There's no denying the massive shoes that "Sherlock" has to fill. The last episode, "His Last Vow," aired on January 14, 2014, almost two years ago, and Season 3 amassed an average of almost 12 million viewers. "The Abominable Bride" was released to cinemas, making this a cultural event, so did it live up the massive hype that it set itself? Well, yes and no.
The story jumps back to the 19th century, satisfying fans' curiosities of seeing the "real" Sherlock in his proper time period. To say that this worked would be an understatement. Costumes were elegant and impressive, the sets decorated with attention to detail, and the dialogue matched the time period, with quips of "Jolly good" and other time-specific pieces (OK, they never actually said that, but you know what I mean). The cinematography by Suzie Lavelle was as perfect as ever, with one shot, the scene in the club with the sunshine coming in beams into the room, being particularly gorgeous.
Therefore, with the period set dramatically and everything else working accordingly (the performances are as good as ever), "The Abominable Bride" was set to be a "Sherlock" classic. The story follows a murderous bride, Emilia Ricoletti (a creepy Natasha O'Keefe) as she kills men who are abusive to women. Or does she? The story of the bride twists and turns, and it takes us to some unexpected places, with a conclusion that couldn't help but raise a few eyebrows. As it turns out, a group of feminists, including the hilarious Molly Hooper (Louise Brealey) were posing as the bride after her death in order to strike fear in men that abuse women in order to give a voice and a cause to the feminist movement. It was a bold move, but one that worked with mixed results. Here is a man (Sherlock) giving an explanation and a voice to a quiet group of women, written by men (showrunners Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat), explaining the plight of women. It's a noble pursuit, but one that kind of negates the power and theme of its own story.
This was in turn ruined even further by the reveal that this is only happening in Sherlock's mind palace, as he tries to deduce how Moriarty could be alive after blatantly shooting himself in the head. As it turns out, Sherlock uses this real case of the bride as a metaphor for his own case; he concludes that, like the women taking over the plight of the bride, someone else is taking over for Moriarty. It's an interesting idea, but one whose execution was spotty.
In the middle of a confrontation with the creepy Moriarty (an always wonderful Andrew Scott), including Moriarty licking dust off his hand as he talks about dust being human remains, the story suddenly shifts to Sherlock on the jet, minutes after we last saw him in "His Last Vow." It's a jarring shift, and one I'm not so sure worked as effectively as the writers had hoped. Instead of keeping the story contained in Victorian England and creating a fun, one-off special, they found it necessary to tie the story in to the over-arching story of the series, and it's a bold move that shouldn't have happened.
The story before the shift was fun. We had Gothic castles, creepy fog, a genuinely frightening villain, and an interesting case. To make this all moot when we discover that none of it is real dramatically lessens any stake we had in the narrative. If they HAD to shift back to present day, they should have stayed there, as any other scene afterwards in the 19th century suddenly lost any intrigue that it would have otherwise had.
The episode also featured some truly baffling scenes. The Reichenbach Falls scene should have worked in theory, and while it looked wonderful, it was terribly out of place. Moriarty being kicked off the cliff with a dramatic scream made me laugh, and I don't think it meant to. Furthermore, the scene of Sherlock falling beside the Falls looked horrendous, and while I understand that the budget maybe limited what they could have done, they should have simply cut after Sherlock jumped rather than show us the actual fall. It made an otherwise dramatic scene terribly corny.
The conclusion itself also left much to be desired. Again, if they were going to cut to the present, they need to give us more than what they did. Sherlock stating that he has solved the case doesn't exactly get my hopes up. I know he was going to solve it. This is "Sherlock," not some dramatic series where the hero is beaten into submission. HOW did he solve it? What did we, the viewers, not understand? It's a question left for Season 4 to answer, but for a whole episode to work up to that anticlimactic conclusion left me feeling empty.
What otherwise was an excellent and intriguing episode turned instead to frustration and confusion. If it stayed in the 19th century and left us with a creepy, intriguing mystery to be solved, the episode would have worked much better than it actually did. However, "Sherlock's" ambition got the better of it, and by trying to be smart, it in turn left me feeling so much worse.
7/10.
The story jumps back to the 19th century, satisfying fans' curiosities of seeing the "real" Sherlock in his proper time period. To say that this worked would be an understatement. Costumes were elegant and impressive, the sets decorated with attention to detail, and the dialogue matched the time period, with quips of "Jolly good" and other time-specific pieces (OK, they never actually said that, but you know what I mean). The cinematography by Suzie Lavelle was as perfect as ever, with one shot, the scene in the club with the sunshine coming in beams into the room, being particularly gorgeous.
Therefore, with the period set dramatically and everything else working accordingly (the performances are as good as ever), "The Abominable Bride" was set to be a "Sherlock" classic. The story follows a murderous bride, Emilia Ricoletti (a creepy Natasha O'Keefe) as she kills men who are abusive to women. Or does she? The story of the bride twists and turns, and it takes us to some unexpected places, with a conclusion that couldn't help but raise a few eyebrows. As it turns out, a group of feminists, including the hilarious Molly Hooper (Louise Brealey) were posing as the bride after her death in order to strike fear in men that abuse women in order to give a voice and a cause to the feminist movement. It was a bold move, but one that worked with mixed results. Here is a man (Sherlock) giving an explanation and a voice to a quiet group of women, written by men (showrunners Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat), explaining the plight of women. It's a noble pursuit, but one that kind of negates the power and theme of its own story.
This was in turn ruined even further by the reveal that this is only happening in Sherlock's mind palace, as he tries to deduce how Moriarty could be alive after blatantly shooting himself in the head. As it turns out, Sherlock uses this real case of the bride as a metaphor for his own case; he concludes that, like the women taking over the plight of the bride, someone else is taking over for Moriarty. It's an interesting idea, but one whose execution was spotty.
In the middle of a confrontation with the creepy Moriarty (an always wonderful Andrew Scott), including Moriarty licking dust off his hand as he talks about dust being human remains, the story suddenly shifts to Sherlock on the jet, minutes after we last saw him in "His Last Vow." It's a jarring shift, and one I'm not so sure worked as effectively as the writers had hoped. Instead of keeping the story contained in Victorian England and creating a fun, one-off special, they found it necessary to tie the story in to the over-arching story of the series, and it's a bold move that shouldn't have happened.
The story before the shift was fun. We had Gothic castles, creepy fog, a genuinely frightening villain, and an interesting case. To make this all moot when we discover that none of it is real dramatically lessens any stake we had in the narrative. If they HAD to shift back to present day, they should have stayed there, as any other scene afterwards in the 19th century suddenly lost any intrigue that it would have otherwise had.
The episode also featured some truly baffling scenes. The Reichenbach Falls scene should have worked in theory, and while it looked wonderful, it was terribly out of place. Moriarty being kicked off the cliff with a dramatic scream made me laugh, and I don't think it meant to. Furthermore, the scene of Sherlock falling beside the Falls looked horrendous, and while I understand that the budget maybe limited what they could have done, they should have simply cut after Sherlock jumped rather than show us the actual fall. It made an otherwise dramatic scene terribly corny.
The conclusion itself also left much to be desired. Again, if they were going to cut to the present, they need to give us more than what they did. Sherlock stating that he has solved the case doesn't exactly get my hopes up. I know he was going to solve it. This is "Sherlock," not some dramatic series where the hero is beaten into submission. HOW did he solve it? What did we, the viewers, not understand? It's a question left for Season 4 to answer, but for a whole episode to work up to that anticlimactic conclusion left me feeling empty.
What otherwise was an excellent and intriguing episode turned instead to frustration and confusion. If it stayed in the 19th century and left us with a creepy, intriguing mystery to be solved, the episode would have worked much better than it actually did. However, "Sherlock's" ambition got the better of it, and by trying to be smart, it in turn left me feeling so much worse.
7/10.