Sherlock - BBC ONE & HD - Sunday 25th

[Jax]

Just watched the finale and while not as good as the pilot it was still very good and dam the cliffhanger you bastards and something rare in UK TV shows. I do wonder what sort of length BBC are looking for season 2 and heres just why they want more because even though ratingd fell the share went up...

Episode One - 8.70 million & 28.5% share (Final Numbers) AI Figure = 87

Episode Two - 7.74 million & 29.9% (Final Numbers) AI Figure = 88

Episode Three - 7.34 million & 31.3% (Overnight Numbers) AI Figure = ??


EDIT - BBC has offically renewed SHERLOCK for a 2nd season I am hearing.

 

[Holdfast]

^ what does AI stand for?

 

[Bob The Skutter]

^ what does AI stand for?

Appreciation index. Basically audience satisfaction.

 

[Rosalind]

Just watched the finale and while not as good as the pilot it was still very good and dam the cliffhanger you bastards and something rare in UK TV shows. I do wonder what sort of length BBC are looking for season 2 and heres just why they want more because even though ratingd fell the share went up...

Episode One - 8.70 million & 28.5% share (Final Numbers) AI Figure = 87

Episode Two - 7.74 million & 29.9% (Final Numbers) AI Figure = 88

Episode Three - 7.34 million & 31.3% (Overnight Numbers) AI Figure = ??


EDIT - BBC has offically renewed SHERLOCK for a 2nd season I am hearing.

I wouldn't say ratings went down. Ep1's overnight was 7.05 million, so the final numbers for episode 3 would probably go right up there in the high 8mil / low 9 mil mark.

 

[Jax]

^ When I made that comment I found the episode 2 numbers were lower than originally posted, I just forgot to edit my line about ratings falling.

BBC must be loving Sherlock's peformance and wanting more ASAP.

 

[Lonemagpie]

Watched the last episode last night. Much better than the first episode, lots of lovely references to the original stories (and the Rathbone movie series!) - but I have to say that as soon as they introduced a character called Jim, I said to the wife "He'll be Moriarty, then" (cos it's James Moriarty) and I was right.

Was a bit bothered at first that the plot seemed to be casting Moriarty as the Joker more than anything else, and not as the "Napoleon of Crime" fixer and big-money man he should be, but they did come back to that in the end, so it worked out OK. And I know the Master was created as the Doctor's Moriarty, but putting Jim in a Harold Saxon suit and haircut (and direction) was just making me go cross-eyed...

(And, though thankfully he wasn't James Nesbitt as I feared, he was Irish, so I bet they just couldn't get Nesbitt, or something. I'll count that as close and dodging a bullet)

There was a bit of a plot hole that could have sparked another line to the case- surely Moriarty would have had to kill the blind woman anyway, as she had heard his voice, so they could have had an element of what did she or someone else in the building have to be eliminated for...

The cliffhanger- well I know how I'd get out of it, and I assume Moffatt and Gatiss don't read this, so... Pre-credit: Sherlock keeps Moriarty talking for a few more seconds, getting Watson near the door - then shoots the bomb. It goes off, blows Watson out to safety. He wakes up to see the emergency services carrying out unidentifiably mangled bits of bodies. Cue Credits, then "Six months later" Watson gets involved in a new case, unaware that a shady character is actually a disguised Sherlock...

 

[lennier1]

Liked the episode up to the point where they cast Moriarty as a guy without any balls whatsoever.
Well, they screwed up the casting on Moffat's old show so it's only fair the new one suffers as well.

 

[Saul]

Great final episode. Moriarty seems to be trying to do a crazy man ala Joker. Don't know if that's gonna work. I don't think you can have the character shouting like that all the time. Well, we shall see. Can't wait for more.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Moriarty was shouting? I don't think he was shouting perse as maybe he's a loud talker. I'll have to rewatch the episode again but I'm pretty sure he wasn't shouting and if he was it was justified as it was an intense scene.

 

[Saul]

He shouted sometimes in a bit of an over the top fashion I felt when angry or pretending to be angry. I don't see the character as manic. Since they did such a good job nailing down Sherlock and John I thought they would do the same with Moriarty.

What accent was he supposed to be doing there? It seemed to go back and forth between several, with about half of it being very clearly American/'mid-Atlantic'. The first big misstep of the series IMO.

He sounds Irish to me. I'&m guess the actor is actually Irish too since it's not a put on accent. However there is a mix of middle Europe, American at times too. A bit all over the place. Reminded me of that guy from "The Powder Puff Girls" cartoon.

 

[Holdfast]

^ what does AI stand for?

Appreciation index. Basically audience satisfaction.

Thanks. You don't happen to know what's a typical rating? I mean, I doubt many shows would actually really get a low rating or people would stop watching and so wouldn't be asked what they thought about it. Selection bias, IOW.

I thought Moriarty's accent was vaguely mid-Atlantic, but I'm awful at accents.

 

[Nerys Myk]

He was a bit of a disappointment. I'm thinking the constant shift in attitude and accent was to mess with Sherlock's head.

 

[Admiral_Young]

A thought occurred to me regarding Jim...I'm curious as to how he and Molly met in the first place and knew of Molly's infatuation with Sherlock? I know look back on that scene with curiosity. He plays himself as being gay but now clearly Morarity was playing up his intense interest of Sherlock and the latter was too distracted by his case (one in which Jim himself instigated) to discover the ruse! I think it a brilliant scene now.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

^ what does AI stand for?

Appreciation index. Basically audience satisfaction.

Thanks. You don't happen to know what's a typical rating? I mean, I doubt many shows would actually really get a low rating or people would stop watching and so wouldn't be asked what they thought about it. Selection bias, IOW..

I believe above 70 is considered good, above 85 is excellent but I'm not sure how they measure it, whether it's done by BARB or the BBC themselves or what.

From Wikipedia

The Audience Appreciation Index (AI) is a score out of 100 which is used as an indicator of the public's appreciation for a television or radio programme, or broadcast service, in the United Kingdom. Until 2002, the AI of a programme was calculated by BARB, the organisation that compiles television ratings for the major broadcasters and advertisers in the UK. Currently the AI is produced as part of an online Television Appreciation Survey, on behalf of the BBC Audience Research Unit,[1] by GfK NOP.[2][3]

...

On average, BBC TV programmes (as of 2009) receive an AI rating of 80. For radio this is 79.[6] The average AI for a drama programme on UK television channels BBC One and ITV1 is reported to be 84.[5] Programmes with specialist appeal will often score higher ratings. Internal guidance to BBC production staff is that an AI of 85 or over is to be considered excellent,[7] over 90 is exceptional, 60 or less is poor, and less than 55 is very poor. Sometimes a programme will not garner an AI, as the response for that programme may have been too small.[6] Nor is the AI a conclusive measure; while it is valuable for comparisons within a particular programme category, comparisons between the AIs of different programme types (e.g. dramas with quiz shows) carry no weight.
AI scores in the 90s are not common, though this is less the case for US imports on smaller channels (such as Sky1), or for specialist programmes, or some very popular dramas.[4][5] The highest recorded score up until the end of 2009 has been 97 for a US import on Sky1. Scores lower than 30 are very rare, though some party political broadcasts have received AI scores in the 20s. One criticism of the more general value of AI scores is that audiences tend to watch those shows they like, or expect to like, and so will tend to score them well.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appreciation_Index#cite_note-guardian-4

 

[Starkers]

Well that was just brilliant, kudos to Gatiss that might be the best thing of his I've ever seen. Lost its way towards the end, with the tense puzzles giving way to what was really going on, and Moriarty is a little odd (assuming that is actually Moriarty?) and what kind of evil genius keeps his identity a secret yet names his website after himself?

Minor quibbles though, aside from the second episode this show's been bloody fantastic! Cannot wait for it to return!

 

[Admiral_Young]

Yeah that is Moriarty, an obvious different take on the character with his mannerisms which I don't mind. The BBC has confirmed that the series will continue with three more specials. Hopefully they'll get them filmed and aired by Christmas next year but who knows.

 

[Starkers]

Well I just wondered, if he'd already used surrogates to talk to Holmes, who's to say that Jim isn't one of them? Albeit one in on the joke.

I was sort of hoping that Moriarty would be an organisation rather than an individual, so that Sherlock could defeat a stream of Moriartys

 

[captcalhoun]

^i had similar thoughts.

 

[RJDiogenes]

If Sherlock Holmes exists as a real person in the 21st Century, that means that Arthur Conan Doyle (or Watson) never wrote those stories, meaning that all the writers, detectives, scientists et cetera who were inspired in our world had completely different lives and careers in that world; not to mention all the producers, directors, actors et cetera involved in theatrical adaptations, pastiches, parodies and so on. I wonder how significant the changes would really be to a world without a literary Holmes.

For one thing, nobody in that world has ever said, "No shit, Sherlock" (except maybe to him).

 

[Nerys Myk]

Sounds interesting. But thats not this show.