Sherlock as a show has always been struggling to compensate for Sherlock's own intellect - Moffat and Gatiss may as well admit that they have from the beginning written themselves into a corner with a character this intelligent. The villains therefore have to be even smarter, a class above, or else have something to leverage their position: information for blackmail, or a gun, which always seems to work. This led me to be hesitant when they finally revealed Eurus last week, the long lost Holmes sister. We've already heard so much about how Mycroft is a great deal cleverer than Sherlock, only lazier, and now we are being told that Eurus is some sort of generational genius and able to manipulate minds like puppets on a string. What's in store for them next season, Einstein's long lost immortal twin sister? The episode goes to great lengths to establish her as the finale threat that she is, including a high-tech 'patience bomb' delivered via drone which, when you think back on it, doesn't have a whole lot of motive behind it. Neither did the ending of the last episode which marked the second time that one of our leads has been shot at in a cliffhanger only to miraculously survive - it's getting a little old.
But surprisingly the story then begins to dial itself back, recognising that they can't keep throwing super genius after super genius at Sherlock if they want the series to last. Instead we see him given a puzzle to unravel his past, and at the end of that path isn't a psychotic supervillain, but a sister who has been alone and neglected from a young age and retaliates in the only twisted way she knows how. There's an even better twist with the reveal that she is the lonely girl on the plane; the episode tricks us and Sherlock into thinking there's innocent lives at stake, and a greater good to be achieved, but withdraws into a more personal exploration of their relationships. John, having been a doctor all his life, can't bring himself to kill an innocent civilian even if it is to save another; he is as pure and rigid a moral compass the show can get. And then there is something heartbreaking about Mycroft resorting to his cruel rationalisation in order to subtly goad his brother into sacrificing his life; Gatiss makes this great because his reasoning is quite sound, and we almost agree with him. It's very clever to frame the plot with the overarching stake of a crashing plane, because having that heavy cloud above their heads brings out all their doubts, insecurities and reveals to us how truly good they are (they have already been proved to be great).
Yes, the whole season has been about catch-up, and that sullies this episode slightly. The first two were so preoccupied with Mary the wife and loving mother, but kept dipping back into the past and trying to convince us to pay attention to Mary the secret assassin. We didn't sympathise with John losing her because we kept being told she was another person, and the season dragged trying to resolve all the loose ends. With Mary's final video she is hopefully done - her blessing for her 'Baker Street Boys' is a little cheesy, but I think she merely says what we all think, in that we want them both to continue on solving mysteries and busting crimes. And for a show that is at times so desperately trying to appeal to its former villainous glory, they finally find a way to convincingly drag Moriarty back into the fray without making it seem contrived. His train-related interjections may be merely campy fun, but then again, half the show's fanbase comes from Doctor Who.
A lot of the backlash directed at the episode has been moaning the slow death of the show into melodrama. They pine for the days when it was merely Sherlock and John solving believable mysteries, where the situations are rooted in logic, where the story favoured plausibility over inconsistency. To them I say, what show do you think you have been watching? Sherlock's never been a plausible, intelligent story - it has a very intelligent main character, but it's a detective story, from a genre that began as pulp. Nearly all detective stories (yes, even the hard, gritty police procedurals from all cities of America) cheat their audience; they show us an incomplete picture, and then the genius at the end of the road fills it in for us (for example, when Sherlock deduces the Vermeer painting was a fake in ten seconds - the audience is never given the information to solve this, and it's important we are not). Sherlock was never about logic or believability. It's strengths were in its delivery: the quick wit, the humour, the sound design of a churning mind, the slick visual graphics depicting an old fashioned genre now immersed with technology. I never saw these complaints when the moustache-twirling Culverton Smith opened last week by inexplicably confessing his crimes to his family just because. Hell, if Moriarty can steal the Crown Jewels it proves that anyone can do anything in this show. The point is, Sherlock has always been a bit far-fetched, a bit ridiculous, a bit over the top, and to pick it apart logically is to admit that you want to watch an entirely different show. But while CSI and Criminal Minds etc. may try and convince you that their dull, grey murder mysteries are rooted in reality, in the end they're all just the same silly little detective stories.
8/10 - A good finish for a weak year, and a fitting season and perhaps even series finale if it comes to that. And yet, spare a thought for Molly, no? She's been broken emotionally and no one seems to care the slightest in the end.
11 out of 28 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
