Sherlock - The Great Game

It was hyped to hell before broadcast and seems to have won quite a few people over now it has been broadcast, but for me the season finale of Sherlock just didn't work.

On the plus side, it was well-directed and very well-acted. The banter between Holmes and Watson was extremely enjoyable - something that Martin Freeman needs the lion-share of the praise for, since I think it is far easier to play the abrupt and rude Holmes than it is to play the more humble and, well, normal Watson effectively. And I also liked the idea that Watson was blogging Holmes' cases - and exposing some of the gaps in Holmes' knowledge - in particular, about how the earth goes around the sun.

And there were a number of interesting plot threads in last night's episode; some interesting cases and some interesting concepts. The problem - the massive, glaring problem - is that there was so much crammed into this 90 minute installment meaning that nothing was given enough time to breathe. Sure, some plot threads - like the boy drowning in the swimming pool decades before - did not need the time to breathe, since they were concepts more than stories. But Watson solving a case on his own deserved an episode on its own, and the cold, cruel lack of empathy in Holmes leading to an old woman being blown up needed far more attention that it got in this episode.

Then we had Moriarty. He'd been trailed - lumpenly and predictably - in the previous two episodes, so we knew he was coming. However, he wasn't built up into the menacing character that this episode assumed we would consider him to be. He had links to a psycho, and killed a mafia boss. Fair enough, but it hardly makes him Ernst Stravo Blofled now, does it? Perhaps, though, they were deliberately trying to underplay the big M since when he actually appeared in the story, he was anything other than menacing. And that was even after he had wired Watson up to explode at the same time as putting a sniper on him. Moriarty was weedy in physical appearance and both manic and irritating in the way he came across. In some respects, he reminded me of the most recent incarnation of the Master, albeit lacking that character's air of malice. I didn't so much want Holmes to defeat Moriarty's evil scheme as give him a clip around the ears and send him home with a note to his mother.

And the ending - which was trailed as something that would make sure that Sherlock was never the same again - was actually just pretty darned predictable. We always knew that Holmes would meet Moriarty - and the idea that the show would end on a cliff-hanger is not that exciting. In fact, it is becoming pretty much the norm for a season finale. The ending was more "oh" than "wow" for me.

Ultimately, this episode seemed to assume that we were much more involved in the world of Sherlock than we were ever likely to be, given just two episodes preceded it. Had this story come at the end of Season Two, or even at the end of an eight-part first season - then it would probably have packed more a punch. But this episode seemed to be trying to mess with our expectations of what an episode of Sherlock might be - something it was always going to struggle with since it has yet to raise those expectations. A good season finale should leave you wanting more and here, for me, The Great Game failed. It left me feeling that I would probably watch further episodes should they appear, but equally I wouldn't be too disappointed if the series never returned.

Possibly one of the most awesome pictures in the world:

Assuming, of course, that you are a total geek like me...

Not shit, Sherlock

I have an issue with the premise of Sherlock. I like the idea of Sherlock Holmes - although I am by no means as obsessed by the detective fiction of Conan Doyle as other people I know are - but for me Holmes should always be based in the Victorian era. Unlike other icons - James Bond, for example - he doesn't transfer well in my mind from era to era.

Fortunately, the programme managed this transfer quite well. Partly because - for all the talk of mobiles, the internet and the current war in Afghanistan - this was about as detached from the current world as it possibly could be without setting in the Victorian era. In its heightened and highly stylised depiction of modern London, the show really bought into the idea that Holmes always borders on the highly unlikely.

Consequently, this was a romp from beginning to end. It was designed to make Holmes look as cool as possible - no mean feat given, by his own admission, he is a "high-functioning sociopath". It also fleshed out Dr Watson and some of the more minor regular characters. In particular, the world weary Lestrade was wonderfully underplayed. The same cannot be said for Mycroft Holmes - Mark Gatiss seems to relish the opportunity to camp it up as Mycroft - some sort of sinister government employee who also talks about his mother a lot - but his performance jars slightly with the other, more understated characters. Furthermore, the concept of Moriarty was introduced in this episode with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer to the face. Yep, we get it - this was the pilot episode, and we had to be made to understand from the outset that Mycroft and Moriarty are going to be two of the key recurring characters. However that point could have been made in a much more unobtrusive way.

But this was a fun adventure that brought Holmes and Watson together and laid out what we can expect from the rest of the series. Unfortunately, that throws up a couple of problems as well. Firstly, we get that in the modern world Holmes and Watson could be mistaken for a gay couple. And it's mildly amusing the first time it's mentioned. However, when it keeps on happening it ceases to be a nod to a more tolerant modern world and instead becomes almost a bit crass. It develops a schoolboy tone, as if the production team wants to point and snigger about the misunderstandings relating to Holmes and Watson's relationship.

However, a far bigger problem is the character of Holmes. He is hyper-observant and awkward in his dealings with other people - just as he should be. Unfortunately, his gift for observation is almost exactly the same as that of Fitz. Or the Mentalist. Or Monk. Sure, all these characters owe a debt to Holmes in the first place, but as I watched Sherlock I couldn't help but be reminded of those other detectives. There's nothing novel about Holmes' observation skills anymore. And all this is rather undermined anyway when, at a crucial moment, Holmes seems to miss the point that there are two people in any one taxi - the driver as well as the passenger.

Furthermore, while the wonderfully named Benedict Cumberbatch gives his all to the role of Holmes, I was constantly reminded of another character when I watched this show. Particularly in the moments when Holmes is complaining about the tiny minds of those around him or arrogantly dealing with everyone, even those close to him, he comes across almost exactly like the Eleventh Doctor. Now, I'm a big fan of the Eleventh Doctor, but he isn't Sherlock Holmes. I can't help but think that Gatiss and Moffat - the co-creators of this programme - didn't really spend enough time trying to distinguish their Doctor from their Holmes. And this production ends up being a poor relation to Doctor Who - which is a shame, because it deserves to be so much more.

I'm aware that this post makes it sound like I didn't like the show - and that isn't really true. It was fast-moving, filled with witty dialogue and interesting stylistic flourishes. The story - once you realise that it really isn't going for verisimilitude - is entertaining nonsense that is generally well-performed. No, Sherlock isn't shit - but it also isn't that urgent or unique as TV programmes go. And I doubt when all is said and done that this show has a particularly long life ahead of it. Based on the first episode, it is a novelty - a distraction, a little hobby on the side for Moffat and Gatiss as they work on their day job: the ongoing adventures of Doctor Who.