Elementary 2.09 & 2.10
Dec. 7th, 2013 06:12 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
selenakIn which a theme is once treated clumsily and once very well indeed.
By which I mean Holmes and his ways of interaction with the NYPD. The problem I had with 2.09 was that while Watson makes good points about social interactions, everyday courtesy and respect towards people not her, Gregson or Bell, the episode itself doesn't back her up because the cop who takes exception to Holmes' behavour is a singularly unprofessional guy, complete with leaking Holmes' and Watson's address to a suspect because he's that irritated. You could see the episode wanted you to think Holmes' final speech about his unwillingness to change his approach to cases was questionable, if not misguided, but the problem was that the case itself because the cop was such a complete ass didn't leave any room for that. (Not to mention that we did see Holmes treat other people with consideration before, though they're usually the victims, not cops.)
Episode 2.10, by contrast, was far better constructed, and the flashback structure was the least of it. This was a genuinely good character episode, jiving with all established before, down to the detail of Holmes insisting on the importance of the mentally ill man being cleared from the crime he was framed for (if we recall, the very first case on the show (or was it the second?) was about a mentally ill person being manipulated by a doctor abusing his knowledge of said person, and Holmes was then and was consistently through other cases on the show particularly incensed about this type of abuse. At the same time, he's also clinging to this success because of the guilt he feels regarding Bell.
And here's where the far better writing as compared to the previous episode comes in. In both cases we see Holmes behaving high handedly in typical fashion, blithely assuming rules are not for him because of the result he brings. But in 2.10 it's Bell who gets hurt because of that, and he does so by being a good cop, instinctively shielding Holmes with his body when one of the suspects who through Holmes' behaviour has lost his job and civilian existence tries to shoot him. Now I wasn't seriously worried the show would kill off Bell (it's too good for that), but I do approve that they show consequences to the shooting instead of just letting him survive; he may have suffered permanent nerve damage in one hand and even if not faces a painful recovery period. Moreover, when Holmes after avoiding visiting him for four days because of feeling guilty finally shows up and explains himself, he's not, as on a lesser show he would be, immediately forgiven because That's Just How Holmes Rolls. Instead, Bell (making a distinction between the department's need for Holmes as a consultant, which is why he told the Comissioner to keep him, and his own relationship with Holmes which the start of the episode had become so friendly Holmes had offered fencing lessons) not only rejects Holmes' offer to pay for Swiss specialists (with Dad's money, one presumes) but also makes it clear he doesn't want more visits from him. Would this have happened if Holmes had shown up from the start, as Watson had urged him to? Maybe, maybe not. But to me, this, too, falls into the "consequences from Holmes' behaviour" category which as mentioned this episode does far better than the previous one.
The acting was top notch throughout, and I also appreciated that the prosecutor (err, whatever her actual title was) wasn't vilified (all too often, one episode characters charged with inevestigating the heroes of a show are made into villains or shown as too dumb to understand the important work - not so here!), and that Holmes' moment of bonding with her over being recovering addicts got the pay off it did at the end of the case.
An excellent episode, and I await further developments!
By which I mean Holmes and his ways of interaction with the NYPD. The problem I had with 2.09 was that while Watson makes good points about social interactions, everyday courtesy and respect towards people not her, Gregson or Bell, the episode itself doesn't back her up because the cop who takes exception to Holmes' behavour is a singularly unprofessional guy, complete with leaking Holmes' and Watson's address to a suspect because he's that irritated. You could see the episode wanted you to think Holmes' final speech about his unwillingness to change his approach to cases was questionable, if not misguided, but the problem was that the case itself because the cop was such a complete ass didn't leave any room for that. (Not to mention that we did see Holmes treat other people with consideration before, though they're usually the victims, not cops.)
Episode 2.10, by contrast, was far better constructed, and the flashback structure was the least of it. This was a genuinely good character episode, jiving with all established before, down to the detail of Holmes insisting on the importance of the mentally ill man being cleared from the crime he was framed for (if we recall, the very first case on the show (or was it the second?) was about a mentally ill person being manipulated by a doctor abusing his knowledge of said person, and Holmes was then and was consistently through other cases on the show particularly incensed about this type of abuse. At the same time, he's also clinging to this success because of the guilt he feels regarding Bell.
And here's where the far better writing as compared to the previous episode comes in. In both cases we see Holmes behaving high handedly in typical fashion, blithely assuming rules are not for him because of the result he brings. But in 2.10 it's Bell who gets hurt because of that, and he does so by being a good cop, instinctively shielding Holmes with his body when one of the suspects who through Holmes' behaviour has lost his job and civilian existence tries to shoot him. Now I wasn't seriously worried the show would kill off Bell (it's too good for that), but I do approve that they show consequences to the shooting instead of just letting him survive; he may have suffered permanent nerve damage in one hand and even if not faces a painful recovery period. Moreover, when Holmes after avoiding visiting him for four days because of feeling guilty finally shows up and explains himself, he's not, as on a lesser show he would be, immediately forgiven because That's Just How Holmes Rolls. Instead, Bell (making a distinction between the department's need for Holmes as a consultant, which is why he told the Comissioner to keep him, and his own relationship with Holmes which the start of the episode had become so friendly Holmes had offered fencing lessons) not only rejects Holmes' offer to pay for Swiss specialists (with Dad's money, one presumes) but also makes it clear he doesn't want more visits from him. Would this have happened if Holmes had shown up from the start, as Watson had urged him to? Maybe, maybe not. But to me, this, too, falls into the "consequences from Holmes' behaviour" category which as mentioned this episode does far better than the previous one.
The acting was top notch throughout, and I also appreciated that the prosecutor (err, whatever her actual title was) wasn't vilified (all too often, one episode characters charged with inevestigating the heroes of a show are made into villains or shown as too dumb to understand the important work - not so here!), and that Holmes' moment of bonding with her over being recovering addicts got the pay off it did at the end of the case.
An excellent episode, and I await further developments!
no subject
Date: 2013-12-07 06:06 pm (UTC)The prosecutor's characterization impressed me most, along with Bell's: Most shows would have made her the Harpy in this little charade, but Elementary gives her humanity, motivation outside of the "court"room. She has good reason for her recommendation, after all: Der Zweck heiligt nicht alle Mittel!
And Bell, I am loving his storyline. Yes, he's a Black guy who has taken the heat for a White Person, but it's an actual storyline, *his* actual storyline wherein he has agency throughout. He's been shown to be a calm, focused policeman, who makes his decisions based on reason -- the recommendation to keep Holmes makes sense from his perspective of getting the job done, i.e. solve cases even where the methods aren't ideal. But he has feelings, too, and Holmes being an ass without sense lead to his injury, perhaps permanent disability.
For personal reasons, I would like Bell to not regain control of his right hand, and see the show navigate this without focusing on Holmes's guilt but with attention to Marcus Bell in this.
I understand this is unlikely; 'tis a Sherlock Holmes adaptation, so I would just be happy with Bell recovering but in the future having and retaining a different, more fraught relationship with Holmes.
no subject
Date: 2013-12-07 06:28 pm (UTC)re: Bell, yes. The show allowing him to have feelings and not letting that final scene between them about Bell absolving Holmes or making Holmes feel better, but about Bell's reaction to what happened to him, and his own decision of how to proceed, was great.
no subject
Date: 2013-12-08 12:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-12-08 06:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2021-03-11 11:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2021-03-11 11:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2021-03-13 07:45 am (UTC)Anyway, it's been a few years since I watched these, but from what I remember the Marcus Bell storyline proceeded well. (And of course Marcus, unlike Mary, did not die.)