I think I read somewhere they're doing a one-off period episode (that's back in the right time, nothing to do with er, woman's things!). I wonder if that's the Christmas special. A stylish show, that for me has been let down by plot holes & lapses in logic, so I hope they tighten up the plotting.
Big news for Sherlock fans – the upcoming special – set in Victorian Times will be shown in cinemas first.
Stephen Moffat said so at the Sherlock panel at San Diego Comic Con (he was a busy man yesterday!)
From the BBC:
A special one-off episode of Sherlock will be shown in cinemas around the world, co-creator Steven Moffat announces at Comic-Con. Speaking at Comic-Con in San Diego, he told thousands of fans of the TV show the story, set in Victorian England, would also be seen “on the big screen”. The Victorian-era Christmas special will also play in select theaters in the U.S. this December, showrunner Steven Moffat revealed. Details will be announced in due course.
Im glad you dug this thread out jim. I have been a big fan of this and was really looking forward to this new year special.
But what a convoluted confusing pile of poo. I dont know about sherlock but i think moffat and co mustve been on a coke/opium cocktail mind palace when they wrote it. Very disappointing.
I'm disappointed to hear that, Bill. I haven't seen it yet but I have had mixed feelings about series three and wonder if I should even try to watch that a second time, because it was largely a failure to me.
Oh well, we'll always have the brilliance of series one and two thirds of series two to watch again and again...
I loved the first 3 seasons of Sherlock, but I'm kind of with Bill on this latest Sherlock episode. It was convoluted and at times just plain boring. Still, I did find random glimmers of brilliance; I just wish there had been more.
I'm disappointed to hear that, Bill. I haven't seen it yet but I have had mixed feelings about series three and wonder if I should even try to watch that a second time, because it was largely a failure to me.
Oh well, we'll always have the brilliance of series one and two thirds of series two to watch again and again...
I loved how in the last season 3 episode the villain blackmailer, whose livelihood and personal safety depends on having proof, {spoiler ahead} tells Holmes he has no proof, thus forfeiting his business and life. Really really smart move! It also contradicts the over-the-top need for Sherlock to liquidate him - he was fair game for anyone if Sherlock had made the revelation public.
The new year special was very disappointing. Convoluted, confusing and too self-referential, it seemed as though the writer had ducked out of actually penning a story. It's like he's stalemated himself, unable to top Moriarty.
It probably spewed out enough crowd-pleasing stuff to entertain some viewers.
My wife turned to me after it finished and said it was up it's own ass, and she loves the series normally. I had to partly agree. They just could not leave it alone as a nice special set in the original period with a nice well written story. Stephen Moffat (I'm almost sure) just had to link it up with the regular modern set series.
There are some in our Doctor Who fraternity (i'm sure most here know it's the same writers) who think this is the problem with fan-turned-professional writers. Moffat joked around the time of Doctor Who's 50th anniversary that if he could have thought of a good way to do it, he would have written something that would have made the Peter Cushing 'Doctor Who' movies of the 60s somehow canonical with the tv series! At least I thought he was joking. Now I'm not so sure...
