- Starring: Martin Freeman, Benedict Cumberbatch
- Summary: Two years have passed since the end of The Reichenbach Fall and Sherlock returns to London to find not everything is the same in the first episode, which was loosely based on Conan Doyle's The Adventure of the Empty House.
- Genre(s): Drama, Suspense
Please enter your birth date to watch this video:
You are not allowed to view this material at this time.
Autoplay On Off
Positive: 23 out of 23
Mixed: 0 out of 23
Negative: 0 out of 23
The performances are even better than in previous years, with brand new but fully credible sides of Holmes’ and Watson’s characters. And the writing, by Moffat and Gatiss, is in a league by itself.
Sherlock (and Sherlock [the show]) is that good, we do forgive his callousness, and yeah, we'll wait for two years for his return and never let our fervor flag. In exchange, when the miracle happens and he (and the show) come back, he's as good or maybe better than ever.
Mostly, the show deserves to do well because it’s so bloody good--smart, whimsical and occasionally laugh-out-loud funny, finding fresh, distinctive avenues into this venerable character, even with multiple incarnations currently in circulation.
[Sherlock's third season] at last settles into its own assured rhythm, simultaneously honoring the swift escapist roots of Doyle's writing while also mounting a heady meditation on friendship and brotherhood.
Watching these two friends bond anew--and meeting a more empathetic. vulnerable Holmes--makes for warm and witty fun. [17 Jan 2014, p.61]
Sherlock moves swiftly and intelligently but also a little too coldly, like a long commercial for better WiFi..... Cumberbatch’s take on Holmes’s narcissism can come off as skeevishly robotic. If not for Freeman’s deeper, more human work as Watson, the style would soon go sterile.
Jan 16, 2017The bad news: We won't be seeing this fantastic series for another four years (at best?)
The good news: Because 'Sherlock' appears soThe bad news: We won't be seeing this fantastic series for another four years (at best?)
The good news: Because 'Sherlock' appears so seldom, it never gets stale. The fourth season was another triumph of writing and acting skills replete with twists and turns, villains and heroes to remain worthy of its devoted fan base, with just enough pathos (Mary Watson's demise, Molly Hooper's love confession) to keep its human touch.… Expand
Jan 23, 2014Thank for Moffat and Gatiss that make Sherlock be more human which is should be. The cases are not bad but the reunion is great. The storiesThank for Moffat and Gatiss that make Sherlock be more human which is should be. The cases are not bad but the reunion is great. The stories mimic the canon in sophisticated way. I love this season more than the previous two and I repeatedly watch it until now. :)… Expand
Jan 19, 2014After a year and a half hiatus, the greatest British television phenomenon since Doctor Who proves that, going into its third season, it's notAfter a year and a half hiatus, the greatest British television phenomenon since Doctor Who proves that, going into its third season, it's not planning on slowing down or falling for third season slump. BBC's Sherlock, which features electrifying writing, high-end production, and absolutely phenomenal acting, hits the ground running in its first episode, resolving the cliffhanger of the decade from season two while warmly inviting its viewers back into its slick crime-solving, ego-busting milieu.
If there is one thing in this first episode that stands out as particularly laudable, it is Martin Freeman's dazzling portrayal of John Watson. After spending more than a year coping with the traumatic suicide of his closest friend (the feelings run so deep, some will speculate it goes beyond platonic), he reacts to the untimely and jocular return of Sherlock with such passion and credibility that he uncompromisingly validates - no, reifies - no, objectifies the character he has been able to establish with only nine hours of television. If Freeman (and to a lesser extent, Cumberbatch) are not showered with nominations by around this time of the year in 2015, you can be rest assured I will throw a fit.
Glossy visual effects create more elaborated manifestations of Sherlock's enigmatic thought processes (more words are floating in mid-air, more images and memories whoosh by the screen to the sound of beeping technology and murmuring voices), but it's always for the better. Although some may consider the crime the duo solve in the first episode to be a little underdeveloped and convoluted, any returning fan (I included) will proudly proclaim how blown away they were by what is arguably the most impressive season premiere in Sherlock history. Unsurprisingly, the Brits at BBC have done it again.
FINAL SCORE: 97.5 (almost perfect ---------------o----- perfect)… Expand
Feb 12, 2014Phenomenal! Gatiss and Moffat are brilliant. Performances are outstanding and production value are excellent. The actors have lives outsidePhenomenal! Gatiss and Moffat are brilliant. Performances are outstanding and production value are excellent. The actors have lives outside the program, which will not lead to typecasting worries. Plots are packed with intrigue and humor. Love it!… Expand
Jan 24, 2014Overall, the episode is well done. We meet Watson soon to be Fiance Mary Morstan, Sherlocks brother Mycroft (played by Gatiss) and a smallOverall, the episode is well done. We meet Watson soon to be Fiance Mary Morstan, Sherlocks brother Mycroft (played by Gatiss) and a small scene where we meet Sherlock's parents (played by Cumberbatch's real parents, Timothy Carlton and Wanda Ventham). In this episode it seems we have seen all of the plot and action in other movies, all be it from the 2010. Hopefully it gets better… Expand
Jan 29, 2014Oh lord, where to start. When this series had just started, I sat there thinking "Finally, a show without the 'emotional interpersonal drama'Oh lord, where to start. When this series had just started, I sat there thinking "Finally, a show without the 'emotional interpersonal drama' that so plagues just about every single series in every TV show ever." [I'm not talking about basic human interaction, I mean the whole 'you lied to me' I'm sorry' 'I can't believe you anymore, I'm leaving' 'baby come back blah blah' that even Breaking Bad cannot shake] Previous seasons were case-oriented, character building, to the point. And then there's this season...It's so...melodramatic? Disconnected? Soap Opera-y? Overly stylistic? I feel like the Sherlock and John we knew from seasons 1 and 2 are no longer with us, especially Sherlock. He's grown so emotional and, although I suppose this is more personal than anything, no longer relatable. God I am disappointed. Also if the gay fan-service wagon is not in your interests, watch out, the whole season's peppered with it. I don't mind but it made a few of my friends stop watching because of such.… Expand
Aug 19, 2017Atrocious. Among the worst television ever produced.
It can best be explained by discussing the episode that really killed the series. So,Atrocious. Among the worst television ever produced.
It can best be explained by discussing the episode that really killed the series. So, with regard to one episode only, I am about to provide numerous spoilers. So ....
SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT - regarding only the blackmailer episode, which I believe was the final one of the season.
SPOILERS START NOW.
The final episode (inspired somewhat by The Aventure of Charles Augustus Milverton, by Arthur Conan Doyle, and the Jeremy Brett Sherlcok Holmes episode, The Master Blackmailer) took the cake. You see there is a blackmailer who wears computerized eyeglasses - like Google Glass - with a screen that recognizes the faces of everyone the blackmailer looks at and - through a connection to some kind of grand computer database - provides the vitals on each person, the most important vital being their "pressure point" or blackmail-worthy secret. Sherlock's client wishes that Sherlock would get back from this evil fellow compromising letters he has in his possession.
It's a long ridiculous tale, but by the end we learn that Watson's wife secretly is an assassin who has killed several people including for the CIA, and that Watson doesn't even know her real name. In seeking to keep the blackmailer from divulging this information, which he has on a USB drive, she gets the thumb drive back from him at gun point, and when Sherlock bursts in during the middle of all this, Watson's wife turns and deliberately shoots Sherlock in the chest knowing full well that it is Sherlock Holmes.
Sherlock survives and for some reason (because she dialed an ambulance I believe) he forgives her and all is well. But he's still after the blackmailer. Ultimately the blackmailer promises to show Sherlock his grand database and takes him into a room where the blackmailer sits in a chair and says that his mind is the database - that he sits there memorizing all the dirt he learns about people, and that there is no actual computer database at all.
Now this is stupid for two reasons. First, he had google glass-like computer eyeglasses on for the first part of the show and we saw the computerized information coming up on the screen in front of his eyes - so what is he even talking about? Second, if he had no backup to his information, no documentation, none of it could be used to blackmail anyone, but when confronted with this rather obvious fact he says blithely, "I don't deal in information; I deal in news," meaning he can publish it and ruin someone anyway, which is obviously not true or the tabloids would have ruined everyone by now. So that's rubbish. Thirdly, he had letters - he showed them to Sherlock - that Sherlock's original client in this episode wanted back as they contained proof of something that could be used for blackmail. So the whole ending where all the blackmail info is just in the bad guy's head doesn't make any sense and is incosistent with the first portion of the episode.
Finally, as if a blackmailer without proof (except those letters and his computer glasses which I suppose in the latter part of the show we are supposed to forgot existed in the earlier part of the show) and as if Watson's wife being an assassin who intentionally shoots Sherlock in the chest, aren't bad enough, in the end Sherlock shoots and kills the blackmailer in cold blood to rid the world of the information in his head and free everyone from his potential blackmailing. Yes, Sherlock Holmes is a cold blooded murderer. The man had no gun, no weapon, and made no suggestion that he had any weapon. Sherlock just popped him like a Mafioso.
This is the episode that many times over ruined this series for me. It had gotten quite bad but this was not just jumping the shark; it was jumping a dozen sharks and a killer whale. Sherlock is done.… Expand
Published: August 25, 2014Find a list of this year's Emmy winners, see how accurate expert and user predictions turned out to be, and read reviews of the broadcast (including an assessment of Seth Meyers as host).
Published: August 13, 2014The trend of adapting the written word to the small screen has been accelerating in recent years, and especially this summer, when nine such shows will launch. We look back at the best and worst TV adaptations of books from the past 30 years.
Published: May 23, 2012We've reached the end of another TV season, so it's time once again for our annual look at the best and worst shows. Find out which first-year series impressed critics and users the most, and see how the major networks compared.
Published: May 3, 2012Summer will bring some of TV's best shows (including "Breaking Bad" and "Louie," and--possibly--new shows like "The Newsroom"). Inside, we look at the 20 most noteworthy series, specials, and miniseries coming this summer. You'll also find a full calendar of premiere dates from now through August.
Awards & Rankings
- By user score