The Afterword

Musings on the byways of popular culture

Menu

Navigation

You are here: Home / Forum / Sherlock – the finale

Sherlock – the finale

by 105 Comments

That. Was. Terrible. With a capital F.

How to screw up four seasons of superlative escapist drama in one excruciating episode. That had Moffat’s filthy Doctor Who fingerprints all over it. Damn him.

2

Comments

  2. I loved it. Mad, baroque, with its own cracked internal logic. There can never be enough Doctor Who fingerprints on a programme for me, anyway.

    Neat, realistic plots? Pah! *That’s* how I want to be entertained on a Sunday night. Although I’m aware I might be in a minority.

    It seems that the “reset” at the end does allow for stories more like the first couple of series, assuming they can get everyone together. Did the trailer for upcoming drama afterwards assume another series?

    • Its not just realistic plots, its scenes with no logic at all, it’s characters who can do anything, it results in total lack of involvement in the “story” and it was actually a load of boring tosh that made it seem the creators were unsure why it ever was good. Oh and theres no plane and and let’s give the murdering psychopath a hug and all is well. It insulted anybody who ever invested time in the series. Last weeks episode was very good, but 3 of the last 4 have been drivel.

  3. Dull. As. Ditchwater.
    The final sense was akin to the feeling you get when you wait ages at a bus stop.
    Should I just walk? But if I do, a bus is bound to come & sail past me.
    So you wait, getting bored & peed off & eventually exasperated, decide to walk only to see a heaving bus sure enough sail by. The fact it’s heaving means you wouldn’t have got on anyway so you may have just walked immediately – thus adding to the frustration.
    You never get the time you spent getting wound up back – just like last night’s poppycock.

  6. I don’t mind implausible plots, but impossible ones are just taking the piss. They dress it up with fast cuts and whirling graphics, and you can never fault Moffatt for dialogue, but there really ought to be some kind of narrative underneath. You’re never given enough information to be ahead of the plot, anticipating the next dilemma, which is the skill of great drama. In this you don’t even try to predict what will happen because nothing makes any sense.

    It’s been a really disappointing decent since the first series and I hope they kill it now.

  7. I remember watching this program that was witty, clever and had great twists in the plot. And then i woke up and it was a dream.

    BY

    Steven Moffat – Aged 55 and 2 months

  8. I’d disagree with you @chiz. I don’t think that the plot was implausible. You give it too much credit.
    There was no plot at all, merely a series of scenes that were linked because the same characters appeared in them.
    Utter bollocks and a waste of time.
    Why, I could have wasted my time watching the implausible Endeavour where murderers cover their tracks by murdering someone else, then someone else…

  12. It was dreadful. Disjointed, sadistic, and a redemptive “reveal” that was straight out of Doctor Who
    (similar to Jenna Coleman being a dalek)
    Moriaty’s return was a wasted red herring, the cameo appearances from the regular cast members pointless, and the final Amanda Abbington VoiceOver clichéd and annoying (whenever you need them, they’ll be there etc)

    I can’t see too many people clamouring for another series – but after that, I don’t think Moffatt & Gatiss want to write one.

  13. Agree with all the above, especially Timbar.

    As a longstanding member of the audience, it insulted my intelligence. If my nan was still alive, she might have said, “What a crock of shite!”

  15. I could list my niggles with the plot, but a commentator called SpamDuster has done it for me on the Guardian (and added some more I hadn’t thought of):

    1.) Why did they give Euros magic powers? It was laughably stupid that she could enslave an entire prison worth of guards and, presumably experienced, psychologists. Oh sorry, she was really really clever. That’s fine then.
    2.) Sherlock is now stupid. Doesn’t solve crimes, doesn’t remember his dad was allergic to dogs, can’t recognise there is no glass two inches away from his face.
    3.) Euros has spent years on this plan. Working with Moriarty, escaping prison, disguising herself as various people to entrap them, building a torturous assault course for Sherlock to escape from. Why does she try and kill them with a grenade drone before it all comes off?
    4.) In the small, isolated grounds of a manor house, why did nobody check for a missing child down the nearby well?
    5.) Why did Mycroft, super genius, let her talk to Moriarty? A person he explicitly states he thinks is a criminal? Spam can buy giving her a violin as a reward, but this is stupid.
    6.) Why is Euros even in prison? A child, who they suspect (not know) killed someone, then set a fire, and they imprison her in the negative zone? Bit far no?
    7.) Why is this super prison so shit? Sherlock and Mycroft infiltrate it by respectively putting on a scottish accent and dressing as Captain Birdseye.
    8.) Why do they NEED to infiltrate it if Mycroft is so obviously in charge? Just walk in.
    9.) How is Watson able to just climb the rope out of the well if he is chained to the floor?
    10.) Why was the bit with Molly so rushed? Did she not deserve a bit longer on screen after she finally tells Sherlock she loves him, the culmination of four series of plot?
    11.) Why is Mary such a big character?
    12.) So what exactly did Euros and Moriarty plan together? Are we just meant to guess? Why did he react to the word Redbeard? He wouldn’t know anything about it. Why did she mention Redbeard? Non of Moriarty’s schemes involved him in any way.

    https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/jan/16/sherlock-how-the-tv-phenomenon-became-an-annoying-parody-of-itself (comment posted 10:46)

    • Don’t get me started… the gravestones thing was particularly stupid. Perhaps they thought that if you’ve got that far in you’ll have stopped trying to make sense of it and just accept everything they throw at you.

      Also the girl in the airplane was blatant cheating. Misdirecting an audience is fine, lying to them isn’t.

    • “we won’t have to watch him (i.Moriarty) infuriatingly goon about like the third understudy in a touring regional theatrical adaptation of Jim Carrey’s The Mask” …

      Brilliant!

  18. The fact that I nodded off at some point may have added to it! I thought at the time “I have no idea what’s going on” because I must have slept through an important bit. Now I suspect from some of these comments that being awake wouldn’t have helped that much.

  20. I feel bad putting the boot into Gatiss and The Moff as they are tightrope walkers and it’s inevitable they will have some spectacular falls, but I wouldn’t want them not getting up on the high wire. The beauty of The Doctor is he’s a character of infinite flexibility and “rebooting the universe” or handwaving “timey wimey” explanations can just about get you out of a jam. Really, the only limitation is UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE should The Doctor pick up a gun and shoot someone (Oops!).
    People come to SH stories to see him “do the Sherlock thing”. I don’t think it’s really a problem that his adversary has almost supernatural powers of persuasion or a plan that makes no sense to us (after all, if you want to be picky, you could start with the stage direction “leaps out of upstairs window, pursued by fireball, lands intact).
    The real problem is Sherlock not being Sherlocky enough and (Oy vey! yet again, Mr Moff!) those who are most intimately connected to the protagonist being all of the most important people in the universe (Moriarty was a gift from Conan Doyle, who wasn’t much concerned with how Sherlock came to be as he is).
    Also, Moose was looking forward to more of Irene Adler in the nip – so, boo!

  21. Bloody hard work – I think I nodded off (very briefly) in the middle.
    Tried to be a bit clever, and “atmospheric” rather than a storyline with an “Ahh .. now I get it” ending

    Was that the end end?

    I may be reading too much into this, but as Sherlock and Watson ran from the building (before or after final credits, can’t remember), the name of the building was Rathbone Place.

    Coincidence, or a statement of this Sherlock is now leaving the place designated for Rathbone?

  22. If anyone else uses ‘Doctor Who’ as a term of denigration they will get a punch up the bracket , mush! I dunno – Moffat produces some of the best TV of the 21st Century in ‘Blink’ ‘Empty Child’ ‘Heaven Sent’ ‘Silence In The Library’ ‘Listen’ and most of Sherlock and all he gets is bleating from a bunch of old farts wanking over their Nigel Bruce glossy 8x10s

    Stone me

        • I see. It was well worth my while wading through the hours of drivel of the last three episodes because all will be revealed in due course. Great. I don’t think I’m the only one who won’t be tuning in again.

          • I was talking Dr Who. I have no future info on Sherlock – just lots of gossip.

            I usually try not watching something if I constantly don’t like it. You should try that

            I thought finale was ok – I “guessed” the girl on a plane bit from the off especially when it was still flying hours later. And even Sherlock Holmes couldn’t get that thing landed safely – in real life it’s impossible.

            But again with the duplicitous females and Molly was horrendously treated with no real satisfying coda – just broken and thrown way. Felt a bit rushed towards the end. Was part Saw, part Pyramids Of Mars problem solving but gleefully nasty

            Some great visual touches, found the I Want To Break Free sequence hilarious and the ‘5 years ago’ caption wrongfooting the audience. They do love to fuck with you and secretly, you love it, you know you do

            • It’s like 10cc. I found their first album to be genius, so bought their second. Sheet Music was almost/just as good, on to Original Soundtrack. Hmm, not quite on the money but a lot of positives. How Dare You? I’m loving the odd track but at least half is, well, ordinary. I’ve invested a lot of love in this band. They were magic. Deceptive Bends lands on my record player. Oh dear. No more.

              The previous series of Sherlock was How Dare You? These last three episodes have been Deceptive Bends. Oh dear. No more.

            • I keep coming back to it because I want to see good actors act in something non-risible. Like the Russians say, it’s the hope that dies last.

              And Dr. Who criticism seems fine to me if one comes from the perspective of not liking Dr Who. Each to their own.

    • Good point, well made DFB. I do feel a bit of a knob criticising when I couldn’t even write the very worst one. Problem is you make a rod for your own back when you set such a high standard on your best days..

  26. I’m in the boo camp. I enjoyed the opening, and the ‘reveal’ that the tables had been turned on Sherlock and co. gave me a shiver of anticipation. Only for it all to be squandered by the puzzles bit, which was like watching Holmes and Watson being hassled by Catherine Tate doing ‘bovvered’. By the time of the well and ‘there’s no plane’ twist I was thoroughly bored.

    • Old Euros or whatever her name is (I preferred her early work in Gorky’s Zygotic Mynci) was rubbish. The attitude of the writers was just “She’s magic, OK? Get over it.” It was annoying. And her whole acting thing was just to open her eyes really wide in the hope that we’d be all like “Wow she’s well mad”. Plus Moriarty is just a cartoonish irritant now. Tick tock piss off.

      Also the puzzles were just a really boring version of the Crystal Maze. I kept checking my watch.

      Crap on toast, the whole lot.

  27. Mark Gattis s usual has a calm znd measured response. Not in rhyme this time. Although that was a parody of a similar bad poem by Conan Doyle but not many people got the reference. Bit like Sherlock. Anyway

    “People ask if it’s good to challenge the audience. Of course it fucking is. Why would you not want to challenge your audience?”

    He added: “I did a phone-in after the Christmas special a few years ago and someone said it was too complicated for people to follow. I said ‘oh, go and pour some warm paste into your mouth’. If you don’t want to be challenged, don’t watch it. It’s a complex and entertaining programme. Go and read a children’s book with hard pages if you don’t want to be challenged. We’re making the show we want to make. We don’t make it a certain way because fans are pressuring us.”

    So that’s us told. One man’s complicated is another’s pretentious twaddle of course but I’d rather have television that troes to dazzle and deceive than endless reality, baking, police procedurals ( and detective shows for that matter) Homeland knock offs, X FILES clones or witless sitcoms. But hey, that’s just me

      • I saw someone use the phrase ‘it’s a stupid persons idea of a clever show’ about Sherlock yesterday. A meme which I’ve seen applied to Inception, Lost, Stephen Fry, Life On Mars (TV show).

        Smug Cuntarary, My Dear Watson

        • Isn’t that kind of true though? Convoluted plotting isn’t really that clever, it’s just a few meetings with some flipchart paper. If plotting was the important thing in telling a story Dan Brown would have the same reputation as Saul Bellow. Trouble is Dan Brown writes bollocks. His plotting is quite good but his books are still bollocks. That’s the problem with Sherlock now. It’s got twists and turns but its an incoherent blobby mess. It’s not very clever at all. What’s clever about it?

          BTW I’m not sure the examples of Inception, Lost etc do your cause much good cos those things are total examples of style over substance and “stupid persons idea of clever” strikes me as an apt description of them all. Why isn’t it?

          (poor old Stephen fry. He seems nice, but the description still seems to fit IMO)

          • Because it’s a standpoint that appeals to the worst kind of air sniffing contemptuous smug turd who has never had an original thought in their lives. The only joy they have is in looking at things other people have created and going ” well that’s not very good is it?”

            Gattis has earned the right to kick against the pricks who think they know better than those who do a job that haven’t the wit to do but think themselves smarter than the average prole.

            I would loathe to see television made by a committee of fan boys and Guardian commentators

            • I doubt anyone on this website can play guitar as well as Wes Borland. You’re all still double sniffy about Limp Bizkit though, aren’t you?

              Ultimately, Gattis is in danger here of telling a potentially sizeable portion of his now diminishing audience to cock off because they’re not clever enough to understand that what they’re watching is really, really good.

              If that strikes him as a smart way to conduct his business, then fair enough. It’s his party, and he can cry if he wants to.

            • Not really with you there old boy. That line of argument suggests that you’re only allowed to call out shit telly / music / whatever if you’re creative yourself.

              What would be an OK way to call this episode of Sherlock shit if I’m not allowed to use that one?

            • Sorry DFB, it’s nothing to do with being sniffily contemptuous. I’m part of an audience and I expected something far, far better than this.
              I don’t get joy from disliking it. I just feel cheated because I expected so much more.

    • Gattis doesn’t really believe he was ‘challenging’ the audience, does he. A challenge suggests there’s a possibility of winning, and he knows there’s no explanation (other than bored writers) for this episode’s nonsense. He’s just torturing the faithful who desperately want to believe they didn’t just get fucked over by their heroes

  28. That plot, btw (spoilers):

    There’s a little girl on a plane. Oh no!
    Watson wasn’t really shot, it was a tranq gun. Obviously. (It obviously wasn’t in the prev episode)
    They scare Mycroft with a member of Slipknot to get him to fess up to Euros or whatever her name is.
    Mycroft has messed with Sherlock’s memories so he doesn’t remember her. No explanation of how that’s supposed to work, exactly.
    They break into a prison that Mycroft is the boss of and therefore doesn’t need to break into. There’s some talk of a dog.
    All the prison guards are under Euros’s spell because she’s magic. No explanation of how five minutes with her can make you her bitch, apart from SHE’S A NEXT LEVEL GENIUS SO THERE.
    Sherlock’s got to get the plane with the girl in it down.
    Moriarty’s not dead!
    Oh. He is.
    She locks our heroes up and acts like a cross between the Saw killer, Max Headroom and Richard O’Brien for an hour or so. (They can’t see what they’ve got to do. They’re coming out.)
    More girl on plane. Please hold love. Got a coffin tantrum to have.
    They get out and go back to the old house.
    Oh Redbeard isn’t a dog. Euros killed a kid ages ago. Now he remembers.
    John is down a well.
    Sherlock works out a puzzle and gives Euros a cuddle.
    The plane was ALL A DREAM.
    She gets banged up again. Cue literal actual violins.
    The end.

    I know I’m taking the piss but that isn’t a clever plot. That’s an incoherent mess, that is. And what grates is the fact that Gattiss has the nerve to act like we’re all too dim to understand his great art despite the fact that nothing he’s ever written since after the League of Gentlemen has ever ever ever been good.

    What is clever about it? It’s nonsense.

    • Thing is that they are now back to where those who don’t like how the series has gone want them to be. Moriarty definitely dead, no Watson wife just Sherlock, John, the scene stealing Stubbs, Lestrade, arch Mycroft and the wronged Molly. And Paul Weller as a viking.

      And a baby that will actually be revealed to be Sherlock’s and grow up to recreate the Young Sherlock Holmes film

      Maybe it’s best to leave it there to really piss people off. The closing narration that adapted Watson’s eulogy for Holmes after his ‘death’ in the books suggests it’s a definite long pause

      • I liked that coda. I read it as “Sherlock Holmes is immortal. There have been many takes on this character before us. There will be many more to come. This was ours – we hope you liked it”.
        And, taking the twelve episodes as a whole, I certainly did.

Leave a Reply