While the episode is still fresh in my mind, I wanted to expound upon that which I enjoyed and did not care for as to this Victorian interpretation
( Read more... )
Stay on the soapbox ALL YOU WANT. Won't hear any complaints from me.
Personally, I think you hit the target in the center of the bullseye with the "needy co-dependency" comment. That is it, exactly with BBC Sherlock & John. It was, I must admit, very much toned down here than compared to series three, where their friendship was literally reduced to nothing but that co-dependency of two very disturbed individuals. If the special had been that bad, I would have thrown up my hands in disgust, but while there were instances of OOCness, at least it wasn't so overpowering anymore.
Watson would never have been a jerk to a servant, because it simply wasn't done.
Not only did they blast away Victorian ideals, that particular scene was done 100% purposefully to prove how wretched "heteronormative" men are, and how they deserved what they had coming. Because there was a whole deranged sub-plot surrounding a secret society of murderous suffragettes :/ Basically, women who were frustrated with their social status started killing their husbands dressed in wedding gowns (no subtext there, eh?) and SHERLOCK CONDONES THIS. No, he COMMENDS it. Because you feel wronged, or your husband tells you to go knit, then murder becomes justified for the "cause" you are fighting.
IMHO, that's nothing but vindication for extreme misogynists.
And I also agree with you, that's why I hated the (BBC?) version of HOUN with Roxborough/Hart. I found myself saying the same thing I did here - do the writers realize Holmes & Watson were actually friends? And you probably know the Ritchie movies are not my favorite, but I don't dislike them either. Not at all. I was literally getting antsy for SH 3 because maybe then we'll finally see a good Victorian adaptation again. And sorry, but the Moran /Moriarty in that movie were unbeatable, as was the plunging off the balcony scene in AGoS.
Personally, I think you hit the target in the center of the bullseye with the "needy co-dependency" comment. That is it, exactly with BBC Sherlock & John. It was, I must admit, very much toned down here than compared to series three, where their friendship was literally reduced to nothing but that co-dependency of two very disturbed individuals. If the special had been that bad, I would have thrown up my hands in disgust, but while there were instances of OOCness, at least it wasn't so overpowering anymore.
Watson would never have been a jerk to a servant, because it simply wasn't done.
Not only did they blast away Victorian ideals, that particular scene was done 100% purposefully to prove how wretched "heteronormative" men are, and how they deserved what they had coming. Because there was a whole deranged sub-plot surrounding a secret society of murderous suffragettes :/ Basically, women who were frustrated with their social status started killing their husbands dressed in wedding gowns (no subtext there, eh?) and SHERLOCK CONDONES THIS. No, he COMMENDS it. Because you feel wronged, or your husband tells you to go knit, then murder becomes justified for the "cause" you are fighting.
IMHO, that's nothing but vindication for extreme misogynists.
And I also agree with you, that's why I hated the (BBC?) version of HOUN with Roxborough/Hart. I found myself saying the same thing I did here - do the writers realize Holmes & Watson were actually friends? And you probably know the Ritchie movies are not my favorite, but I don't dislike them either. Not at all. I was literally getting antsy for SH 3 because maybe then we'll finally see a good Victorian adaptation again. And sorry, but the Moran /Moriarty in that movie were unbeatable, as was the plunging off the balcony scene in AGoS.
Reply
Leave a comment