User Score
8.5

Universal acclaim- based on 506 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 33 out of 506

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jan 22, 2014
    3
    I am compelled to write this as I feel there is nothing worse than a series which starts good, becomes great and falls so far from grace its unreal. For me its classic BBC. Like Luther, the popularity becomes such that it feels its untouchable and it can get away with the quirky and the overdramatic. Sherlock season 3 is a disorganised nose dive from season 2. For me Scandal in Belgravia was one of the finest episodes of any series ever - the series started to show its bbc quirkyness with the introduction of the camp moriarty and the gay innuendo between Watson and Sherlock which is completely out of place and adds nothing to the story. Season 3 was simply forgettable in every sense. The explication of Sherlocks return was handled appallingly. His media stardom and the silly detectives Empty hearse group just seems so far from reality and the show loses all credibility thereafter. Without trying to spoil the 'twist' at the end of ther series - cheap ....is the only way i can describe it. "did you miss me" does anyone care???? Expand
  2. Jan 20, 2014
    0
    I hate this show, I know I'm alone on an island but the term style over substance fits it perfectly. Super close up shots of Sherlock's eyes, camera work to induce travel sickness, texts on screen and at least a dozen slow motion or film in rewind shot, the one thing it lacks is a story. What made Sherlock Holmes so popular was the writing of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the cases were superb with a incredible depiction of Victorian London. This has none of that its a mess and Professor Moriarty is the one of the worst casting decision in the history of television. If people want to watch the Sherlock Holmes try ITVs version staring Jeremy Brett at least a hundred time better than this pile of modern crap. Expand
  3. Jan 20, 2014
    4
    Sherlock in series one and two was a good show, now the excessive and frankly unbearable fan service has ruined it (especially in the first episode). The second episode was stronger due to its unique narrative structure, but still struggled from the same problems. The third episode was terrible and featured a massive cop-out of an ending.

    Also, is anyone going to remember the villain
    from this season? I know I won't. This show has lost its touch. Expand
  4. Feb 1, 2014
    0
    In this season Moffat and the gang have given up the pretense that this is a mystery program and have presented us with unadulterated Conan Doyle themed Yaoi. The plots are tortured there is no mystery individual scenes are clever but lend nothing to the plot. (but how could they there is no plot). I guess we should be grateful there are only 3 episodes per season.
  5. Jan 22, 2014
    0
    This modern garbage storytelling should not be allowed to carry the Sherlock name in any respect. This is weak writing and is a slap in the face to people that really like mysteries. This is the equivalent of a bad star trek movie. The opening scenes in the first episode are laughable. The quality of the production is cheap.
  6. Jan 23, 2014
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I've had it with Sherlock and the pretentious way it presents itself.
    It isn't smart.
    It isn't funny.
    And it's downright insulting to your intelligence.

    Where to start?
    Everything about the first episode is styled to make you want to like a **** who-apparently-informed everyone in his life except the one man he calls friend. And as the rest of the group never bothered to tell the pained and scarred friend. No. That's melodrama meant to distract you from the fact that the creators never had a way out for the end of season 2.
    Then comes the really painful part. Episode 2. That was SO much better written, acted, directed and overall a better production than 1, it was what I expected to see in a Sherlock show. I have nothing but praise for that episode because it's so well done.
    Shame episode 3 came along to F0ck that all up.
    Episode 3 has good points, characters like Magnussen should have been seen far more in this iteration of Holmes than has been shown. Lars Mikkelsen played the perfect counter to Holmes in this, he was as smart as him-if a little creepier than I'd like-and the type of person who can be a mirror to Holmes, something like 'he's the type of person I would be if not for you, John.'
    Shame that the title character is so off base again that I couldn't stand him in a single scene.
    Pretentious...totally and utterly pretentious, this isn't a slight against Cumberbatch, he's a terrific actor, but the role and lines in this episode were utterly crap.
    And the reveal at the end...well I hate to use too much profanity, but Gatiss and Moffat, you can go away and never touch Sherlock again as far as I'm concerned.
    Because that reveal was a load of Donkey Bollocks. And it's just reset the writing to season 1 level now, we'd passed this, it was over with. You'd written yourselves into a position where it would mean the show would end.
    LET IT! Not all shows have happy endings, look at The Soprano's for god sake, just as he'd reunited his family after all the **** as his daughter sees him as she's coming in, BAM!
    But as this is a staple of the British Broadcasting Company now, as it's raking in a load of money, why not wring as much out of it as possible, eh?
    What matter to literary integrity when you can line your pockets?
    I'm done, Sherlock is dead to me now, he died as he hit the pavement in season 2, I'm not buying this boxset just for one good episode.
    I'm done.
    Expand
  7. Feb 8, 2014
    4
    The third season of Sherlock, respectively, provided little quality entertainment. This season, in my opinion, completely threw off the series. In the first two seasons, Sherlock was quite a show, and the writers orchestrated such a unique, witty performance. However, this third season didn't live up to the name. In the first episode of this season, we find out how Sherlock faked his death, which by the way, isn't answered until the end. Even when you find out how he did it, you've got to admit, it's a bit disappointing. All the questions surrounding it were answered with such simplicity, it wasn't even funny. Speaking of which, Sherlock pulled a number of tricks on Dr. Watson (which weren't funny at all) that were, simply put, irritating and repetitive. The humor was that of a child: it's not funny when people get hurt, writers. In the second episode of the season, John is getting married and Sherlock gives a speech, being the best man. That's pretty much the entire episode. This is, by far, the worst episode of the entire series. In Sherlock's speech, he talks about a murder they haven't solved. Okay, in a wedding, have you ever heard a speech about murder? No! The speech should only be about the bride and the groom!!! Worst writing ever. During the speech, there are flashbacks to the murder and finally in present day, they solve it. However, it would've been 100% more logical to simply have the events in order, leading up to the wedding. The murder story was fine, it's just the order and way it was written that ruined the episode for me. And last, but certainly not least, the third and final episode of the season. It starts out with one of the most interesting story lines yet--Sherlock is found doing drugs, Dr. Watson finds out Sherlock has a girlfriend, and an evil mastermind knows all secrets against all kinds of powerful people and using their secrets against them. Wow. This kind of story is why I stuck watching Sherlock, even through their worst episodes. The story picks up and gets Sherlock on a roll, finally focusing on the brilliant detective he is. Everything is superb up until the ending. #1: That was beyond stupidity for Dr. Watson to destroy the USB drive about his wife's real identity and then turn to Sherlock to go to great lengths to get the information he destroyed, from the villain they are facing. #2: The villain is not even worthy to be called a villain because he isn't doing anything wrong. #3: The cliffhanger is not necessary and is really misleading. With all that said, I give this season of Sherlock 4/10 stars. It wasn't horrible, but it was still pretty bad. The third episode saved the series, in my opinion. If some fans even withstood the first two episodes to get to the last episode. Overall, if you want to watch the third season of Sherlock, just skip to the last episode. The first two are pointless. Expand
  8. Apr 9, 2014
    0
    Love it!!! Season 3 is better than the previous seasons. Can't wait for season 4. Sherlock basically spoiled me from other shows that are almost the same type.
  9. Jun 5, 2014
    3
    While I loved a lot of the previous episodes, in season 3 the explanation of Sherlocks death was disappointing, the wedding episode much too streched out and as in the other seasons, everything regarding Moriarty a joke.
  10. Feb 15, 2014
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Disappointing

    Being in love with Sherlock after the first two seasons i was even more frustrated watching the third season. Why? Lots of changes are maid regarding the characterization of sherlock, the characters around him and the main subject, the cases.
    Season 3 tries in general to make Sherlock Holmes more social, more human. This is maid by the people around him who missed him so much, the new „family“ member Mary Watson and various characters with powers of deduction as well. Unfortunatly that does not do any good. While i understand that the creators are somehow interested in pushing Sherlock in that direction it makes him simply more ordinary. Being so untouchable, so unsocialized and so deductive are the reasons for him being such an extraordinary person. But since he is now part of a family, people starting to really like him, some drug addict, some child, some criminal are "deduct ors" as well Sherlock is very weakended in being so unique.
    On the other hand the 3rd season tries to make Sherlock some kind of superagent who is dealing no longer with ordinary crimes but only with matters oft he greatest importance. Of course terrorism and stuff. There is only ONE real case in all the three seasons and that one is the highly unbelieveable „Bloody Guardsman“ (I am stabbing myself in the belly with my belt, then I am going to a wedding, eating, drinking and not feeling that there is a blade in my stomach? Lucky he did not have to pee in between... After so many really great cases in the first two seasons this is almost insulting). The rest is some whatever stuff connected mostly around Mary Watson and the national security.
    But the worst thing came to us at the end of episode three. Sherlock Holmes is now a murderer. Because he wanted to protect Mary Watson (who is „of course“ not only some woman, no, she is ex-secret service, special agent 00X, responsible for killing various people and almost killed Sherlock himself). But killing someone really evil (unfortunatly the script is not able to make the victim really hatred. It tries hard showing us how really, really mean this man is but still he does not deserve to be murdered in cold blood) does more damage to Sherlock than al the humanizing stuff. Sherlock is an „anti-hero“ but he is not an **** as he states himself in the wedding speech. He is a man with principles. He is definitly not a murderer.
    The style itself is still good but you can see the need of the producers to be even more genius. Having Sherlock in his "vault" to survive being shot was great but why also picturing him as a child? This is symptomatic to the desire of the series of being even more extraordinary.
    I am really hoping for the next season to being more devoted to storytelling and interesting cases. Get rind of Mary Watson and a lot of the new and changed faces. Get Sherlock and Watson back into the field solving extra- "ordinary" crimes like in the first two seasons.
    Expand
  11. Sep 8, 2014
    4
    Not sure what happened here - Steven Moffat clearly lost the plot. Unclever, boring and often out of character, this didn't sit well with me at all. Won't bother with the DVD.
  12. Apr 15, 2014
    2
    they really downgraded this show from previous 2 series this time, and lowered the IQ of the show and many audience's as well.

    let's just say that i prefer there's no series 3 at all, and Sherlock show should just end at series 2 for good.

    although there are still some good acting, music and cinematography at some moments in series 3, but the writing, plots or stories just suck and
    are not even believable or logical at time, plus character assassination to Sherlock himself (just counting how many times in the episodes you don't believe the things he said, the way he acted or the cold blood killing itself). do we really believe this is THE Sherlock ACD created? really? no, this series showed only a genius detective no more! Expand
  13. Jun 13, 2014
    3
    We LOVED the first two season of Sherlock, which were based on Sir. Arthur Conan Doyle's works; however, this third season is more into personalities and "emoting" than plot or story structure. The two episodes so far were filled with flashbacks, memories, and opium dreams. I'll have to talk my husband into watching the third episode against his better judgment. This is the "Monarch of the Glen" problem. A hit show tries to attracts additional demographics, becomes soap opera-esque, and ruins a fine series that could have gone on for a decade. Drama is a poor second to believable stories based on human behaviors. Expand
  14. Aug 9, 2014
    0
    Dis they just changed the whole writers team? That would be the only thing that could explain that insane drop in watchability from the first to seasons to the third.
    Seriously. I can't watch this, and especially when compared to the other seasons. It's like a new series. Bad puns are coming in in uncount numbers, absolutely no feeling of any seriousness, total change in characters. I
    moan a good TV series. Expand
Metascore
88

Universal acclaim - based on 23 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 23 out of 23
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 23
  3. Negative: 0 out of 23
  1. Reviewed by: Brian Tallerico
    Feb 20, 2014
    90
    The writing is still incredibly crisp, so smart, and never boring, and the deeper focus on relatable emotion, particularly in the definition of the relationship between Holmes (Benedict Cumberbatch) and Watson (Martin Freeman), could even bring in new fans to this international phenomenon.
  2. Reviewed by: Emily Nussbaum
    Jan 22, 2014
    80
    The show is at its best in such moments, these sequences that capture the semi-virtual, semi-real ways that we think, and feel, and meet, and connect today. It’s a rare attempt to make visible something that we take for granted: a new kind of cognition, inflected by passion, that allows strangers to think out loud, solving mysteries together.
  3. Reviewed by: Alan Sepinwall
    Jan 21, 2014
    75
    When you're smart men writing about the smartest man of all, you may feel the need to demonstrate your smarts in every possible way, with every beat of the story. But Holmes and Watson are such enduring characters, and these versions written and played so well, that they don't always require such elaborate mental gymnastics.