|Sherlock with a gun|
I love the new series of Sherlock on the BBC, both series 1 and 2 were brilliant. The writing is sharp, the chemistry between the leads is excellent and while I feel some stories are dragged out a little to fit their feature length slot, I very rarely check my watch which is a very good sign in my book.
However, there are two things that continually bug me and in my humble opinion are major flaws with the show.
First of all, Guns.
|Watson with a gun|
|Lestrade with a gun|
|Joe Public with a gun|
We are the UK, not the USA. Please to be learning the cultural differences.
Actually what really irks me is that the writers are English and if they engaged with current affairs in even the smallest way through out the past 20 years, they could not have failed to notice that guns=illegal.
Clearly they have chosen to ignore this rather massive and important piece of legislation but why?
|John Watson with another gun|
|Sherlock with another gun|
Are they trying to sell the show to American audiences? Because in my opinion, ignoring this huge cultural difference is as jarring as then the Americans doing a bad British accent or we Brits doing a bad American accent. It doesn't sit right, it doesn't feel right and it throws you out of the story because it draws your attention to something that is out of place.
|Sherlock showing off with a gun|
My other big bug bear, which upsets me even more than the lackadaisical use of firearms, is Cliffhangers.
|Each movie told its own complete story|
|Each book told a complete story|
It's sloppy writing and to me it says "I'm really not confident that my writing is good enough to tempt the audience to tune in next season, so I have to leave them on a massive cliffhanger so that they will want to watch the next series to find out what happens".
The writing on Sherlock is strong enough to draw the audience back in next season without resorting to these silly and annoying theatrics.
The cliffhanger in season 1 wasn't too bad, they completed the arc of the series and episode leaving just one question unanswered, who would win the face off, Sherlock or Moriarty and to be perfectly honest, this ending felt like it was just tacked onto the end of the episode as an afterthought. I still thought that it was cheap and bad writing but on the whole season 1 left me satisfied.
|No cliffhangers in sight!|
Why can you not trust in your writing ability enough to give your loyal viewers a satisfying conclusion? Are you catering to the fan-boys/girls who love a good mystery and coming up with their own theories? Are you hoping that they will create an internet buzz? Because I have to tell you, doing that at the end of the series is the wrong time to get people interested.
95% or more of your viewing audience are not fan-boys/girls who will trawl the internet looking for answers and even if they were inclined to come up with their own theories, one week is ample time for anyone to do so.
To sum up my feelings on this, if you can't be bothered to give me a satisfying resolution, then I'm not sure I can be bothered to tune in next year.
Trust me, I have real life problems that last a year or more, I do not want my entertainment to be so problematic.
In the interests of fairness, this is Mark Gatiss's reply. Forgive the brevity, they're tweets.
|Click to enlarge|
"Re: guns. It's fiction and merely mirroring the accessibility of weapons in the original (Watson's revolver) Re: cliffhangers. As Wilkie Collins said "Make 'em cry, make 'em laugh, make 'em wait."
It's nice that he would take the trouble to reply to a viewer, even if we must agree to disagree!