I pretty much agree with you -- Thanks for taking the time to articulate it so well. (I had a pretty similar experience -- I did enjoy it the first time, but it took another viewing for me to decide what was going on with the over-sexuality stuff.) I like that "Sherlock and love" quotation, because that's exactly how I interpreted it. :-D
( ... )
Oh, wow, thanks for reading all the way through my monster review. I actually didn't plan for such an epic, but the writing just didn't stop... Hopefully it made some sense
( ... )
Okay, had another moment of AHA! re: the final scene.
So, in Irene's first really big scene, she is nude and in a well-lit, bright room. This does throw Sherlock for a second, but he pulls himself together in seconds, and is pretty harsh (and I think honestly so) about how pathetic she was being (e.g. "you cater to the whims of the pathetic and you take your clothes off to make an impression").
In the final scene, Irene is wearing a hijab, doesn't look made up. Honestly, there's nothing sexy about her at that moment. And, as I said, at that moment she wins.
So, if that interpretation is in any way valid, then that scene is the sort of climax of... well, everything in their relationship throughout the show.
First: Look, I've found an article that interprets the final scene in the same way we have discussed here - that Irene is the winner in the end because she makes Sherlock feel about her. Nice to see other people have come to the same conclusion. :)
Next: I really like your new analysis of the final scene in comparison to Irene's first scene! Big contrast there, you are right. Hm, could one say that Sherlock only loves her when her body isn't the focus anymore or is that over-interpreted? Or that he doesn't like her doing stuff to impress him and only decides to show his feelings when he feels like it, not when he is pressured? (Although he DOES like her trying to impress him with her cleverness...) Oh, so much left to think about it! :)
Thank you, I enjoyed hearing your thoughts on the episode. I also generally enjoyed it, but I'm not sure how I feel about Irene's characterization as "a baddie," as Steven Moffat put it. That's one issue that didn't come up in your review. I think through Irene and John and Sherlock the episode was doing an interesting job of exploring what it means to love someone in nonsexual ways, as you said. Although I'm not sure I like that they added a clear physical element to Irene's attraction (racing pulse, dilated pupils) for the sake of a plot point (Sherlock needed that physical evidence of attraction to conclude that she was not disinterested in him and had not simply been manipulating him as she said she had been, so that at the key moment he could finally figure out her passcode. He realized how important he was to her only when he saw how hard she was trying to deny any feeling for him at all). But I have to admit that I don't like the fact that Irene was working with Moriarty. This is not for me a question about feminism or
( ... )
I disliked the fact that she allied herself with Moriarty--and would have made Sherlock, John, and everyone cater to HIS whims as well as hers--and yet we're sill supposed to be happy Sherlock saved her.
And, yes, she helped Jim become even more dangerous, and let more people die (to say nothing of the women who died so she could fake her death twice) and, again, we're supposed to LIKE this character? WHY?
That's an interesting point about the faked bodies, I hadn't thought about that. Though as Sherlock was implied to be responsible for the evidence regarding the second fake death, I think we can rule out any actual murder on that one. He may have taken a page from his brother's book and procured an already-dead body which he then brilliantly/morbidly altered to pass post-mortum tests. *handwaves a bit as the ending was a bit ridiculous to begin with*
I suppose finding a conveniently freshly-dead doppelganger corpse the first time she faked her death is vaguely possible as well, but I think probably Irene used Moriarty's consultancy to arrange that one, so murder's seeming a lot more likely in that case. :(
Yes, when you make Irene criminal to that extent, I'm afraid in my eyes she no longer deserves to win against the Holmeses, whereas in the orginal story Holmes regards her as clearly morally superior to the King who hired him to retrieve her photographs. "Is it not a pity that she was not on my level?" / "From what I have
( ... )
Yes, when you make Irene criminal to that extent, I'm afraid in my eyes she no longer deserves to win against the Holmeses
Exactly. They made her too much of a bad guy to justify her winning. Hell, I can see Sherlock not caring that much about the lady on the slab, but, again, she allied herself with a man that strapped John--you know, Sherlock's FRIEND?--to a fucking bomb. And he supposed to just... not care? I'm sorry, but: BULLSHIT.
Aha, you have seen it! I just sent you a carefully worded, spoiler-free email in case you hadn't... ;D
Great review. I think I agree with almost everything! Particularly about Mycroft. I do hope he continues to feature as much in the other two episodes! I really didn't like the episode's ending, though. I read through your interpretation a few times and tried to reconcile myself to it, but... No, I just can't! I hated everything after John and Mycroft in the cafe.
Really, I just wish they hadn't called the character Irene Adler. The only connection between this character and the orginal Adler seems to be her being photographed with royalty... They've missed the whole point of the original Adler, which was that she won and Holmes lost! Instead we have this damsel-in-distress ending
( ... )
Oh, thanks for your comment (and sorry it took me so long to reply to it). I am glad you liked my review and could agree with most points. :-) Though it's sad you didn't like the ending at all. I mean, I wasn't fond of it in the beginning, either, but after giving it some serious thought, I can see what they (maybe) were trying to show and that's okay for me now. I've actually even started to like it. Maybe you'd be interested in goldvermilion87s thoughts on who actually won in the end. She basically agrees with my points, but examines the final scene in much more detail
( ... )
Comments 13
Reply
Reply
So, in Irene's first really big scene, she is nude and in a well-lit, bright room. This does throw Sherlock for a second, but he pulls himself together in seconds, and is pretty harsh (and I think honestly so) about how pathetic she was being (e.g. "you cater to the whims of the pathetic and you take your clothes off to make an impression").
In the final scene, Irene is wearing a hijab, doesn't look made up. Honestly, there's nothing sexy about her at that moment. And, as I said, at that moment she wins.
So, if that interpretation is in any way valid, then that scene is the sort of climax of... well, everything in their relationship throughout the show.
Reply
Next: I really like your new analysis of the final scene in comparison to Irene's first scene! Big contrast there, you are right. Hm, could one say that Sherlock only loves her when her body isn't the focus anymore or is that over-interpreted? Or that he doesn't like her doing stuff to impress him and only decides to show his feelings when he feels like it, not when he is pressured? (Although he DOES like her trying to impress him with her cleverness...)
Oh, so much left to think about it! :)
Reply
Reply
And, yes, she helped Jim become even more dangerous, and let more people die (to say nothing of the women who died so she could fake her death twice) and, again, we're supposed to LIKE this character? WHY?
Reply
I suppose finding a conveniently freshly-dead doppelganger corpse the first time she faked her death is vaguely possible as well, but I think probably Irene used Moriarty's consultancy to arrange that one, so murder's seeming a lot more likely in that case. :(
Yes, when you make Irene criminal to that extent, I'm afraid in my eyes she no longer deserves to win against the Holmeses, whereas in the orginal story Holmes regards her as clearly morally superior to the King who hired him to retrieve her photographs. "Is it not a pity that she was not on my level?" / "From what I have ( ... )
Reply
Exactly. They made her too much of a bad guy to justify her winning. Hell, I can see Sherlock not caring that much about the lady on the slab, but, again, she allied herself with a man that strapped John--you know, Sherlock's FRIEND?--to a fucking bomb. And he supposed to just... not care? I'm sorry, but: BULLSHIT.
Reply
Great review. I think I agree with almost everything! Particularly about Mycroft. I do hope he continues to feature as much in the other two episodes! I really didn't like the episode's ending, though. I read through your interpretation a few times and tried to reconcile myself to it, but... No, I just can't! I hated everything after John and Mycroft in the cafe.
Really, I just wish they hadn't called the character Irene Adler. The only connection between this character and the orginal Adler seems to be her being photographed with royalty... They've missed the whole point of the original Adler, which was that she won and Holmes lost! Instead we have this damsel-in-distress ending ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment