ElectricBoogaloo January 23, 2017 Share January 23, 2017 Quote A man takes hostages, including Joan, and threatens to execute them unless Holmes finds the person responsible for the death of his son. As Sherlock investigates, the captor gives him 16 hours to find the perpetrator before the statute of limitations on the crime runs out. 1 Link to comment
paigow January 28, 2017 Share January 28, 2017 (edited) Never mind... Edited January 30, 2017 by paigow Link to comment
paigow January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 Does this mean Sherlock gets to experiment with The Blacklist wig inventory??? 1 Link to comment
Vermicious Knid January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 Black market maple syrup is actually a real thing. I liked this. The mystery was twisty without going overboard. Also the fact the dead kid was having an affair with another man was treated just the same as any other relationship, 7 Link to comment
rhys January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 Will Sherlock still be shorn after the Superbowl? 1 Link to comment
Driad January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 Basal cell carcinoma is not as dangerous as Joan said. Presumably she was exaggerating. 5 Link to comment
Calamity Jane January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 The things she was saying, including the Mohs surgery, would apply to melanoma, not to basal cell. My dad had many basal cell carcinomas, I've had a few, and the doctor just cuts or burns them off. The only time Mohs was mentioned was when it was mistakenly thought I had a melanoma. It bothered me that the show muffed that so badly. 5 Link to comment
Gregg247 January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 It was funny how none of the "bad guys" in the episode were all that Bad after all. The hostage-taker was just a concerned parent trying to find out who assaulted his son, starting his spiral into drugs. The feared drug gang was involved in smuggling huge amounts of....maple syrup, because they found the drug trade to be too dangerous and wanted to make money in a safer environment. The other gang, who took over the drug territory, was very accommodating to Sherlock, giving him what little information they had to help in the case. The gang member who used to work for the previous gang was well-spoken and very helpful. Even the guy who actually beat up the victim seemed a little chagrined about it, as he beat him a little more than he intended. If only the gang had decided to pay the victim a bribe to stay home from work that night, everyone would have been much better off. I'm not a fan of the BBC version of "Sherlock" (too pretentious, and they never solve regular cases, just personal issues), but I wish "our" Sherlock did more amazing deductions like in the books and on the BBC. Lately, Sherlock solves most of his cases by obtaining satellite images, or relying on Joan and Det. Bell, or getting incredibly lucky data from "Everyone", or poring over mountains of old case files (much like REAL detectives do). These cases are a little less amazing to watch than they could/should be. 14 Link to comment
Popular Post iMonrey January 30, 2017 Popular Post Share January 30, 2017 Marcus: "Why do you have a totem pole in your bathroom?" Sherlock: "Because it doesn't fit in the closet." It's the little things like that that keep me tuning into this show. I liked this episode because it gave Marcus more to do and I like when he's more involved in the investigations. 26 Link to comment
Kathira January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 (edited) Q: "Is there a reason you have a totem pole in your bathroom?" A: "Too big for the closet." Oops, cross-posted with iMonrey. Sorry. I also liked Sherlock's throw-away mention of a case involving a Belgian, the Dalai Lama and a wheel of very expensive cheese. LOL I really loved Sherlock and Bell in this episode. Bell was just the right combination of smart, helpful and skeptical. A fun, twisty case, with good performances all around. And I'm sure Sherlock knew, even if Watson didn't, why Everyone wanted to watch her shave Sherlock's head. It was very intimate and hella sexy. Edited January 30, 2017 by Kathira 9 Link to comment
Loandbehold January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 I kept expecting Clay Davis, I mean Brunelle, to say "Sheeeeiiiittt." Only a little disappointed. I like Isiah Whitlock. Enjoyed the episode and glad to see Marcus fully involved in a case, even if it meant sidelining Joan for a good part of it. 3 Link to comment
MaryHedwig January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 I watched this show to watch Sherlock and Watson's relationship. I was expecting Sherlock to be more concerned that Watson's welfare when she was held hostage. Sherlock certainty would have been in previous season when Watson was the only person he could admit he cared about. 4 Link to comment
paigow January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 I was thinking that Joan would only shave the middle of Sherlock's head...much like Dilbert's boss... 4 Link to comment
paigow January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 1 hour ago, Kathira said: I also liked Sherlock's throw-away mention of a case involving a Belgian, the Dalai Lama and a wheel of very expensive cheese. LOL And that somebody called the NSA to fix it..... 2 Link to comment
Xantar January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 Somebody with more legal knowledge will have to enlighten me, but if you assault someone and that person slips into a coma and dies as a result of the injuries you inflicted, then wouldn't you be charged with murder? And murder has no statute of limitations. 5 Link to comment
tennisgurl January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 This episode reminded me A LOT of an episode of Law and Order SVU where a guy kidnapped a college girl, broadcasted it online, and wouldn't give up her location until the detectives looked into the case of his brothers kidnapping years ago that had gone cold. Of course, in that one Spoiler The "kidnapped" girl was actually in on it with the guy, and was never in any real danger. so it was a little different. I did like this one though. Some twists, but nothing too ridiculous. I felt awful for the bereaved father, even if he did snap at the end. I mean, I get that Joan and Sherlock get busy, but they couldn't have spent a few minutes on this guys case? Plus with him stopping by and seeing them getting into all their antics, it looks like they're just screwing around, even though we know that they're doing something productive. 2 hours ago, Gregg247 said: The hostage-taker was just a concerned parent trying to find out who assaulted his son, starting his spiral into drugs. The feared drug gang was involved in smuggling huge amounts of....maple syrup, because they found the drug trade to be too dangerous and wanted to make money in a safer environment. The other gang, who took over the drug territory, was very accommodating to Sherlock, giving him what little information they had to help in the case. The gang member who used to work for the previous gang was well-spoken and very helpful. Even the guy who actually beat up the victim seemed a little chagrined about it, as he beat him a little more than he intended. I liked this too. I liked the gang member who pulled up by Sherlock, and was just like "I'm that guy on your shirt" and looked kind of bemused by the whole thing. Nobody was EVIL, even though some of them are clearly criminals. I mean, some of them are dealing in black market maple syrup! Even the guy who beat up the victim didn't mean to kill him, he died because he got addicted to his pain meds. Sill a bad guy, but less murder happy than a lot of villains we get on this show. Most everyone was pretty understandable and reasonable. 4 Link to comment
paigow January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 Hoping for continuity...Sherlock has credibility with gangs / cartels after helping Esposito from Castle .... That's why he and Bell were not blown away on the sidewalk.... 3 Link to comment
illdoc January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 Re: murder if someone dies from their injuries. I believe that if they die within 1 year and 1 day of the original attack, it can be called murder, otherwise not. And I think he didn't actually die of the injuries---the injuries caused him to get hooked on drugs and he ODed. 7 Link to comment
johntfs January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 2 hours ago, MaryHedwig said: I watched this show to watch Sherlock and Watson's relationship. I was expecting Sherlock to be more concerned that Watson's welfare when she was held hostage. Sherlock certainty would have been in previous season when Watson was the only person he could admit he cared about. I figured Sherlock read the same clues Joan did regarding the ammo and he also knew the guy wasn't going to kill everyone in the diner. I liked how this case was all about consequences of choices. The case involving a Belgian, the Dalai Lama and a wheel of very expensive cheese was the kind of thing Sherlock enjoyed as opposed to "some guy got beat up." I do like that it was Sherlock and Joan that kept blowing the guy, not just Sherlock. A diner full of people were taken hostage and a man is going to prison because Sherlock and Joan prefer the "cool" cases to the "boring" ones. 6 Link to comment
Aliconehead January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 I kind of wish the last scene would have been someone asking for their help on a "boring" case and Sherlock taking it. Some guilt that this man asked and asked for help and they blew him off for what probably would have taken them 2 or 3 days. Maybe it's just I thought they treated the father badly. 16 Link to comment
tennisgurl January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 21 minutes ago, Aliconehead said: Maybe it's just I thought they treated the father badly. I thought they did too. It seems like they didn't take the case because the guys son just got beat up and that lead to his OD, and he wasn't murdered in some interesting and quirky way. And we can see that it would have taken them a really short time to solve the case, there's no way they couldn't have fit him in somewhere. Its nice that they felt bad and tried to get the father some help and the bad guy to jail, but it would be nice in the future to see them taking some more "normal" cases, or else it looks like they think some cases are "beneath" them, even if it lead to a person dying. 8 Link to comment
paigow January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 5 minutes ago, tennisgurl said: I thought they did too. It seems like they didn't take the case because the guys son just got beat up and that lead to his OD, and he wasn't murdered in some interesting and quirky way. And we can see that it would have taken them a really short time to solve the case, there's no way they couldn't have fit him in somewhere. Its nice that they felt bad and tried to get the father some help and the bad guy to jail, but it would be nice in the future to see them taking some more "normal" cases, or else it looks like they think some cases are "beneath" them, even if it lead to a person dying. If the lazy cop had done his job, the case would have been closed....Although it is curious that the FBI recorded the delivery and did nothing... 1 Link to comment
tennisgurl January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 2 minutes ago, paigow said: If the lazy cop had done his job, the case would have been closed That's also true. The father really did just get screwed over by everyone he tried to reach out to. I don't at all condone what he did, but I can see where his frustration came from. I would have actually liked to hear a bit of the lazy cops perspective, if he was overworked, if the sons case got buried, or if the guy was just lazy and didn't care much (again, the case got solved really quickly by Joan and Sherlock, so I'm leaning towards lazy). 4 Link to comment
sinkwriter January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 Each time Sherlock and/or Joan turned the father away, my heart broke a little bit for the guy. I thought Lucy played it very well in their last scene together the sorrow (and guilt) Joan felt for the loss of that man's son. When she teared up and told him to stay away from the back door or the sniper would kill him, and then told him to put down the gun, I got teary too. Interesting case, emotionally connective, I felt for the father, and really wanted them to find the person who had hurt his son. And on a side note, the music was fantastic. The use of the strings set up a wonderfully tense background music for the scenes as the time slowly ran out. 10 Link to comment
johntfs January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 (edited) 27 minutes ago, tennisgurl said: I thought they did too. It seems like they didn't take the case because the guys son just got beat up and that lead to his OD, and he wasn't murdered in some interesting and quirky way. And we can see that it would have taken them a really short time to solve the case, there's no way they couldn't have fit him in somewhere. Its nice that they felt bad and tried to get the father some help and the bad guy to jail, but it would be nice in the future to see them taking some more "normal" cases, or else it looks like they think some cases are "beneath" them, even if it lead to a person dying. It took them a short time to solve the case because the situation allowed them muster some unusual resources, 20+ people hostage causes the NYPD to put everything into it. McNally of the NSA likely wouldn't have released the video with with the Belgian/Lama/Cheese thing except that Joan was also a hostage. Also, the weird, unusual cases are easier to solve because of that. "A woman wearing a harlequin mask and nothing else repelled down from a zeppelin and robbed Sacks Fifth Avenue using a Thompson Sub-Machine Gun that once belonged to John Dillenger" has a whole lot of built-in clues and public interest. "Some guy got beat up by some other guy" doesn't have nearly as much, especially with the only witness dead. Quote Although it is curious that the FBI recorded the delivery and did nothing... About what? A bunch of people unloaded a boat at the docks. The FBI had no context to believe anything was wrong with that. Edited January 30, 2017 by johntfs 1 7 Link to comment
las68 January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 Good episode, but I must have been daydreaming during part of it because I have no idea why Sherlock had Joan shave his head at the end of the episode. I called my mom this afternoon to ask her and she didn't know either (guess it runs in the family)! Could someone please fill me in? Thank you! 1 Link to comment
illdoc January 30, 2017 Share January 30, 2017 They needed help from "Everyone" (the hacker group) to get the footage of the guy in Canada. "Everyone" always asks for something "odd" in return for their help---in this case, asking Sherlock to shave his head. 1 1 Link to comment
TV Anonymous January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 Les Habs, c'est quoi...?! The Habs is the nickname of the Canadiens in English. French usually call them le Tricolore or le CH. 2 Link to comment
paigow January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 1 hour ago, johntfs said: About what? A bunch of people unloaded a boat at the docks. The FBI had no context to believe anything was wrong with that. It was the middle of the night - at a company on the verge of bankruptcy....suddenly is moving 18 trailers worth of mysterious barrels...no chance it could be chemical weapons for a terrorist attack...when the TSA looks at every nail file as a critical security threat...FBI / DHS sees the biggest truck convoy since Simon Gruber cleaned out the Federal Reserve and goes back to sleep.... 1 Link to comment
Maelstrom January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 (edited) The good: Sherlock and Bell working together to solve the case. Special mention to the totem pole joke and the "looking for bad guys" sign. The father. My heart broke for him every time he was rebuffed, and I could understand why he felt such an extreme action like taking the diner hostage was his only choice. I was worried he'd be killed by episode's end, so I'm glad he wasn't sniped. The bad: Oh Jonny, not the hair!! It'd finally grown back to a decent length after the too-short cuts of the past few seasons. While I applaud the continuity department for bringing back Watson's cat shirt in the "flashback" I really could've gone without seeing that ugly shirt again. (I say that as a cat lover but an ugly-clothes hater) This show is by far my favorite Holmes adaptation, and I love how they've developed the characters and their relationships over the years without falling prey to some of tv's most tired tropes (such as pairing the leads or big dramatic set pieces that are forgotten within an episode or two). I always enjoy watching JLM's performance, how he manages to turn Sherlock's strange quirks and tics into character-defining moments. I really enjoy the genuine friendship they've built between Watson and Holmes, how they've made these two people more important to each other than anyone else without it being a romantic relationship. All that being said... I feel the Holmes/Sherlock relationship is gone this season. I realize they've been through a lot over the years and have finally come to an equilibrium of sorts in how they live and work together. But from a tv standpoint, I feel they need to find a way to keep the dynamic between them active, instead of being a passive background element (if that makes sense). Others posted upthread they wanted to see his concern for her after the standoff ended, and I totally agree. It just feels, IMO, that that aspect of the show (their friendship) is missing anymore, and the show has lost something without it. Wow, that was a digression and a half. Boo to no new episode next week. I guess it'll give Jonny's hair another week to grow back... ETA: Finally figured out what I was trying to get at in my above ramblings - it seems like the personal connections, between both Holmes and Watson and H/W and their clients, are missing this season. The banter is still in place but everything seems rather detached and indifferent. Even in the past when SHerlock would play something cool on the surface we the audience always knew there was a lot more going on with him under the surface. I dunno. Anyone else feeling this, or is it just me? Edited January 31, 2017 by Maelstrom 4 Link to comment
Chyromaniac January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 So, the kid essentially got beat up so that he wouldn't be around for the black market syrup smuggling. This syrup has been illegally sold to restaurants all around the NYC area, to this very day. Maybe I've just watched too much L&O, but I feel like they should've been able to beat the statute of limitations just by tying the assault to the ongoing criminal enterprise. I mean, I appreciate "tolling" as an inventive solution to the problem - but it felt weird to me that they've uncovered what appears to be a fairly substantial conspiracy, and it's kind of not even acknowledged at the end. Overall it was an interesting case, and the actor who played the dad is always great. I just wish somebody would've gone all Jack McCoy on hockey/truck guy's @$$... 7 Link to comment
thuganomics85 January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 I can't remember which show or shows it was, but I have seen a variation of the "illegal maple syrup" plot. Still, that was a pretty fun reveal and, of course, Sherlock would up trying some to pinpoint where it came from! Isiah Whitlock Jr. was awesome as always (even if he'll always be Clay Davis to me.) I felt bad for him, even if he ended up crossing the line. I actually did think Sherlock and Joan were being kind of jerks to him in the flashbacks. I certainly get that they can't work on every case, and sometimes they have to make choices, but I also remember episodes where it starts out with them being bored, working on older, cold cases or just doing Sherlock's wacky experiments, so I would like to think they would have had time to at least take a glance at it. But I liked the general idea of a minor case becoming something even bigger. Still, I felt bad for the dad, even he does deserve to be in jail. Also thought the reason behind the beating was a bit much. I wonder if the gang even attempted to simply bribe the guard, or did they just go straight to the beating? Either way, I get maple syrup is awesome, but damn, guys! I'm guessing the episode ending with Everyone making Joan shave Sherlock's head is because Jonny Lee Miller needed to go bald for a role (Trainspotting 2, maybe?) Good episode. 2 Link to comment
paigow January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 6 hours ago, thuganomics85 said: I'm guessing the episode ending with Everyone making Joan shave Sherlock's head is because Jonny Lee Miller needed to go bald for a role (Trainspotting 2, maybe?) BTW: The Graham Norton episode is on-line. Danny Boyle & the cast [dudes only] discuss T2. Obi-Wan & Sherlock are completely bald 1 Link to comment
paigow January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 9 hours ago, Chyromaniac said: they've uncovered what appears to be a fairly substantial conspiracy, I just wish somebody would've gone all Jack McCoy on hockey/truck guy's @$$... McCoy & Stone would have found some way to make it a RICO case...like finding a syrup customer in NJ 4 Link to comment
Athena January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 7 hours ago, thuganomics85 said: I'm guessing the episode ending with Everyone making Joan shave Sherlock's head is because Jonny Lee Miller needed to go bald for a role (Trainspotting 2, maybe?) I have been following JLM's Instagram watched the Graham Norton Show. I kept wondering when his shaved head would be on Elementary. T2 was filmed last spring/summer I believe so he would have head his hair back then. Either way, Ewan and Jonny looked adorable together with their shaved heads. I really enjoyed the Sherlock and Marcus partnership in this episode. I laughed out loud when they were outside the ware house and Sherlock convinced Marcus to search the premises: "What's that? It's the sound of evidence being destroyed. Following a Supreme Court case, you can go in and search without a warrant." (not exact quote but most of it). 2 Link to comment
theatremouse January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 17 hours ago, tennisgurl said: It seems like they didn't take the case because the guys son just got beat up and that lead to his OD, and he wasn't murdered in some interesting and quirky way. And we can see that it would have taken them a really short time to solve the case, there's no way they couldn't have fit him in somewhere. Its nice that they felt bad and tried to get the father some help and the bad guy to jail, but it would be nice in the future to see them taking some more "normal" cases, or else it looks like they think some cases are "beneath" them, even if it lead to a person dying. I think what you've described is how the father felt about the situation, but I don't know if it's just that the case was "not interesting enough". All three times he came to them, they were in the middle of another case, cases we've seen in other episodes. Sure maybe they could've looked into it after wrapping those cases, before their next if they took the guy seriously, so perhaps there was a little bit of "this case is too normal". But at the same time, they didn't just blow him off or tell him it didn't matter. Each time they were in the middle of a recent murder. And if they did think it was too normal/too easy, they probably were thinking that the actual police officer assigned to it should be looking into it and finding something out, perhaps not as quickly as they would if they really are that good but eventually. So it could easily be not that it's beneath them so much but just shouldn't be necessary for them to be involved to figure it out. I'd say it didn't turn out that way. But that's also because you can't know a case won't end up super complicated until you actually investigate it. I'm more surprised that they didn't twinge that the guy kept coming back and they should maybe deal with him in a different way before he snapped, than that they didn't take the case in the first place. But also sometimes Sherlock is so sure of himself he'll do things like say he can look at a case file for 20 minutes and solve it. So, I don't know, maybe do that more frequently next time someone shows up annually begging for help with something before a statute of limitations expires? Give it ye olde 20 minute once over? He's cocky enough to think he could do it. 5 Link to comment
Chyromaniac January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 2 hours ago, paigow said: McCoy & Stone would have found some way to make it a RICO case...like finding a syrup customer in NJ Exactly! :) Granted, if this were L&O the syrup evidence would've been tossed in act 3 - but at least those hostages would've been home by dinner time. 3 Link to comment
illdoc January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 "Illegal Maple Syrup plot" was on the series Mom. 1 Link to comment
fastiller January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 It's a real issue: Alleged ringleader in $18.7M maple syrup theft testifies he faced death threats Even has its own 'cartel' (more OPEC than Mexican Drug) : Maple Syrup 'Cartel': Federation Of Quebec Maple Syrup Producers 1 Link to comment
MissLucas January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 Oh, that was great! Interesting mystery with lots of great characters (as mentioned above all the obliging criminals were a nice touch), no guest character played by a well-known actor giving away the culprit, Bell's various facial expressions while tagging along with Sherlock, Lucy Liu nearly making me cry in that last scene in the diner, Gregson giving Watson a well-deserved hug, Watson in another killer coat (we've seen this one before but it's still great) and most of all the exquisite cello score by Zoe Keating in the two scenes book-ending the diner story. One of the better outings this season and one of those episodes where Elementary has (excuse my language) Sherlock by the balls. (I've read reviews claiming this should have ended with Burnell committing suicide by cop. Yeah, right - if I wanted depressing stories about how everything sucks I'm going to watch 'Criminal Minds' or the news.) 8 Link to comment
dargosmydaddy January 31, 2017 Share January 31, 2017 20 hours ago, Maelstrom said: The bad: Oh Jonny, not the hair!! It'd finally grown back to a decent length after the too-short cuts of the past few seasons. Glad I'm not the only one who felt this way. Thirty seconds of shirtless JLM did not make up for the loss of his hair... 4 Link to comment
Machiabelly February 1, 2017 Share February 1, 2017 See...if that guy had been a Bruins fan, like all right thinking people are, then he would still be free. The Habs ruin every thing. 1 Link to comment
Texasmom1970 February 1, 2017 Share February 1, 2017 On 1/30/2017 at 9:22 AM, Calamity Jane said: The things she was saying, including the Mohs surgery, would apply to melanoma, not to basal cell. My dad had many basal cell carcinomas, I've had a few, and the doctor just cuts or burns them off. The only time Mohs was mentioned was when it was mistakenly thought I had a melanoma. It bothered me that the show muffed that so badly. Just putting in my two cents about basal cell carcinomas. It can depend on the location and depth. Mine was very deep, and the location on my face was delicate so cryosurgery was not an option. Mine might be a rare case but to be sure the entire depth and width of the cancer was eradicated it was the best option. I know everyone's experience with Cancer is different. I loved Bell asking Sherlock why there was a totem poll in the bathroom and him answering so matter-of-factly, like its a common thing. Still missing Clyde is he hibernating? 2 Link to comment
Calamity Jane February 1, 2017 Share February 1, 2017 1 hour ago, Texasmom1970 said: Just putting in my two cents about basal cell carcinomas. It can depend on the location and depth. Mine was very deep, and the location on my face was delicate so cryosurgery was not an option. Mine might be a rare case but to be sure the entire depth and width of the cancer was eradicated it was the best option. I know everyone's experience with Cancer is different. I loved Bell asking Sherlock why there was a totem poll in the bathroom and him answering so matter-of-factly, like its a common thing. Still missing Clyde is he hibernating? Ugh, so sorry about your experience! I've had several basal cell places removed from my face and neck, but nothing very elaborate had to be done. There was one they thought was melanoma, though, and that was a whole nightmarish other scenario. The one in question on the show was behind the guy's ear, if I recall correctly, and I doubt Joan could have known just by looking that it would need special treatment such as yours required. I still think they got mixed up with melanoma, but it's possible a writer had an experience like yours and generalized to all basal cell cases. And, as you say, cancer just doesn't follow the rules, so anything is possible. 1 Link to comment
basil February 1, 2017 Share February 1, 2017 On 1/30/2017 at 0:16 PM, Kathira said: Q: "Is there a reason you have a totem pole in your bathroom?" A: "Too big for the closet." Oops, cross-posted with iMonrey. Sorry. I also liked Sherlock's throw-away mention of a case involving a Belgian, the Dalai Lama and a wheel of very expensive cheese. LOL Two of my favorite quotes for the show. You left off the punchline for the second one, though: Marcus: "Where the hell did you get this [overhead drone recorded footage of the smuggling operation]? Holmes: " Agent Mc Nally of the NSA - shhh. He owed me a favor - I helped him untangle a rather ugly incident involving a Belgian, the Dalai Lama and a stolen wheel of priceless cheese" Marcus: "What incident was that?" Holmes: "Exactly". I loved that they referenced other episodes, McNally, and the other three cases Sherlock and Joan speak of when turning Burnell down - all cases we've seen. 4 hours ago, Texasmom1970 said: Just putting in my two cents about basal cell carcinomas. It can depend on the location and depth. Mine was very deep, and the location on my face was delicate so cryosurgery was not an option. Mine might be a rare case but to be sure the entire depth and width of the cancer was eradicated it was the best option. I know everyone's experience with Cancer is different. Not so rare. I had almost exactly the same experience. It can and does happen. 4 Link to comment
paigow February 1, 2017 Share February 1, 2017 8 hours ago, Calamity Jane said: I doubt Joan could have known just by looking that it would need special treatment such as yours required. Watson: Dammit Sherlock! I'm a surgeon, not an oncologist!!! 6 Link to comment
possibilities February 1, 2017 Share February 1, 2017 I gave her a pass on that because she was trying to say stuff to reach the hostage-taker, and if it wasn't true or necessary that he needed specialized treatment, no harm done. But offering it to him was like how she tried to give him hope and bond with him and save his life at other times, hoping he wouldn't kill anyone because she was making amends for the way everyone had ignored his son's case before, and that might have calmed him down and changed his mind about revenge. 1 Link to comment
theatremouse February 1, 2017 Share February 1, 2017 Plus when you ask a surgeon for an opinion, they tend to suggest surgery. Goes with the territory. It's what they know. So even if maybe some less fancy surgery might've been OK, if her most common experiences with that, were this doctor friend and that surgery, of course that's what she'd say. 3 Link to comment
sinkwriter February 1, 2017 Share February 1, 2017 Quote "Illegal Maple Syrup plot" was on the series Mom. I've not seen that show or heard of such a thing before, so I had no idea where they were going with it when they opened the barrel and found maple syrup. I thought, okay, how are they going to explain this one! It was pretty unusual. Who would have thought you could illegally sell maple syrup. I mean, it's maple syrup! (Yum.) 1 Link to comment
shapeshifter February 2, 2017 Share February 2, 2017 I know I've seen the maple syrup plot on another crime show. Bones? Castle? One of the L&Os? Psych?? 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts