fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2071 ]

[ SECRET POST #2071 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2071 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

__________________________________________________

16.

__________________________________________________

17.

__________________________________________________

18.

__________________________________________________

Notes:

Important: I'm really sorry about this, but I accidentally misclicked and deleted the submission post from last week instead of saving it. Managed to save the first page (25) of secrets, but the rest (about 100 or so) are gone.

If you submitted something last week (Aug 26-Sept 1), please resubmit it here.

The submissions post for next week is below as usual.

Secrets Left to Post: ?? pages, ??? secrets from Secret Submission Post #296.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - 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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Curious, why do you hate Cumberbatch's version of Sherlock? You've hinted because "he is such an ass." But isn't that more Moffat's writing than anything else? Or does Cumberbatch do something that makes you want to punch Sherlock?

On a side note, I know I am going to be burned by this but, what the heck. I always thought that Moffat's writing was weak. Sometimes even bad. (Like in the last episode of Doctor Who. Ouch. That was bad.) And what has saved him time and time again is that he has almost god-like luck when it comes to casting. (He should have the name of his casting director tattooed on his body somewhere.)

His Sherlock is no different. Bad writing all around but excellent casting. I love Cumberbatch as Sherlock and Freeman as Watson. It's really the only reason why I watch the show.

Naw, I think most of the fandom thinks Moff's writing is weak. Most of the people I have met like the show for the same reason you do (me included). I think I've said this before somewhere, but from what I have seen (& this is my opinion too) Sherlock is a very uneven show, mostly pretty decent but punctuated sporadically with either REALLY AWESOME or fucking awful.

I think dickery is one of the core tenets of the performance, though. Moffat's episodes generally write Sherlock as more of a dick than the other writers do(except for Gatiss at the end of Hounds WHAT WAS THAT GATISS WHAT), but it's his mannerisms too, he's cold and serious and dismissive a lot of the time. He's also extremely eccentric which is funny, so 'eccentric' and 'dick' basically sums up his character in a nutshell imo.

Moffat's episodes generally write Sherlock as more of a dick than the other writers do(except for Gatiss at the end of Hounds WHAT WAS THAT GATISS WHAT

You know I never noticed it before but Sherlock is a lot more likeable, and more heroic, in Stephen Thompson's episodes. It is a little jarring when you then have Moffat's episode and even parts of Gatiss' where he's just a complete dick.

But then I always like characters who are dicks. From Blackadder to Arnold Rimmer. :P

Yeah (except for when he leaves John to fend for himself with that ASBO in The Blind Banker, so, yeah still uneven writing but that's forgiveable really because their relationship is so new). I quite like the way he writes them in TRF and I love the way he writes women as people so I'm looking forward to him in series 3.

I also love dicks, but I want them to be more consistent in their dickery :/

Exactly. And the ASBO thing is more careless dickery as opposed to intentional or malicious dickery like trying to drug John and put him in a fear experiment (seriously, are we supposed to believe that would be so easy to forgive? Really?!).

Yeah, I could see canon Holmes doing that kind of careless dickery even. Really what I think is weird about TBB is Freeman's acting, he seems so angry for some reason and idk why but ymmv. Sherlock seems most like a person when Thompson writes him. Definitely a dick, but a person nonetheless.

I have a headcanon that John is used to Sherlock experimenting on him because really their relationship is pretty fucked up anyway, but yeah if you have to think hard about an episode to make a headcanon for why that bit of it doesn't suck something the writer is doing is wrong.

.....except, that is NOT what happened in The Devil's Foot. Holmes informed Watson of the experiment ahead of time, and apologized profusely afterwards, for submitting BOTH OF THEM to it.

Also. Three Garridebs. Holmes as a sociopath is all in Moffatt's fevered imagination, and has no relation to the ACD Canon whatsoever.

I love dick characters, but I always prefer ones who have a massively dickish demeanor, but don't actually do a lot of serious dickish things. I dunno how else to explain it, except that I separate out "behavior that doesn't really matter" and "actions that have consequences".

So I don't mind Sherlock being rude and dickish and dismissive and shit, but when he does totally amoral dickery like in Hounds it really pisses me the fuck off.

Yeah I'm still not over the drugging thing. My biggest problem is: Was there a point to it? Really? I mean, having it be Sherlock, as opposed to John getting drugged in another way? And the bad thing is, as much as I love Freeman's acting that scene, knowing what was going on, and who was responsible, I just can't watch that scene again...

It seemed like they just wanted Sherlock to be a dick for the sake of it, because it's edgy or shocking or whatever.

Or because they wanted Freeman to do that scene and didn't care that the plot events that made the scene possible actually had consequences.

My money is on the latter. Gatiss has said that he really likes that scene because it's atmospheric and originally they even planned to do it in a meat locker (which, why? but idk) until they realized that made no sense, so I'm thinking that the how was totally handwaved. Honestly the only bit about that that bothered me was that while Sherlock was watching John in the camera room he had his feet up on the desk, which I think was an odd acting decision. He should have been more serious about it or something.

he had his feet up on the desk [...] He should have been more serious about it or something.

No shit! It's bad enough they did this, but for Sherlock to be so fucking casual about it? No. Just no. d-:

I pretend the feet on the desk thing never happened.

I mentally retcon a lot of things in Sherlock. . .

I hear you... ~_~

Season One was so awesome--hell, there are even things in TBB I liked (SARAH!)--but this season... ugh...

I am actually sort of opposite of you. I thought the pacing for the last two episodes of series 1 was slow (although it was still entirely enjoyable and left me wanting more!) but I really have a lot of things I like about series 2. More mental retcons, but also more things I like. In particular I am massively fond of TRF, despite its numerous flaws, and I also love all the domestic bits in ASiB (although that one loses its shine with each successive rewatch). Hounds for me has good rewatch value despite the small retcon.

ASiP is BRILLIANT though, and I think it has the least flaws out of all of the six episodes thus far.

I've never made it through TBB more than once. John seems angrier than usual in it for the whole thing and it makes me sad.

I like TGG until Moriarty actually showed up. I can't STAND him. Which meant a lot of TRF bugged be because... yeah...

And I liked little tiny bits of ASiB, but I'd love to transplant them into an overall story I'd actually rather watch then trying to ff through all the bullshit I can't stand just to watch a few minutes here and there.

"Hounds" is the only story in S2 I can tolerate watching most of. Compare that to S1, where I can sit through nearly all of all three episodes.

.....okay, no offense, but as someone who's watched nothing but miniseries and 45-minute, 22-episodes-a-season dramas until she was introduced to Downton Abbey last summer, this thread is making me giggle like crazy. Sorry! :D

(no subject)

biohazardgirl - 2012-09-03 22:53 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

intrigueing - 2012-09-03 23:05 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

biohazardgirl - 2012-09-03 23:09 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2012-09-05 08:38 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

biohazardgirl - 2012-09-03 22:59 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

fenm - 2012-09-03 23:08 (UTC) - Expand

Yeah I completely agree with this. The man can't plot for shit but the actors are amazing. I mostly watch the show for Freeman and then everything else is secondary to that.

What was so bad about the writing in the last episode of Doctor Who? I'm being serious and not questioning your opinion or anything, I'm just really, really inept at picking up on whether writing is generally considered "good" or "bad" and why.

In general? The plot made no sense, the characters were out of character and Moffat put in another on his cookie cutter "sassy smart, sexy, flirts with the Doctor and saves the day" female characters.

Let's start with the plot. The Daleks said they couldn't blow up the planet because they consider it wrong to kill their own kind. Then two seconds later they said they couldn't do it because of the force field. And they would blow of their kind if it wasn't for the force field. What a minute?

Then the Doctor calls them out that in reality, the reason why they haven't gone down to the planet is because they are afraid of the insane Daleks. The Daleks all but admitted this. But then later on Amy says she is afraid when she is turning into a Dalek and the Doctor remarks, "Good. Fear is not a Dalek trait." Again, huh?

And out of all the aliens that Daleks can get to help out, they get their worst enemy. Why? Wouldn't it have been easy to grab a random alien, strap a bomb to him and beam him down? I am sure the bomb exploding within the force field would have taken that down. Never mind the fact of why didn't they just teleport a bomb down?

Then the Daleks says something to the affect of the reason why they could never seem to kill the Doctor is because they think their hate and his hate for each other is beautiful. What? BS. They have tried time and time again to kill him.

That right there is a Dalek being sentimental and when have Daleks ever been sentimental?

So, they send their worst enemy of all time down to the planet with an escape route back. Why? Why would they allow the teleporter to work in reverse?

Then there is Rory and Amy. They have been together through thick and thin. Rory has stood by Amy's side for two thousand years. Amy has fought aliens and nearly died for Rory. In fact, another version of her did. They have been through hell and back. And yet I am to believe that they two never had a heart to heart about having kids? Any frank discussion about the fact that Amy couldn't have children or how Rory feels about that? No, Amy just kicks Rory out instead. And she thinks that is what is best for Rory. Again, BS. From what we've seen of Rory, what has given Amy any idea that Rory would simply go, "Oh, well. Let me find a new wife and have a boat load of kids." Again, the man stayed by her side for two thousand years.

Either Amy is stupid and doesn't know her husband at all or that is just bad writing.

And then there is Oswin who is afraid to go outside because of what is out there. But has no problem of saving the Doctor by hacking into the Daleks to shut them down. Why couldn't she shut down everything and venture out? Mind you, how do you shut a Dalek down? They aren't machines. They are organic beings in personal tanks. Moffat's solution for this? A hive mind. Though that goes against the fact that the Dalek's have a Prime Minister. (How does that work? Dalek elections.) And why would the Dalek's have a Prime Minister when in the past we've seen them all following the orders of the "Dalek God?"

Clearly, Moffat is making this up as he goes along without any regard of canon.

Anyway, you get the idea. This episode gave me a headache with its bad writing.

The Amy/Rory plot was what annoyed me the most about that episode. It just doesn't make sense for them to break up after everything they've been through. And the reasoning for it... couldn't they just have talked about it? And surely there are other options, like adoption? It just seemed like an excuse to inject a bit of drama in to the episode, but it didn't really work. (Their reconciliation was really sweet though.)

You brought up a lot of good points that I didn't notice. I'm like the anon you're replying to, I'm not great at noticing why writing is bad right off the bat. But wow, there is a lot of contradiction in this episode. Not to mention the doctor blowing up all the daleks when he should be against that. (Though maybe not, he's got a pretty messy track record there.)

Yes, and usually I am very forgiving with Doctor Who. I know you can't really apply logic to it and I am good that. It was and is never a well written science-fiction show. Mind you, it's a fun, entertaining show. A blast to watch. But will it inspire future scientists like Star Trek has to create tech based on the show or be used as an inspiration for associations like NASA as in naming a shuttle after Enterprise in order to "bravely go where no man has gone before?" Nope. (Frankly, no one is trying to build a time-space machine based on the TARDIS or trying to figure out if the laws of space-time behave like that on Doctor Who because, again, there's no real science that you could use from the show to inspire you.)

But, odd enough, Doctor Who does inspires the art culture more than anything else. Fanartists, fanfic writers even fanvideo creators. That's where Doctor Who shines as a beacon of creativeness. And, fine, that's great. As a fanartists, I am right drawing along besides everyone else.

But, back to this episode, again, usually I can forgive the complete lack of logic that Doctor Who gives you simply because in the end, Doctor Who is meant to be fun and not serious and the actors are always top notch. (Matt Smith, in my humble opinion, is an absolutely brilliant actor. And I'll watch him in anything.) But not out of character characters and plot holes that scream of, "Frik, I've got five minutes to finish this script." I hate lazy writing. And this episode is trampled to death with it.

LOL LOVES CLASSIST RACISTS

What? Is this suppose to mean something in English?

IA with your comments about the weak writing (disappointing, given the base material they've got to work with, and how well (all things considered) STUD was handled...and with the exception of the last two episodes of BBCSherlock, the actors were very much IC to the books...until they started playing up the "high-functioning sociopaths" angle for the Holmes brothers. Because, no. Just no. The Greek Interpreters and The Red Circle and and and, would like to disagree with you, Moffatt, etc. Don't get me started on Nu!Who.

I read on the last Sherlock secret that came up here, the Brits recently gave Moffatt some kind of "lifetime achievement" award. So. Yeah.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only