Commi-Ninja wrote:Yes, that is unfortunate. If it is ever aired on BBC America, I'll probably watch it.
Yes, it would have been much more impressive if he had been able to tell that. However, in the late 19th century, Afghanistan was Britain's only major war (if you don't count the Zulu war that is). Iraq and Afghanistan are also roughly in the same region and climate zone, so the tone of Watson's skin wouldn't give the game away. It's hard to think of a reason why Holmes would be able to tell right away that it was Afghanistan instead of Iraq.dilbertschalter wrote:General Thoughts (in the tags because a few things are spoiler-ish)
Insanely trivial quibble- shouldn't Holmes be able to tell whether it is 'Afghanistan or Iraq?' This is a non-important point, but shouldn't there be some clue in Watson's skin tone, mannerisms, something that should clarify where he served.
Someone as clever as Holmes should have been able to tell after the chase. To be fair, I wasn't able to put the pieces together (completely forgot how the original ended). But when you've actually located the phone in your flat and there's a cabbie at your doorstep, he should be the obvious suspect. That seemed completely ooc.The cab chase scene made it pretty obvious who the killer was (or, to be more accurate, what the killer was), but Holmes took awhile to get there (the killer came to him after all). Also, the conclusion, was expected x1000 (I wasn't even surprised that Watson killed someone, as he had mentioned before that he had a 'death sentence' anyway).
Stereotyping of foreigners is far too common in classic mysteries. I agree, she was a rather bland character, the cabbie was much better. I do like the recurrent theme of Moriarty being behind all these crimes. Makes them feel less like their just loosely connected episodes.[/spoiler]My feelings about the second one were similar, except that they did a much better job of getting to the 'underbelly' of the city- that being said I found the villain to be almost unimaginably cliched- there's nothing wrong with using a stock type as a villain (it's often necessary), but it's good to deviate from convention in at least a few ways.
Dus wrote:[spoiler]Yes, it would have been much more impressive if he had been able to tell that. However, in the late 19th century, Afghanistan was Britain's only major war (if you don't count the Zulu war that is). Iraq and Afghanistan are also roughly in the same region and climate zone, so the tone of Watson's skin wouldn't give the game away. It's hard to think of a reason why Holmes would be able to tell right away that it was Afghanistan instead of Iraq.dilbertschalter wrote:General Thoughts (in the tags because a few things are spoiler-ish)
Insanely trivial quibble- shouldn't Holmes be able to tell whether it is 'Afghanistan or Iraq?' This is a non-important point, but shouldn't there be some clue in Watson's skin tone, mannerisms, something that should clarify where he served.Someone as clever as Holmes should have been able to tell after the chase. To be fair, I wasn't able to put the pieces together (completely forgot how the original ended). But when you've actually located the phone in your flat and there's a cabbie at your doorstep, he should be the obvious suspect. That seemed completely ooc.The cab chase scene made it pretty obvious who the killer was (or, to be more accurate, what the killer was), but Holmes took awhile to get there (the killer came to him after all). Also, the conclusion, was expected x1000 (I wasn't even surprised that Watson killed someone, as he had mentioned before that he had a 'death sentence' anyway).Stereotyping of foreigner is far too common in classic mysteries. I agree, she was a rather bland character, the cabbie was much better. I do like the recurrent theme of Moriarty being behind all these crimes. Makes them feel less like their just loosely connected episodes.[/spoiler]My feelings about the second one were similar, except that they did a much better job of getting to the 'underbelly' of the city- that being said I found the villain to be almost unimaginably cliched- there's nothing wrong with using a stock type as a villain (it's often necessary), but it's good to deviate from convention in at least a few ways.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests