S03.E24: A Controlled Descent

[shapeshifter]

...I was very afraid that Oscar was going to force the heroin on him, by stabbing him [sherlock] with a needle...

I'm still worried that Oscar did that to Alfredo.

 

Did anyone else notice that Oscar's sister was named Olivia, and that The actor who plays Oscar was Olivia Benson's brother in SVU?

I couldn't remember where I knew him from either. She had an "O" name so Sherlock could point out that Oscar had convinced the rehab place that the paid, open-ended reservation was for "O." not "Oscar," but I wonder if the writers were thinking about Olivia Benson at some point.

 

I really don't get why Oscar is so obsessed with Sherlock he would go to THESE LENGTHS to get at him. By far the weakest part of the episode for me, and tbh it really took me out of the episode. I just found it completely unconvincing, esp given that Oscar had just been in 1 episode previous (maybe 2? I missed a few this spring)....

That's why I'm thinking he was doing it because someone paid him.

[Trey]

I don't think anyone paid Oscar to kidnap Alfredo and try to get Sherlock back on drugs.  Sherlock was just so contemptuous of  him that I think it really, really stung Oscar to the point that he obsessed about it - I don't think his mind/emotions are on an even keel.  I really can see someone like Oscar hating Sherlock that much.

[dargosmydaddy]

Well, that was awesome. I'm hooked in for next season. And on a completely shallow note, I loved Sherlock returning to the scruffy, sweatshirted version from early season one. I'm not sure how much more of the extreme button-ups I could take.

 

I loved the use of the Keaton Henson song at the end, too.

[Brattinella]

Well, that was awesome. I'm hooked in for next season. And on a completely shallow note, I loved Sherlock returning to the scruffy, sweatshirted version from early season one. I'm not sure how much more of the extreme button-ups I could take.

 

I loved the use of the Keaton Henson song at the end, too.

 

I would watch and listen to Jonny Lee Miller read the encyclopedia wearing a tutu.  *blush*

[roomtorome]

I just really dislike that this show made his drug issue so gigantic in the show - and, I really have no interest what happens next year but then, admittedly, I don't like these formulaic crime dramas of CBS regardless of how much they try to sell me that this is Holmes and Watson.

 

Oh, well, two more down as of last night.  

[basiltherat]

The more I think about it, the more I wonder if some Big Bad is behind Oscar's machinations.  Oscar did name-check both Irene and Papa.

[possibilities]

I think Oscar wanted Sherlock to "choose to use" because it would justify in Oscar's mind, that his own choices were best, and that he wasn't really a destructive force in the lives of his sister and his "friend." If he had stabbed Sherlock with a needle, he would not be able to paper over his own guilt, and claim that Sherlock "really wanted it and was better off and chose it." He wanted to think of himself as a role model. He wanted to replace Alfredo as a sponsor, in a way.

 

I can't get over the idea of casting John Goodman as Sherlock's father. I know he's not British and he's the wrong age, but still... I see him as having the proper command to stand up to Sherlock and not be malleable in the face of any intellectual machinations.

[HalcyonDays]

I can't get over the idea of casting John Goodman as Sherlock's father. I know he's not British and he's the wrong age, but still... I see him as having the proper command to stand up to Sherlock and not be malleable in the face of any intellectual machinations.

 

Wait, what? They cast John Goodman as Sherlock's father??? That's seems weird. I love JG to death, think he is a fabulous actor, but I really thought it would be a British actor cast. Still - he'll do a fabulous job!

[possibilities]

That was just my idea; I have no idea who they actually cast, or if they've decided yet. I was just weighing in with an idea that was stuck in my head. My apologies if my way of phrasing it made it seem like actual fact rather than internal whimsy! I don't want to start a rumor.

[miles2go]

I think Oscar wanted Sherlock to "choose to use" because it would justify in Oscar's mind, that his own choices were best, and that he wasn't really a destructive force in the lives of his sister and his "friend." If he had stabbed Sherlock with a needle, he would not be able to paper over his own guilt, and claim that Sherlock "really wanted it and was better off and chose it." He wanted to think of himself as a role model. He wanted to replace Alfredo as a sponsor, in a way.

 

 

 

This. Also, Oscar was in control when Sherlock was using.  A sober Sherlock was not only beyond Oscar's control, but was openly contemptuous of him.  Not good for Oscar's ego.

 

The two possibilities for Oscar's motivation, i.e., being hired versus trying to fulfill his own murky emotional needs, are not mutually exclusive.  He could possibly have been contacted by someone who knew something about his and Sherlock's past.  This would be a great deal for Oscar -- he can have the perverse pleasure of luring Holmes off the wagon and get paid for it, too.

[MisterGlass]

I think a relapse was always on the books for this show, or at least since the second season.  I don't think it means that Sherlock will continue using.  I do think that this will make him questions his purpose and whether it is worth living his life from here.  He commented once on the tedium of life in the effort to maintain his sobriety.  If he can't even manage to maintain it, and his credibility, and self respect, then why bother with any of it?

 

The actor that played Oscar was also the private detective on House, so really this is his second Sherlock Holmes show.

 

Some interesting casting suggestions.  I've been thinking along the lines of John Hurt, or Johnathan Pryce, but Tarasme, John Noble is the best idea I've head to date.  Watching him and JLM intone at each other would be fantastic.  Holmes has always referred to his father as evil, and John Noble could do a lot in that vein, or prove Holmes as biased as he was with Mycroft.

 

Holmes's father does not appear in the stories.  The only family mentioned as far as I recall is Mycroft.  In the first season, when his father was referred to as M. Holmes I thought perhaps they would shift the narrative to have Mycroft as a parent rather than brother, but I'm glad they retained him as the brother.

 

 

I loved Alfredo's response to Sherlock's question:" I dunno. Third base."

That is by far my favorite moment involving Alfredo.

[justjoan]

 

I've been thinking along the lines of John Hurt, or Johnathan Pryce, but Tarasme, John Noble is the best idea I've head to date.

 

Ugh, John Noble is utterly burned out for me at this point. No more. I'm still afraid they'll find some way to bring him back from the dead on Sleepy Hollow next season. John Hurt is an interesting idea, though. Or if we're not restricted to tall, thin gentlemen (the Holmes boys could have gotten their form from Presumably Dead Mum, after all), perhaps Brian Cox.

 

I'm undecided how I feel about his relapse. I've been dreading it from the pilot, but I assumed it would happen at some point, and now that it has... I'm waiting, I guess. I sort of trust the writers, and sort of don't. They fumbled Mycroft so badly, but they handled Sherlock/Joan/Kitty so well, that I really can't get a bead on how this will play out. And instead of being eager for next season, I just feel cautious. A summer of "hmmm" to look forward to.

[fauntleroy]

I really don't get why Oscar is so obsessed with Sherlock he would go to THESE LENGTHS to get at him. By far the weakest part of the episode for me, and tbh it really took me out of the episode. I just found it completely unconvincing

 

This, as they say. Why is he doing this? Plus, the unlikeliness of an addict having the organizational skill required. (Both of these points were mentioned above, I'm just piling on.) The emotional coercion reminded me of the old National Lampoon cover 'If you don't buy this magazine, we'll shoot this dog.'

[Frisson]

Perhaps I'm looking for associations where none exist, but after last week's episode, I wonder if the events of this episode will tie into the warning thrown Gregson's way. Like, someone wants Holmes out to affect Gregson and his precinct, or the expansive use of manpower or Holmes's relapse this episode will hurt Gregson next season.

[shapeshifter]

Perhaps I'm looking for associations where none exist, but after last week's episode, I wonder if the events of this episode will tie into the warning thrown Gregson's way. Like, someone wants Holmes out to affect Gregson and his precinct, or the expansive use of manpower or Holmes's relapse this episode will hurt Gregson next season.

That makes more sense to me than anything I've come up with, so you've got my vote. Heh.

[emma675]

 

Apparently one of the Elementary EP's confirmed that yeah - Sherlock relapsed. Sad.

Oof, that kills me, even if it is completely realistic. I hate that despicable Oscar essentially got Sherlock to a state that he was weak enough to relapse. I hope it comes out next season that someone paid Oscar to do it, because I felt like Oscar's motivations were somewhat weak. It was the only off moment in an otherwise stellar episode.

 

I hope Alfredo is back a lot next season because I want to see him recovering from this, how it affects his relationship with Sherlock, and to see him helping Sherlock recover from this. They are friends, after all.

 

I'm also wondering if Sherlock killed Oscar. Those were some vicious kicks to what looked like his head and as Oscar said himself, he had health problems.

[Neurochick]

I think Oscar wanted Sherlock to "choose to use" because it would justify in Oscar's mind, that his own choices were best, and that he wasn't really a destructive force in the lives of his sister and his "friend." If he had stabbed Sherlock with a needle, he would not be able to paper over his own guilt, and claim that Sherlock "really wanted it and was better off and chose it." He wanted to think of himself as a role model. He wanted to replace Alfredo as a sponsor, in a way.

 

 

My two cents:

 

From my experience, addicts are both very sensitive and very selfish people.  Sherlock was kind of abrupt to Oscar a few episodes ago; I thought that Sherlock thought it was better than Oscar when in fact they're not so different, meaning they are both addicts, Sherlock got sober, Oscar didn't and nobody knows really why one person gets and stays clean and another can't.  The mix of sensitivity and selfishness made Oscar upset that Sherlock was so dismissive of him and also made him want to get back at Sherlock in some way.  

 

I think Oscar was trying to show Sherlock that they are both addicts, that even though Sherlock is sober, he's really no different than Oscar, in that he has an addict's brain.  When Sherlock got the phone call that they had found Alfredo, he could have told Oscar, "Guess what, you're going to jail for kidnapping, asshole."  But Sherlock didn't do that, he beat the shit out of Oscar, maybe killing him, maybe putting him in a coma.  Sherlock didn't relapse, meaning he didn't do heroin in front of Oscar, but he did what an addict would do, do the first thing that came to his mind, beat the shit out of Oscar, an emotional relapse which probably triggered a physical relapse.

Edited May 16, 2015 by Neurochick

[sinkwriter]

 

Sherlock didn't relapse, meaning he didn't do heroin in front of Oscar, but he did what an addict would do, do the first thing that came to his mind, beat the shit out of Oscar, an emotional relapse which probably triggered a physical relapse.

 

Definitely. He's so controlled and precise, and losing control would probably be a huge weakness in Sherlock's mind, so when he lost control and beat Oscar... I imagine his mind is a very dark emotional place right now. I'm sure logically he understands that he was angry about so many things (Oscar trying so hard to bait him, to get him to use again, the fear that Alfredo might be in mortal danger and it's indirectly Sherlock's fault) and he would do anything to protect people he cares about. But emotionally he might "rationalize" that he cannot afford to lose it like that and he can't afford to be put in position where his sobriety rests in the hands of people who might manipulate his emotions; therefore he may decide maybe he shouldn't have friends or anyone who could be put at risk in order to mess with Sherlock. He would be better off solitary. No matter what he's learned over the past few years about friendship (through Alfredo, Watson, Marcus and the Captain), he may decide it's not worth the risks.

[stealinghome]

Perhaps I'm looking for associations where none exist, but after last week's episode, I wonder if the events of this episode will tie into the warning thrown Gregson's way. Like, someone wants Holmes out to affect Gregson and his precinct, or the expansive use of manpower or Holmes's relapse this episode will hurt Gregson next season.

Could it be someone out to hurt Papa Holmes? I know that Joan said he "heard" about what happened but it still seems pretty coincidental that JUST NOW Papa Holmes chooses to make an appearance....

[kitmerlot1213]

I don't think anyone paid Oscar to kidnap Alfredo and try to get Sherlock back on drugs.  Sherlock was just so contemptuous of  him that I think it really, really stung Oscar to the point that he obsessed about it - I don't think his mind/emotions are on an even keel.  I really can see someone like Oscar hating Sherlock that much.

I agree, Oscar hated that Sherlock was able to get his life together and that he couldn't control Sherlock anymore.  In his mind, Oscar wanted to continue to be important to him, like he and Sherlock were friends.  Oscar actually allowed his sister's body to sit in that tunnel and rot just so he could continue to torture Sherlock--that is sick and damned cold. 

Edited May 16, 2015 by kitmerlot1213

[fauntleroy]

I think Oscar was trying to show Sherlock that they are both addicts, that even though Sherlock is sober, he's really no different than Oscar, in that he has an addict's brain. 

 

This does not seem like compelling motivation though. They have a commonality--it does not mean they are the same. Other than the fact that they share an addiction, they are nothing alike. In that sense it's like left-handedness or atheism. What has Oscar proven as a result of his unlikely feat of organization? He gets to say ha Sherlock you see, you are like me after all, an addict! But so what? We already knew that addicts can relapse. Sherlock, either directly with heroin or indirectly with uncontrolled behavior, relapsed. He never claimed he was exempt from this risk. If you relapse you suffer, then you pick yourself up and start the process again.

 

So basically I don't know, one addict getting another addict to relapse just didn't add up for me, as a motive.

[Pomegranate]

For anyone who watched Psych...I can't believe Hornstock is Oscar!

[johntfs]

I would watch and listen to Jonny Lee Miller read the encyclopedia wearing a tutu.  *blush*

 

I'd rather hear him sing the soundtrack from Frozen.  In a tutu.

[Neurochick]

This does not seem like compelling motivation though. They have a commonality--it does not mean they are the same. Other than the fact that they share an addiction, they are nothing alike. In that sense it's like left-handedness or atheism. What has Oscar proven as a result of his unlikely feat of organization? He gets to say ha Sherlock you see, you are like me after all, an addict! But so what? We already knew that addicts can relapse. Sherlock, either directly with heroin or indirectly with uncontrolled behavior, relapsed. He never claimed he was exempt from this risk. If you relapse you suffer, then you pick yourself up and start the process again.

 

So basically I don't know, one addict getting another addict to relapse just didn't add up for me, as a motive.

I see it this way.  Say two people live in a bad neighborhood, they grow up together, go through the same experiences.  One makes it, the other doesn't.  The one who doesn't make it resents the one who did and seeks to sabotage them.  

 

As I said, addicts are sensitive, selfish and childish.  It doesn't make sense to a rational person, what Oscar did, but to him, it made perfect sense because he's got that sick, addict brain.

[stealinghome]

I understand why Oscar would resent the hell out of Sherlock and have a petty desire to see him fall back into being an addict--that was pretty clearly telegraphed in his first appearance. Where I just can't make the leap is Oscar being SOOOOOO crazily obsessed with Sherlock that he would a) leave his dead sister's body under a bridge for 2 days and b) kidnap a man at gunpoint and lock him away to die JUST to get Sherlock to relapse. "Addict wanting another to relapse" is waaaaay far away from "kidnapping, murder, and letting his sister's body rot for 2 days." Nothing in Oscar's previous appearance suggested he was that insane/homicidal (in fact he came off as a real wuss). I just can't make that jump--not to mention, as others have said, that's a pretty elaborate scheme for a dude who spends 90% of his time high.

 

So maybe if we had seen more of Oscar this season (part of my problem is that the show pulled their history a bit out of nowhere), and they had hinted at his nuttiness a bit more, I could have bought it. But for me it remains a really weak motivation relative to the level of shit he pulled to try to get Sherlock to relapse. Leaving drugs on Sherlock's porch every day? Sure, I could see him doing that. Getting high in front of Sherlock? Totally. Kidnapping/murder/neglect of sister's body? Not so much.

Edited May 16, 2015 by stealinghome

[miles2go]

I understand why Oscar would resent the hell out of Sherlock and have a petty desire to see him fall back into being an addict--that was pretty clearly telegraphed in his first appearance. Where I just can't make the leap is Oscar being SOOOOOO crazily obsessed with Sherlock that he would a) leave his dead sister's body under a bridge for 2 days and b) kidnap a man at gunpoint and lock him away to die JUST to get Sherlock to relapse. "Addict wanting another to relapse" is waaaaay far away from "kidnapping, murder, and letting his sister's body rot for 2 days." Nothing in Oscar's previous appearance suggested he was that insane/homicidal (in fact he came off as a real wuss). I just can't make that jump--not to mention, as others have said, that's a pretty elaborate scheme for a dude who spends 90% of his time high.

 

So maybe if we had seen more of Oscar this season (part of my problem is that the show pulled their history a bit out of nowhere), and they had hinted at his nuttiness a bit more, I could have bought it. But for me it remains a really weak motivation relative to the level of shit he pulled to try to get Sherlock to relapse. Leaving drugs on Sherlock's porch every day? Sure, I could see him doing that. Getting high in front of Sherlock? Totally. Kidnapping/murder/neglect of sister's body? Not so much.

 

The elaborate and extreme nature of the plan may be an indication that Oscar wasn't working alone. (Of course, it could also mean that the scriptwriters got a little carried away!)  The thing is, while I can certainly imagine Oscar leaving drugs on Sherlock's porch, I can't imagine Sherlock falling for it.  It would require something more than that for him to relapse.  Oscar could be strewing heroin in Sherlock's path every day for years, but unless he happened to catch him in the right emotional state, it would be a waste of time and resources.

 

I really don't have any problem with Oscar's motivation, although I entirely agree that we should have seen some indications of violence in him before this time.  Whether he was smart enough -- or had the resources --  to pull this off on his own, is another matter altogether.

[Abra]

A whole season gone by, and we still don't know what happened to Randy? To me, that is now the show's greatest mystery.

 

I can buy Oscar being so obsessed with tearing Sherlock down, but leaving his sister's corpse under a bridge for two days? That was too much, especially as it seems we were supposed to believe Oscar and Olivia really did care about each other.

 

I am also glad to see Sherlock "dressing down" again; I miss his season one sartorial choices (and the hair from the pilot).

[johntfs]

I understand why Oscar would resent the hell out of Sherlock and have a petty desire to see him fall back into being an addict--that was pretty clearly telegraphed in his first appearance. Where I just can't make the leap is Oscar being SOOOOOO crazily obsessed with Sherlock that he would a) leave his dead sister's body under a bridge for 2 days and b) kidnap a man at gunpoint and lock him away to die JUST to get Sherlock to relapse. "Addict wanting another to relapse" is waaaaay far away from "kidnapping, murder, and letting his sister's body rot for 2 days." Nothing in Oscar's previous appearance suggested he was that insane/homicidal (in fact he came off as a real wuss). I just can't make that jump--not to mention, as others have said, that's a pretty elaborate scheme for a dude who spends 90% of his time high.

 

So maybe if we had seen more of Oscar this season (part of my problem is that the show pulled their history a bit out of nowhere), and they had hinted at his nuttiness a bit more, I could have bought it. But for me it remains a really weak motivation relative to the level of shit he pulled to try to get Sherlock to relapse. Leaving drugs on Sherlock's porch every day? Sure, I could see him doing that. Getting high in front of Sherlock? Totally. Kidnapping/murder/neglect of sister's body? Not so much.

 

See, the thing is that Oscar was pushed past his limits.  He took Sherlock's "free bed" offer amd used it to do one truly good, positive thing in his life.  He got his sister into rehab.  He could finally make up for all the damage he did by getting her clean.  Against all the bad he'd done, he'd have that one good thing.  And then it turned to shit and she ODed in a tunnel.  Figure when Oscar found her after desperately, frantically searching, he could hear Sherlock cold, contemptuous judgmental voice in his brain.

 

So, if Oscar couldn't push his sister out of the gutter, he decided to pull Sherlock back down into it.  Sherlock knows tobacco and footprints and esoteric knowledge that aids in crimefighting.  Oscar only really knows addicts and addiction.  And Sherlock, of course.  He knows Sherlocks failings and weaknesses.  So, he uses that knowledge to bang long and hard on Sherlock's leaky pipe until Sherlock finally gets washed away.  That's ultimately why he beats and kicks Oscar.  It's a tantrum against this weak, sad, evil person who pulled him into the relapse he's going to suffer.

[theatremouse]

I too felt Oscar's motivation seemed a little shallow. Or really, just, I didn't quite buy that he not only would but had gone to the lengths he did for the reasons he said he did. Not because I think it's not plausible that an addict might (for reasons others have described quite well) but rather just because I didn't quite buy it from Oscar, and I can't quite decide if that's due to a flaw or choice in the acting, or if it were in the writing, or if other's have posited, perhaps there's more too it than has yet been explained. I just can't decide if the possibility someone put him up to it sounds appealing because they actually laid the groundwork for that, or if it's just appealing because the way it played out was unsatisfying to me and so an alternative where there's a more justified reasoning would improve my mood.

Edited May 17, 2015 by theatremouse

[johntfs]

I too felt Oscar's motivation seemed a little shallow. Or really, just, I didn't quite buy that he not only would but had gone to the lengths he did for the reasons he said he did. Not because I think it's not plausible that an addict might (for reasons others have described quite well) but rather just because I didn't quite buy it from Oscar, and I can't quite decide if that's due to a flaw or choice in the acting, or if it were in the writing, or if other's have posited, perhaps there's more too it than has yet been explained. I just can't decide if the possibility someone put him up to it sounds appealing because they actually laid the groundwork for that, or if it's just appealing because the way it played out was unsatisfying to me and so an alternative where there's a more justified reasoning would improve my move.

 

I think part of our dissatisfaction comes from expectations imposed by the genre.  In his own way, Sherlock Holmes is a kind of detective superhero.  He's kind of a larger-than-life figure who clashes with other larger-than-life figures like Moriarty or the evil spy from last year's season finale.  It feels wrong that Sherlock is brought to such a low point by this ugly, pathetic, homeless junkie.  There should be more to it, perhaps some vast and terrible conspiracy at whose stands an evil genius  Except there's not.  There's just this grubby but petty man and grubby little fake case that ultimately loosens Sherlock pipe 's to the point of relapse.

[Mom x 3]

Oscar:  I get it.  His actions were multi-faceted.  He hated that Sherlock made it and was being successful.  Then, Sherlock had the gall to offer help to him, which was seen as patronizing.  In addition, Sherlock used to be his buddy, and Oscar was alone again.  This was a win-win scenario for him.  He gets to knock Sherlock down a peg while getting his bff back.  He just didn't account for getting the shit kicked out of him.  I also agree that this was too complicated a set up for Oscar to pull off alone, which brings me to

 

Sherlock:  Totally knows that Oscar had help, but won't be able to discover who it is unless he plays along.  This is like when he let people believe he was dead at Reichenbach.  He is letting them (whoever is watching) believe he relapsed.  That's my thought and I refuse to believe he relapsed for real until I see proof.  *stamps foot childishly* 

[theatremouse]

Now that I think more about it, I think my dissatisfaction is not that Oscar did it, but that he could actually pull it off. Although I guess he didn't since Watson and Bell found Alfredo, and Sherlock figured him out within a day. It's just...it's a very convoluted plot from Oscar to try to get out of Sherlock what he wanted. I think he just doesn't strike me as much of a chess player? And what he did was a sort of "thinking three steps ahead" type scheme. Or so it struck me. I'm not surprised a non-genius like Oscar "bested" genius Holmes, because he didn't; Holmes saw through it. I think I am surprised that Oscar specifically would come up with this particular plan in the first place.

Edited May 17, 2015 by theatremouse

[bmjax]

Eh, didn't love, like or tolerate this one. I have NOOOOO interest is watching Sherlock struggle to become clean again and overcome his addictions. It seemed to come out of left field that he would start using again. I mean who could look at the situation and think "I know what a good idea would be, use heroin and live in these nasty drug dens and give up everything that has been working for me, oh and lets forget my distaste of who I was when I did use drugs. Whohoo Needle time!" Sorry if I sound insensistive, I have nothing but empathy for real people battle addictions I just am not interested in watching fictional people do it.

[DeLurker]

I'm not surprised a non-genius like Oscar "bested" genius Holmes, because he didn't; Holmes saw through it. I think I am surprised that Oscar specifically with come up with this particular plan in the first place.

The only advantage Oscar could have over Sherlock is the years of addiction yielding a scatter shot and totally nonlinear thought process. Trying to find a thread of logic in an irrational mind is futile.

It seems like someone else had to do the planning because how would Oscar know about Alfredo and even where he worked? But even with someone else doing the thinking, I'm skeptical that Oscar could hold himself together long enough to pull it off.

[johntfs]

Eh, didn't love, like or tolerate this one. I have NOOOOO interest is watching Sherlock struggle to become clean again and overcome his addictions. It seemed to come out of left field that he would start using again. I mean who could look at the situation and think "I know what a good idea would be, use heroin and live in these nasty drug dens and give up everything that has been working for me, oh and lets forget my distaste of who I was when I did use drugs. Whohoo Needle time!" Sorry if I sound insensistive, I have nothing but empathy for real people battle addictions I just am not interested in watching fictional people do it.

 

It didn't seem out of left field to me.  The idea of relapse has been a constant threat since the show's beginning.  Pulling the trigger on it at this point felt kind of right to me, especially in the context of Sherlock's earlier "leaky faucet" metaphor.

 

For my part I liked the concept of Oscar as a villain who was the near anti-thesis of a typical Holmes villain by being sick, homeless, poor and having no real cleverness aside from his insights into addicts in general and Sherlock in particular.  One of the reasons his plan worked as well as it did for as long as it did was that Sherlock had no respect for Oscar, so he couldn't conceive that the search for the sister wasn't genuine.

 

It's interesting in that unlike most other villains on Elementary, Oscar actually succeeded in his goal - he pushed Sherlock into a relapse.

[fauntleroy]

It's interesting in that unlike most other villains on Elementary, Oscar actually succeeded in his goal - he pushed Sherlock into a relapse.

 

What an unappealing goal though. Exploitation of weakness is a lowly pursuit. I'd hope to see criminals with higher goals, like outsmarting Sherlock by means of some clever crime that he could not solve. In other words, beat him at his strength, not at his weakness.

[johntfs]

What an unappealing goal though. Exploitation of weakness is a lowly pursuit. I'd hope to see criminals with higher goals, like outsmarting Sherlock by means of some clever crime that he could not solve. In other words, beat him at his strength, not at his weakness.

 

Oscar's a lowly, unappealing person.  The only way he was ever going to "beat" Sherlock was by exploiting his weakness.  Still, even though Sherlock fell, we can be fairly certain that he'll rise again.  That's the ultimately difference between Oscar and Sherlock.  Oscar falls on his face and stays there.  Sherlock gets back up and keeps going.

[Brattinella]

I can't imagine John Cleece as his father.  I just LOVE him, his physical comedy is such that he doesn't even have to utter a word to send me off into convulsive laughter.  So, unless he plays Sr Mr Holmes as a lanky hilarious Brit, it won't work for me.

[HalcyonDays]

That was just my idea; I have no idea who they actually cast, or if they've decided yet. I was just weighing in with an idea that was stuck in my head. My apologies if my way of phrasing it made it seem like actual fact rather than internal whimsy! I don't want to start a rumor.

 

Oh, okay. The post made it seem like it was actually determined to be JG as Sherlock's father. No worries. For some reason though, Ian McKellen rings in my head as the perfect father for him, though there is a big age gap.

 

Ugh, John Noble is utterly burned out for me at this point. No more. I'm still afraid they'll find some way to bring him back from the dead on Sleepy Hollow next season. John Hurt is an interesting idea, though. Or if we're not restricted to tall, thin gentlemen (the Holmes boys could have gotten their form from Presumably Dead Mum, after all), perhaps Brian Cox.

 

I totally agree, unfortunately (for JN). First, no I don't think they will bring him back to SH (thank god), but at the same time, he's a brilliant actor and was tainted with the stench of Mark Goffman/Katrina/CFD on SH. I do think he would be excellent cast as the dad, EXCEPT for what you said. Because JN looks exactly the same, I would have a hard time thinking him as a different character. He had a guest role on a show called Forever and was basically the same.

 

I had the thought for another person, but interestingly enough, they are younger than JLM, but the persona and demeanour of this actor matches how JLM is at times. If anyone watches/watched the show Turn or Forever, I'm thinking Burn Gorman. Except he's only 40 years old, and JLM is 42. Still...

 

But as another choice - Ian McKellen- He would be awesome.

[johntfs]

I kind of want Brian Blessed as Holmes senior.

[HalcyonDays]

Brian Blessed? I like. Could be good. 

 

What about Hugh Laurie? Speaks with his natural voice (i.e. English accent to us), is tall thin and grumpy like Sherlock can be at times, but also the obvious brilliance.

 

I do think they will cast someone who looks naturally posh - i.e. since Sherlock comes from money, they will get someone who looks like a corporate businessman with a "stiff upper lip" and all of that. Just my thoughts.

[Frisson]

I know "Wolf Hall" had mixed reviews, and I have no idea about how old Mark Rylance is, but his quiet, stern presence could convey the things that Father Holmes would.

[Brattinella]

I know "Wolf Hall" had mixed reviews, and I have no idea about how old Mark Rylance is, but his quiet, stern presence could convey the things that Father Holmes would.

 

Oh HELL yes!  Mark Rylance is wonderful!

[Mom x 3]

I might be insane, but I totally think Timothy Dalton would rock as Holmes daddy.  He can easily come off as paternal, suave and ruthless.

[CooperTV]

I might be insane, but I totally think Timothy Dalton would rock as Holmes daddy.  He can easily come off as paternal, suave and ruthless.

My only issues is that how a person that looks like Timothy Dalton would produce a pair of such unfortunate looking children as Mycroft and Sherlock. Especially Mycroft.

Edited May 19, 2015 by CooperTV

[fauntleroy]

Would be nice to choose an actor not well known. Otherwise you get the oh it's Timothy Dalton! effect. Which is an effect I just made up. Mark Rylance and Anton Lesser are both great but are a bit wee to have sprouted those two lanky boys.

 

And did pa fly to the US when Sherlock was in his earlier addiction? I think he found and paid for Watson to help him, but didn't himself make an appearance. That would have been before this series began, but I don't remember that being mentioned.

 

This ought to be its own topic but I have no idea how to create a new topic in this forum.

[frenchtoast]

Replying about Papa Holmes and other speculation in the Unspoiled Speculation topic.

[PeriMenopausal]

Couldn't agree more that what we’ve been seeing throughout Season 2-3 has been A) boring, esoteric and worse, convoluted crime plots with lack of stakes, too little action and way, way too much statically shot exposition B) Watson continually shortchanged in terms of character / emotional development C) promising backstory threads introduced and immediately dropped (Joan's family, Gregson's wife/daughter, etc.) D) huge chunks of key emotional stories happening off screen and E) the absence of worthy adversaries (I know Moriarty/Natalie Dormer is busy, but doesn't she have any minions available to do her dirty work?).

As for the finale, the decision itself to kick Sherlock off the wagon works fine for me. He's always hanging onto his sobriety by a thread. My beef is the way in which that thread was cut. He was pushed off the wagon, instead of falling off of it on his own, which would've made much more narrative sense and which they seemed to have been setting up all season.

And no doubt, JLM is wonderful and played the hell out of what he was given. But I do not buy for one millisecond that after spending two days with Oscar berating, hounding and manipulating him into using again, that the strong-willed, stubborn Sherlock would immediately turn around and give Oscar the satisfaction of getting exactly what he wanted. That trigger did not seem true to the character -- no trigger at all would've been a much more powerful statement on dealing with addiction. Plus, the ending was needlessly ambiguous -- it might've been interesting to speculate over the hiatus whether Holmes was upset over killing Oscar or whether he'd actually used. But then the showrunner comes out and says for sure he'd relapsed. If half your audience is confused about that, then you're doing something seriously wrong.

But the most gut-wrenching failure of the finale was depriving Watson -- his former sober companion, best friend and partner -- of the onscreen moment where she realizes that Sherlock has relapsed. This follows a mid-season climax in which Watson is leaning over her gasping-for-air boyfriend and then by the next episode, he's died, been buried and his freaking murderer has been caught -- all off screen.

This is a shocking waste of Lucy Liu's talent (save for her directing, which is excellent), not to mention the excellent chemistry between the leads. And it all points back to the failures in the writers' room. Please, Lord (AKA CBS) can we have a new showrunner, more than one woman writer, and MORE WATSON?

[basil]

Apparently one of the Elementary EP's confirmed that yeah - Sherlock relapsed. Sad

 

 

 

Does anyone have a link to this?

 

As I said, addicts are sensitive, selfish and childish.  It doesn't make sense to a rational person, what Oscar did, but to him, it made perfect sense because he's got that sick, addict brain

 

 

 

That's a VERY broad generalisation. Is there truly such a thing as a "sick, addict brain"? People become addicts for a myriad of reasons, and every addict is different. A great many of them are so mired in their own addictions/misery that they can't see far beyond their next fix, much less work out some convoluted plan to cause another former addict to relapse.

 

More questions than answers here. If Oscar is dead, or even severely injured, why isn't Sherlock in jail?

 

As to Papa Sherlock, I'm hoping that he never shows. He'll have to be absolutely amazing, and still it will be borderline shark jumping. It will change the whole dynamic of the show.

Edited May 19, 2015 by basil

[Tarasme]

I understand why Oscar would resent the hell out of Sherlock and have a petty desire to see him fall back into being an addict--... "Addict wanting another to relapse" is waaaaay far away from "kidnapping, murder, and letting his sister's body rot for 2 days." Nothing in Oscar's previous appearance suggested he was that insane/homicidal (in fact he came off as a real wuss). I just can't make that jump--not to mention, as others have said, that's a pretty elaborate scheme for a dude who spends 90% of his time high.

 

So maybe if we had seen more of Oscar this season (part of my problem is that the show pulled their history a bit out of nowhere), and they had hinted at his nuttiness a bit more, I could have bought it. But for me it remains a really weak motivation relative to the level of shit he pulled to try to get Sherlock to relapse. Leaving drugs on Sherlock's porch every day? Sure, I could see him doing that. Getting high in front of Sherlock? Totally. Kidnapping/murder/neglect of sister's body? Not so much.

I can see where this would trouble folks from Oscar. But I agree with...

 

See, the thing is that Oscar was pushed past his limits.  He took Sherlock's "free bed" offer amd used it to do one truly good, positive thing in his life.  He got his sister into rehab.  He could finally make up for all the damage he did by getting her clean.  Against all the bad he'd done, he'd have that one good thing.  And then it turned to shit and she ODed in a tunnel.  Figure when Oscar found her after desperately, frantically searching, he could hear Sherlock cold, contemptuous judgmental voice in his brain.

 

So, if Oscar couldn't push his sister out of the gutter, he decided to pull Sherlock back down into it.  Sherlock knows tobacco and footprints and esoteric knowledge that aids in crimefighting.  Oscar only really knows addicts and addiction.  And Sherlock, of course.  He knows Sherlocks failings and weaknesses.  So, he uses that knowledge to bang long and hard on Sherlock's leaky pipe until Sherlock finally gets washed away.  That's ultimately why he beats and kicks Oscar.  It's a tantrum against this weak, sad, evil person who pulled him into the relapse he's going to suffer.

 

It's not a stretch for me to think that drug addled to paranoia, psychotically selfish, horrifically guilt ridden Oscar would convince himself that he was doing what needed to be done by elaborately entwining Sherlock in the most miserable thing ever to happen to him.

 

If I remember right, Oscar leveled blame at his own circumstances at Sherlock on his introductory episode- along with believing he had protected Sherlock from the law and his own guilt about the murder of the lady (For All You Know). I can see where Oscar, in order to AVOID all of the feelings assaulting him over his sister's death, would seek to destroy as much and as many as he possibly could. It strikes me as being pathologically passive aggressive but it doesn't seem out of character or unsubstantiated as motivations go.

 

While watching the ep, I had a much harder time accepting that Gregson, once advised, would allow Sherlock to continue acting alone. I had to shrug that off with an "eh- it's the plot."