Sherlock

:

Season 3
Season #: 4, 3, 2, 1
User Score
8.5

Universal acclaim- based on 779 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 682 out of 779
  2. Mixed: 51 out of 779
  3. Negative: 46 out of 779
Watch Now

Where To Watch

Buy on
Stream On
Stream On

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

view
per page
  1. MightyMatt
    Jan 19, 2015
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The show is straying further by the season. Holmes is a murderer, Watson loves a government paid serial killer, no one has integrity, they focus mostly on shiny packaging and witty insults, not on actual murder mysteries, with suspects and insights into human motivations and flaws, the soul of the source material. Now it’s flash and melodrama over substance. What started out promising is now cheap and lazy, bordering on a betrayal of the characters. I give it three stars simply for the watchability of Cummerbund and Bilbo--that and a nice Derren Brown cameo.

    The Sherlock from the books used to sympathize at times with the plights of his clients. This one is just a massive jerk, if jerk could be a stronger word.

    The Empty Hearse was a stop-the-terrorist plot out of the show 24, and more fabricated mush between Holmes and Watson, along with more unnecessary gay innuendo. Two guys can be friends, get over it and get on with interesting cases. One thing I do appreciate is the sharp humor, and nods to elements from the short stories can be fun, the sleek text and on-screen clues are inventive, but I'll get to my low score shortly.

    In The Sign of Three, the only attempt at a proper murder mystery this season, they spend all of 90 seconds explaining the motivation of the murderer and a throwaway line about a dead brother, as an afterthought. In the books, a good few pages would go into the scheming of the crime, shedding some light on the dark side of human nature. How could you not feel being impaled in the gut, or see a harpoon sticking out of your belt when you put it on?? Not enough thought went into things seeming plausible. During the wedding, Holmes goes on and on about murder and stabbing and no one objects--no one acts like a realistic human.

    Watching Northern Exposure recently, from the 90s, some shots go on for over a minute without cutting. Here, there is a scene where Sherlock is simply dancing/talking with a girl in a violet dress, and it cuts 19 times in a single minute. That kind of editing kills your ability to focus (kind of the opposite of reading, actually).

    To anyone who gives a fraction of thought to the original stories, this show has become an embarrassment. I like Ben. He was phenomenal in Star Trek Into Darkness, The Last Enemy, Parade's End. Martin Freeman was enjoyable in The Office and The Hobbit films. But they are too often wasted on slapped together, shoddy storylines here that chuck common sense and character continuity out the window.

    The whole Mary/Magnussen plot is absurd, shock value over comprehension. Are we supposed to be rooting for this unconvincing relationship, and glad that Sherlock became a murderer to protect it? She’s a hired killer, and lied to keep that from John. That’s a pretty solid reason to end a relationship if there ever was one. But this Watson is drawn to psychopaths, apparently. If you say so.

    Now the most offensive thing: Sherlock's murder of Magnussen.

    Doyle's short story was handled much more skillfully. Holmes and Watson break into Milverton's house (Watson actually remorseful even of burglary, let alone straight up murder) to destroy the files, but witness one of his victims kill the hell out of him, with the resolution that Holmes sided with her, keeping it covered up. Moffat comes off as stunningly dense and sexist (after changing the ending of Irene Adler's story too) that he can't believe a woman even capable of the act and spouts in an interview that Holmes and Watson made the woman up. Weak.

    Mycroft wasn't even in the Milverton story, and his vague reasons for protecting Magnussen come off as a first-draft plot device. They should have just had the swat team or Mary take out Magnussen instead of killing Sherlock's moral high ground along with the villain. Twice in one episode Magnussen outsmarted Sherlock, until Holmes just resorted to direct slaughter--it's just a big bowl of wrong.

    He can make no speeches about taking down murderers because he's now in their fine company. If he takes cases to catch anyone who killed their blackmailer, of which there are several in the canon, that's tremendously hypocritical. What an unholy mess, and supposedly two seasons to go. Sherlock does say in the short story that some criminals are beyond the law and deserve the revenge they suffer, so maybe it's not so far fetched he'd do it himself. But this season just left me feeling kind of weary and let down.

    They are trying so hard to be extreme and unpredictable, but Moffat and Gatiss are like children with a new toy, so carried away by excitement that they smash the thing to pieces.    … Expand
  2. Boo_Radley
    Mar 9, 2014
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Sherlock is one of my favourite shows. It's unique, cerebral and compelling, and I love both male leads. That said, I was disappointed with Season 3. Here's why (with SPOILERS): Firstly, they got carried away with their popularity and ended up catering too much to the excitable fanbase. In giving us what they thought we wanted, they threw all their energy into action sequences and John and Sherlock's relationships (with each other, with their families, with their friends...). 3.1 focussed on John and Sherlock's friendship, 3.2 on John and Mary's wedding and Sherlock's loneliness, and 3.3 on John and Mary's marriage crisis. I found myself longing for Moriarty or Irene Adler to show up and throw a spanner in the works. Mark Gatiss also wrote himself into the story more than was necessary. Secondly, and as a consequence of all this, the stories were less complex and satisfying than usual. I guessed a few plot twists before they happened, which is rare for me because I'm stupid. For example, in 3.1 it was obvious that the [spoiler] was the killer. In 3.2 it was obvious that Watson was sitting at the end of the darkened hallway. In 3.3 it was obvious from early on that Magnussen had a "mind palace" in lieu of actual vaults. Thirdly, fast-paced and cliched action sequences were shoehorned into the plot to compensate for actually story. Sometimes it felt more like "24" than "Sherlock." Sherlock racing through the streets of London to rescue John from a bonfire, Sherlock diffusing a bomb on a train, and most ridiculously, Sherlock shooting the villain to resolve a complex problem. I have a major issue with this sorry excuse for a plot device, because in theory Sherlock could solve all crimes by simply putting a bullet through the criminal's head. In fact, I don't know why he didn't do it sooner in Magnussen's case. It wasn't surprising or clever. On TV, people shoot each other all the time. Sherlock is supposed to be different. And finally, the characters were simply less compelling. Sherlock and John's friendship was unnecessarily sentimental (why did we need to go with them on a bachelor's PUB CRAWL?!?), John and Mary's conjugal bliss is pedestrian, and even Sherlock's relationship with his brother and parents is overly schmaltzy. Magnussen was a repugnant and unappealing villain. While they may be psycopaths, Sherlockian nemeses are supposed to be DELICIOUSLY evil, so that we love to see them on screen. Magnussen, with his "fish eyes," and creepy habits like urinating in fireplaces, eating saucy olives off other people's plates, licking people's faces and flicking their eyeballs, was just icky. His motivations were not obvious, and I couldn't really even work out why anyone cared about him. I didn't. The whole season suffered for lack of a compelling arch-nemesis, so I was relieved to see a glimpse of Moriarty in the end, and I hope the next season will hail a return to the mind-bending plots of seasons past. Because I still prefer it to just about anything else currently airing.… Expand
  3. cmyk
    Jan 29, 2014
    5
    Oh lord, where to start. When this series had just started, I sat there thinking "Finally, a show without the 'emotional interpersonal drama' that so plagues just about every single series in every TV show ever." [I'm not talking about basic human interaction, I mean the whole 'you lied to me' I'm sorry' 'I can't believe you anymore, I'm leaving' 'baby come back blah blah' that evenOh lord, where to start. When this series had just started, I sat there thinking "Finally, a show without the 'emotional interpersonal drama' that so plagues just about every single series in every TV show ever." [I'm not talking about basic human interaction, I mean the whole 'you lied to me' I'm sorry' 'I can't believe you anymore, I'm leaving' 'baby come back blah blah' that even Breaking Bad cannot shake] Previous seasons were case-oriented, character building, to the point. And then there's this season...It's so...melodramatic? Disconnected? Soap Opera-y? Overly stylistic? I feel like the Sherlock and John we knew from seasons 1 and 2 are no longer with us, especially Sherlock. He's grown so emotional and, although I suppose this is more personal than anything, no longer relatable. God I am disappointed. Also if the gay fan-service wagon is not in your interests, watch out, the whole season's peppered with it. I don't mind but it made a few of my friends stop watching because of such.… Expand
  4. maesterpycell
    Jan 20, 2014
    4
    Sherlock in series one and two was a good show, now the excessive and frankly unbearable fan service has ruined it (especially in the first episode). The second episode was stronger due to its unique narrative structure, but still struggled from the same problems. The third episode was terrible and featured a massive cop-out of an ending.

    Also, is anyone going to remember the villain    Sherlock in series one and two was a good show, now the excessive and frankly unbearable fan service has ruined it (especially in the first episode). The second episode was stronger due to its unique narrative structure, but still struggled from the same problems. The third episode was terrible and featured a massive cop-out of an ending.

    Also, is anyone going to remember the villain from this season? I know I won't. This show has lost its touch.    … Expand
  5. vikesh2206
    Nov 10, 2014
    9
    The third series of Sherlock is the best so far. With a change from plot-driven episodes to character-driven ones, this helps the show to evolve emotionally. Plus, great acting from the leads and a terrific new villain helps to cement this as one of the best and most clever shows on television.
  6. Zayn
    Feb 8, 2014
    4
    The third season of Sherlock, respectively, provided little quality entertainment. This season, in my opinion, completely threw off the series. In the first two seasons, Sherlock was quite a show, and the writers orchestrated such a unique, witty performance. However, this third season didn't live up to the name. In the first episode of this season, we find out how Sherlock faked hisThe third season of Sherlock, respectively, provided little quality entertainment. This season, in my opinion, completely threw off the series. In the first two seasons, Sherlock was quite a show, and the writers orchestrated such a unique, witty performance. However, this third season didn't live up to the name. In the first episode of this season, we find out how Sherlock faked his death, which by the way, isn't answered until the end. Even when you find out how he did it, you've got to admit, it's a bit disappointing. All the questions surrounding it were answered with such simplicity, it wasn't even funny. Speaking of which, Sherlock pulled a number of tricks on Dr. Watson (which weren't funny at all) that were, simply put, irritating and repetitive. The humor was that of a child: it's not funny when people get hurt, writers. In the second episode of the season, John is getting married and Sherlock gives a speech, being the best man. That's pretty much the entire episode. This is, by far, the worst episode of the entire series. In Sherlock's speech, he talks about a murder they haven't solved. Okay, in a wedding, have you ever heard a speech about murder? No! The speech should only be about the bride and the groom!!! Worst writing ever. During the speech, there are flashbacks to the murder and finally in present day, they solve it. However, it would've been 100% more logical to simply have the events in order, leading up to the wedding. The murder story was fine, it's just the order and way it was written that ruined the episode for me. And last, but certainly not least, the third and final episode of the season. It starts out with one of the most interesting story lines yet--Sherlock is found doing drugs, Dr. Watson finds out Sherlock has a girlfriend, and an evil mastermind knows all secrets against all kinds of powerful people and using their secrets against them. Wow. This kind of story is why I stuck watching Sherlock, even through their worst episodes. The story picks up and gets Sherlock on a roll, finally focusing on the brilliant detective he is. Everything is superb up until the ending. #1: That was beyond stupidity for Dr. Watson to destroy the USB drive about his wife's real identity and then turn to Sherlock to go to great lengths to get the information he destroyed, from the villain they are facing. #2: The villain is not even worthy to be called a villain because he isn't doing anything wrong. #3: The cliffhanger is not necessary and is really misleading. With all that said, I give this season of Sherlock 4/10 stars. It wasn't horrible, but it was still pretty bad. The third episode saved the series, in my opinion. If some fans even withstood the first two episodes to get to the last episode. Overall, if you want to watch the third season of Sherlock, just skip to the last episode. The first two are pointless.… Expand
  7. Kribskraps
    Feb 15, 2014
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Disappointing

    Being in love with Sherlock after the first two seasons i was even more frustrated watching the third season. Why? Lots of changes are maid regarding the characterization of sherlock, the characters around him and the main subject, the cases.
    Season 3 tries in general to make Sherlock Holmes more social, more human. This is maid by the people around him who missed him so much, the new „family“ member Mary Watson and various characters with powers of deduction as well. Unfortunatly that does not do any good. While i understand that the creators are somehow interested in pushing Sherlock in that direction it makes him simply more ordinary. Being so untouchable, so unsocialized and so deductive are the reasons for him being such an extraordinary person. But since he is now part of a family, people starting to really like him, some drug addict, some child, some criminal are "deduct ors" as well Sherlock is very weakended in being so unique.
    On the other hand the 3rd season tries to make Sherlock some kind of superagent who is dealing no longer with ordinary crimes but only with matters oft he greatest importance. Of course terrorism and stuff. There is only ONE real case in all the three seasons and that one is the highly unbelieveable „Bloody Guardsman“ (I am stabbing myself in the belly with my belt, then I am going to a wedding, eating, drinking and not feeling that there is a blade in my stomach? Lucky he did not have to pee in between... After so many really great cases in the first two seasons this is almost insulting). The rest is some whatever stuff connected mostly around Mary Watson and the national security.
    But the worst thing came to us at the end of episode three. Sherlock Holmes is now a murderer. Because he wanted to protect Mary Watson (who is „of course“ not only some woman, no, she is ex-secret service, special agent 00X, responsible for killing various people and almost killed Sherlock himself). But killing someone really evil (unfortunatly the script is not able to make the victim really hatred. It tries hard showing us how really, really mean this man is but still he does not deserve to be murdered in cold blood) does more damage to Sherlock than al the humanizing stuff. Sherlock is an „anti-hero“ but he is not an **** as he states himself in the wedding speech. He is a man with principles. He is definitly not a murderer.
    The style itself is still good but you can see the need of the producers to be even more genius. Having Sherlock in his "vault" to survive being shot was great but why also picturing him as a child? This is symptomatic to the desire of the series of being even more extraordinary.
    I am really hoping for the next season to being more devoted to storytelling and interesting cases. Get rind of Mary Watson and a lot of the new and changed faces. Get Sherlock and Watson back into the field solving extra- "ordinary" crimes like in the first two seasons.    … Expand
  8. Mitchelldfc
    Jan 22, 2014
    3
    I am compelled to write this as I feel there is nothing worse than a series which starts good, becomes great and falls so far from grace its unreal. For me its classic BBC. Like Luther, the popularity becomes such that it feels its untouchable and it can get away with the quirky and the overdramatic. Sherlock season 3 is a disorganised nose dive from season 2. For me Scandal in BelgraviaI am compelled to write this as I feel there is nothing worse than a series which starts good, becomes great and falls so far from grace its unreal. For me its classic BBC. Like Luther, the popularity becomes such that it feels its untouchable and it can get away with the quirky and the overdramatic. Sherlock season 3 is a disorganised nose dive from season 2. For me Scandal in Belgravia was one of the finest episodes of any series ever - the series started to show its bbc quirkyness with the introduction of the camp moriarty and the gay innuendo between Watson and Sherlock which is completely out of place and adds nothing to the story. Season 3 was simply forgettable in every sense. The explication of Sherlocks return was handled appallingly. His media stardom and the silly detectives Empty hearse group just seems so far from reality and the show loses all credibility thereafter. Without trying to spoil the 'twist' at the end of ther series - cheap ....is the only way i can describe it. "did you miss me" does anyone care????… Expand
  9. Lokathor
    Jan 19, 2014
    5
    First episode was okay, second episode was cringe-inducing but pretty solid, and the third episode was weirdness that ended with sherlock being cool when no one else would. There's some parts that are stupid, and they slather a ton of jokes over it all to cover up where there's plot nonsense. It comes out alright.

    I couldn't help but think of it as "Sherlock Holmes and The Hobbit" this    First episode was okay, second episode was cringe-inducing but pretty solid, and the third episode was weirdness that ended with sherlock being cool when no one else would. There's some parts that are stupid, and they slather a ton of jokes over it all to cover up where there's plot nonsense. It comes out alright.

    I couldn't help but think of it as "Sherlock Holmes and The Hobbit" this whole season.    … Expand
  10. nautico
    Jan 27, 2014
    9
    This show has redeemed itself (in spades) with episode 2 (John's wedding). Absolutely masterful. Cumberbatch is peerless, probably the best of the current crop of American and British actors. I now feel confident that "Sherlock" is on the way to a 10 rating.
  11. RedOwlReviews
    Jan 19, 2014
    10
    After a year and a half hiatus, the greatest British television phenomenon since Doctor Who proves that, going into its third season, it's not planning on slowing down or falling for third season slump. BBC's Sherlock, which features electrifying writing, high-end production, and absolutely phenomenal acting, hits the ground running in its first episode, resolving the cliffhanger of theAfter a year and a half hiatus, the greatest British television phenomenon since Doctor Who proves that, going into its third season, it's not planning on slowing down or falling for third season slump. BBC's Sherlock, which features electrifying writing, high-end production, and absolutely phenomenal acting, hits the ground running in its first episode, resolving the cliffhanger of the decade from season two while warmly inviting its viewers back into its slick crime-solving, ego-busting milieu.
    If there is one thing in this first episode that stands out as particularly laudable, it is Martin Freeman's dazzling portrayal of John Watson. After spending more than a year coping with the traumatic suicide of his closest friend (the feelings run so deep, some will speculate it goes beyond platonic), he reacts to the untimely and jocular return of Sherlock with such passion and credibility that he uncompromisingly validates - no, reifies - no, objectifies the character he has been able to establish with only nine hours of television. If Freeman (and to a lesser extent, Cumberbatch) are not showered with nominations by around this time of the year in 2015, you can be rest assured I will throw a fit.
    Glossy visual effects create more elaborated manifestations of Sherlock's enigmatic thought processes (more words are floating in mid-air, more images and memories whoosh by the screen to the sound of beeping technology and murmuring voices), but it's always for the better. Although some may consider the crime the duo solve in the first episode to be a little underdeveloped and convoluted, any returning fan (I included) will proudly proclaim how blown away they were by what is arguably the most impressive season premiere in Sherlock history. Unsurprisingly, the Brits at BBC have done it again.

    FINAL SCORE: 97.5 (almost perfect ---------------o----- perfect)    … Expand
  12. rgang
    Jan 21, 2014
    5
    this is probably catering towards a larger audience, the series packs a lot of drama,delves more into character development, and relationships... but falls kinda flat when it comes to what Conan Doyle's canon is known for, mysteries/story-telling
  13. TNF1343
    Jan 19, 2014
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Sherlock Season 3 focuses on character development much more than it has in previous Seasons. While fans may love this shift, I feel that this Season, specifically the first two episodes, suffer from the lack of an interesting core mystery.

    The first episode, The Empty Hearse, deals with the fall-out of the cliffhanger. I feel like this episode would've benefited from a B-level case, rather than the huge terrorist threat we're given. It's odd since it feels rushed and uninteresting throughout. One of Sherlock's deductions relied on withheld information too, which is sort of frustrating for the viewers.

    I think The Empty Hearse's biggest problem is that it tries to do too much. Yes, this is a 90 minute program but the aftermath of last Season's big cliffhanger weights down half of what makes Sherlock good: the suspense and mystery. The episode does decently fulfil its purpose, however.

    Episode one suffered from an interesting case all the way through, but the second episode (The Sign of Three) manages to build intrigue, only to fall apart at the end. Someone who can stab people seemingly through walls is an interesting premise, but the conclusion is one big 'wtf?' moment. Surely, you'd feel it if someone stabbed you, no matter how tight your belt is. And you definitely wouldn't just walk into the shower after pulling out a blade. Sherlock introducing us to the case in his best man speech was a good idea in theory, but this is just poor writing.

    There is quite a bit to love about this episode though. Sherlock admitting that he cares about someone other than himself was a huge moment for the character and the series as a whole. We even see this pay off in the finale. There's more great character stuff too, including more hints that Mary isn't who she says she is. There's also some hilarious moments, but I don't think a three episode Season can really afford having a lull in the middle.

    In true Sherlock fashion, after a weaker second entry, the third episode (His Last Vow) comes back in full from. I've talked about some of the problems I had with the first two episodes; perhaps the most criminal is not giving Charles Augustus Magnussen enough of a build-up. Charles is an expert blackmailer who pushes people around thanks to his super computer of a brain. He's the most Sherlock-esque villain of the series, and it's not much of a stretch to imagine Sherlock ending up like him if he hadn't have met Watson. That's why it was so powerful symbolically to have Sherlock kill Charles at the end. It also explains why this Season decided to focus so much on character development this time around.

    The show is called Sherlock but Freeman's performance as Watson may be his best yet. Learning his wife was lying to him all this time was heartbreaking for poor Watson and Freeman does an amazing job of reflecting the character's emotion.

    The reveal at the end about Moriarty's return is something I'm looking forward to with cautious optimism, given this series' murky reputation regarding cliffhangers. They also have to give us a clear explanation as to how Moriarty lived (assuming this wasn't a pre-recorded message) because they can't just bring everyone back to life and expect fans not to lose interest. Notwithstanding, Moriarty's return probably only means good things for the series, making Season 4's wait all the more tantalizing.    … Expand
  14. eagleeyeviking
    Jan 21, 2014
    9
    The third series of Sherlock is the best so far. With a change from plot-driven episodes to character-driven ones, this helps the show to evolve emotionally. Plus, great acting from the leads and a terrific new villain helps to cement this as one of the best and most clever shows on television.
  15. movieradar
    Aug 9, 2014
    0
    Dis they just changed the whole writers team? That would be the only thing that could explain that insane drop in watchability from the first to seasons to the third.
    Seriously. I can't watch this, and especially when compared to the other seasons. It's like a new series. Bad puns are coming in in uncount numbers, absolutely no feeling of any seriousness, total change in characters. I    Dis they just changed the whole writers team? That would be the only thing that could explain that insane drop in watchability from the first to seasons to the third.
    Seriously. I can't watch this, and especially when compared to the other seasons. It's like a new series. Bad puns are coming in in uncount numbers, absolutely no feeling of any seriousness, total change in characters. I moan a good TV series.    … Expand
  16. heromoder
    Sep 8, 2014
    4
    Not sure what happened here - Steven Moffat clearly lost the plot. Unclever, boring and often out of character, this didn't sit well with me at all. Won't bother with the DVD.
  17. DrewtheDude85
    Apr 29, 2014
    8
    The third Season of Sherlock was enjoyable. Episode One was the best of three though. It used all the elements of the past seasons and used them well. My only problem was that Episode Three was a little confusing at times, but overall this is a good season. Season Four can't come soon enough.
  18. JakobVirgil
    Feb 1, 2014
    0
    In this season Moffat and the gang have given up the pretense that this is a mystery program and have presented us with unadulterated Conan Doyle themed Yaoi. The plots are tortured there is no mystery individual scenes are clever but lend nothing to the plot. (but how could they there is no plot). I guess we should be grateful there are only 3 episodes per season.
  19. victorhjkl
    Jan 22, 2014
    10
    The third season is amazing, Sherlock is my favorite series, this season is the best one up to now, The show is very intelligent, the casting is totally amazing, the story will surprise each second, you will be looking forward to the next season in the end of this one.
  20. lightningbarer
    Jan 23, 2014
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I've had it with Sherlock and the pretentious way it presents itself.
    It isn't smart.
    It isn't funny.
    And it's downright insulting to your intelligence.

    Where to start?
    Everything about the first episode is styled to make you want to like a **** who-apparently-informed everyone in his life except the one man he calls friend. And as the rest of the group never bothered to tell the pained and scarred friend. No. That's melodrama meant to distract you from the fact that the creators never had a way out for the end of season 2.
    Then comes the really painful part. Episode 2. That was SO much better written, acted, directed and overall a better production than 1, it was what I expected to see in a Sherlock show. I have nothing but praise for that episode because it's so well done.
    Shame episode 3 came along to F0ck that all up.
    Episode 3 has good points, characters like Magnussen should have been seen far more in this iteration of Holmes than has been shown. Lars Mikkelsen played the perfect counter to Holmes in this, he was as smart as him-if a little creepier than I'd like-and the type of person who can be a mirror to Holmes, something like 'he's the type of person I would be if not for you, John.'
    Shame that the title character is so off base again that I couldn't stand him in a single scene.
    Pretentious...totally and utterly pretentious, this isn't a slight against Cumberbatch, he's a terrific actor, but the role and lines in this episode were utterly crap.
    And the reveal at the end...well I hate to use too much profanity, but Gatiss and Moffat, you can go away and never touch Sherlock again as far as I'm concerned.
    Because that reveal was a load of Donkey Bollocks. And it's just reset the writing to season 1 level now, we'd passed this, it was over with. You'd written yourselves into a position where it would mean the show would end.
    LET IT! Not all shows have happy endings, look at The Soprano's for god sake, just as he'd reunited his family after all the **** as his daughter sees him as she's coming in, BAM!
    But as this is a staple of the British Broadcasting Company now, as it's raking in a load of money, why not wring as much out of it as possible, eh?
    What matter to literary integrity when you can line your pockets?
    I'm done, Sherlock is dead to me now, he died as he hit the pavement in season 2, I'm not buying this boxset just for one good episode.
    I'm done.    … Expand
  21. joao1198pedro
    Jan 29, 2014
    10
    Sherlock is now one of the best recent series, but it still have that agonizant problem of having only three episodes per season wich is really traumatizing
  22. Slipper
    Jan 22, 2014
    10
    Just like first two season, this third was great. Very good from start to the end. It is ok to don't like this show, but this is 21st century and Sherlock is now modern detective and he acts according to time he lives in. The best way to enjoy all this, is to watch all nine episodes.
  23. hiphop97
    Jan 19, 2014
    10
    Still my favourite show! Season 3 exceeded my expectations and it was just as good as the previous 2 series. Brilliant! Better than a lot of the rubbish on at the moment!
  24. high90
    Jan 20, 2014
    0
    I hate this show, I know I'm alone on an island but the term style over substance fits it perfectly. Super close up shots of Sherlock's eyes, camera work to induce travel sickness, texts on screen and at least a dozen slow motion or film in rewind shot, the one thing it lacks is a story. What made Sherlock Holmes so popular was the writing of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the cases were superbI hate this show, I know I'm alone on an island but the term style over substance fits it perfectly. Super close up shots of Sherlock's eyes, camera work to induce travel sickness, texts on screen and at least a dozen slow motion or film in rewind shot, the one thing it lacks is a story. What made Sherlock Holmes so popular was the writing of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the cases were superb with a incredible depiction of Victorian London. This has none of that its a mess and Professor Moriarty is the one of the worst casting decision in the history of television. If people want to watch the Sherlock Holmes try ITVs version staring Jeremy Brett at least a hundred time better than this pile of modern crap.… Expand
  25. BogKid
    Jan 19, 2014
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Hooray, Sherlock is back! But, I cannot help but to add the comment -- "slightly disappointing."

    The opening scenes explaining the failure of Sherlock's suicide seemed initially ridiculous but I did feel they were eventually funny, clumsy funny, but funny. The whole of Episode 1 of Season 3 seemed essentially contrived. Bits and pieces pasted together to produce a show without much cohesion and, frankly, not a heckuva lot of humor (humour?). Martin Freeman was his reliable old Dr. Watson Self. Mr. Cumberbatch, on the other hand, indulged himself in a bit too much of mugging rather than comic acting. I hope he is not becoming impressed with his legion of teeny-bopper fans.

    I still enjoyed the show but it definitely paled in comparison with the first two seasons. Oh, and the music is different and much less creative and interesting.    … Expand
  26. zero298
    Jan 25, 2014
    8
    It took me a while to come around to this show, but I kept wanting to come back and re-watch all the episodes over from the beginning. This season starts off strong, but episode 2 is stellar and makes the whole season great. The 3rd episode is the weakest to me though. The villain is an interesting complement to Sherlock, but its ending is bothersome. Still, a great season though.
  27. Acher4
    Feb 5, 2014
    10
    The best series in the world right now. Ok I am being a little overdramatic but this Sherlock is one of the best masterful tv-series. Stories, acting, end result. It’s really like seeing a trilogy on the cinema. A very well done to the creators. Masterful!
  28. DownByTheRiver
    Mar 28, 2014
    10
    No surprise that it was another fantastic season of Sherlock, my personal favourite show on right now, can't wait for series 4. If you aren't watching this show, you should, it's smart, funny, tense and all sorts of drama mixed in to a 90 minute episode.
  29. NikolayG
    Aug 19, 2017
    0
    Atrocious. Among the worst television ever produced.

    It can best be explained by discussing the episode that really killed the series. So, with regard to one episode only, I am about to provide numerous spoilers. So .... SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT - regarding only the blackmailer episode, which I believe was the final one of the season. SPOILERS START NOW. The final episode    Atrocious. Among the worst television ever produced.

    It can best be explained by discussing the episode that really killed the series. So, with regard to one episode only, I am about to provide numerous spoilers. So ....

    SPOILER ALERT SPOILER ALERT - regarding only the blackmailer episode, which I believe was the final one of the season.

    SPOILERS START NOW.

    The final episode (inspired somewhat by The Aventure of Charles Augustus Milverton, by Arthur Conan Doyle, and the Jeremy Brett Sherlcok Holmes episode, The Master Blackmailer) took the cake. You see there is a blackmailer who wears computerized eyeglasses - like Google Glass - with a screen that recognizes the faces of everyone the blackmailer looks at and - through a connection to some kind of grand computer database - provides the vitals on each person, the most important vital being their "pressure point" or blackmail-worthy secret. Sherlock's client wishes that Sherlock would get back from this evil fellow compromising letters he has in his possession.

    It's a long ridiculous tale, but by the end we learn that Watson's wife secretly is an assassin who has killed several people including for the CIA, and that Watson doesn't even know her real name. In seeking to keep the blackmailer from divulging this information, which he has on a USB drive, she gets the thumb drive back from him at gun point, and when Sherlock bursts in during the middle of all this, Watson's wife turns and deliberately shoots Sherlock in the chest knowing full well that it is Sherlock Holmes.

    Sherlock survives and for some reason (because she dialed an ambulance I believe) he forgives her and all is well. But he's still after the blackmailer. Ultimately the blackmailer promises to show Sherlock his grand database and takes him into a room where the blackmailer sits in a chair and says that his mind is the database - that he sits there memorizing all the dirt he learns about people, and that there is no actual computer database at all.

    Now this is stupid for two reasons. First, he had google glass-like computer eyeglasses on for the first part of the show and we saw the computerized information coming up on the screen in front of his eyes - so what is he even talking about? Second, if he had no backup to his information, no documentation, none of it could be used to blackmail anyone, but when confronted with this rather obvious fact he says blithely, "I don't deal in information; I deal in news," meaning he can publish it and ruin someone anyway, which is obviously not true or the tabloids would have ruined everyone by now. So that's rubbish. Thirdly, he had letters - he showed them to Sherlock - that Sherlock's original client in this episode wanted back as they contained proof of something that could be used for blackmail. So the whole ending where all the blackmail info is just in the bad guy's head doesn't make any sense and is incosistent with the first portion of the episode.

    Finally, as if a blackmailer without proof (except those letters and his computer glasses which I suppose in the latter part of the show we are supposed to forgot existed in the earlier part of the show) and as if Watson's wife being an assassin who intentionally shoots Sherlock in the chest, aren't bad enough, in the end Sherlock shoots and kills the blackmailer in cold blood to rid the world of the information in his head and free everyone from his potential blackmailing. Yes, Sherlock Holmes is a cold blooded murderer. The man had no gun, no weapon, and made no suggestion that he had any weapon. Sherlock just popped him like a Mafioso.

    This is the episode that many times over ruined this series for me. It had gotten quite bad but this was not just jumping the shark; it was jumping a dozen sharks and a killer whale. Sherlock is done.    … Expand
  30. Wesp5
    Jun 5, 2014
    3
    While I loved a lot of the previous episodes, in season 3 the explanation of Sherlocks death was disappointing, the wedding episode much too streched out and as in the other seasons, everything regarding Moriarty a joke.
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

12
#12 Best TV Season of 2014
23
#23 Most Discussed TV Season of 2014
83
#83 Most Shared TV Season of 2014

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
88

Universal acclaim - based on 23 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 23 out of 23
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 23
  3. Negative: 0 out of 23
  1. RogerEbert.com
    Reviewed by: Brian Tallerico
    Feb 20, 2014
    90
    The writing is still incredibly crisp, so smart, and never boring, and the deeper focus on relatable emotion, particularly in the definition of the relationship between Holmes (Benedict Cumberbatch) and Watson (Martin Freeman), could even bring in new fans to this international phenomenon.
    Read full review
  2. The New Yorker
    Reviewed by: Emily Nussbaum
    Jan 22, 2014
    80
    The show is at its best in such moments, these sequences that capture the semi-virtual, semi-real ways that we think, and feel, and meet, and connect today. It’s a rare attempt to make visible something that we take for granted: a new kind of cognition, inflected by passion, that allows strangers to think out loud, solving mysteries together.
    Read full review
  3. Hitfix
    Reviewed by: Alan Sepinwall
    Jan 21, 2014
    75
    When you're smart men writing about the smartest man of all, you may feel the need to demonstrate your smarts in every possible way, with every beat of the story. But Holmes and Watson are such enduring characters, and these versions written and played so well, that they don't always require such elaborate mental gymnastics.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »