# Sherlock series 3, better or worse than series 1 and 2 ?



## Thom (Jun 5, 2000)

I'm not enjoying series 3 of Sherlock as much as series 1 and 2. The episodes seemed more confusing in spots, and more jerky/jumping around in their presentation. 

I like where the characters arrived at, but didn't enjoy watching the journey. I know this is vague, and may not make much sense, but I can't quite put it into words.

If I remember correctly, even the wedding episode (which I liked) had something off-putting in its makeup, something I don't remember from episodes in series 1 or 2.

What's the opinion of the Sherlock fans here?


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

I loved it. I like different and I thought the final episode was sublime - some of the best TV I've seen in a looooooong time.

In fact, my wife refused to watch anything else that night because it couldn'at match up to the quality of that installment.

To each his own, I guess.


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I didn't enjoy series 3 all that much. It felt weird to me.


----------



## markz (Oct 22, 2002)

I enjoyed it, although I am partial to the Moriarty story line from previous seasons. He was great every time he was on screen.


----------



## bdmarine (Sep 8, 2009)

I have to agree with Thom here. I almost cancelled the series after the first episode of this season. It did jump around and as soon as you had time to get comfortable with a particular scene or plot line, another one would pop in. The wedding episode was a bit more cohesive, so I will hang in there.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Haven't watched the last show yet but I'm enjoying it. I like quirky story telling as long as it is coherent. I prefer stories that don't rely on a single bad guy.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Still catching up on season 3, but I found the 2nd episode of seasons 1 and 2 really, really bad. Just surprisingly terrible and not even worthy of inclusion in the series. I've been hoping that, at worst, season 3 holds true to form and has great 1st and 3rd episodes and a terrible 2nd.


----------



## ClutchBrake (Sep 5, 2001)

I didn't care for season 3 at all. Very disappointing. :down:


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

TAsunder said:


> Still catching up on season 3, but I found the 2nd episode of seasons 1 and 2 really, really bad. Just surprisingly terrible and not even worthy of inclusion in the series. I've been hoping that, at worst, season 3 holds true to form and has great 1st and 3rd episodes and a terrible 2nd.


Episode 2 of Season 2 was Hound of the Baskerville. I hated that episode. Loved the other 2 episodes that season though.

Hmm, I have not liked at least 4 of the total 9 Sherlock episodes made. I don't remember what episode 2 of season 1 was even about. Maybe I didn't like it either??


----------



## JMikeD (Jun 10, 2002)

I've been very disappointed by series 3. The only thing I liked about S3E1 was Watson beating up Holmes and I kept losing interest in S3E2 and wandering off to do household chores. Episode 3 was doing OK until the reveal at the end, which ruined the entire episode for me.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

The 3rd season was terrible. I guess the writers only had a few good story ideas in them, which they used up in the first 6 episodes. I suspect that is part of the reason that Season 3 took so long. They were trying to think of good story ideas, but could not. Then they finally just decided to go for it anyway.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

john4200 said:


> The 3rd season was terrible. I guess the writers only had a few good story ideas in them, which they used up in the first 6 episodes. I suspect that is part of the reason that Season 3 took so long. They were trying to think of good story ideas, but could not. Then they finally just decided to go for it anyway.


It took so long because they had trouble getting the stars together. Benedict cumberbatch is as busy as Michael Caine in his prime and then there was this little thing called the Hobbit.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

TonyD79 said:


> It took so long because they had trouble getting the stars together. Benedict cumberbatch is as busy as Michael Caine in his prime and then there was this little thing called the Hobbit.


Well, it apparently was not enough time for the writers to come up with any good story ideas.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

Hoffer said:


> Episode 2 of Season 2 was Hound of the Baskerville. I hated that episode. Loved the other 2 episodes that season though.
> 
> Hmm, I have not liked at least 4 of the total 9 Sherlock episodes made. I don't remember what episode 2 of season 1 was even about. Maybe I didn't like it either??


It was the chinese smuggling ring episode. Before I knew Sherlock was only 3 episodes per season, I watched that episode and immediately gave up on the entire series and figured episode 1 was a fluke.


----------



## murgatroyd (Jan 6, 2002)

TAsunder said:


> Still catching up on season 3, but I found the 2nd episode of seasons 1 and 2 really, really bad. Just surprisingly terrible and not even worthy of inclusion in the series. I've been hoping that, at worst, season 3 holds true to form and has great 1st and 3rd episodes and a terrible 2nd.


S1E2 is universally loathed as far as I can tell.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

john4200 said:


> Well, it apparently was not enough time for the writers to come up with any good story ideas.


Yes because they can't read Doyle's material and use it.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

john4200 said:


> Well, it apparently was not enough time for the writers to come up with any good story ideas.


I thought Series 3 was well done, and overall more consistent than Series 2, but neither really could top the amazing 1st series.

However it does get tiring that some folks not only complain, but then continue complaining, a bit more and it very quickly turns into thread crapping.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

dianebrat said:


> However it does get tiring that some folks not only complain, but then continue complaining, a bit more and it very quickly turns into thread crapping.


Considering that this thread is explicitly asking for opinions on the 3rd season, who is "thread crapping" now, hmmm, Diane?


----------



## TomK (May 22, 2001)

Any Sherlock episode has been so far beyond any other episode from another show, they've all been of the highest quality with the writing and the acting. Season 3 has been a great follow on to seasons 1 and 2.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

TomK said:


> Any Sherlock episode has been so far beyond any other episode from another show, they've all been of the highest quality with the writing and the acting. Season 3 has been a great follow on to seasons 1 and 2.


S1E2 was worse than Sharknado.


----------



## ADG (Aug 20, 2003)

john4200 said:


> Well, it apparently was not enough time for the writers to come up with any good story ideas.


I assume you mean in your opinion. In my opinion, all three episodes were unique and excellent in both story line and presentation. I thought it was the best of the three seasons.



TomK said:


> Any Sherlock episode has been so far beyond any other episode from another show, they've all been of the highest quality with the writing and the acting. Season 3 has been a great follow on to seasons 1 and 2.


+1


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

I did not enjoy series 3 at all.
Watching episode 1 I kept thinking maybe it'll get better as they wrap it up.
and then I changed that to maybe the next one will be better.
Lather, rinse, repeat.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

john4200 said:


> Considering that this thread is explicitly asking for opinions on the 3rd season, who is "thread crapping" now, hmmm, Diane?


wow that's uncalled for, offering thoughts is cool, positive or negative, but to to just come back with a 2nd post to say


> Well, it apparently was not enough time for the writers to come up with any good story ideas.


Yeah, it's on the way to threadcrapping when the posts continue along that path, opinion thread or not.


----------



## Agatha Mystery (Feb 12, 2002)

I've enjoyed Sherlock, all 3 seasons. I've always been a fan of Sherlock Holmes stories. It's fun watching how Cumberbatch plays him. Watson is not a cookie cutter character that's always been in books. He's less of a cardboard cut out and more of a foil. Holmes is extremely smart, and yet, he needs Watson, rather than just using Watson to prove how smart he is.

Mycroft has been fun. I liked how they made you think that he was Moriarty in the first episode. 

For the current series, I've been pausing the show at points when Sherlock has been gathering information about each person, with all of the words. I wanted to make sure I didn't miss anything.

As far as quality from series to series, I think the first series was a surprise to many, and how the second series ended made everyone take notice. The quality of the show is the same, but people become inured to a character, and it no longer takes them by surprise. Sherlock has always been a bit of a surprise. Now that we all know how he operates, people are a bit let down when he continues to operate in the same way. It's hard to keep that fresh. And because it isn't fresh, it seems like it isn't as good.

Sherlock has been written in the same fashion in the 3 series. Sherlock is not always a likeable character. It's only his relationship with Watson that makes him more human, more approachable, redeemable.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

ADG said:


> I assume you mean in your opinion.


You assume wrong. Obviously I meant someone else's opinion.


----------



## john4200 (Nov 1, 2009)

dianebrat said:


> wow that's uncalled for...


Your comment certainly was uncalled for. I don't know why you went and thread crappped.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

Agatha Mystery said:


> Mycroft has been fun. I liked how they made you think that he was Moriarty in the first episode.


I was totally fooled and enjoyed it. But it is a reminder that people who are familiar with the original novels can get more out of the show. As for the new Doctor Watson returning home after being injured in active service in Afghanistan more than 100 years after the original Watson did the same thing....

I think the sequence of Mary shooting Sherlock is probably going to be my television moment of the year.


----------



## T-Wolves (Aug 22, 2000)

I thought the first 2 episodes of season 3 were among the series' best -- absolutely loved the wedding episode. I just watched the final episode, and didn't like it nearly as much as the first 2. Season 4 should be interesting and fun to see how


Spoiler



Moriarty faked his own death at the same time as Sherlock was faking his own death.


----------



## hairyblue (Feb 25, 2002)

I didn't like season 3 as much. I really didn't care for how the season finale was resolved. I'd have been happier with Sherlock out smarting the guy. Sherlock didn't handle it like Sherlock.

I think introducing Mary and having Watson married was a big mistake. The show worked with Watson and Sherlock interacting. I'm not sure if they can get that back. Did the show Jump the Shark already? I hope not.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I enjoyed season 3 but I don't think it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. One thing I absolutely, positively loathed was


Spoiler



Sherlock Holmes as a cold blooded murderer. Maybe that's from the books but I never read any of them.


----------



## tiassa (Jul 2, 2008)

T-Wolves said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Moriarty faked his own death at the same time as Sherlock was faking his own death.


speculation on the above follows:



Spoiler



I think Moriarty is dead. I think the "miss me" is some sort of computer hack that he implemented before his demise, and is now controlled by someone else Irene Adler, maybe, or the last remaining member of Moriarty's network. The ultimate hack would be Sherlock set it up as a "get out of Jail (or suicide mission in Eastern Europe) free card"


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

^^^^^

Agreed, mostly, but not discussed in the open!


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Is this the inevitable backlash?

I had fun with season 3. There were plenty of times during the first two runs that I watched the TV feeling something like euphoria, and those admittedly were less common this time around. But then, there is only so long that a thing can feel truly new. Familiarity has for some people, I suspect, indeed bred contempt.

That said, sure, this season was probably a bit less successful creatively than the first two. There are a few more plot nits to pick at, some tonality shifts that didn't quite work, and character beats that were a little surprising. I suspect the latter two things, at least, were quite deliberate. This is a character study as much as anything, and it would be a failure if Sherlock and Watson did not change as a result of their relationship with each other. Maybe you liked it, maybe not. 

It's still high-level television, and I can't wait for more.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

enjoyed season 3, even with episode 1 dragging on and on, and really enjoyed the last episode, though the cliffhanger was not completely unexpected - looking forward to season 4.


----------



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

I thought the majority of season 3 was fun, but at the same time it felt like the characters' personalities morphed around too much to suit specific scenes.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

I haven't watched S3.. but I've watched the first 2 eps of S1 so far. I've been watching "Elementary" all along, and likely because I saw that first (and because of Lucy Liu), I like it better, but still have enjoyed this show. Watching it on Amazon, of course you miss the little intros that the guy does on Masterpiece Mystery. (Though the one I checked out, after watching it on Amazon, was just the oft-repeated story of Doyle's teacher Bell.)

(tangent) Reading some of the imdb comments about "Elementary" is funny though. Basically a lot of "I stayed away from this because of the British series" comments, then they eventually tried out "Elementary", and really liked it.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Yeah, for all the talk about Elementary being a rip-off off Sherlock, they are two completely different shows...equally awesome, but completely different.


----------



## kmccbf (Mar 9, 2002)

I'm not sure I think season 3 is worse or better than the other seasons, but it has a very different feel which I thinks puts some people off. I really enjoyed the last episode. I almost felt that Moffet merged some scripts from Doctor Who with those of Sherlock. I almost got a wibily wobely, timey wimy feel from them. This is said in jest, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if at some point in the series we don't find out that Sherlock and Moriarty are time lords.


----------



## pgogborn (Nov 11, 2002)

kmccbf said:


> ...
> I almost felt that Moffet merged some scripts from Doctor Who with those of Sherlock. I almost got a wibily wobely, timey wimy feel from them. This is said in jest, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if at some point in the series we don't find out that Sherlock and Moriarty are time lords.


Steven Moffat interviewed in the Guardian:
"Sherlock is Doctor Who but an hour later in the TV schedules. Not two hours later, one hour." Doesn't Moffat want to write grown-up stuff for two hours later? "Not really. Writing for adults often means just increasing the swearing  but find an alternative to swearing and you've probably got a better line."

He says he did write grown-up stuff  Joking Apart in the 90s and Coupling in the 00s, sitcoms that riffed on his own sexual history. "You could say they were adult. Or maybe they were more childish than what I'm writing now." >
http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2012/jan/20/steven-moffat-sherlock-doctor-who


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Yeah, for all the talk about Elementary being a rip-off off Sherlock, they are two completely different shows...equally awesome, but completely different.


I think at this point, I enjoy Elementary more. I typically give up on procedurals fairly quickly. I just get bored with 22, 1 hour episodes every year. Elementary keeps me interested and watching.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

pgogborn said:


> He says he did write grown-up stuff  Joking Apart in the 90s and Coupling in the 00s, sitcoms that riffed on his own sexual history. "You could say they were adult. Or maybe they were more childish than what I'm writing now." >


Hm, never heard of "Joking Apart". I guess it's not on DVD? (simply checked imdb). I love Coupling, so would like to check this out.


----------



## Thom (Jun 5, 2000)

mattack said:


> Hm, never heard of "Joking Apart". I guess it's not on DVD? (simply checked imdb). I love Coupling, so would like to check this out.


You can get the Joking Apart season 1 DVD set from Amazon, but you will need a DVD player that can play region 2 DVDs.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

kmccbf said:


> I almost felt that Moffet merged some scripts from Doctor Who with those of Sherlock. I almost got a wibily wobely, timey wimy feel from them. This is said in jest, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if at some point in the series we don't find out that Sherlock and Moriarty are time lords.


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

I purchased the BR disks of Sherlock season three because the high def broadcast of Sherlock in the Los Angeles area was very poor. For example: During the scene at the wedding when the flower petals are tossed into the air, the picture breaks up and pixelates so badly it's not much better than video noise. The BR disk looks stunningly beautiful at that point compared to the video mess that was broadcast. (That isn't the only place where the picture breaks up, but it was the worst.) I guess the LA PBS station is using too many sub channels to provide enough bandwidth for the main video stream.

The Amazon.com version of the Sherlock Season 3 BR disks was released Tuesday. The ones I have are from the UK. While the latest season of Downton Abbey was clearly labeled as BR region B, these Sherlock season 3 BR disks are not labeled with a region code at all that I could find, and I really looked hard for it, so I assume they are all-region. It's hard to tell since my BR player is all-region. I read somewhere that only 30-35 percent of BR disks are region encoded.

[RANT = ON]
I think that the region coding was enacted to protect the income of local distributors, though it's real effect is to irritate people like myself who then have to get region-free hardware. Whatever the reason, it's one of the things that are in the way of free information exchange. I'd hate to have a disk that wouldn't play because of a region code. All the data is there, but it's inaccessible simply because of an arbitrary bit set somewhere in the format.  Yeah I got region free DVD and BR players.
[RANT = OFF]

Watching episode three a second time, I saw some interesting stuff I missed the first time. Sherlock and Janine never had sex. The guy who challenged Magnussen, in the opening scene, was a bit later indicted on corruption charges. Lady Smallwood's husband, later in the show, commits suicide. The story telling can get a bit dense and takes some attention to get the details. They did a good job of faking us out into thinking that there was a computer interface in his glasses. At one point, he takes the glasses off when the visible text gets fuzzy. He cleans the glasses, puts them back on, and the text is back and is now clear. It sure looked like it was the glasses to me.  In the scene where Magnussen first meets Sherlock, there is a long list of his "pressure points" in red, but it's a fake. It's the same five or six lines of text are repeated many times and quickly scroll up. Magnussen laughed, and I did as well at that. When Magnussen was "flicking" Watson's face, he commented that he had done the same thing to Janine.

Who would benefit the most from FAKING the return of Jim Moriarty? Why Sherlock 
himself, of course.


----------



## Hunter Green (Feb 22, 2002)

I felt season 3 was a step down, but not so huge a step down that I'd ever consider not watching; it wasn't stepping down that far, and it was stepping down from so very high.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Church AV Guy said:


> The Amazon.com version of the Sherlock Season 3 BR disks was released Tuesday. The ones I have are from the UK. While the latest season of Downton Abbey was clearly labeled as BR region B, these Sherlock season 3 BR disks are not labeled with a region code at all that I could find, and I really looked hard for it, so I assume they are all-region. It's hard to tell since my BR player is all-region. I read somewhere that only 30-35 percent of BR disks are region encoded.


The way you can tell is try to play it. Blu-Ray players can't be region-free without switching regions (that is, if it's a Region A player and you have a Region B disc, you have to switch the player to Region B through some arcane manner specified by the modifier). So if you play it without switching, the disc is either the one you have it set to or region-free.

(Often British discs are labelled "Region B" but are actually region-free.)


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Aren't region free players at best grey market, and possibly black market?


----------



## ElJay (Apr 6, 2005)

mattack said:


> Aren't region free players at best grey market, and possibly black market?


You can buy some legit region-locked players and then install a third party mod which allows the region to be changed on demand.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

ElJay said:


> You can buy some legit region-locked players and then install a third party mod which allows the region to be changed on demand.


Or you can buy modded players. The place I got mine is a pretty big established outfit with a store in Chicago and an open internet presence, who advertise their region-free players openly, so I assume it must be legal or they would have gone after them years ago.


----------



## kmccbf (Mar 9, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Or you can buy modded players. The place I got mine is a pretty big established outfit with a store in Chicago and an open internet presence, who advertise their region-free players openly, so I assume it must be legal or they would have gone after them years ago.


Off Topic, but this is true. There are many legitimate needs for region-free or dual region players. I know that Indiana University's multicultural centers and student groups have several region-free players that are used to help foreign students keep up with news and culture from their home countries.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Or you can buy modded players. The place I got mine is a pretty big established outfit with a store in Chicago and an open internet presence, who advertise their region-free players openly, so I assume it must be legal or they would have gone after them years ago.


modded players, I'd call that grey market. I bet if the MPAA wanted to get the feds on them, they would.. (I am *NOT* one of those who think the MPAA is by definition evil.)

Education-wise, heck, there may be some kind of a loophole for that.


----------



## wtherrell (Dec 23, 2004)

FWIW I think I still prefer the old Edwardian setting shows. 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jan 19, 2005)

mattack said:


> Aren't region free players at best grey market, and possibly black market?


There is no mandate that disk manufacturers adhere to region coding. Only about 30-35 percent of Blu-Ray disks are region encoded. If there were any issues with selling region free disk players, you wouldn't see so many of them being openly advertised in national retailers like Amazon.com Some companies manufacture two versions of the same player, one region free, the other region coded. The distinction between the two is just a suffix to the model number.


----------



## AeneaGames (May 2, 2009)

mattack said:


> modded players, I'd call that grey market. I bet if the MPAA wanted to get the feds on them, they would.. (I am *NOT* one of those who think the MPAA is by definition evil.)
> 
> Education-wise, heck, there may be some kind of a loophole for that.


Neither the MPAA nor the feds are interested in US people who want to watch discs meant for the non-US market...


----------



## doom1701 (May 15, 2001)

Bumping this since we just finished watching series 3 on Netflix. All of the series have struggled with story/"mystery" resolution, but series 3 struggled the most. All 3 episodes had really weak resolutions.

Where the show excels has been the characters and the way they relate to each other. The wedding episode was one of the greatest 90 minutes of character interaction I've ever witnessed, and the finale was wonderful as well, but in a less light hearted way. 

We watch for the characters, but if series 4 continues to slip in the mystery department, I don't know if we'll be so interested in series 5.


----------



## Hcour (Dec 24, 2007)

I agree the shows seemed to be all over the place. If they would just tell the mystery story and get on with it I would've enjoyed it much more, but it's like they kept interrupting it for some personal Watson/Sherlock stuff or something else for a bit, then some mystery, then more personal stuff, a little more mystery, and so on. The Wedding episode took me about a month to get thru.


----------



## Johncv (Jun 11, 2002)

Question, I miss the first episode of S3 on PBS, it now on Netflix. However, PBS has all the episodes at 2 hours, Netflix has them at 1 hour 30 minutes, so did Netflix edit them?


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Johncv said:


> Question, I miss the first episode of S3 on PBS, it now on Netflix. However, PBS has all the episodes at 2 hours, Netflix has them at 1 hour 30 minutes, so did Netflix edit them?


No, they're 1.5 hours.


----------



## Agatha Mystery (Feb 12, 2002)

The two hours were an hour and a half of show and thirty minutes of special features


----------



## sushikitten (Jan 28, 2005)

Bumping as we just finished S3 last night. 

I have to say I'm not a nitpicker and I thoroughly enjoyed this show from start to finish. (Yes, Hounds was probably my least fave ep, but it's still miles ahead of most other TV.) I could easily watch many more episodes and I'm kind of annoyed there were only nine thus far. 

I am not one to rewatch shows, but we might rewatch these.


----------



## Jstkiddn (Oct 15, 2003)

sushikitten said:


> I am not one to rewatch shows, but we might rewatch these.


They only get better on the rewatch.


----------



## Malcontent (Sep 5, 2004)

Bump...

*'Sherlock' Christmas Special: January 1, 2016*

http://screenrant.com/sherlock-christmas-special-abominable-bride/



> However, when the show returns it wont be a continuation of where Sherlock last left off. Instead, the series is airing a one-off, Victorian-era special with the cast playing the more traditional incarnations of their characters. Today we learned the special is titled, The Abominable Bride, and will premiere January 1st  on both sides of the pond!


----------



## laria (Sep 7, 2000)

I didn't realize for a while that I was reading an extremely old thread.

I have liked all of the episodes of all of the season of _Sherlock_... even the "universally loathed" S1E2.


----------



## Malcontent (Sep 5, 2004)

Bump...

*Sherlock: Series 4 Teaser (Official)*


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

Dark!


----------

