ELEMENTARY - News, Reviews, and Discussion

[Allyn Gibson]

I had two problems with the councilman.

First, I didn't catch what the motive was for his first murder.

And second, if he hadn't leaned on a guy to make an anonymous tip about Holmes, he would have gotten away with it. I realize that was probably a panic move on his part and he expected no downside, but getting Holmes locked up wound up digging up the physical evidence that connected him to the crime.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

I thought it was fantastic. I get the criticism, and I agree with it, but it didn't make the story worse for me. It could have worked with a better, more complex mystery, but I simply didn't care about the mystery. I think I stopped caring about mysterious on this show after the series' crown jewel – the euro/denar mishmash.

Holmes' realization he might be a killer though? Wonderful.

 

[Christopher]

And second, if he hadn't leaned on a guy to make an anonymous tip about Holmes, he would have gotten away with it. I realize that was probably a panic move on his part and he expected no downside, but getting Holmes locked up wound up digging up the physical evidence that connected him to the crime.

But isn't that kind of a classic mystery/villainy trope, though, the bad guy's own fatal mistake or hubris bringing about their downfall?

 

[Gov Kodos]

And second, if he hadn't leaned on a guy to make an anonymous tip about Holmes, he would have gotten away with it. I realize that was probably a panic move on his part and he expected no downside, but getting Holmes locked up wound up digging up the physical evidence that connected him to the crime.

But isn't that kind of a classic mystery/villainy trope, though, the bad guy's own fatal mistake or hubris bringing about their downfall?

I wouldn't mind if they did some episodes more like 'Columbo' in style letting the killer be known from the start and focus on Holmes's methods of proving who the killer was.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

Huh. I was just thinking how it was weird (but cool) seeing Leonard Nimoy as a villain in Fringe, yet how it was fitting to see him as a villain in Columbo.

That would be nice. Knowing the villain from its start has its charms, and can increase the tension. Not in this episode, though. The mystery didn't matter, but we had to pretend Sherlock could be the killer, and that we honestly didn't know.

 

[Christopher]

Honestly, the setup didn't really work for me here. How did everyone jump so quickly from "She had a note signed by him on her body" to "He's the only suspect in her murder?" Sure, the note should've led the cops to Sherlock as a possible witness or source of information, but by itself, it shouldn't give them reason to suspect him of murder, not when they know he's a police consultant. There should've been something more incriminating than just the note in order to justify Holmes being the prime suspect rather than just a person of interest. That was bugging me for most of the episode.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

I get where you're coming from, Christopher, and I agree with that in large part. I think Holmes made himself a suspect by his attitude toward the detectives from the other precinct and his insistence that he had no idea who the woman was. If Holmes had said he knew her and had an explanation for how he knew her, they wouldn't have had a reason to consider him a suspect. But his insistence that he didn't know her meant that at that point, as far as they were concerned, they had a blatant liar across the table from them, and based on his reputation they knew he was unlikely to crack. So they had no reason not to treat him as a hostile suspect.

The thing that bugged me about the note is that I'm not sure a paper napkin would have held up like that for three years. Was it hermetically sealed or something? I kept expecting the "Holmes is being framed with planted evidence" shoe to drop throughout the episode.

 

[Christopher]

I get where you're coming from, Christopher, and I agree with that in large part. I think Holmes made himself a suspect by his attitude toward the detectives from the other precinct and his insistence that he had no idea who the woman was. If Holmes had said he knew her and had an explanation for how he knew her, they wouldn't have had a reason to consider him a suspect. But his insistence that he didn't know her meant that at that point, as far as they were concerned, they had a blatant liar across the table from them, and based on his reputation they knew he was unlikely to crack. So they had no reason not to treat him as a hostile suspect.

I dunno, it looked to me like they already considered him to be a suspect. I got the impression that Gregson already knew that when he called Holmes in.

The thing that bugged me about the note is that I'm not sure a paper napkin would have held up like that for three years. Was it hermetically sealed or something? I kept expecting the "Holmes is being framed with planted evidence" shoe to drop throughout the episode.

The murder victim was buried until recently, they said. Maybe she was wrapped in plastic?

 

[Christopher]

I broke up when they showed the photo of the "murder suspect" in the climactic scene this week. I'm still laughing. I'd noticed the movie poster on the guy's wall, but I didn't make the connection to the man in the sketch.

I was so busy breaking up, in fact, that I missed the explanation of who had actually strangled the movie buff. He killed the first guy, but who killed him?

 

[Allyn Gibson]

I was so busy breaking up, in fact, that I missed the explanation of who had actually strangled the movie buff. He killed the first guy, but who killed him?

One of the two guys at Cryo NYC. They killed him because they were afraid he could turn on them, since they were all in the murder of Jim Sullivan together.

 

[Christopher]

Yeah, I figured that had to be it, but I was too busy laughing at Torgo to notice.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

So, not much going on around here.

Just watched this week's episode, and I noticed the producers snuck in a little "cameo" from another British icon.

Spoiler: Picture

Appears to be an edition of John Gardner's "Licence Renewed".

 

[CorporalClegg]

Next week, Joan should read The Hobbit.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

I enjoyed last night's episode immensely.

The mystery plot was thoroughly twisty, and I didn't suss to the fact that the dentist was Fisher Stevens. If I had, I'd have suspected him immediately. I remember him as he was in Short Circuit, and he doesn't look anything like that any more.

The Sherlock/Alfredo plot was enjoyable. I like their relationship, and I like that it's now moved to true friendship. (And Alfredo asking Sherlock's permission to ask out Joan was cute.)

On Twitter last night, the Elementary writer mocked John Philip Sousa. Not a fan, it seems. I personally love Sousa. "The Washington Post" is my favorite work of his. And how can you not like someone who wrote a march to celebrate the transit of Venus?

I've also visited Sousa's grave in DC. My great-great-aunt is buried about twenty feet away from Sousa in Congressional Cemetery.

 

[Christopher]

I enjoyed last night's episode immensely.

The mystery plot was thoroughly twisty, and I didn't suss to the fact that the dentist was Fisher Stevens. If I had, I'd have suspected him immediately. I remember him as he was in Short Circuit, and he doesn't look anything like that any more.

Unfortunately, I spotted Stevens's name in the Act I credits, so I was watching out for him. I didn't recognize him at first either, but then I recognized the voice and jawline. So it was obvious from then on that the dentist would turn out to be the bad guy.

Still, one interesting thing this show has been doing lately is to have the characters figure out whodunnit in the penultimate act and then spend the rest of the episode trying to prove it or trap them into confessing. So it starts out as a conventional whodunnit, but ends up as a Columbo-style "How to catch them" story.


I also recognized Michael McGlone, who played "Lloyd," the private detective. I'm used to him looking more clean-cut, though. He was the square-jawed presenter in the Geico "rhetorical questions" ad campaign from a couple of years ago, and he had a recurring role on Person of Interest as Detective Szymanski.

The Sherlock/Alfredo plot was enjoyable. I like their relationship, and I like that it's now moved to true friendship. (And Alfredo asking Sherlock's permission to ask out Joan was cute.)

It's a sign of how much Sherlock has grown that he's open to acknowledging actual friendship with someone other than Joan -- and particularly that he was the one who initiated the declaration of friendship. You'd never see Moffat/Gatiss Sherlock acting like this. As soon as he and Alfredo had that "I'm your sponsor, not your friend, so butt out" talk, I predicted that Sherlock would place friendship first and "fire" Alfredo as his sponsor, but I had a hard time believing my prediction, because it is surprisingly gregarious for Sherlock.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

The Sherlock/Alfredo plot was enjoyable. I like their relationship, and I like that it's now moved to true friendship. (And Alfredo asking Sherlock's permission to ask out Joan was cute.)

It's a sign of how much Sherlock has grown that he's open to acknowledging actual friendship with someone other than Joan -- and particularly that he was the one who initiated the declaration of friendship.

Completely agreed. Sherlock may have bottomed out after Mycroft faked his death, but that experience also made him reevaluate what's important in his life. Kitty is the prime example.

You'd never see Moffat/Gatiss Sherlock acting like this.

He's a much more emotionally closed off person. I'm not convinced that he's friends with Mycroft or John. Friendly maybe, but there's a difference between being friendly and being friends.

As soon as he and Alfredo had that "I'm your sponsor, not your friend, so butt out" talk, I predicted that Sherlock would place friendship first and "fire" Alfredo as his sponsor, but I had a hard time believing my prediction, because it is surprisingly gregarious for Sherlock.

Was it, though? You can make the argument that it was a very utilitarian move on Sherlock's part; he needs Alfredo in his life, he needs Alfredo in his life in a specific way, Alfredo's terms ("I'm your sponsor, not your friend") inhibit Sherlock's ability to have Alfredo in his life in the way he needs him, so he makes a coldly rational move to redefine the nature of their relationship to eliminate those terms.

 

[Christopher]

You'd never see Moffat/Gatiss Sherlock acting like this.

He's a much more emotionally closed off person. I'm not convinced that he's friends with Mycroft or John. Friendly maybe, but there's a difference between being friendly and being friends.

I dunno, I think that there is a real bond between Sherlock and John in that show, inasmuch as Sherlock is capable of it. There's a connection there that makes them choose to be involved in each others' lives even when it's against their normal inclinations or sometimes their better judgment. And the show is at its best when it emphasizes that, like Sherlock's speech at John's wedding. But then it goes and plays up the "Sherlock's an edgy sociopath, ooh, isn't that dramatic and surprising?" angle and makes Holmes a caricature of himself, and that works against it.

As soon as he and Alfredo had that "I'm your sponsor, not your friend, so butt out" talk, I predicted that Sherlock would place friendship first and "fire" Alfredo as his sponsor, but I had a hard time believing my prediction, because it is surprisingly gregarious for Sherlock.

Was it, though? You can make the argument that it was a very utilitarian move on Sherlock's part; he needs Alfredo in his life, he needs Alfredo in his life in a specific way, Alfredo's terms ("I'm your sponsor, not your friend") inhibit Sherlock's ability to have Alfredo in his life in the way he needs him, so he makes a coldly rational move to redefine the nature of their relationship to eliminate those terms.

I don't see where you're coming from here. If Sherlock only needed Alfredo to serve a functional role in his life, wouldn't that be as his sponsor?

Unless you're saying that he feared Alfredo would get busted for the car breakins and arranged to get him off the hook to ensure he'd still be part of Sherlock's life, and used the friendship thing as his justification. I'm not sure I'd agree, though. As you said, I think Sherlock has reassessed what's important, and his partnerships with Joan and Kitty have demonstrated the value of having personal ties. So yes, he reasons that he needs Alfredo to play a certain role, but I think that is the role of a friend.

I think the telling thing is that, when Sherlock protested the idea of them not being friends, his way of defining that was, "If we're not friends, how can I tell you when I think you're making a mistake?" Not a lot of sentimentality there, and not the sort of thing you'd say if you were just trying to trick someone into thinking of you as a friend. That's an expression of genuine caring through meddlesomeness.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

The mystery plot was thoroughly twisty, and I didn't suss to the fact that the dentist was Fisher Stevens. If I had, I'd have suspected him immediately. I remember him as he was in Short Circuit, and he doesn't look anything like that any more.

That's strange to me. I haven't seen Fisher Stevens in anything, other than some members of my extended family watching Early Edition on TV, I don't think I even knew his name until now. And I immediately knew who he was. But since I am stupid, I never suspected him of anything (other than hiding something which we were told he was – I am a literal dude).

Then I guess I haven't seen him in anything dating back to the 1980s, so...

The set up at the end was beautiful, and I thoroughly enjoyed Stevens' role in this, and his attorney too. I know that this is a cliché scene in shows like this, because I have seen it way more than once, but I felt like I was watching something for the first time for some reason. Maybe because Stevens' character was convincingly oblivious of how it will play out and his obliviousness was contagious. (I felt a déjà vu too though – didn't we get an identical scene in Elementary some time back?)

It's always good to see how plea bargains often work. Although I'd rather have them depict one where our guys make a mistake and offer one to an innocent.

 

[Aldo]

Fisher Stevens will always be Iggy from Super Mario Bros. to me

 

[CorporalClegg]

And Mr. The Plague.

(Since it's JLM and all.)