S03.E12: The One That Got Away

[zxy556575]

It took a while for this to play out and I'm not saying some of it didn't bore me, but Jesu Christo, what a payoff. Brilliant writing and acting all around. I include LL because I think she's kept her buttoned-up portrayal of Watson very consistent, while still letting us see the underlying concern, anger, jealousy, and even hurt beneath her own mask.

Edited January 31, 2015 by lordonia

[ElectricBoogaloo]

It drives me crazy when the good guys confront the bad guys before arresting them because I think it's unwise to show your hand and give the other person the opportunity to destroy evidence or leave town, so I liked that Sherlock said as much and then Joan said she wanted to rattle Del into giving something away. It was a gamble but at least she wasn't doing it just for the sake of giving away information.

[stealinghome]

I doubt that we'll ever get a storyline where Gruner escapes and goes on a rampage. It would strain credulity like whoa--that he could escape what will surely be a maximum security prison AND that law enforcement wouldn't find a really visually memorable fugitive rather quickly--and I don't think that's this show's style. I took the end scenes to be pretty definitively it for Gruner at least. That said, I still have the horrible spirit of Mycroft from last season lingering in my mind, so it's not like this show is above that kind of creative misstep, they've surely done worse. But I didn't at all get "Gruner will come back" from the end of the episode. I think his story, at least, is finished.

 

None of that matters. Gregson knew it was Kitty who did that to Gruner and pretty much came out and told Sherlock he was giving her a head start to get out of the country when he said "in a few hours [he'll] go in there and ask who did that to him." Then he walked away, giving Sherlock opportunity to do with that information what he will. Kitty is safe from Gregson. He will not be going to a lot of trouble and expense to try to locate a suspect who has left the country.

Oh, I agree that Gregson (and the entire NYPD/whomever) will put little to no effort into finding Kitty. But I was responding to the suggestion that the NYPD had no evidence on Kitty, so she had no need to flee--that's not the case. I agree that no one will try very hard to find her, but if Gregson et al know where she is, they don't have the option of NOT going after her. They can't just leave her chilling at the brownstone like nothing happened.

[MaryHedwig]

I just realized that Kitty, not Del, is the One that the title is referring to: The One That Got Away.

 

I agree with above posters that are not looking forward to wooden, pissed off Watson and groveling Sherlock again.  I would love a story line where Watson loosens up and shows some emotional depth.  Maybe they will follow canon and give her a Mary (spouse) that is as engaging as Kitty is.

 

I also wondered why Sherlock was crying before Kitty knocked on the door.  According to Kitty, it had been one week since she walked out so that's a lot of tears to shed over a lot of hours.  Heartbreaking and makes me shudder to think how many tears he shed when Watson left.

 

It is time for Sherlock to visit a chiropractor and loosen those joints up a bit...or let's go Oz and put some oil on the Tin Man, it is painful to watch him jerk his shoulders back like that.

 

I have to assume the Aidan Quinn signed on for this show to put some kids through college, and he gets paid by the show, not the line.  Otherwise, there is no justifying this waste of a great talent.  His facial expression during the Del-on-the-gurney scene were masterful, take notes Lucy Liu.

[basil]

That scene with Sherlock and Kitty in the warehouse was electric. Just fantastic. Probably the best scene of the season. JLM and Lovibond were on fire.

Possibly the best scene of all seasons. So fraught yet tranquil. Sherlock scarcely moved at all after Kitty opened the door, even though he knew what was inside and what she planned.

 

Is it wrong that I would have been fine with Kitty marinating Del in that special nutmeg concoction? I'm not a fan of vigilantism but I can get behind some cathartic fictional revenge when it's someone as sick and twisted as Del obviously was.

 

If you're wrong, I'm standing right next to you. From his own mouth we heard how much he enjoyed torturing and murdering many women....and I'm anti death penalty. Kill him, flush him down the toilet and let Kitty walk away a free woman. Yep. Just fine with that

 

I have always said there's a way to emit a calm exterior while covering up a bunch of roiling emotions. Joan's absolute need to look Del in the eye at that charity function, proves this woman is not the ice cube she appears to be. I get a woman who cares too deeply, and she has to hold herself back. Her empathy meter is off the charts. Some doctors would get right back on that horse, but the guilt ate her up to the point where she made her career about helping people.

When Del put his hands on her was a perfect example of controlled rage, and I thought she handled it magnificently.

 

 

I will never understand those who think Lui is a bad actress. I'd far rather an actor under than overplay, and that scene where Del grabbed her? Her reaction was sheer genius. Had I been Del on the receiving end of that look, I would have instantly been 10 feet away with no idea how I got there. She was terrifying (and my God, those bruises on her arm afterwards!).

 

None of that matters. Gregson knew it was Kitty who did that to Gruner and pretty much came out and told Sherlock he was giving her a head start to get out of the country when he said "in a few hours [he'll] go in there and ask who did that to him." Then he walked away, giving Sherlock opportunity to do with that information what he will. Kitty is safe from Gregson. He will not be going to a lot of trouble and expense to try to locate a suspect who has left the country.

 

 

I agree. I also loved that Joan suddenly had something else to do at that very moment when Sherlock did not answer his phone on the first ring. She very clearly knew it was Kitty and wanted to give Sherlock his privacy.

 

On a humorous note, I loved the incongruity of Sherlock telling Kitty to come back the next day, with goggles "...and a ladder"

[DeLurker]

When Kitty walked back to Gruner after Sherlock left the abandoned warehouse where he had tracked her, I thought Gruner had somehow managed to get free when she was away and would then pop out of the chair on her. My nerves were raw.

Stuart Townsend played his role perfectly. He made me believe he was a monster capable of doing horrible things without ever actually doing them on screen.

[Neurochick]

I do truly think that even if Gruner named Kitty as the acid-thrower, I don't think the police or the DA would go after her very hard, particularly has she was one of his torture/rape victims--mitigating circumstances out the wahzoo.

 

 

I agree.  I rolled my eyes when the captain said they would have to go after the person who disfigured a serial rapist killer.  Yeah, like that's what I'd like my tax dollars spent on.  

 

If you're wrong, I'm standing right next to you. From his own mouth we heard how much he enjoyed torturing and murdering many women....and I'm anti death penalty. Kill him, flush him down the toilet and let Kitty walk away a free woman. Yep. Just fine with that

 

I'll join that party.

Edited January 31, 2015 by Neurochick

[UncleChuck]

 

...Maybe Moriarty finds out about her and abducts her?

Good luck with that.  Moriarty might be an evil genius and master manipulator, but she has not met a true "badass" like Kitty.  If Kitty can capture and subdue a serial rapist like Del, Moriarty would have no chance at all.

 

Besides, the show spent half a season allowing Kitty to grow from a simpering victim to an overpowering vigilante.  TPTB would not revert Kitty to some defenseless, weak victim tied to a chair or chained in a cage.  Just not gonna happen.

[basil]

I rolled my eyes when the captain said they would have to go after the person who disfigured a serial rapist killer.  Yeah, like that's what I'd like my tax dollars spent on.

 

 

Well, Gregson wasn't wrong. Del's word against Kitty's. No proof he did anything to Kitty and he is a very, very rich man. No proof even that he killed his son's mother - only that he is the biological father. Once Del accused Kitty of disfiguring him, Gregson would have no choice but to go after Kitty.

 

Good luck with that.  Moriarty might be an evil genius and master manipulator, but she has not met a true "badass" like Kitty.  If Kitty can capture and subdue a serial rapist like Del, Moriarty would have no chance at all.

 

 

Totally disagree. I don't think we'll see that storyline, but Kitty wouldn't stand a chance against Moriarity. Kitty is all impulse and action. She'd never see Moriarty coming. 

 

[DeLurker]

Good luck with that.  Moriarty might be an evil genius and master manipulator, but she has not met a true "badass" like Kitty.  If Kitty can capture and subdue a serial rapist like Del, Moriarty would have no chance at all.

 

Besides, the show spent half a season allowing Kitty to grow from a simpering victim to an overpowering vigilante.  TPTB would not revert Kitty to some defenseless, weak victim tied to a chair or chained in a cage.  Just not gonna happen.

Bold mine - I can't recall Kitty every came across as a simpering victim.  Damaged - yes.  Possibly unhinged as a result - yes.  Not being argumentative (because my recall is very much like a colander), but can you provide an example of this?

[basil]

Bold mine - I can't recall Kitty every came across as a simpering victim.  Damaged - yes.  Possibly unhinged as a result - yes.  Not being argumentative (because my recall is very much like a colander), but can you provide an example of this?

 

 

I've recently rewatched this entire season, and I can't think of any time where Kitty could be described by either of those words.Quite the opposite, in fact. She went through a remarkable transformation (and I have huge respect for the actress), but I never saw her as simpering or a victim, At worst, she (understandably) showed signs of PTSD, and even that she kept in check.

 

....but maybe I missed something.

Edited January 31, 2015 by basil

[zxy556575]

On a humorous note, I loved the incongruity of Sherlock telling Kitty to come back the next day, with goggles "...and a ladder"

 

Except Sherlock would have specified, "6' stepladder" or "telescoping ladder" or whatever. ;)

 

I assumed Sherlock was in tears in London because he was at his nadir, an emotional wreck and struggling mightily not to relapse. Having no purpose was destroying him. I didn't think it was Kitty specifically he was mourning, only that having no one to tutor and occupy his mind was another boulder on his crushing pile of depression.

 

I also thought Kitty's "I love you" was offered in friendship, but now I'm thinking perhaps she did mean romantic love -- another surprise for me as a viewer, because I didn't see it coming at all.

[sinkwriter]

 

Except Sherlock would have specified, "6' stepladder" or "telescoping ladder" or whatever. ;)

 

Or he would have expected her to somehow be mentally in sync with him and automatically "know" already that she should come prepared with the appropriate ladder for any circumstance. And if she didn't show up with the "right" ladder on the first try, oh the exasperated sigh and forthcoming lecture/lesson she would endure! LOL.

[theatremouse]

I also thought Kitty's "I love you" was offered in friendship, but now I'm thinking perhaps she did mean romantic love -- another surprise for me as a viewer, because I didn't see it coming at all.

Interesting. The fact that she mentioned never expecting to be able to say it to anyone again didn't, to me, auto-associate with anything romantic, just that she had felt so completely broken emotionally before. For me, if previous episodes had not already convinced me their relationship was quite paternal, this episode certainly cemented my feeling of that. The looks shared between Sherlock and Kitty, both in the flashbacks and in the episode, everything about that read to me surrogate parent/child. Especially reinforced by her question of if she might still call. Edited February 1, 2015 by theatremouse

[basil]

On a humorous note, I loved the incongruity of Sherlock telling Kitty to come back [mid day], with goggles "...and a ladder"

 

 

Except Sherlock would have specified, "6' stepladder" or "telescoping ladder" or whatever. ;)

 

 

Actually, those were his exact words. No specifics. Who knows what he had in mind, if anything? By morning he would have sussed something out. I loved that. He went from weeping and despondent to "OK, give a me a day to regroup and I'll teach you some wacky thing with goggles and a ladder".

[morgankobi]

When Joan confronted Gruner outside, I saw O-Ren and was kind of hoping he'd give her a reason to take him down.

[jhlipton]

The only real objection I have to the article was when the author said Kitty

“does not wish to be defined by her victimhood,” Sherlock tells Joan early on, and, granted this control over her story, Kitty attempts to give other women control over theirs.

 

 

I never once thought that Kitty was seeking permission to control her story, she simply found someone (Sherlock) who could support her in the way that she needed to gain that control, and when she moved to New York she found others that were also able to help her.

I read that as the script granted Kitty control over her story, which it did.

 

 

I took Kitty's "I love you" to be non-romantic love; more as I alway tell my friends that I love them.  Did others see it as her saying she was "in love" with him?

It's funny -- while they were at the warehouse, I got a "kissing vibe" and was very grateful when it didn't happen but by time she was in London, I felt that it was non-romantic love. But being able to say "I love you" to a man, even without romance, is a huge, gigantic immense step for Kitty.

 

In fact, Joan believed at the end of her and Sherlock's first scene, when Gruner called her and fired her.

When Gruner fired Joan, I thought, "Dude, you just told her that Kitty was right!" And then when he grabbed her, it was "It's over for you now!"

[Blakeston]

I never had any sense of anything romantic between Sherlock and Kitty. Not even a little bit - I think the thought of it would disgust him. I think he sees her as a family member.

  

Well, Gregson wasn't wrong. Del's word against Kitty's. No proof he did anything to Kitty and he is a very, very rich man. No proof even that he killed his son's mother - only that he is the biological father. Once Del accused Kitty of disfiguring him, Gregson would have no choice but to go after Kitty.

 

Even if they could prove that Gruner was guilty, Gregson would have no choice but to go after Kitty. It's illegal to abduct and torture your rapist, no matter how much they deserve it. 

 

I did think it was odd, though, that the DNA match between Gruner and the boy was presented as a smoking gun that would guarantee Gruner's conviction. Gruner being the father certainly suggests that he abducted the boy's mother, and then killed her after she gave birth..but it doesn't prove it. I completely agree that if that was their only evidence, they'd never be able to get a conviction - not with Gruner's top-notch lawyers around.

I am really in the minority here, but I was not happy with Kitty disfiguring Gruner.  I say this as someone who liked Kitty right from the start.  And her part was really well written (and acted).  I understand she was scarred by her experience, but I don't think the eye for an eye really works.  I'm going to have to think about this episode some more, and even though Gruner was a heinous monster, I think she crossed a line.

 

I'd say she stopped short of an eye for an eye - that would have involved doing to Gruner what he did to those women he killed.

[frenchtoast]

There was a throwaway line at the hospital that they found a book in his home recording all the crimes that Gruner committed, so he is most likely going to prison for a long time. I was glad to hear it because that's what Holmes was trying to steal in the original story, to dissuade the fiance. I would think Kitty might be in that book, too.

 

I'm deeply impressed how they took a very brief, if intense, mention of a character in a short story and created an incredibly touching and powerful story. 

[DeLurker]

I am really in the minority here, but I was not happy with Kitty disfiguring Gruner.  I say this as someone who liked Kitty right from the start.  And her part was really well written (and acted).  I understand she was scarred by her experience, but I don't think the eye for an eye really works.  I'm going to have to think about this episode some more, and even though Gruner was a heinous monster, I think she crossed a line. 

In a real life morality kind of way, I think the bulk of us would agree with that.  And even in real life, if someone who was victimized and extracts revenge, while understandable to some degree, and that would be a criminal act.

 

In terms of a story I give more flexibility to morality.  The one shortcoming I felt with Kitty's story is never getting a clear sense of where her "line" is.  Clearly, having gone through what she did, it would have shifted.  I could, fictionally, see her justification for doing what she did to Gruner - everything is personal there and tied into her very being.  But since she had her chat with Greggson's daughter's boyfriend and was very persuasive in getting him to opt pursue a field outside of law enforcement and to leave the daughter alone, I question whether her line has moved too far.  They never reveal what exactly she said or did, but Greggson did say when he suspended her he had ignored a prior misdeed on her part (words to that effect).

 

They were probably going for ambigous on this front, but they ended up with murky to me.

Edited February 1, 2015 by DeLurker

[HeatherinThailand]

"Anyway, juuust when you had wiped the last tear from their previous exchange, Sherlock and Kitty slam you with a second Moment." Yep. Literally.

MAN, this was a great episode. As much as I was against Kitty at the beginning of the season, she has become my favorite character and I wish we could get a spinoff to follow her future cases. The producers almost did themselves a disservice with this great story arc, because now everything else will feel lacking without Kitty.

[paigow]

I wish we could get a spinoff to follow her future cases.

She could get Sherlock's old job at MI-6 and do pro bono assignments on the side.

[johntfs]

One thing that was cool was Kitty using the nutmeg concoction.  Now, every Autumn the bastard will suffer flashbacks.

 

Del: What kind of coffee are we having?

Guard: Pumpkin Lattes

Del: Nooooooooooooooooooo!!!

[Neurochick]

Well, Gregson wasn't wrong. Del's word against Kitty's. No proof he did anything to Kitty and he is a very, very rich man. No proof even that he killed his son's mother - only that he is the biological father. Once Del accused Kitty of disfiguring him, Gregson would have no choice but to go after Kitty.

 

 

True.  Kitty should have just nutmeg-ed him.  When it comes to the rich and powerful, justice isn't blind.  

 

But I wonder if Del is.  

[shapeshifter]

I'm also glad they didn't show us what Kitty did to Del. There's been too much t0rture pron on my TV lately.

Me too!

...I'd say she stopped short of an eye for an eye - that would have involved doing to Gruner what he did to those women he killed.

She did have a white hot iron at the ready and even whacked him with it.

If this were a less dark story arc, she would have just gotten him to give her the location of his journal with the one whack (no nutmeg concoction burning), and then Kitty would tell Gregson that she was just therapeutically re-enacting the creation of the iron and Gruner happened to walk by and stumble into it--which Gregson would "believe," after which he would get a warrant for the journal and throw Gruner in prison for 1,000 years or so.

[Mom x 3]

Does this mean we get a spinoff centered around a renegade Kitty evading the law and solving crimes across the world? Man, do I hope so. She was by far my favorite thing about this season. And she was amazing in these last two episodes.

I would watch the shit out of that.  Lovibond has made me a fan.

 

 

1.  Kitty and Sherlock’s relationship is a thing of beauty.  They have the requisite amount of affection and caring but not too much to where it ventures onto romantic.  I like that he told her point blank that no matter what she decided, he wouldn’t turn his back on her and they’d always be friends and Kitty’s telling him she loved him brought tears to my eyes.

 

 

This.  So much this.  This is the relationship that Sherlock and WATSON should have. 

 

It's funny -- while they were at the warehouse, I got a "kissing vibe" and was very grateful when it didn't happen but by time she was in London, I felt that it was non-romantic love. But being able to say "I love you" to a man, even without romance, is a huge, gigantic immense step for Kitty.

 

This was my take on it as well.  I think it was the fact that she was able to feel love again - no matter what kind - that was the important development.  And hell, if she develops her skills more and they run into each other in a few years and something more develops, I'd be okay with that too. 

My biggest issue is with Joan not believing Kitty at first.  She was a physician as well as a sober companion.  She knows what PTSD looks like.  Kitty wasn't faking that shit.  I thought it was poor writing to have her be dismissive, despite the fact that she came around. 

I like Lucy Liu, but I'm starting to wish Lovibond had been cast as Joan.

And we have come full circle, as Joan has no private business and no Insurance job, I guess she is a team again with Sherlock. 

 

[theatremouse]

My biggest issue is with Joan not believing Kitty at first.  She was a physician as well as a sober companion.  She knows what PTSD looks like.  Kitty wasn't faking that shit.  I thought it was poor writing to have her be dismissive, despite the fact that she came around.

I thought they were implying it was precisely because of her background she didn't believe Kitty at first. Witness accounts of traumatic events are notoriously flawed. Not to say someone cannot make a positive identification, but there are many many cases when a traumatized person feels 100% certain of something and later turns out to be totally wrong. It's because Joan knows what PTSD looks like that she was initially skeptical. To me, she didn't show signs of thinking Kitty was faking anything, rather the extremity of Kitty's reaction, coupled with the circumstances of recent events made it to any calm, rational person, something worthy of suspiciousness. I mean, dude basically needed to be a supervillain to pull that shit off. It turned out he was, but it's also reasonable not to jump to assuming a very convoluted string of events was the most likely explanation. Once she had more than just Kitty's freak out, Joan was on board, because she had evidence beyond a traumatized person freaking out to back it up. Edited February 1, 2015 by theatremouse

[kieyra]

LL looked so lovely when she crashed the donors event. She's gorgeous even tho I have a wee nit to pick WRT her earring choice. Loved the dress and hair.

Speaking of which: does Sherlock weedwhack his own hair? It's so strange. He's sporting a bit of a fauxhawk which seems out of character for Mr Button My Top Button All The Time.

 

Quick delurk: The hair. I really appreciate this show for what it is, but I do not understand why anyone involved with this show, or JLM himself, allows that haircut to go unchecked. It makes him look like an escaped mental patient with an unfortunate skull deformity. Maybe it's some inside joke, but goddamn is it distracting.

[Mom x 3]

But this was different from some unknown coming in off the street and saying, "I heard the voice of the guy who raped me on TV."  This was someone she knew and respected. 

Edited February 1, 2015 by stecciem

[jhlipton]

Me too!She did have a white hot iron at the ready and even whacked him with it.

If this were a less dark story arc, she would have just gotten him to give her the location of his journal with the one whack (no nutmeg concoction burning), and then Kitty would tell Gregson that she was just therapeutically re-enacting the creation of the iron and Gruner happened to walk by and stumble into it--which Gregson would "believe," after which he would get a warrant for the journal and throw Gruner in prison for 1,000 years or so.

 

It would have been less dark but near as satisfying.  I liked that she walked up to a line, but didn't cross it, and that Sherlock would be her friend regardless of where that line was.  We wouldn't have had that scene between them in this scenario.

 

Her line may be too far for some, and it would probably be too far in real life, but I was fine with how it played out myself.

[Blakeston]

Once she had more than just Kitty's freak out, Joan was on board, because she had evidence beyond a traumatized person freaking out to back it up.

 

I completely understand Joan having her doubts about Kitty's insistence that Gruner was the one who abducted her - especially with Kitty's realization happening right after she found out that the most obvious suspect died.

 

But I was somewhat disappointed in Joan when she said something to Sherlock like, "You think it's just a huge coincidence that my boss is the same guy who raped Kitty?"

 

It really should have occurred to Joan that if Gruner was the rapist, it wouldn't necessarily have been a coincidence - he'd just . It seemed like she'd had at least a few hours to think about it.

 

I get that it was probably just a way for the writers to explain the theory to the audience. But there are ways to give the audience an information dump without having a really smart character act dumb.

[MaryHedwig]

I get that it was probably just a way for the writers to explain the theory to the audience. But there are ways to give the audience an information dump without having a really smart character act dumb.

While the writers have been very kind to Kitty this season, kinder with each episode, they have not at all been kind to Watson.  Watson has come off as wooden, unforgiving, cold-hearted, and with limited empathy for others.  Does she even now know about the amount of pain giving notice to move out caused Sherlock?  Since The One That Got Away was Kitty and not Watson (no writer asked for my opinion on that) I hope they warm Watson up and give her her own heart-wrenching story line.  However, if that storyline involves a bed and Mycroft, I am taking names and writing protest letters.

Edited February 2, 2015 by MaryHedwig

[ohjoy]

I'm rewatching this episode, and was struck for a second time by the change in Sherlock's face as he listened to Kitty throw the locks on her door in the flashback when he wanted to talk to her about the missing child. Very beautiful dawning realization there.

[MaryHedwig]

I just watched it again too and was stuck by the skull on the back of the jacket that Kitty wore in London with the skull on the back, it was as if the skull was to shield her from the vulnerability of the scars there.

[shapeshifter]

I had noticed the skull jacket, wasn't sure if it was just a fashion choice or something more. Now that you've reminded me that both her scars and the skull were on her back, I'm thinking of how a skull (and cross bones) are used as a universal warning symbol for poison that can cause death--as if to say: My back will scare you to death.

[basil]

Even if they could prove that Gruner was guilty, Gregson would have no choice but to go after Kitty. It's illegal to abduct and torture your rapist, no matter how much they deserve it.

 

 

And even in real life, if someone who was victimized and extracts revenge, while understandable to some degree, and that would be a criminal act.

 

 

Still has to be proven. An accusation does not make a conviction.

 

There was a throwaway line at the hospital that they found a book in his home recording all the crimes that Gruner committed, so he is most likely going to prison for a long time. I was glad to hear it because that's what Holmes was trying to steal in the original story, to dissuade the fiance. I would think Kitty might be in that book, too.

 

 

This, however, was such a throwaway line that even though I heard it, I dismissed it. It was like the writers said "well, we have to put something in there that proves Del's guilt, so let's have him keep a book of the horrors he's committed" - which for someone who was so careful to get rid of the bodies was almost unbelievable, but maybe he just couldn't help himself. Thanks for that reminder.

 

While the writers have been very kind to Kitty this season, kinder with each episode, they have not at all been kind to Watson.  Watson has come off as wooden, unforgiving, cold-hearted, and with limited empathy for others.  Does she even now know about the amount of pain giving notice to move out caused Sherlock?

 

 

They started turning Joan into a bitchy pod person last season. I remember writing a long rant on it on TWoP. I hated her turning on Lestrade for daring to have a drink in the backyard only hours after he had been mugged.

[dr pepper]

I knew Kitty wasn't going to kill Del, but I thought she'd scar his body -- didn't expect the acid to the face!

 

 

 

 

When we found out that Kitty splashed acid on Gruner, we were a bit surprised she didn't castrate him too.

 

 

 

I wish she hadn't maimed him. I think it is widely accepted that such actions psychologically injure the person dishing out the retribution. Plus, now I have to assume there will be some story about the scarred evil doer stalking more victims (like Pelant from Bones and the guy in SVU)--which I would not watch.

 

 

I am really in the minority here, but I was not happy with Kitty disfiguring Gruner. 

 

In the original Holmes story, she blinds him with sulfuric acid.

[MaryHedwig]

In the original Holmes story, she blinds him with sulfuric acid.

Because of the canon story, I wondered if we were to assume that Del was left blind as well.

Edited February 3, 2015 by MaryHedwig

[basil]

Witness accounts of traumatic events are notoriously flawed. Not to say someone cannot make a positive identification, but there are many many cases when a traumatized person feels 100% certain of something and later turns out to be totally wrong. It's because Joan knows what PTSD looks like that she was initially skeptical.

 

 

Witness accounts have been shown to be flawed anyway, whether said witness was victim or not. Still, I didn't like that Joan totally discounted Kitty. Kitty wasn't some random person Joan barely knew. I thought she ought to have at least given her some credence.

 

In the original Holmes story, she blinds him with sulfuric acid.

 

Because of the canon story, I wondered if we were to assume that Del was left blind all well.

 

 

Agree. If we see Del again, he'll be disfigured, blind, and looking to put Kitty in jail. He's not going to be a supercriminal. Great job by Townsend, A great casting against type.

 

The hair. I really appreciate this show for what it is, but I do not understand why anyone involved with this show, or JLM himself, allows that haircut to go unchecked. It makes him look like an escaped mental patient with an unfortunate skull deformity. Maybe it's some inside joke, but goddamn is it distracting

 

 

Has to be a deliberate choice, like the buttoned up shirts. A way to show Sherlock's "otherness". I'm actually glad they didn't go for a traditionally handsome Sherlock. I still find him hot as hell.

Edited February 3, 2015 by basil

[Driad]

Sherlock's haircut reminds me of Gibbs on NCIS, and his buttoned-up shirt reminds me of Monk.  Gibbs and Monk both live by strict rules.  I think Sherlock's appearance is a hint that he does too, even though his rules may not be obvious to others.

[basil]

Sherlock's haircut reminds me of Gibbs on NCIS, and his buttoned-up shirt reminds me of Monk.  Gibbs and Monk both live by strict rules.  I think Sherlock's appearance is a hint that he does too, even though his rules may not be obvious to others

 

.

 

I always just figured Sherlock - in general - doesn't give a monkey's about his looks. Not that he's unaware of how he looks - there have been several references where Joan will say something to the effect of "You're going to wear that?" and Sherlock will reply he's doing purposefully to insult the people they are about to visit (I think he did this to the bankers whose CEOs kept dying off).

 

Seems to be his way of showing contempt on occasion, and generally he geniuinely doesn't care. In one episode he actually says "I could swear I was wearing a shirt" seconds before leaving the house - and meant it).  It's like the brownstone or his "brain attic" What difference does any of it make to him?

 

It also may be a a way of distancing himself. Sherlock's looks are a deliberate choice by the creatives, though. 

[johntfs]

Still has to be proven. An accusation does not make a conviction.

 

 

This, however, was such a throwaway line that even though I heard it, I dismissed it. It was like the writers said "well, we have to put something in there that proves Del's guilt, so let's have him keep a book of the horrors he's committed" - which for someone who was so careful to get rid of the bodies was almost unbelievable, but maybe he just couldn't help himself. Thanks for that reminder.

 

 

They started turning Joan into a bitchy pod person last season. I remember writing a long rant on it on TWoP. I hated her turning on Lestrade for daring to have a drink in the backyard only hours after he had been mugged.

 

Joan's always been fiercely protective of Sherlock's sobriety.  Lestrade made her a promise of no alcohol/drugs on the premises and then broke that promise.  He deserved Joan chewing on his ass.

 

Serial murderers/rapists often take trophies/memorials of their crimes to relive them,  I have no problem believing that Del Gruner would have something like that.

[MaryHedwig]

It also may be a a way of distancing himself. Sherlock's looks are a deliberate choice by the creatives, though.

Well, Jonny Lee Miller is being a very good sport to let them botch up his head like that with that give-the-razor-back-to-Mommy style.  Do the creatives want to prevent JLM from getting any acting moonlighting jobs?

Edited February 5, 2015 by MaryHedwig

[Kromm]

I was afraid that Kitty was going to end up dead by the end of her story arc, and I'm glad that didn't happen. In fact, she was rather empowered throughout the episode. And I loved Sherlock's speech to her at the end. He refused to judge her and simply laid out the choice for her.

 

Her declaration of love somehow felt like a revelation but at the same time didn't come out of nowhere. There wasn't any overt sign from her, but at the same time, it just made sense. We can see it in her backstory and all the episodes she's been in up until now.

Well I don't think it needs to be taken as some great mystery... because she wasn't talking about romantic love. That was dead clear.

[Miss Dee]

I just loved the way she sandwiched it between those comments. Taken exactly literally, it didn't have to be a declaration at all, just a comment on a rarely used phrase. Dig a litter deeper, and it shows us Kitty's frame of mind, her final epitaph on the effect this monster and her attempts to cope have had on her life. And deepest of all, she told Sherlock what he meant to her in a way that allowed his sentiment-detesting heart to hear and accept it. Because on the surface, it's just a comment about a rarely used phrase.

It was a beautiful bit of writing.

[basil]

I'm deeply impressed how they took a very brief, if intense, mention of a character in a short story and created an incredibly touching and powerful story.

I kept meaning to respond to this. ITA, and well-said. Also, it has been awhile since I've read the books, but this episode feels like the closest to canon of all so far (perhaps because it was because it was a short story?). I love the way this show uses canon (names, quotes. titles, plots, etc). It's never shoe-horned in canon just to throw it in). They (imo) always utilise it well.

 

This use of canon seemed particularly thought-out and well done.

 

Joan's always been fiercely protective of Sherlock's sobriety.  Lestrade made her a promise of no alcohol/drugs on the premises and then broke that promise.  He deserved Joan chewing on his ass.

Yes, he broke a promise, and that a discussion was warranted is completely understandable - but there's a time and place for everything. Lestrade had just been mugged and beaten. He had been locked outside in the cold, bleeding from an inches-long gash above his eye. Sure he was a tough guy about it, but still...Watson was a doctor. She knows that even seemingly inconsequential head injuries can lead to death (Natasha Richardson, anyone?). Joan even suggested he go to the hospital, but two minutes later, she goes all Carrie Nation on him. She couldn't take the time to examine him, maybe treat his wounds, before shouting at him? Men are traumatised by violent attacks too. What if Lestrade had been a female guest, say Kitty. or Irene - would Joan, smelling alcohol on an injured female guest's breath, have treated a woman as angrily? Especially one who had just been beaten and robbed?

 

It just seemed out of character, as did her telling Lestrade that he had the weekend in which to leave. Sherlock is in the brownstone by the grace of his father. Joan was there at Sherlock's suggestion. Lestrade was Sherlock's guest.. Where did Joan get off evicting him without Sherlock's permission? That's what I meant by turning Joan into a pod person. First season Joan wouldn't have treated Lestrade that way after his assault (or the eviction, of course, because she was very new there) nor would she have instantly discounted Kitty's accusation so quickly and decisively. 

 

Jonny Lee Miller is being a very good sport to let them botch up his head like that with that give-the-razor-back-to-Mommy style.  Do the creatives want to prevent JLM from getting any acting moonlighting jobs?

That is very funny. May I use that hair cut like "that give-the-razor-back-to-Mommy style"? Actually, truly, JLM himself has never been known for his hairstyles, in life or his screen appearances. I can't think of one, anyway. Many actors prefer to grow hair/beards/mustaches for roles to avoid time in haIrdressing chairs (and to help stay in character, for some), but hair people do great work. They can "fix" JLM if he wants to moonlight. Did you ever watch Fringe? Michael Cerveris, a bald actor/musician, played the also bald "alien" known as "The Observer". Later, he became a human known as "September", who did have hair. Wasn't a lot, but looked perfectly natural.

 

I don't think it needs to be taken as some great mystery... because she wasn't talking about romantic love. That was dead clear.

If t was dead clear, we wouldn't be talking about it. ;) I happen to agree with you, though. I also make a distinction between romantic sexual love and romantic platonic love, and I don't think Kitty meant either. She just plain meant "love". She had healed enough to feel something positive for another person again.

Edited February 5, 2015 by basil

[MaryHedwig]

Jonny Lee Miller is being a very good sport to let them botch up his head like that with that give-the-razor-back-to-Mommy style.  Do the creatives want to prevent JLM from getting any acting moonlighting jobs?

That is very funny. May I use that hair cut like "that give-the-razor-back-to-Mommy style"?

Of course.  I adapted the expression from another one I made up years ago.  We used to live in a beach house that was a do-it-yourselfer from the 1940's.  There were several deep gouges on the interior wood paneling where it look like someone got a little carried away.  I called them give-the-chainsaw-back-to-Mommy gouges.  It made it easier to live with them, and the wind that whistled and blew through them.

Edited February 5, 2015 by MaryHedwig

[johntfs]

 

It just seemed out of character, as did her telling Lestrade that he had the weekend in which to leave. Sherlock is in the brownstone by the grace of his father. Joan was there at Sherlock's suggestion. Lestrade was Sherlock's guest.. Where did Joan get off evicting him without Sherlock's permission? That's what I meant by turning Joan into a pod person. First season Joan wouldn't have treated Lestrade that way after his assault (or the eviction, of course, because she was very new there) nor would she have instantly discounted Kitty's accusation so quickly and decisively.

 

First season Joan was fully willing to kick out Rhys, Holmes' ex-dealer/friend whose daughter had been kidnapped, when he toked up with marijuana.  This despite the fact that at the time she was legally no longer Sherlock's sober companion.

 

As for initially dismissing Kitty's accusation, Kitty's accusation does come off as kind of nuts in Joan's context at that time.  Think about from Joan's perspective.  Joan "knows" Del Gruner and likes him.  She likes him enough to be willing to fold her own detective practice and come to work for him.  Then Kitty, who is clearly bitterly disappointed by the way the hunt for her attacker has ended, just happens to hear Del's voice and declares him to be her rapist.  It's nuts.

 

Also at stake here is Joan's pride in her own abilities as a detective.  The idea that Del Gruner is a vile serial killer and rapist and that she's worked closely with him and never suspected a thing?  Also nuts.

 

However, once Sherlock breaks things down for her, Joan is willing to listen.  Del, who has been listening via Joan's phone calls to fire her because he knows that Joan will come around to Sherlock's side very soon and he wants to cast Joan's accusations as retaliation.

[MaryHedwig]

Is there something in canon about Sherlock and eggs?  Is that the only dish he knows how to make?  That was what was for breakfast in the meal the Sherlock was making for Kitty, right?  Seem like we have seen him beat up eggs in a bowl quite a few times before.

[basil]

First season Joan was fully willing to kick out Rhys, Holmes' ex-dealer/friend whose daughter had been kidnapped, when he toked up with marijuana.

I'll have to re watch. I don't recall her threatening to kick him out - and even if she did, how does she have any right to evict anyone from the home she was living in as a result of Sherlock's largesse without consulting Sherlock? I do remember her insistence that he immediately flush the drugs. Even if she did threaten to evict him, the situations were quite different. Rhys was smoking an illegal substance in the house right in front of her. Never mind Sherlock's sobriety - Joan could be arrested as a result of Rhys' actions.

 

As to Lestrade, IMO, season one Joan would have held off a bit on the lecture, or at least given it to him as she tended his wounds. not shouting at him as he bled after being traumatised after an assault - for the crime of drinking in the backyard. Looks like we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

However, once Sherlock breaks things down for her, Joan is willing to listen.  Del, who has been listening via Joan's phone calls to fire her because he knows that Joan will come around to Sherlock's side very soon and he wants to cast Joan's accusations as retaliation.

You could see the lightbulb go off in her head when Sherlock asked if anyone had handled her phone.

 

Is there something in canon about Sherlock and eggs?  Is that the only dish he knows how to make?  That was what was for breakfast in the meal the Sherlock was making for Kitty, right?  Seem like we have seen him beat up eggs in a bowl quite a few times before.

 

 

I don't recall canon Holmes ever cooking, but sometimes Elementary Holmes cooks when he's thinking (I want to say figgy pudding?) and then he throws it away.