S04.E03: The Final Problem

[Clanstarling]

2 minutes ago, AEMom said:

There was never any talk at the end of the show about contacting Victor's family to let them know the truth.

There didn't seem to be much coherent talk at the end about anything. And when it comes to Euros, I guess I'm a cold hearted bitch, because the broken little girl didn't move me. Not with all the damage and killing she did. Intellectually, I could possibly sympathize if I stretched myself, but I'm not so inclined.

[Mark Webb]

I think the last season wasn't up to the usual Sherlock standards.. It seemed too personal and melodrama rather than intellectual brilliance..

https://megamovies.cc/

Edited January 22, 2017 by Mark Webb

[callie lee 29]

11 hours ago, Clanstarling said:

There didn't seem to be much coherent talk at the end about anything. And when it comes to Euros, I guess I'm a cold hearted bitch, because the broken little girl didn't move me. Not with all the damage and killing she did. Intellectually, I could possibly sympathize if I stretched myself, but I'm not so inclined.

Yeah, me too. I also thought a lot of her games were rather obvious. An maybe I'm a double bitch because I get why Mycroft locked her in the prison. Course, one could've just killed her and been done with it. 

 

I did like it better that lst week. Besides the Eurus twist I thought the serial killer nonsense was unimpressive and overwrought. 

[Ronin Jackson]

I'd say the episode kept me entertained and the epilogue was effective (even if it wasn't the end), but man the story really doesn't hold up to any kind of scrutiny. Actually opening the show with this visualization of a lie/delusion felt a bit cheap, but I could give it a pass. But then Mycroft doesn't use his advanced security clearance to figure out which planes are off course or not responding (this of course would have revealed too soon that there is no plane or little girl, but it's nevertheless something that would have been discovered even without a high ranking government official on the case). Eurus' abilities border on supernatural. Granted Sherlock's own power of deduction always bordered on being psychic dating back to the source material but his deductions have always had been given with relatively plausible explanations. But here Euros can take over a top secret high security prison simply through the power of verbal persuasion? Then there's three main characters escaping a bomb completely unscathed. And how exactly did Mycroft manage to get Eurus locked away as a child without his parents knowing about it? He was a high ranking government official in his teens I guess? I could go on...

I wouldn't be broken up if this is how the series ended. It's provided it's fair share of great entertainment and I don't know how much I need any Sherlock/Watson story to be wrapped up (it seems appropriate for them to have continuing adventures indefinitely). But it would be nice for the show to end on a higher note if it wasn't going to end. They tried to ramp up the stakes as high as they can with this one and if any of it worked it it was pretty much carried by the charisma and chemistry of it's stars. But there's no reason to put a finite ending on the thing. I mean, if five years is how long it takes for them to get everyone together again, people will still watch it, so there would still be reason to make it.

[IWantCandy71]

On ‎1‎/‎16‎/‎2017 at 6:18 PM, Clanstarling said:

This. I too have been reading adult books since grade school - I even started off with true crime. Since I mostly watch shows and don't seek out the media regarding the shows, I didn't know Gatiss was such a smug ass. I knew Moffit was terrible - I stopped watching Doctor Who because I was fed up with the way it treated companions once he took over. But I'd liked Sherlock so I kept watching.

I hated this episode. I've like the show from the get-go, and even enjoyed the episodes most people seemed to have disliked. But pretty much from the get-go, I knew this was a self-indulgent piece of crap (in my opinion). I kept watching hoping it would turn into something coherent. There's two hours I'll never get back again. If there's another season, I won't be watching.

I love true crime-some of the best books ever written have been that genre. Believe me, when I first started reading the comments from Gatiss in interviews and I realized he really is a lot like Moffat in his thinking, my heart broke. I kind of had a wee bit of a crush up until that point. To me, there's just no way anyone can say they are NOT condescending and rude to their audience with comments like that. No thank you. You're not doing me a favor by putting on this show-I'm doing YOU a favor by watching it. I don't deserve to be talked down to just because you think you are vastly more intelligent.

One consolation, is that The Final Problem garnered the lowest ratings to date, of the series as a whole. Every now and then, the way we treat people really DOES come back to bite us. And I don't think the low ratings had a thing to do with that "Russia" (oh, please, as if Gatiss and Moffat had nothing to do with that) leak. I think it's just proof some people are tired of them shoveling crap and trying to call it gold.

Quote

That's a pure "Emperors New Clothes" argument. "Oh no, it's not pretentious crap... you're just not smart enough to see how good it really is!" Maybe it really IS crap and you just want to convince people to keep watching.

Exactly ! I was thinking the same thing. :)

Edited January 23, 2017 by IWantCandy71

[illini1959]

Quote

Call me demanding but when I watch a drama in the mystery genre I want to see an actual coherent mystery and not some avantgarde mess with delusions of grandeur.

Only on page 2 but ^ this.

I've read all the SH stories, multiple times. It's a goldmine of future episodes! They've already done a few - the Thatchers for one and I saw on the blackboard of this episode the "dancing men".

There's so much legit material, so yeah - why the "avant-garde mess"?

So often good ideas (this series) end up with poor execution :(

[SusanSunflower]

but it's so self-consciously "clever" and mind-bendy and gimmicky ... to show my age, I remember when the Patrick McGoohan The Prisoner first aired (and was a phenomenon) ... I also remember when "Memento" and Donny Darko were fresh, new and "bendy"  ... and Twin Peaks and Mulholland Drive... (and a dozen other "new" creations -- rather than re-makes). 

Moffatt and Gattis are using well-established Sherlock Holmes franchise as another DC Comix remake/franchise vehicle ... as was done with the well-established Dr. Who ... with an eye to not only -- afaict -- making beaucoup bucks on selling the DVDS but also enhancing their personal "trademark" (with bigger paydays and maybe feature film in their future), but without having to start with the germ of a concept and then build stories around that.  

I think, like Julian Fellowes with Downton, they've rather gloriously self-sabotaged ... give them free rein and unlimited budget and their final product is self-indulgent -- and -- mediocre.  As Downton survived on the Dowager Countess' quips and various gowns and hats and the awesome house and grounds (and possibly nostalgia for the noblesse oblige); Sherlock has descended into watching moments of great emotional acting, awesome cinematography and special effects and Mrs. Hudson (and arguably Lestrade) for ballast .. 

Edited January 23, 2017 by SusanSunflower

[Ceindreadh]

16 hours ago, Ronin Jackson said:

I'd say the episode kept me entertained and the epilogue was effective (even if it wasn't the end), but man the story really doesn't hold up to any kind of scrutiny. Actually opening the show with this visualization of a lie/delusion felt a bit cheap, but I could give it a pass. But then Mycroft doesn't use his advanced security clearance to figure out which planes are off course or not responding (this of course would have revealed too soon that there is no plane or little girl, but it's nevertheless something that would have been discovered even without a high ranking government official on the case). Eurus' abilities border on supernatural. Granted Sherlock's own power of deduction always bordered on being psychic dating back to the source material but his deductions have always had been given with relatively plausible explanations. But here Euros can take over a top secret high security prison simply through the power of verbal persuasion? Then there's three main characters escaping a bomb completely unscathed. And how exactly did Mycroft manage to get Eurus locked away as a child without his parents knowing about it? He was a high ranking government official in his teens I guess? I could go on...

I wouldn't be broken up if this is how the series ended. It's provided it's fair share of great entertainment and I don't know how much I need any Sherlock/Watson story to be wrapped up (it seems appropriate for them to have continuing adventures indefinitely). But it would be nice for the show to end on a higher note if it wasn't going to end. They tried to ramp up the stakes as high as they can with this one and if any of it worked it it was pretty much carried by the charisma and chemistry of it's stars. But there's no reason to put a finite ending on the thing. I mean, if five years is how long it takes for them to get everyone together again, people will still watch it, so there would still be reason to make it.

By the time Mycroft first heard about the girl on the plane, he was already in the trap and had no means of communicating with the outside world to check if there was a plane off course. 

Regarding locking Eurus away as a child, that was their Uncle Rudy's doing. Mycroft simply kept her locked up when he was in a position to do so. 

[Clanstarling]

5 hours ago, SusanSunflower said:

I think, like Julian Fellowes with Downton, they've rather gloriously self-sabotaged ... give them free rein and unlimited budget and their final product is self-indulgent -- and -- mediocre.  As Downton survived on the Dowager Countess' quips and various gowns and hats and the awesome house and grounds (and possibly nostalgia for the noblesse oblige); Sherlock has descended into watching moments of great emotional acting, awesome cinematography and special effects and Mrs. Hudson (and arguably Lestrade) for ballast .. 

You nailed it.

Edited January 23, 2017 by Clanstarling

[IWantCandy71]

23 hours ago, SusanSunflower said:

but it's so self-consciously "clever" and mind-bendy and gimmicky ... to show my age, I remember when the Patrick McGoohan The Prisoner first aired (and was a phenomenon) ... I also remember when "Memento" and Donny Darko were fresh, new and "bendy"  ... and Twin Peaks and Mulholland Drive... (and a dozen other "new" creations -- rather than re-makes). 

Memento ! Eeeee! Guy Pearce. I still think that's one of the best Nolan films ever, and the first time I saw it, when I got to the end-Mind.Blown. It was many  years ago now, but even it though, had some plot holes. Still-it was at least entertaining enough to forgive the minor messiness.

[SharonH58]

I read Moffet said this was a back story and now the guys are where they were in the books (something like that) how is that when they were doing Doyle stories and Watson in the books didn't have a kid?

Edited February 5, 2017 by SharonH58

[1TrackMind]

Any fans of the online show RWBY would know why I found Mycrofts cane/sword/gun so amusing. Roman Torchwick help you design that, Mycroft?

[cleo]

Really really hated this. I hate torture porn like Saw, and this was the emotional equivalent.

Such a waste of a great setup with the sister and Moriarty.

I'm only at the hour mark, and posting rather than watch. 

ETA Poor little sister needed a hug. Please. I don't know how BC got through that without laughing.

Edited July 24, 2017 by cleo

[rereader2]

On 1/16/2017 at 2:56 AM, TomServo said:

[...]the M*A*S*H episode where the woman on the bus kills a "chicken" in Hawkeye's memory, but in reality she had killed her own baby trying to keep it quiet.  Only M*A*S*H got the story over with in half an hour instead of an hour and a half.

Actually, that was in the series finale, and it took a full 2 hours to get to the end.

[illdoc]

Actually, the M*A*S*H finale was 2 and a half hours long (granted, the whole 2.5 hours wasn't the "chicken" story).

[kassygreene]

Yep, and the half hour (with perhaps a bit more) was Hawkeye's session with the shrink (how did I forget his name?) as he dealt with his breakdown and the gradual return of his memory of what really happened on the bus.  The rest was the farewell, the kitchen-sink goodbye episode.  (I threw a viewing party, so I remember it fairly well, plus the formatting was just strange enough that we actually did a post-viewing roundtable.  The things one remembers.)

[rereader2]

IMDB has it listed at 2 hours; I assumed you didn't want to count the half hour of commercials?

[illdoc]

1 hour ago, rereader2 said:

IMDB has it listed at 2 hours; I assumed you didn't want to count the half hour of commercials?

I'm sure it was probably more than a half hour of commericials..... I always think of episodes as "how much time was blocked off to show it". So, MASH finale--2.5 hours, dramas 1H, comedies 1/2 hour (even if dramas are technically 42 min & comedies 22 min (at best, sometimes less).

[Pallas]

On 11/14/2017 at 4:48 PM, kassygreene said:

Yep, and the half hour (with perhaps a bit more) was Hawkeye's session with the shrink (how did I forget his name?)

Sidney Freedman, played by the late Allan Arbus: high school boyfriend/fashion photography partner/only husband and father-to-the-children of, Diane Arbus. He died aged 95. The Times obituary called his Sidney "caustic;"  I found him sad and centered -- an old soul -- and a character that the showrunners relied on as a compassionate moral arbiter, far more than Fr. Mulcahy.

Perhaps what Mycroft wished to be: first for Euros, then for Sherlock. But Mycroft became someone who could best elicit confessions, not confidences.

[rereader2]

On 11/14/2017 at 4:48 PM, kassygreene said:

Yep, and the half hour (with perhaps a bit more) was Hawkeye's session with the shrink (how did I forget his name?) as he dealt with his breakdown and the gradual return of his memory of what really happened on the bus.  The rest was the farewell, the kitchen-sink goodbye episode.

By that standard, The Final Problem spent about 10 minutes (if that long) unraveling Euros's problem; the rest of the show was finding out where she was, getting to where she was, solving all her bizarre puzzles/tests, and character moments. If anything, it didn't spend enough time on Euros's psyche, but that didn't bother me, TBH.

[Friendly Lurker]

Just watched this again last night and one thing ("one" thing, ha!) that bugs me is at the end when Mycroft is explaining to the family why he continued to do Uncle Rudy's work and they're trying to figure out how to move forward, Mummy Holmes says to Sherlock "You were always the grown up". Gah bah wah? In what universe?

[rereader2]

20 hours ago, Friendly Lurker said:

Just watched this again last night and one thing ("one" thing, ha!) that bugs me is at the end when Mycroft is explaining to the family why he continued to do Uncle Rudy's work and they're trying to figure out how to move forward, Mummy Holmes says to Sherlock "You were always the grown up". Gah bah wah? In what universe?

Presumably in the universe of his family life--his parents clearly saw a side of Sherlock that he never showed the rest of the world. And after all, he was the only one who figured out how to reach Euros, so they weren't just blethering.

Edited February 6, 2018 by rereader2

[Friendly Lurker]

Hmmm. Seems I've seen, but nor observed. Also, I might need to cut back on the Mycroft fanfiction.

[Peace 47]

On 2/5/2018 at 4:53 PM, Friendly Lurker said:

Mummy Holmes says to Sherlock "You were always the grown up". Gah bah wah? In what universe?

I agree that prior episodes seemed to at least indicate the opposite, like in ASiB when Mycroft saying at Buckingham Palace, “I’ll be Mother,” and Sherlock sniping, “There’s our childhood in a nutshell.”  Also the fact that Sherlock went to the Palace naked, whereas Mycroft occupies the staid, establishment job.  Or how Mycroft seemed to view keeping Sherlock away from drugs as his own responsibility (which doesn’t necessarily align for me as Sherlock being the mature one).  Or how Mycroft spied on/ confronted John in the first episode to make sure that he was worthy of Sherlock.  Or how Mycroft saw Sherlock as a little boy after Sherlock shot Magnussen (i.e., if Sherlock was always the grown up in family life, why does Mycroft see him as a frightened child)?

[Pallas]

6 hours ago, Peace 47 said:

I agree that prior episodes seemed to at least indicate the opposite, like in ASiB when Mycroft saying at Buckingham Palace, “I’ll be Mother,” and Sherlock sniping, “There’s our childhood in a nutshell.”  Also the fact that Sherlock went to the Palace naked, whereas Mycroft occupies the staid, establishment job.  Or how Mycroft seemed to view keeping Sherlock away from drugs as his own responsibility (which doesn’t necessarily align for me as Sherlock being the mature one).  Or how Mycroft spied on/ confronted John in the first episode to make sure that he was worthy of Sherlock.  Or how Mycroft saw Sherlock as a little boy after Sherlock shot Magnussen (i.e., if Sherlock was always the grown up in family life, why does Mycroft see him as a frightened child)?

Beautiful post. Yet except for Sherlock's showing up starkers at Buck-Naked House, the examples you cite are all from Mycroft's point of view. It's clear that Mycroft does regard himself as Mother, as the authority, as the designated adult and guardian, as the brother no one ever thought was slow.

Mycroft is the kind of child, youth and man who took assiduous notes on the rules of the game: that is, what the people in charge regarded as laudable behavior. First, what wins all the prizes. Then, what moves you to the top of your generation: what make you noticed by those who matter; noticed and not dismissed for flippancy or eccentricity. Finally, what keeps you indispensable. What Mycroft didn't understand is that the game is more than its rules, and that life is more than the game.

Mycroft thought his parents were better off believing that their daughter was dead. Or more likely, he knew he had no way of empathizing with what they would want, and so fell back on something he had heard someone say about some other emotional conflict. "It would be easier on them." "It would only confuse them." "They'd rather not know." As with his family, so with the country. To me, what the line implies is that their mother believes that of her two sons, Sherlock had always been adult enough to be capable of love, and to continue to grow up.

[Meredith Quill]

21 hours ago, Pallas said:

Beautiful post. Yet except for Sherlock's showing up starkers at Buck-Naked House, the examples you cite are all from Mycroft's point of view. It's clear that Mycroft does regard himself as Mother, as the authority, as the designated adult and guardian, as the brother no one ever thought was slow.

Mycroft is the kind of child, youth and man who took assiduous notes on the rules of the game: that is, what the people in charge regarded as laudable behavior. First, what wins all the prizes. Then, what moves you to the top of your generation: what make you noticed by those who matter; noticed and not dismissed for flippancy or eccentricity. Finally, what keeps you indispensable. What Mycroft didn't understand is that the game is more than its rules, and that life is more than the game.

Mycroft thought his parents were better off believing that their daughter was dead. Or more likely, he knew he had no way of empathizing with what they would want, and so fell back on something he had heard someone say about some other emotional conflict. "It would be easier on them." "It would only confuse them." "They'd rather not know." As with his family, so with the country. To me, what the line implies is that their mother believes that of her two sons, Sherlock had always been adult enough to be capable of love, and to continue to grow up.

Ohh, well said.