The Abominable Bride

I did not fully get it the first time but when I watched it again, it all started making some sense to me. It may be difficult for those who are not devoted fans of this series to fully grasp the craziness of this episode, but once you open your eyes to the genius of the writers' intent on what they were trying to achieve here, I could not keep my eyes off the show and found myself watching it over and over again. If the writers of series simply made this an one-off episode to truly stick to the original storyline, then there would be numerous critical remarks about how the writers settled for the comfort of predictability and made the whole plot so ordinary and boring. Before shooting at the TV screen and calling it 'stupid', one may want to watch it one more time and there will be that "a-ha" moment!

The long-awaited Sherlock special, "The Abominable Bride," is supposed to satiate our hunger for Sherlock, since we see him so rarely.

It did and it didn't.

I want to disclose up front that I flew to London to see Benedict Cumberbatch in Hamlet.

This episode was as divisive as Cumberbatch's looks. Some people thought this was the worst thing they've ever seen, and others thought it was wonderful.

I'm somewhere in between. Without giving anything away, I'll say, given the idea behind this episode, the story as it unfolded made sense. It was chaotic, confusing, and filled with strange things -- it was supposed to be.

Instead of taking the idea so literally, I would have preferred something more straightforward with Sherlock returning to Victorian times. There were too many interwoven ideas and people popping up.

One thing I was very impressed by was how much, in Victorian times, Cumberbatch resembled the standard idea of Sherlock Holmes' appearance. He looked amazing.

The production values and acting were both excellent; besides the leads, Andrew Scott was incredible. A good deal of the dialogue was fun. "He said the crime solution was so easy that even I could have solved it," Lestrade tells Mrs. Hudson. "Oh, I'm sure he was exaggerating," she assures him.

I wish they would release more episodes before 2017. For a man the producers objected to when he was cast, Cumberbatch is now too busy to be available for episodes. The price of fame.

The BBC has been trailing the return of three (okay, four) of its most popular detective heroes in a clever advertisement showing Stella Gibson from "The Fall", John Luther and Sherlock (and Dr Watson). "The Fall" re-starts next week although it is my least anticipated of the three, while "Luther's" comeback was very good but this dazzlingly brilliant episode was the best thing I've watched this Christmas.

The writing really was terrific with a plot that had more ups and downs than a mountain range, more ins and outs than Hampton Court Maze and more twists and turns than a dozen corkscrews, in short it was a triumph. Starting with a Victorian-era impossible murder with an even more impossible murderer, guest appearances by all the previous supporting cast including a massively-bloated Mycroft, surely a homage to Sydney Greenstreet and the return of the master-criminal we've all missed, a premonition of another husband-slaying in a big old house after dark, a recreation of the real Reichenbach Fall climax of yore, an ingenious denouement anticipating female suffrage years later but perhaps the best thing of all was the promise of a new series to come.

As ever, the technical aspects of the production were great, I'm a sucker for the multiple camera-angle, 360 degrees perspective, time-freezing, computer graphics and microscopic zoom shots employed. There was humour a-plenty and hosts of references to the Conan-Doyle original, including, if I'm not mistaken, the first time this Sherlock has ever said "Elementary my dear Watson".

The playing by Cumberbatch, Freeman and Andrew Scott as the three main protagonists was never better. I'm sure there will be Sherlock-oligists who can pick apart the complexities of the plot, which for sure seemed at times like a read-across from Moffat and Gatiss's other re-creation Dr Who, but let them, they won't spoil it for me. This was the best "Sherlock" I've yet seen and sets an almost impossibly high standard for what may come after this.

Doesn't matter if they don't however, this one was so good it really was the perfect after-Christmas present.

Sherlock and Watson land in the late Nineteenth Century to solve the case of Emelia Ricoletti, a bride that killed herself, and then later manages to shoot her husband and bring about the death of Lord Carmichael. The duo must uncover how this devious crime was carried out.

I must admit I have been hugely looking forward to this, possibly because I was keen to see how the altered setting would work. Series 3 had been somewhat of a disappointment, a little too self satisfied I suppose, so I'm glad they did something different to refresh it, it was certainly different.

A few minor quibbles, a little contrived at times, and as is the nature of the show it did seem a little wrapped up in its own smuggness at times, but I was utterly enveloped in the story, it had me wrapped from start to finish. Beautiful cinematography, great direction, awesome production values. It managed to feel fresh and exhilarating once again.

Cumberbatch was definitely on fine form, I loved the altered appearance, suited him, I noticed a few Jeremy Brettisms, not sure if anyone else did, maybe the hair and some of the body language. The scenes between Holmes and Moriarty once again were simply amazing, Andrew Scott is just unbelievable, he is such a charismatic performer.

Crazy, fun, Gothic, energetic, waited a long time, and it was worth the wait. 9/10

In a Sherlock Holmes mind trip he is taken back to the 1890s. In a setting very much like that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle would have envisaged, Holmes is a private detective, operating out of 221B Baker Street. Assisting him is Dr Watson. They are presented with a very baffling case. A woman, Emelia Ricoletti, publicly shoots and kills herself, only to appear a few hours later and kill her husband. Within the next few months other murders are committed by woman appearing to be Mrs Ricoletti. Even the police are thinking that paranormal activity is afoot. Then Sir Eustace Carmichael is threatened by such an apparition and his wife calls in Holmes and Watson.

The idea of filming a Sherlock Holmes episode in the original time and setting appealed to me. It gave us a taste of what the series would have been like if it hadn't been contemporised. However, at the back my mind was the nagging suspicion that the writers had run out of ideas and that going back to the 1890s was a gimmick, and the series' jumping the shark moment.

Ultimately it isn't as straightforward as an entire Sherlock episode set in the 1890s, so difficult to judge whether it was meant to be a gimmick or not. It ends up much more complex than that, and, to an extent, unnecessarily so. We have many jumps between the 1890s and the 2010s and it seems like style over substance.

However, it is very entertaining. The 1890s murder story is very intriguing and is woven into the overall plot well. The modern day side is reasonably well done, though the Moriarty scenes seemed a bit self-indulgent and overblown.

Overall, not brilliant but a pretty good episode nevertheless.