S03.E04: Bella

[Athena]

 

When a groundbreaking artificial intelligence software program is stolen, Sherlock agrees to take on the case, but enlists Joan’s assistance in solving it when he becomes more interested in disproving the computer’s abilities than finding the thief. Joan confronts Sherlock about his motives after she learns he has been in direct contact with her boyfriend without her knowledge.

 

[Danielg342]

Seems like we are getting obnoxious Sherlock in this one...which fits his character but it seems lately they want to hit me over the head with it. The B story also sounds like a “blah”- when has Sherlock ever straight up asked for a favour when he could just manipulate things so he gets that favour? Also, when hasn't worked out or without Sherlock's heart in the right place? Enough with the soap operas, please.

[AimingforYoko]

Pike was played by New York stage actor Michael Cristofer, best known as villain Truxton Spangler from the short-lived Rubicon.

I'm glad Holmes had nothing to do with Andrew's new venture and I loved his scene with Holmes in the kitchen.

Edited November 21, 2014 by AimingforYoko

[Betweenthisandthat]

I promised to take a break from Elementary but I checked it out while watching How to Get Away with Murder, and I'm glad I did.  I'll watch the entire episode again, but I loved that Kitty and Watson were working together.  Also loved seeing that Watson and Sherlock conversation about Watson's boyfriend.  I was so afraid that they'd make Holmes an invasive jerk when it came to Watson's private life, and he wasn't.  I almost can't believe it.  He kept his boundaries and also admitted his attachment to Watson, and she's off to have some fun in Denmark.  That ending was open ended when it came to Sherlock's choice about the case.  I wonder where that will go or if they'll leave it with Sherlock conflicted about his choice or inability to make one and what that says about him.  

[shapeshifter]

Pike was played by New York stage actor Michael Cristofer, best known as villain Truxton Spangler from the short-lived Rubicon....

I loved Rubicon, and he was a big reason why.

I'm assuming the real reason Andrew will be spending time in "Scan bloody navia" is so he can play the hot Pakistani general on Homeland too.

The computer program flashing lights to trigger a fatal seizure in an epileptic is a tired story, but I will forgive it if Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was the first to use it, albeit in a pre-computer age version--was he? Doyle's father had "epileptic seizures" (perhaps brought on by alcoholism?) and I see mention of Sir Arthur using the illness in his stories, but nothing specific.

[stealinghome]

I thought this was another solid episode. After really faltering in the second half last year, this season is feeling like a return to S1 Elementary for me.

 

I find myself really liking Kitty and how the writers are writing her relationship with both Sherlock and Joan and how she's catalyzing certain things for them. And I rofl'd when she was all "I am not part of this conversation." What was that you were saying about she's not your kid, Joan?

[Blakeston]

The name "Magnus" must mean something, right? It made me think of Charles Augustus Magnussen from Sherlock (although I know the character in the book had the last name Milverton.)

[sinkwriter]

 

And I rofl'd when she was all "I am not part of this conversation."

 

My favorite line of the night. She was wise not to get involved. LOL.

[thuganomics85]

So, Sherlock and crew figure out who did it like normal, but lack the evidence to take the mastermind down.  That certainly a different ending compared to the norm.  I guess they are leaving it open to the idea that he will go through with the bribe, but I don't think he will.

 

Enjoyed the kitchen scene with Sherlock and Joan.  I hope they don't recon this; I like that Sherlock had nothing to do with Andrew getting this job opportunity, and actually seems to like Andrew and even respect them.  That is very refreshing.  Of course, I love that he admitted how important Joan is to him.  

 

Kitty continues to grow on me, which surprises me since I really didn't like her in the first two episodes.

[johntfs]

The name "Magnus" must mean something, right? It made me think of Charles Augustus Magnussen from Sherlock (although I know the character in the book had the last name Milverton.)

 

Elementary already did Charles Augustus Milverton in Season 1.

[miles2go]

Enjoyed the episode.

A real artificial intelligence?  That kind of scares me, too.

Kitty, you're doing great!

As for Andrew -- I still don't trust him, but I have to admit I have no good reason to feel that way.

[GaT]

This was an OK episode. I do wonder if Bella is going to be permanently living with Sherlock though, & if the professor guy will be back.

[MaryHedwig]

As for Andrew -- I still don't trust him, but I have to admit I have no good reason to feel that way.

I am with you. 

 

I am concerned that Sherlock stuttered during his kitchen conversation with Watson and Andrew stuttered in the same way when Watson surprised him at the airport.

 

I am also concerned that Watson surprised Andrew at the airport with her plans to accompany him, including not responding to his messages to do so.  On an unconscious level, was she afraid Andrew would say no if she had presented her plan to him?  It doesn't seem like confident, independent Watson to invite herself along like that, it seems like needy, insecure girlfriend behavior.

 

Also concerned (back to Andrew's stammer) that Andrew had reasons to not want Watson with him in Denmark, a secret life perhaps, maybe involving the CIA (sorry, couldn't help that -- Homeland fan -- but still I wonder what Andrew is up to in Denmark...)

 

I don't believe that Joan has always wanted to see Copenhagen.  If she had, she would have already visit it.

 

Speaking of Joan, she introduced herself as a doctor.  I thought that she had allowed her license to lapse and now told people that she used to be a doctor.

 

Joan had to pick the lock to get into the Brownstone?  In the first episode of this season (before we knew Sherlock was back), I thought she let herself in with a key.  If not, pretty creepy and poor boundaries to break into a house when you have not been summons there and think the owner is in England.

 

That was the first mention of Sherlock's mother, correct?  Sherlock stated he had loved his mother, Irene, and in a fashion Watson.  I think that he loved Alistair too, in fact he told us so.

Edited November 21, 2014 by MaryHedwig

[jeansheridan]

Loved Mason. Please come back kiddo. Joan being giggly with Andrew was weird. She is so deadpan usually so to see her cheery is very odd. It feels a bit forced. Lucy Liu is great usually but I don't believe she loves Andrew.

Kitty is a delight. I like that they only had one line about the support group. Slow and steady is fine for me.

Of course I love Sherlock being clear about his feelings in the kitchen. He really can say the sweetest things. Joan wouldn't be human if she didn't melt.

And while this is NOT a romance, this is the most romantic sort of platonic relationship since Scully & Mulder.

[Zahdii]

The computer program flashing lights to trigger a fatal seizure in an epileptic is a tired story, but I will forgive it if Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was the first to use it, albeit in a pre-computer age version--was he? Doyle's father had "epileptic seizures" (perhaps brought on by alcoholism?) and I see mention of Sir Arthur using the illness in his stories, but nothing specific.

 

You made me curious, so I looked around a bit and was surprised to find that flashing lights could set off epileptic seizures was known as far back as the late 1800's so it would indeed have been possible for it to be included in one of the Holmes books.  Sadly, I could find no mention of that particular form of epilepsy being used as a plot device in any of the stories.

 

Well, I missed the show tonight and came here to see if it was any good.  Sounds like it was, so I'll be watching it in the next couple of days.

Edited November 21, 2014 by Zahdii

[johntfs]

I am with you. 

 

I am concerned that Sherlock stuttered during his kitchen conversation with Watson and Andrew stuttered in the same way when Watson surprised him at the airport.

 

I am also concerned that Watson surprised Andrew at the airport with her plans to accompany him, including not responding to his messages to do so.  On an unconscious level, was she afraid Andrew would say no if she had presented her plan to him?  It doesn't seem like confident, independent Watson to invite herself along like that, it seems like needy, insecure girlfriend behavior.

 

Also concerned (back to Andrew's stammer) that Andrew had reasons to not want Watson with him in Denmark, a secret life perhaps, maybe involving the CIA (sorry, couldn't help that -- Homeland fan -- but still I wonder what Andrew is up to in Denmark...)

 

I don't believe that Joan has always wanted to see Copenhagen.  If she had, she would have already visit it.

 

Speaking of Joan, she introduced herself as a doctor.  I thought that she had allowed her license to lapse and now told people that she used to be a doctor.

 

Joan had to pick the lock to get into the Brownstone?  In the first episode of this season (before we knew Sherlock was back), I thought she let herself in with a key.  If not, pretty creepy and poor boundaries to break into a house when you have not been summons there and think the owner is in England.

 

That was the first mention of Sherlock's mother, correct?  Sherlock stated he had loved his mother, Irene, and in a fashion Watson.  I think that he loved Alistair too, in fact he told us so.

 

I really didn't notice the qualities of the stammering.  I've always wanted to visit London.  I have (barely) enough money to do this.  However, my life is such that I don't really have a compelling reason to go there because it would be very inconvenient for me to do so.  Figure likewise with Joan.  Being a doctor ate most of her time.  Then being sobriety care-giver, then dealing with Sherlock.  Going to Copenhagen was probably more of an idle wish than a life's ambition. 

 

As for Joan's doctor statement, there was an injured (dead) man on the floor.  The fastest way for Joan to clear space to get to him was to say "I'm a doctor."

 

In the first episode she had a key because Holmes left with a five sentence warning and she couldn't return it him.  Figure she has since returned it and she had to pick the lock this time.  Clearly Holmes was fine with how she entered.

 

As for momma Holmes, given that their father is a Lovecraftian horror, their mother is probably a much nicer Lavinia Whatley.

Edited November 21, 2014 by johntfs

[shapeshifter]

I really didn't notice the qualities of the stammering...

I brushed it off, but now that MaryHedwig mentions it, I agree, there probably is something going on.

[Zahdii]

OK, watched the show.  It was a good episode, but I found the ending kind of troubling.  Is Sherlock going to let the mastermind of the crime go free and allow the subordinate pay for the murder all alone?  Why?  The man clearly has the capacity to rationalize murdering a man 'just in case'.  Besides, the (possible) AI is still functional and there is still another person capable of operating the device.  Is anyone going to warn her that she may be next to die?

If Sherlock and his team of AI experts can't decide if Bella is truly self-aware, why have all those conversations in front of 'her'?  It craves information of all kinds, and giving a potential AI all those glimpses of people's personal thoughts and motivations sounds like a bad idea.  After all, Bella had to have realized that her operator wasn't acting normally.  Bella had the information that Edwin Borstein had epilepsy, that an audio CD contained a software program, and when said program ran Borstein fell to the floor, or at least stopped talking.  Did Bella not have any visual sensors, or lack the ability to call the only other person allowed to operate it?  Since Bella was present and functioning, why did no one ask if Bella had any information on what happened?  When it was finally decided to question the computer, why only ask one question "Did you kill Borstein?" and ignore it after that?

 

I'd have been all over that, questioning the computer and tracking down what Bella knew and how Bella acquired the information.  The woman working with Borstein clearly thought that Bella had all the necessary knowledge to understand how to kill him if Bella wanted to.  She said that Borstein told Bella he had epilepsy, perhaps he'd found the computer screen was using a refresh rate that was close to the rate needed to set off a seizure and replaced the screen with one that didn't bother him.  I found it odd that the show didn't make it known that only photosensitive epilepsy (so far as I can tell) reacts to flashing, I wonder how many people now will think that all epileptics are susceptible to this problem. 

 

(BTW, my daughter saw photosensitive in action at work a few years ago.  A woman who'd never had a seizure before had one while sitting at her computer.  She got up and walked around in a daze with a blank look on her face, was making an odd noise, and drooling until she tripped over a chair and fell to the floor.  Scared everyone to death, including herself when she came out of it.  However she wasn't diagnosed until she returned to work the following week and it happened again, this time causing a full blown seizure and causing her to slam her head hard enough on the floor to give her a low grade concussion.  Turned out that her computer screen was starting to malfunction with age and the refresh rate had slowed enough to bring on her seizures.  The company wasn't at fault, but they were aghast enough to pay all her medical bills, wages for time off, and she got a very nice computer when she came back to work!  My daughter remembers that she came in after the weekend to find that all the computer screens in the building had been checked over to assess their refresh rates and several people got new monitors.)

 

Although it turned out that Bella didn't deliberately cause Bornstein's death, I thought it was interesting that all through the show it'd say "I don't understand the question.  Can you tell me more?".  But in the last scene when Sherlock asks Bella's opinion on turning in bad guy's brother to force a confession, Bella deviated to "I don't understand the question.  Can I have more information?"  Until then I'd decided that Bella was not an actual AI, but when it asked for more information I started to wonder.  Is that why Sherlock looked so stunned and possibly even worried?  Maybe it's time to break out some really powerful magnets and accidently wipe the program.

[ae2]

Although it turned out that Bella didn't deliberately cause Bornstein's death, I thought it was interesting that all through the show it'd say "I don't understand the question.  Can you tell me more?".  But in the last scene when Sherlock asks Bella's opinion on turning in bad guy's brother to force a confession, Bella deviated to "I don't understand the question.  Can I have more information?"  Until then I'd decided that Bella was not an actual AI, but when it asked for more information I started to wonder.  Is that why Sherlock looked so stunned and possibly even worried?  Maybe it's time to break out some really powerful magnets and accidently wipe the program.

 

I fell asleep before the end, but I'm fairly certain the AI changed to this response a little earlier in the episode, about the time that Sherlock brought it to his home. (Which, was one of many problems with the episode.) Tried to find a recap mentioning this but couldn't.

[Primetimer]

It's man v. machine as Sherlock Holmes investigates a super-modern ghost story.

Read the story

[kitmerlot1213]

I am really liking Kitty--I like that she's calling Joan and asking for help in dealing with Sherlock's more "mad" impulses, I like that Kitty is referring to Joan as "Joan" and not "Watson" and I really liked them working together to figure out the crime.

 

The conversation in the kitchen was gorgeous--I didn't think for one second Sherlock had anything to do with Andrew's job offer.  He wants to get his friend and partner back and the quickest way to lose both is to start trying to manipulate Joan and/or Andrew.  I like how straightforward Sherlock was in answering Joan's questions--he is working hard to prove himself a good friend.

 

That being said, Andrew and Joan concern me--she's acting the same way with Andrew like she did with Mycroft, like she's desperate to keep him.  Andrew did not seem that enthused to have her coming along and that is not a good sign that Joan can't see it.

[Boton]

 

The name "Magnus" must mean something, right? It made me think of Charles Augustus Magnussen from Sherlock (although I know the character in the book had the last name Milverton.)

 

It means the same guy who was hired to do the Elementary title card and could think of nothing original after seeing Sherlock was also in charge of naming the new peripheral characters?

[basiltherat]

I think I remember a "Magnus" from one of Sherlock's previous on-line consultants.  So it is possible that Sherlock used Magnus to get Andrew out of Joan's life, but then Joan decided to go to Scandi bloody navia to check it out for herself and thwart whatever machinations Sherlock did.

 

I hated that there was no closure on the Bella question.  I would suggest Sherlock visit Person of Interest and see what Finch's Machine and Samaritan are up to!

[Trey]

 

I hated that there was no closure on the Bella question.  I would suggest Sherlock visit Person of Interest and see what Finch's Machine and Samaritan are up to!

I kept thinking that too - that Sherlock should call Finch:)

 

I really enjoyed this episode; I think it's the best so far this season.

 

I thought Sherlock gave himself away when Joan was asking him if he manipulated Andrew's new project - she mentioned only that he was going to Scandinavia and Sherlock said Denmark - but nothing more came of that so I guess I was wrong.

 

Kitty is really fitting in nicely now.  I like the addition of her character.

[Athena]

I thought this was an excellent episode. It reminded me of the S1 days. It had Clyde, a lovely moment between Joan/Sherlock, an interesting case/antagonist, fun reoccurring character (Mason), and Kitty is warming on me. I'm not sure why she's growing as she doesn't do much, but I like how she is getting along with Joan. Andrew is a wash so I won't think about him.

 

That was the first mention of Sherlock's mother, correct?  Sherlock stated he had loved his mother, Irene, and in a fashion Watson.  I think that he loved Alistair too, in fact he told us so.

 

Yes, he did love Alistair. I do think it's interesting he only mentioned women. In a way, he was talking to an anthropomorphized female too. Starting off with his mother, going to Irene, and then Watson makes emotional sense.

[jeansheridan]

Zadii I don't think it occurred to them to treat Bella like a proper witness. Maybe that was a fail by the writers. Or maybe Sherlock' s prejudice against her/it. I think your approach would have been cool.<br /><br />I like that Pike researched Sherlock. Finally! Finally someone wonders about a British consultant. And his research pays off. He calls Sherlock' s bluff. I love that Sherlock' s decision was entirely in character.<br /><br />Regarding Joan being needy, maybe we have to accept that Joan isn't good at romance. Liam, that DA, Mycroft, Andrew...She likes the idea of normal but really her life is about odd murders, picking locks, and shared custody of a turtle. She just hasn't accepted this yet. As Sherlock pointed out.<br /><br />I did think it was sweet that she cared about his opinion of Andrew.

[shapeshifter]

It's man v. machine as Sherlock Holmes investigates a super-modern ghost story. http://previously.tv/elementary/ciao-bella/

...

Will we see Bella again?

I mean, besides in your nightmares? The conclusion this week was left hanging slightly open. It wasn't totally necessary to close it, really -- Sherlock had his man and could probably prove it, but was unable to pull the trigger, for various reasons. Instead, he is left staring into the unseeing (OR IS IT?) eye of Bella, the doll plugged in to the artificial intelligence. Is this the last we'll see of that creeptastic thing? I don't understand the question. Can I have more information?...

 

I thought it was a 2-parter even though they didn't show "To be continued..."

So it's not really?

[Al Lowe]

Doesn't seem to be a 2-parter, from what I can tell.

I just scanned this thread, so I hope I didn't miss anyone mentioning this. When the "proof" that the thief "deleted" the Bella program from his laptop was the guy dragging the folder to the trash... I LOLed, and loudly. I could have done an entire recap about that, but I liked the episode so I chose to let it slide. But, heeeeee.

[basil]

OK, watched the show.  It was a good episode, but I found the ending kind of troubling.  Is Sherlock going to let the mastermind of the crime go free and allow the subordinate pay for the murder all alone?  Why?  The man clearly has the capacity to rationalize murdering a man 'just in case'.  Besides, the (possible) AI is still functional and there is still another person capable of operating the device.  Is anyone going to warn her that she may be next to die?

 

 

 

What are Sherlock's options? Yes, as Kitty said, they can continue to look for proof, but no guarantee they'll find it. I am sure Sherlock will keep the "mastermind" of the tinfoil hat apocalypse people on his radar, but the guy did call his bluff - and that's what it was - no way is Sherlock going to jail the man's addict brother just because he didn't confess. That really was a "Hail Mary" move and a largely empty threat.

 

I rather liked that the ending didn't neatly tie up all the loose threads, though it took me by surprise. When the credits began, my reaction was "Wait. What?" and I immediately replayed the last 15 minutes of the show, thinking I had missed something.

[Gregg247]

I wasn't sure, as Sherlock's explanation was quick and I missed part of it, but does he think that true AI is impossible, or just that its not possible YET? He talked about it briefly at the start of the episode.

It leads to some interesting questions for me. All I know about AI is what I see in movies and on TV, but is there a group of scientists/smart people who feel that true AI is completely impossible? Or does everyone "in the know" believe that it will exist one day?

I really liked this episode, but wish they'd dwelt a little more on that idea. I guess the 3 options are: Completely Impossible (like a perpetual motion machine, or a machine that turns lead into gold); Theoretically Possible but not likely (like Star Trek's warp drive); or Definitely Possible one day (like curing cancer).

[DeLurker]

I kept thinking that too - that Sherlock should call Finch:)

I generally don't like when shows cross over, but since Finch and Sherlock are both in NYC I could get behind this.  And while I am not a shipper, I could ship a Joan-Reese pairing.  Heck, I'd even like it if they somehow showed up in a street scene on the other's show without saying a word.

 

But Joan's boyfriend strikes me as off without actually having done anything to raise suspicion.  I don't see her surprising him with an undiscussed trip to Scandi-bloody-navia.  Seems out of character for Joan.

[Zahdii]

I just realized that the photo of the person who stole a copy of the Bella program was easily recognized by Watson as being a middle aged man.  She said that the emerging liver marks on his neck indicated his approximate age, and there was also enough to see of his teeth that she deduced that he was a heavy smoker.  Watson and Kitty found the place where the thief did surveillance on the company, and gathered DNA evidence to tie him to another crime where a composite picture of the thief was available.  Sherlock used all that information to identify the thief and figure out what company stole a copy of the AI program.  Does he go after them?  No, he tells them that they can continue as usual if they delete the file they stole, and he accepts a silly video of that happening.  Sherlock's so interested in the program itself that he's willing to let a known international criminal and the company that now employs him go free for an easily forged video of the program being deleted.

 

Even the woman that worked with the murder victim seemed happy and relieved to see the video.  I now wonder if she's involved in some way that we won't see until sometime in the future.

 

Sherlock may have promised the thieves that if they deleted the file he wouldn't turn them in, but this was a bad company and a bad man.  Who knows how many lives have been destroyed by these bad people.  Would Watson really accept such a deal?  No, I expect this to come back later to bite them.

[Xantar]

Can someone clarify for me exactly how the murder happened? As I understand it, someone broke into the house of an unrelated fan and swapped out his heavy metal CD with another one that had a virus that would play flashing lights on a computer that it was installed on. Ok, so far so good. But apparently the way the virus actually started working was that the victim had to insert the CD into the computer and drag and drop something onto the desktop. Are we supposed to believe that a programmer on the cutting edge of computer science and who is already wary of his programs being stolen would be that stupid? 

[fauntleroy]

Actually maybe the closest to AI out there is a computer named, coincidentally (I was going to say ironically, but it's not ironic) 'Watson'. It won $1M playing Jeopardy in 2011. It's not "a program" though, or "a file", it's a system, combining a bunch of software and massive dedicated hardware. So it was silly that they'd just drag "a file" into the trash.

 

It seems plausible to me that with sufficient processing speed, a large enough data set, the ability to reason albeit 'mechanically', and to infer, that what we think of as 'intelligence' could easily emerge. Why not? I don't think there's any special boundary there, other than we humans clinging to our uniqueness. The brain is just a processor. For years people claimed no computer would ever be able to defeat a human at chess, but now it's routine. The young hacker's scenario seemed entirely reasonable, yikes.

 

Edit: Wow it was already nearly four years ago. And, I agree with the recapper about the schmoopiness of Joan's boyfriend situation. Yawners. I don't trust him for a second but I don't care more than I don't trust. Maybe he can go away with Kitty, another unneeded character.

Edited November 21, 2014 by fauntleroy

[sinkwriter]

Can I just say... leeches? EWWWW, Sherlock.

 

Though he did crack me up when he asked Kitty to get the door because he was feeling too lightheaded to get up. LOL.

Edited November 21, 2014 by sinkwriter

[dargosmydaddy]

 

Speaking of Joan, she introduced herself as a doctor.  I thought that she had allowed her license to lapse and now told people that she used to be a doctor.

That was just when they found seizure-guy on the ground, right? I can forgive her saying that in the heat of the moment, either because she literally forgot under stress, or because it's the easiest thing to say to get the woman to move over and let Joan try to help.

 

I hope Sherlock gets custody of Clyde while Joan is in Scanda-bloody-navia.

[basil]

Can I just say... leeches? EWWWW, Sherlock.

 

 

You are perpetuating a long held prejudice against these creatures. ;)

 

Seriously, though, leeches are, in fact, quite useful. I've had then used on me in the past. They are good for reducing swelling and minimising bruises.

[sinkwriter]

 

You are perpetuating a long held prejudice against these creatures. ;)

LOL. I think I'm okay with that.  :D  *shudder shudder shudder*   (It was a really funny line that you quoted, though. Sometimes Sherlock has some terrific snark that cracks me up.)

[shapeshifter]

...When the "proof" that the thief "deleted" the Bella program from his laptop was the guy dragging the folder to the trash... I LOLed, and loudly...

I was not amused. I said out loud to the TV: Seriously?!? This and:

...apparently the way the virus actually started working was that the victim had to insert the CD into the computer and drag and drop something onto the desktop. Are we supposed to believe that a programmer on the cutting edge of computer science and who is already wary of his programs being stolen would be that stupid?

...are examples of the difference between most TV show scripts and a decent movie script or book that has a longer time to get vetted before going public.

[Watcher0363]

All I have to say is the Terminator bit was worth the whole hour. Plus I am sure they went a whole hour without a Twilight reference.

[basil]

...are examples of the difference between most TV show scripts and a decent movie script or book that has a longer time to get vetted before going public.

 

 

 

"vetted"?

 

It's fiction. TV shows, movies and books very often play fast and loose with the facts - even decent ones. I remember an episode of House where someone was exposed to salmonella by smoking marijuana. Aaron Sorkin has admitted outright that he twisted or ignored facts in The West Wing if it made for a better story. A Secret Service agent holding an umbrella for the President comes to mind.  Sorkin liked the image, so he wrote it that way, knowing full well it would never happen in real life.

 

This show does that a lot (a two thousand pound magnet next to an elevator where bullets have been planted as an assassin's weapon? Anthrax being used to kill cattle for an insurance scam? Nah, that won't be suspicious at all!).

 

That said, if it bugs you, it bugs you. I can't watch Castle because it's set in NYC, but shot elsewhere.

 

One thing I did find interesting about this episode was the comparison of Sherlock to Bella. Really, is his curt "Explain!" all that different from Bella's "Can you tell me more?".

 

I generally don't like when shows cross over, but since Finch and Sherlock are both in NYC I could get behind this.  And while I am not a shipper, I could ship a Joan-Reese pairing.

 

 

Well, they are both CBS (and set and shot in NYC), but I would not want to see this at all. It always seems like such a desperate ratings move. I can't see shipping Reese with anybody.

[Texasmom1970]

Love that Joan and Sherlock have joint custody of Clyde, so cute. The conversation between them in the kitchen was amazing. For someone who can be as closed off as Sherlock his admitting how her friendship mattered to him, for him that was close to gushing.

I too am not trusting the new boyfriend, what's his name Andrew. Maybe it was just me but when Joan announced she was going with him to Dennark. I saw an oh shit what am I gonna do now look come over his face. Me thinks he is hiding something. Also the computer doll was creepy!

[theatremouse]

I thought Sherlock gave himself away when Joan was asking him if he manipulated Andrew's new project - she mentioned only that he was going to Scandinavia and Sherlock said Denmark - but nothing more came of that so I guess I was wrong.

I didn't necessarily think that was his giving himself away. They'd been discussing how he has been in contact with Andrew. He easily could've known "Denmark" because Andrew told him, even if Watson had only so far said "Scandinavia". (Even though I do agree something was sketchy about the Denmark thing in general.)

[Xantar]

"vetted"?

 

It's fiction. TV shows, movies and books very often play fast and loose with the facts - even decent ones. I remember an episode of House where someone was exposed to salmonella by smoking marijuana. Aaron Sorkin has admitted outright that he twisted or ignored facts in The West Wing if it made for a better story. A Secret Service agent holding an umbrella for the President comes to mind.  Sorkin liked the image, so he wrote it that way, knowing full well it would never happen in real life.

 

This show does that a lot (a two thousand pound magnet next to an elevator where bullets have been planted as an assassin's weapon? Anthrax being used to kill cattle for an insurance scam? Nah, that won't be suspicious at all!).

There are degrees of playing loose with the facts, though. In the case of the computer virus, it was just a step too far to have a security conscious computer programmer actively click and drag a file from someone else's CD onto his desktop. Even I know not to do that on a work computer, and I'm a political science major.

And it wasn't even necessary. They could have just made it a self-executing file on the CD so that all he had to do was stick it in the drive. It would have been a security lapse, but it wouldn't have been bone-headed stupid.

[johntfs]

There are degrees of playing loose with the facts, though. In the case of the computer virus, it was just a step too far to have a security conscious computer programmer actively click and drag a file from someone else's CD onto his desktop. Even I know not to do that on a work computer, and I'm a political science major.

And it wasn't even necessary. They could have just made it a self-executing file on the CD so that all he had to do was stick it in the drive. It would have been a security lapse, but it wouldn't have been bone-headed stupid.

 

It was stupid, but a necessary stupid.  The whole point of the professor's actions was to blame the AI for the programmer's murder.  If he sticks in the CD so it boots up and kills him, any investigation will immediately determine that something on the CD killed the guy and not the AI.

[possibilities]

Can't they just unplug the computer if they don't like its behavior? I don't understand why it's so threatening. I also think it's weird that people are able to imagine building a computer that can reason, but not a system that would instill it with values (like: don't murder your creator). I think this all says more about the people than the machines.

 

I agree with what everyone has been saying about Joan's relationship behaviors. It's bothering me. It also seems to me that they've separated Holmes and Watson to dampen the possibility of UST, which is okay with me, but then they have Sherlock saying it would be reckless for her to hug him.

 

I loved Clyde's scene with the lettuce. I don't even know why he's so much fun to look at, but he is.

[MaryHedwig]

It also seems to me that they've separated Holmes and Watson to dampen the possibility of UST, which is okay with me, but then they have Sherlock saying it would be reckless for her to hug him.

Interesting take.  I was thinking Sherlock was saying that it would be "reckless" (not sure that's the exact word used) to hug him because he probably wouldn't have a socially-acceptable reaction, not unresolved sexual tension (UST) but just social-awkwardness and social-redrawal; you know, like Clyde ducking his head into his body.  Remember, Sherlock couldn't even muster a hug when he greeted Watson after her kidnapping.

[Watcher0363]

I didn't necessarily think that was his giving himself away. They'd been discussing how he has been in contact with Andrew. He easily could've known "Denmark" because Andrew told him, even if Watson had only so far said "Scandinavia". (Even though I do agree something was sketchy about the Denmark thing in general.)

Actually given Sherlock abilities this is not surprising. Andrew did say he was part of an email chain discussing the AI. This would have included a little chit chat between the parties about other things. In fact, given the brain power on this email chain they would have been discussing many tech issues. I could, no I definitely see Magnus would have asked Sherlock for some kind of reference before entering into a partnership arrangement with a complete stranger.

[theatremouse]

That's essentially what I meant. Sherlock knowing seemed reasonable. The "sketchy" part I was referring to was how Andrew reacted when Joan decided to go with.

 

On the other hand, if it really is "let's have this actor go be on a different show that he's also on for a while now" as someone else suggested, I'm chill with that. On the other other hand, he's barely even a tertiary character. It seems to me they could just as easily plain not shown him for a while. So my question at the moment is really more of a "I can't tell where they're going with that and I'm not sure how I feel about it" type deal. I can't tell if this is a yada yada plot contrivance or a shit's about to go down and it sort of rubbed me the wrong way. Not that I dislike ambiguity, but I guess, I usually like ambiguity that gives me some specific impression, even if I later turn out to be wrong. And with the Denmark thing I just sort of felt hanging (but not in a good way, for me).

Edited November 22, 2014 by theatremouse

[basil]

And it wasn't even necessary. They could have just made it a self-executing file on the CD so that all he had to do was stick it in the drive. It would have been a security lapse, but it wouldn't have been bone-headed stupid

 

 

 I'm a fairly intelligent person, but I'm not terribly computer literate. I own one, but have never used one for work. I didn't even think twice about the conceit. I'm probably in the minority on this forum, since we are discussing this on the internet, but I'm sure I'm not alone - but again, if it bugs you, it bugs you. It didn't bother me at all, in part because I don't know better - besides, as johntfs said:

 

It was stupid, but a necessary stupid.  The whole point of the professor's actions was to blame the AI for the programmer's murder.  If he sticks in the CD so it boots up and kills him, any investigation will immediately determine that something on the CD killed the guy and not the AI.

 

 

 

Or, as the old saying goes "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story".

 

Can't they just unplug the computer if they don't like its behavior? I don't understand why it's so threatening. I also think it's weird that people are able to imagine building a computer that can reason, but not a system that would instill it with values (like: don't murder your creator). I think this all says more about the people than the machines

 

 

Joan suggested unplugging it also (albeit seemingly more in jest). Isaac Asimov wrote about the concept instilling values in machines in his 1950 book I, Robot, detailing The Three Laws of Robotics:

A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law

 

 

In fact, now that I think about it, this episode shares a lot on commonalities with Asimov's book.

Edited November 22, 2014 by basil