The Abominable Bride
3 Jan 2016 01:25 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wren_kt7ozJust wanted to quickly post something about The Abominable Bride.
No spoilers - just two things.
One is that a lot of critics have been carping (not to say whingeing) about the stuff towards the end. Won't go into details, but wanted to say that the stuff that some people feel "spoiled" the episode was exactly the stuff that I found most exciting and which I most liked (okay, loved) about it.
So don't be put off by people who just wanted a cozy Victorian mystery as the Christmas special, because it's not like that at all and that's exactly what's truly great about it.
The second thing is that there seems to be some controversy about the feminist issues and how they're dealt with.
Unless you already know about the battles that the Suffragettes went through in the UK then I suggest you either read up about them first, or at least go to see the current Suffragette movie. Knowing what some of those women went through (and how they were treated, which in some cases was simply horrific) might make a difference to how you see the debate this aspect of the episode has triggered.
It might not. But some of the stuff I've read today is just hysterical mis-informed rubbish and you'd think Moffatt and Gatiss were the biggest mysoginists on the planet, when I actually think they're trying to make several really valid points.
One of which is that women simply do tend to have a more emotional response to situations than men and that's okay! - It's a perfectly valid way to process the world. So at the one extreme you have The Bride and at the other extreme you have Sherlock and the point is that neither extreme represents the most desirable basis for dealing with life.
Anyway, just wanted to say - because I've read a lot of tosh in the last day or so about this episode.
Which, by the way, I thought was simply brilliant and can hardly wait to see it again, so I've already ordered the dvd.
.
No spoilers - just two things.
One is that a lot of critics have been carping (not to say whingeing) about the stuff towards the end. Won't go into details, but wanted to say that the stuff that some people feel "spoiled" the episode was exactly the stuff that I found most exciting and which I most liked (okay, loved) about it.
So don't be put off by people who just wanted a cozy Victorian mystery as the Christmas special, because it's not like that at all and that's exactly what's truly great about it.
The second thing is that there seems to be some controversy about the feminist issues and how they're dealt with.
Unless you already know about the battles that the Suffragettes went through in the UK then I suggest you either read up about them first, or at least go to see the current Suffragette movie. Knowing what some of those women went through (and how they were treated, which in some cases was simply horrific) might make a difference to how you see the debate this aspect of the episode has triggered.
It might not. But some of the stuff I've read today is just hysterical mis-informed rubbish and you'd think Moffatt and Gatiss were the biggest mysoginists on the planet, when I actually think they're trying to make several really valid points.
One of which is that women simply do tend to have a more emotional response to situations than men and that's okay! - It's a perfectly valid way to process the world. So at the one extreme you have The Bride and at the other extreme you have Sherlock and the point is that neither extreme represents the most desirable basis for dealing with life.
Anyway, just wanted to say - because I've read a lot of tosh in the last day or so about this episode.
Which, by the way, I thought was simply brilliant and can hardly wait to see it again, so I've already ordered the dvd.
.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 3/1/16 08:40 am (UTC)And I was surprised to see someone there whose appearance hadn't
been spoiled (at least to me and to Dave, too).
It was totally a piece of fan fiction -- I felt like they were really doing a
"QT" kind of thing where all the characters from one Stream keep
showing up in another Stream. Hey, I like that! And, of course, all
of "Sherlock" is fanfic anyway, so…
no subject
Date: 3/1/16 12:12 pm (UTC)Exactly. I liked it too. *g*
And as you say, all of Sherlock is fanfic.
Did you see the "extras"? with the stuff about the making of the episode. There was something incredibly endearing about Stephen Moffatt talking about the Persian slipper, and the bullet holes in the wall that were mentioned in one Conan Doyle story and the stained glass in the doorway which referred to various stories - it kind of reminded me of when a bunch of QAF fans get together.
Plus, I'm a Holmes nut anyway - quite apart from this series, so I love that stuff.
no subject
Date: 4/1/16 02:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 3/1/16 04:18 pm (UTC)*iz annoyed*
no subject
Date: 3/1/16 08:39 pm (UTC)Between the ones who were whingeing that it got too complicated and why couldn't they have just stuck with the Victorian mystery, and the ones carping about either how they were giving the women's movement a bad name, or (which was even sillier) how they were saying it was okay for the women to have murdered the two men, it was just ....
Oh, frustrating and stupid and ...
And every time someone halfway sane tried to point out that it was really about how Sherlock was processing the "miss me?" message, the response they got was along the lines of "we know that and we don't care".
Honestly!
This is why our TV stations show the mediocre crap they do, because anything that requires any degree of concentration and focus and actual attention is considered "too complicated".
Did you see the specials? The one with Stephen Moffatt wandering around the 221B set behaving like a total fan boy (of Conan Doyle's, I mean) and pointing out the Persian slipper and dagger through the correspondence and all that stuff? And the other one with the little interview snips with all the main actors?
no subject
Date: 3/1/16 08:48 pm (UTC)It was so great to watch, too!
And I agree. I mean - seriously? Too complicated??? I'd rather have it complicated so my mind gets something to do than being bored to death. Ha - I am with Sherlock on that!
I think the Moriarty plot-line was fascinating and had a lot of twists and turns I wouldn'T have expected. That is definitely an episode to be watched multiple times.
As for the women's movement ... Some people just have no humour at all!
no subject
Date: 3/1/16 09:03 pm (UTC)Oh, me too!
And any excuse to get more of Andrew Scott as Moriarty because I think he's simply brilliant. Compelling, even appealing, one minute and totally psycho terrifying the next.
I loved everything about it - especially the scene at the Falls. That scene alone was so clever and had so much going on, on a whole lot of different levels.
Well, really, there was nothing about it that I didn't love. Although Mycroft eating himself to death was kind of ... gross, really.
no subject
Date: 5/1/16 01:01 am (UTC)There isn't one actor that has been miscast in this series. And I have to say Andrew Scott is freaking scary at times! I have actually shivered watching him as Moriarty. I hate to admit it but I have caught myself practically yelling at the screen for someone to shoot him because he's freaking me out!
And the whole Suffragette storyline made complete sense to me. I found it very believable and would not be surprised to discover similar events did occur in history.
Since I can't wait for the next episode, I may just re-watch the entire series!
no subject
Date: 5/1/16 07:40 am (UTC)Went to see Stephen Moffatt and Mark Gatiss talking about the show and they were saying that with Moriarty - for Conan Doyle, the notion of a Crime Lord was a brand new concept that would have been really scary for Victorians; but of course that's now such a tired cliche that it's more laughable than scary. So what they decided to go with was someone who was a total psychopath with no compunction, remorse, nothing that would work as an off switch. But at the same time, someone who could almost pass as normal, even charming, when he wasn't being absolutely psycho.
And Andrew Scott pulls that off beautifully.
Have you seen Pride? He's wonderful in that as well, in such a completely different part.
no subject
Date: 5/1/16 06:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 5/1/16 10:00 pm (UTC)I guess, for me, it was like two threads of my life coming together - my "pflag" persona and my past as a Union rep. (I was the only woman ever elected to the National Executive of my union.)
So it hits so many touch points for me.
But even without that it's just wonderful. It's a real ensemble cast effort. The younger cast members are mainly unknowns, but aside from Andrew, it's got Bill Nighy and Dominic West and Imogen Staunton. Even Russell Tovey pops up at one point. (He's in pretty much everything worth seeing at one point or another in the last few years - from Torchwood to Pride and everything in between.)
I always wind up with tears - of happiness, even delight - running down my face at the end.