Anonymous)]

I still don't think this in any way excuses "Sherlock". It may be faithful to the books (which a lot of "Sherlock" fans have not read, nor do I think they should be expected to) but that doesn't make it good story-telling. Especially as "Sherlock" only vaguely follows the books anyway. It's a different medium anyway.

Perhaps they could've found a way for Sherlock to have shot him and made it satisfying but I doubt it. As it is, they created a viscerally repellant villain and did not give the audience (in my opinion) a cathartic ending. Telling me that it's faithful to the books doesn't change the unfinished feeling I was left with when I watched the episode.

Re: Sherlock

[solticisekf]

At least he got shot *bloodthirsty*

The whole episode wasn't very logical. Sherlock killed him because of Mary? It was pretty selfless, which means character development.