A Scandal in Belgravia (Sherlock BBC)

[keep_counting]

And that was... dissapointing


The episode went sort of like a curve for me: it started out REALLY great, then it got annoying, then I got bored, then a leeeetle bit of drama, then I was completely unempressed with the over-all plot, then Sherlock cracked the phone-code and I was all 'Wooohooo' and then that ending was about the lamest thing in ever.

Moffat, it's alright for characters to die and stay dead. It happens. Also, he can't write romance to save his life. I would say more about that, but just go read kilodalton's review of this. To quote on Moffat-romance: 'they're too rushed, too vapid, too based on sex as opposed to emotion, and fall flat.'

I got a kick out of Mrs. Hudson's scenes. Sherlock and John's relationship seems to have reverted to a former status however: oh, and the Molly scene was greatly executed as well. But overall? Not at all living up to the pure quality that was the first season. Instead of a plot-driven episode with amazing interaction, we have an episode that is mainly about a sexy-sexy lady (who is played beautifully by Laura Pulver I must admit) who double-hands Sherlock, and the secret, somewhat-eeeevil (only not really) government project. Oh, and Mycroft told Mrs. Hudson to shut up. Mycroft, that is so not on. You have been relocated on my favorites-list, and am now just above Anderson. Shame on you!!

In the canon story, Irene Adler is an opera-singer who, yes, cons people and yes, tricks and outsmarts Sherlock, but her story is a small one and in the end she runs away with this guy that she wants to marry - this guy who isn't Sherlock. At all. And this woman - written by a dude who lived in a society where women were not equal to men - managed to write her as strong and brilliant, without the bloody sex jokes.

Sorry, but its starting to become a pattern that a woman is strong if she's comfortable with being naked: she's strong if she's all about her sexuality. These don't have to be connected, at all.

Moriarty's ringtone almost saved this whole episode, though. That was so fucking amazing, I cried from laughter!!!

Comments

[the-silverdoe.livejournal.com]

Sorry, but its starting to become a pattern that a woman is strong if she's comfortable with being naked: she's strong if she's all about her sexuality. These don't have to be connected, at all.
This. Absolutely. Moffat can't write women. I know this for sure now.

So relieved you were disappointed too, lol. I was afraid I was going to be the party-ruiner again.

Also they were so the Doctor and River, that was awful, can't Moff come up with something new, dammit? And I thought their relationship wasn't half as developed as it ought to have been, I mean I didn't really feel the intellectual rivalry here. She was all about sex and her body; how misogynistic is that?

I also agree about the fact that Sherlock and John's relationship seems to have regressed, in a way.

Still, Moriarty's ringtone saved it all! :D
I disagree with you re Mycroft though; I wholeheartedly loved him in this ep; he's up there with John as my favourite character. =P

[keep-counting.livejournal.com]

It nagged me a lot, you know? I mean, obviously it grants a sort of power or awareness, if you're comfortable in your own skin, but that does not make me less intelligent or powerful for being shy and not wanting to full-frontal flash anyone who walks into my living-room. It just sends a wrong signal: Moffat's strongest women are all very sexual and very much on the wrong side of the law: for different reasons yes, it's a grey area, but its still a very horrible pattern that sends a very wrong signal to the world, and the young people watching it.

It is the only way for Moffat to write feelings, because obviously, without the sexual innuendoes, there is no love, right?? (and can we talk about how absolutely horrid that ending was? I cringe just thinking about it!)

And nooo, don't get me wrong, I adore Mycroft :D he was great in this episode, Gatiss really got to show off his talent. I was mainly joking, because Mrs. Hudson is like the Sherlockian, female version of Wilf from DW, and no-one messes with my grandparents! ;)

[the-silverdoe.livejournal.com]

It nagged me too! I think it's a way of saying she isn't really his equal because she gets things because of her body and her sexual inhibition. Psychologically, it must reassure Moffat. Perhaps really clever, confident women, who do not need to be overly sexual because they are confident scare him. The way I see it, if Irene or River were truly strong and confident, they wouldn't need to flash their sexuality like that. And the way he makes the Doctor and Sherlock so utterly asexual in opposition to that... how fucked up is that? It makes me wonder what his problem with sex is...

ts still a very horrible pattern that sends a very wrong signal to the world, and the young people watching it.
Yes! He wants us to think that he's not misogynistic, when in fact everything he writes is.

and can we talk about how absolutely horrid that ending was? I cringe just thinking about it!
It was very meh, if you ask me. But obviously there's no point in expecting Moffat to kill off characters, ever...

Ooh, we need to marry Wilf and Mrs Hudson! :D
I really like Gatiss as an actor, actually; his Mycroft is brilliant! Tbh I'm much more excited about the next episode, which he wrote, than I was about this one.

[keep-counting.livejournal.com]

There's so many issues about gender nowadays, and I think it's very divided for Moffat: women can only be strong because of their natural feminity, such as their bodies being sexy and/or being a mother. It's like when people divide it into hetero-and homo-sexuals, when there's just a person and their sexuality/gender/nationality shouldn't necesarrily have a bearing on what type of person they are. Obviously they affect us, but a large part of the stereotypes are created by media and painted on us, and we just follow along because we get the impression that the world just is like that. I think that's why Moffat bugs me so much, because as a writer of popular shows he has a lot of subconscious power over his audience, and that's sorta scary.

I thought it was waaaay to sentimental, waaaaay to overly-done, waaaaay to manipulative towards John (you cannot tell me that Mycroft didn't know) and waaaaaay too much Moffat yet again writing the main characters - who happen to be bloody masterminds - as 'stupid' and 'slow'.

Gatiss is amazing, and I hope we're getting more of him this season. Next episode can only be better than this one :/

Match made in heaven! :D

[the-silverdoe.livejournal.com]

It's like when people divide it into hetero-and homo-sexuals, when there's just a person and their sexuality/gender/nationality shouldn't necesarrily have a bearing on what type of person they are.
Exactly! Why can't we just have dramas with characters who are people, not 'they're supposed to be like that because...'
That's why I like Rose and Donna, they can be tough sometimes, and so sweet the next time and there's no warning sign like 'oh oh, not behaving like a proper female here'. In the same way Ten(nant) has a feminine side but that never affects his manliness imo... And that's why I love Spooks so much. The female characters are so well-written and everybody is written as a person!

Ah, I don't know about Mycroft, lol. Now that you mention it, he probably did. Everybody treated John like crap, mind you, and I Do. Not. Like! *shakes fist*

Tbh, my favourite thing about this ep was 'Yay! Lots of Mycroft!'. Not enough Lestrade though, if you ask me. Well, see you next time and hopefully we'll be more satisfied. ;)

[keep-counting.livejournal.com]

They are, and that stands as such a sharp contrast to Amy and River, who - while still being badass - is so very defined by their feminity and sexuality. And that's alright, it's just that that seems to be the only way Moffat can write strong women, either that or let them be wholly devoted mothers. It is very stereotypical, especially when he tries to incoporate those two because, erm, sorry, but I would want neither Amy nor River as my mum. None of them have exactly shown incredible skill in that direction.

John got shoved SO in the background in favor of Irene, didn't he? I did adore his scenes, but... :/

Oh yes, definitely more Lestrade. I hope we get to see Anderson again too, though it seems unlikely!

Also, I watched the first ep of Downton Abbey and I loved it!

[the-silverdoe.livejournal.com]

Lol, I love Amy but wouldn't want her as my mum either! It is cliché indeed, his women characters really don't have enough nuance!

Yes, he was... Although, I have to say, having just re-watched the episode to screencap and icon it (because in spite of all the flaws, there's so much pretty!!), that I 'liked' it more this time. I managed to forget Irene's characterization, the nonsensical plot and the terrible, terrible ending to focus on the acting, and they all act so well! I was a lot more moved than I was when I watched it yesterday, especially during the scene in which Sherlock cracks the code. I had shippy feelings then. =P Also the little bits, most of the times due to the acting, like the fact that Mycroft and John seem to somehow like each other, Lestrade, Mrs Hudson etc.

Downton! =D I think you're going to fall in love with this show!

[keep-counting.livejournal.com]

Oh, I believe I've warmed up to it a bit, after thinking about the good parts as well. Overall, it doesn't live up to the first season though :/ but it's weird thinking that there's only two more weeks, and then this season is over!

I've fallen a great deal in love with it already :D