Elementary 3.04
Nov. 21st, 2014 06:26 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
selenakUm, unexpected two parter is unexpected?
Thank you, Joan, for pointing that out. Since I didn't think Della will be revealed to be Skynet (or John Henry, for that matter), I'm glad they came up with alternate murder suspects pretty quickly. But then it seems the reason why this is a two parter is that it's not really about solving crime but ethical boundaries; our villain of the week (or two weeks?) called Holmes' bluff by analysing him as well and declaring with his backstory, Holmes would not be capable of putting another drug addict (who is not guilty of murder, just related to a murderer) into prison. Now I had expected Holmes to carry a recording device on him and use that conversation as a confession, but apparantly not. (Also the killer had kept it in hypotheticals - "if.."/"then...")
Also Joan has to figure out whether or not to believe Sherlock re: his not being responsible for her boyfriend getting an overseas job. His defense was pretty convincing, and I should hope he's not pulling a House on Joan, but then again: it's still possible he could be lying. In any case, that was a great scene between them, with no more pretensions re: just how much she means to him and her acknowledging the stark honesty of it with accepting the explanation given. (Which is why I hope it WAS honest in every regard.) Meanwhile the earlier Joan and Sherlock argument at the police station was hilarious and I loved Kitty's eyeroll and determined staying out of the argument when Joan tried to pull her in. Wise decision, Kitty.
Lastly: Sherlock and Della the computer prove Johnny Lee Miller can act sublimely with immobile objects, too. :)
Thank you, Joan, for pointing that out. Since I didn't think Della will be revealed to be Skynet (or John Henry, for that matter), I'm glad they came up with alternate murder suspects pretty quickly. But then it seems the reason why this is a two parter is that it's not really about solving crime but ethical boundaries; our villain of the week (or two weeks?) called Holmes' bluff by analysing him as well and declaring with his backstory, Holmes would not be capable of putting another drug addict (who is not guilty of murder, just related to a murderer) into prison. Now I had expected Holmes to carry a recording device on him and use that conversation as a confession, but apparantly not. (Also the killer had kept it in hypotheticals - "if.."/"then...")
Also Joan has to figure out whether or not to believe Sherlock re: his not being responsible for her boyfriend getting an overseas job. His defense was pretty convincing, and I should hope he's not pulling a House on Joan, but then again: it's still possible he could be lying. In any case, that was a great scene between them, with no more pretensions re: just how much she means to him and her acknowledging the stark honesty of it with accepting the explanation given. (Which is why I hope it WAS honest in every regard.) Meanwhile the earlier Joan and Sherlock argument at the police station was hilarious and I loved Kitty's eyeroll and determined staying out of the argument when Joan tried to pull her in. Wise decision, Kitty.
Lastly: Sherlock and Della the computer prove Johnny Lee Miller can act sublimely with immobile objects, too. :)
no subject
Date: 2014-11-23 06:36 am (UTC)Cannot tell if meant to be two-parter or if just sort of an inconclusive ending? But I do want it to have a second part. Because awesome.