[ SECRET POST #4696 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4696 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 07 secrets from Secret Submission Post #672.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[sparklywalls]

It's a good look, pity about everything else. I didn't really read anything about this special beforehand so had no idea about the fact the modern Sherlock would feature. I was actually looking forward to "what if Sherlock but the original book setting?" and then I got...that. And still I persisted and gave series 4 a try.

I know they did say that's it but I fear they don't mean it. By this point I wouldn't care if there's a new series because I'm done.

[(Anonymous)]

I'd heard it was kinda bad before I saw it, but wanted to see it anyway because I like historical settings. But yeah... that was bad. Though honestly, I was never a huge fan of the show. The first season had promise, but IMO it went unfulfilled and then tanked.

[sparklywalls]

For a while it felt like it was an absolute fandom no-no to say it but in my mind you're absolutely correct. The first season was the peak and even then episode 2 was weaker than the two surrounding it.

Season 2 was ok tbh until we got that insulting shitshow season 3 premier that felt like it was going out of its way to mock the fanbase for caring about knowing the solution. I should've got out then really.

[(Anonymous)]

I feel like the awfulness that was season 4 made a lot of people go "... but the first three seasons* were so good and then THAT happened!" and I keep thinking no... no they were not good. They might seem good compared to season 4, but to me, they always fell far short of what I'd hoped. The show and any pretense at writing decent plots was quickly swallowed by the main characters and their personal lives, and I still think it was a criminal waste of a character like Irene Adler.


* Or was it two seasons? I can't recall.

[sparklywalls]

It was three. I checked because honestly I've only re-watched the first two, which just about says it all!

You're right about Irene Adler as well. Definitely one of the downsides to the second season as I forgot to take into account how badly the show used her.

As for the personal lives of the characters they even failed at that ultimately because I struggled to understand how John could continue to justify being friends with an absolute dick like Sherlock. Ok Holmes has a certain edge to him in the source material, but it's not like *that*.

[(Anonymous)]

Agreed. I think turning up the asshole dial on Sherlock was something the writers thought was clever, but I didn't care for it. I also didn't care for the interpretation that "Sherlock is an asshole because he doesn't understand people". You can't be a good detective if you don't understand how human beings work.

[(Anonymous)]

The scene with the bomb on the train was a huge Nope for me, and I never watched the show again. When you have John (a war veteran with canon PTSD!!) begging and /crying/ that Sherlock not be joking about the bomb, and then he turns out to be joking? That was disgusting.

[sparklywalls]

Deliberately exposing him to the "hound" as well. It's more like a torture experiment than a friendship.

[type_wild]

I found the first season to be really something, certainly in comparison to most British detective shows having come before it. It was fresh and new and it stood out, and I liked it enough to re-watch it several times.

The second series, not so much, and by the time the third came around, I'd heard enough bad things about it to not even bother.

I'm still not sure whether the first series truly was that good in comparison or if it was just shiny and new, or if the later series were truly worse or just not having the benefit of the "wow"-factor that the first one had.

[(Anonymous)]

Heh, only a rewatch will answer that question! I watch a lot of British detective shows and I enjoyed the Arthur Conan Doyle stories as well as the older Jeremy Brett adaptation. The first season of Sherlock was very stylish, but even then I thought hmmmm, I'd like there to be more substance to go with all that style. I don't feel like I ever got it, tbh.

[(Anonymous)]

My personal take - after going back and re-watching the first season - is that it's 99% the first series being shiny and new. It's a little better than the 2nd series but not that much better.

[(Anonymous)]

I think a lot of why S1 seems so much weaker upon rewatch is because there were a lot of things in S1 that felt like they were deliberate, insightful character beats or were building towards something really interesting. But most of that stuff turned out to just be fluke. In the beginning it was an extremely easy show to read more into than was actually there. There were just so many things that seemed more significant and deliberate than they actually were.

[kulturschnepfe]

So much this. S 1 looked so shiny, so promising. Everything went downhill for me from S 2 onwards when they robustly chose style over substance. But I too like the Victorian era look from The Abominable Bride, even though the episode was rather meh.

[(Anonymous)]

+10000

[(Anonymous)]

it was an extremely easy show to read more into than was actually there

Like what? Other than shipping I don't remember reading a lot into it or hearing people discuss (with any seriousness) a lot of stuff they were reading into it. I didn't feel like I was being invited to solve some larger mystery.

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT, but I think it was mostly the character beats and what the narrative was telling you about the characters as people and the nature of their relationships, with each other, but especially with themselves, and where that might be going.

All the characters felt like they had a lot of implied depth and a huge potential for growth arcs.

[(Anonymous)]

I think this about nails it. I love Sherlock Holmes adaptations and seeing what people do with the characters and I give quite a bit of leeway in interpretation. Especially modern interpretations. Season one had promise and yeah, I thought they were hints at more interesting, meaningful things to come but it was all really superificial. Character and relationship development gave way to the "humor" of Sherlock being an obnoxious jerk and John his victim. That's just not the Holmes/Watson dynamic I enjoy, and it's not in the spirit of the canon.

[dantesspirit]

I feel like they were originally ending it at season 3, but then decided there was enough interest to go ahead with a season 4 and weren't prepared as well as they should have been. So season 4 was decidedly lackluster.