[ SECRET POST #2343 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2343 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.
[not a repeat, was too big before]


__________________________________________________

















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 055 secrets from Secret Submission Post #335.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

02. http://i40.tinypic.com/ay4x1.jpg

[kaijinscendre]

That is why they have not figured it out. In their "universe" these things are not cliche. Also, viewers often see things that the characters will not.

[(Anonymous)]

well tbf, at least in the case of the original canon, a lot of those cliches weren't cliches when ACD wrote the books, and may have been totally original

also, my experience has been that it's pretty difficult to guess the outcome of the stories from the original canon if you don't already know what's going to happen, because Doyle doesn't give a shit about your ability to figure it out and is perfectly comfortable having the entire solution hang on something he doesn't mention at all till the denouement - in other words, he cheats

[(Anonymous)]

That pissed me off so hard the one time I read a Sherlock book.

Come on! If I wanted a story that was impossible for me to solve myself I'd read a modern mystery (looking at you James Paterson).

[galerian-ash.livejournal.com]

Then read/watch something else -- Murder By Death, for example! I bet you won't be able to solve that one ;P

[(Anonymous)]

...was it Death? :3

[dancing_serpent]

That's pretty normal, though, isn't it? And it goes for most of the crime and mystery shows and movies. I mean, most of the fans are experienced viewers, "genre savvy" or even just used to the narrative causality of "modern" television.

There's not much that's truly surprising, and most of the time the viewers get glimpses or even the full info right at the start of a movie/episode anyway.

[sootyowl]

I had to study Numb3rs for a class in uni where we broke it up in sections and found out when and where the killer is generally shown/the format of a show. Ever since then, I can generally tell who the killer is (unless the killer actually hasn't been introduced yet). It sucks, but I try to turn my brain off and just enjoy the show.

Plus, it helps to think that you're a watcher, not a participator -- so you'd pick up on clues quicker as you are shown more viewpoints. Unlike the mystery solvers linear one.

Transcription of secret 2

[transcription_guy]

[Three images of Sherlock Holmes adaptations. One is of BBC Sherlock, the others I am not sure about]

[black text]
I can't take Sherlock Holmes seriously in any of these incarnations. I keep figuring out the plot of the mystery before them and then spending the rest of the episode scoffing at them because they haven't figured it out yet.

[blue text]
I'm not a genius I just watch a lot of detectives and know the cliches.

Re: Transcription of secret 2

[(Anonymous)]

The black and white drawing is, incredibly, a Sidney Paget illustration from the *original stories*. If OP doesn't even like the original, what the hell are they doing trying to pontificate about SH 'adaptations'?

Re: Transcription of secret 2

[(Anonymous)]

The one with Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law is from the 2009 and 2011 theatrical adaptations.

Re: Transcription of secret 2

[(Anonymous)]

Thank you for the description, transcription_guy

Also, randomly, i agree. IF the OP doesn't even like the original...

[(Anonymous)]

... Why is this limited to Sherlock Holmes? Does this not happen to you with most crime/detective canons, then?

As an aside, not that it's necessarily a bad thing to be able to guess the criminal in advance. I still remember the first time that happened to me: with a Secret Seven book involving a criminal on stilts. That warm little glow a few chapters later when you go "Hah! I was right!"

[elaminator]

I can see wanting to be ~shocked~ and ~amazed~ but being right about fictional plots always gives me a warm fuzzy feeling. Even when it's obvious as hell, I still enjoy it.

[(Anonymous)]

It bothers me most with Sherlock because he's supposed to be the world's greatest detective, and as such, smarter than me. It bothers me in any show when we're told over and over again how incredibly brilliant and singularly clever the protagonist is, yet they can't seem to puzzle out the simplest mystery. I agree with the anon about Study in Pink being one of the worst - from the opening scenes it was clear it was a cab driver (who else would all these disparate people in need of a ride go with?) and watching it take Sherlock SO FREAKING LONG to have the idea dawn on him put a damper on the series for me.

If the show or film portrays its protagonist as smart but not Better Than Everyone, and gives him or her an engaging personality, I don't care how simple the mystery is, I enjoy the ride.

Of all the Sherlocks I've seen, only one episode of Elementary fooled me - like the OP, not because I'm especially smart, but because I've read and watched a hell of a lot of mysteries and know the rules. Even then I knew what the end result would be, I just couldn't see the trick until it was spelled out (it was the one with the woman with the flowers pushed in front of the train - very Jonathan Creek).

[making_excuses]

I dunno about you guys, but that is my favourite thing about crime shows, solving the cases!

I find crime shows where you can't solve any of the cases, because it was "the cousins brothers ex girlfriend" whom was never mentioned who did it pretty boring.

It is one of the only fun memories I have from my childhood, watching Easter Crime and trying to solve the case first!

[lex_antonia]

It for the same reason think Citizen Kane or the Beatles are nothing special: they've been copied so often they, in hindsight, seem clichéd. You figure it out so quickly because you've seen it all before.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm confused- you can't take Sherlock Holmes seriously in which incarnations? none of them? Isn't that a picture from the original?

[(Anonymous)]

Someone is missing the point of SH. It's about him and his peculiarities, Watson and his forbearance, and the endless opportunities for angsty H/W slash. Get with the programme.

[ooh_mrdarcy]

But that's half the fun~
Elementary is probably one of my favorite Sherlock adaptions to date, not because the cases are hard to crack for the viewer (lol nope) but because of the simple magical feeling of watching a detective and his assistant work out cases together (it's not about what the end result is, it's about how they get there).

in any case, try Agatha Christie instead if you haven't already?

Marple/Poirot >>>>>>>>>>>> Sherlock Holmes

To be fair, Sherlock Holmes was the original source for a lot of modern mystery cliches

[nyxelestia]

Also, while something maybe be a cliche to readers, how often does this work in real life? The real world does not run on cliches, and so the characters in these worlds aren't paying attention to the cliches. Up to a certain extent, cliches exist to give readers (and viewers) something to hold onto, so to speak, a familiar path for the story. That means many of us figure it out well beforehand - and that's not necessarily a bad thing. It's a piece of fiction, after all. :)

Though also, the RDJ Sherlock Holmes isn't really meant to be a mystery movie so much as an action movie with some mystery in it. ;)

[blueonblue]

"A Study in Pink" was the worst--even Luther managed to figure out his serial killer was a cabbie. I thought the way it was handled in the pilot made far more sense.

[ariakas]

I have a good friend who's a literature postgrad, and sometimes when we watch something together, we'll pick out all the tropes, archetypes, and devices... to the point where we often have the whole plot determined in advance, not just the ending.

...Writing for tv/movies is surprisingly by-the-numbers and mechanical, oftentimes.

Also

[(Anonymous)]

Doyle's books were serialized chapters in magazines, so there are inconsistencies even within the same book. Where we see all the guns lining every wall since, he was mostly writing something he didn't want to continue for the sake of a paycheck.

[straycatblues]

Damn,I applaud you for being able to solve mysteries like that.I can't for the life of me.