Editorial: Moffat Takes (Canonical) Female Victiories Away In Sherlock

 So, two days ago, while at work, I was thinking to myself, when I realized something, something slightly troubling, about one of my favorite shows, Sherlock. And I thought I would share it.



Spoilers for "A Scandal In Belgravia" and "His Last Vow"

 Oh, Steven Moffat. Where do I even begin with you?

 He's kind of become rather infamous for his sexist comments (and other very terrible comments in general), and his writing (which can also be quite sexist). As for me? Well, I don't agree with a lot of what he says. A LOT of what he says. And I will admit: his writing isn't as good as it was to me three years ago. Though I will give him credit: he has written some of my favorite Doctor Who episodes and my favorite Sherlock episode. And I think season 8 of Doctor Who is showing signs of improvement from the last two specials (though part of that could be the new Twelfth Doctor, played by Peter Capaldi). Other than that, I have noticed a decline with his work. And I do think he needs a ego/reality check. I may even be so bold as to compare him a bit to Frank Miller. Sort of.

 But anyway, when I was thinking, I realized something about Sherlock:

 Moffat took away two female characters victories from canon, and gave them to Sherlock.

 Okay, hear me out: let's start with the one that got me thinking of this: "His Last Vow".

 So, in that episode, it's revealed "Mary Morstan" was actually a former secret agent and assassin, who was being blackmailed by Magnussen. When Sherlock discovers this, she's about to kill Magnussen, but is unsuccessful because of Sherlock's intervention. (I'll go more into my thoughts on this twist on Mary's character in my review of the episodes, which I hope to start next week).

 Now, I know some people bring up that she's a lot like Canon!Moran, but honestly, I think these people overlook that she's sort of a compostion of Mary and one of Milverton's (the character Magnusson is based on) victims, who is actually successful in her attempt on Milverton's life.

  Anyway, later, towards the end of the episode, it's Sherlock who gets to kill Magnussen, sparking all the in-universe drama and blah blah blah, stuff I'll get into in the review. Anyway, it's something I noticed. Mary, one of quite a few women who's been directly victimized by Magnusssen, doesn't get to kill the man. No, instead our male hero (who's not as victimized, IIRC) gets to kill him because... Protagonist.

 That feels sort of wrong.

 But then there's the even worse offender. The often criticized "A Scandal In Belgravia". At the end of my second least favorite episode, Irene Adler is inexplicably turned into a damsel in distress for Sherlock to somehow miraculously save. Really.

 Now, in the Canon, it was not even remotely like that. Canon!Irene is never captured by terrorists, she gets away to America safely with her not-Sherlock husband to live happily ever after, taking and disposing of the photo that Sherlock, Watson, and The King of Bohemia (long story) are after. She never needs Sherlock. Heck, she was even bold enough to follow Sherlock in disguise (as he is high off his assured victory over her), and TELL THE MAN GOODNIGHT before leaving. It was really awesome, both for how subtle it is, the fact she got one over on SHERLOCK, and that this was written in the Victorian Era, which I don't usually associate with feminism.

 (This is part of the reason I take offence to this comment I heard Moffat make in a panel about the ending to "A Scandal In Bohemia" being boring.)

 Anyway, I think it is worth noting is both episodes are written by Steven Moffat. While, as I've said before, I'm not sure how the episode writing goes for the show (for all I know, Gatiss suggested the ending of "Belgravia" and Thompson suggested Sherlock shooting Magnussen), but I'm more inclined to point the finger at Mr. Moffat.

 I will admit, Molly does get some victories, but she's an original character to the series. These are characters based on charcaters hundreds of years old.

 I think this is a rotten thing, and something I hope they avoid in the future. Though, given Moffat's track record, I ain't getting my hopes up. Hey, BBC, Thompson, Gatiss! If any of you happen on this, can you slap some sense into Moffat?

Top 9 Problems With Season 9 of Supernatural

 Season Nine… Just… Season Nine. This season just irritates me on so many levels. To disappointing wastes of story, to character issues, to just episodes in general. So, I decided to just list my top nine problems with season nine. These are going to go from minor, more personal problems, to things that fail even on an objective level (or in some cases, are just in poor taste).

 Of course, this being a list about the whole season, expect spoilers, both for the season itself and some seasons before. Here we go!

9. The Lack Of "Fun Episodes" (Decent Ones)

 One of the highlights of the show is how they can go from serious, angsty, depressing episodes to wacky, creative "breather" episodes. The most notable ones being the Trickster episodes (mostly "Tall Tales", "Mystery Spot", and "Changing Channels"),

Most Famous/Quoted line from "Mystery Spot".

 and "The French Mistake" (an episode where the boys are teleported to "the real world", where their lives are a fictional TV show.)

A surreal moment for the fans...

But there are still other ones that are really funny and full of wacky hijinks,  such as "Hunter Heroici" (where they deal with cartoonish situations popping up all over the town of the week), "Clap Your Hands If You Believe" (where they think they're dealing with alien abduction, but it turns out it's fairies),

Actual Dialogue Coming Out The Mouth Of A Gruff Voiced Thirty-Something Year Old Man.

and "Plucky Pennywhistle's Magical Menagerie" (where children's fears (unicorns (yes, I know. And it even shoots rainbows out its butt! :D), octopuses (octopi?), sharks in ball pits, and of course clowns terrorize a town).

 However, Season 9 doesn't have any stand out, "ha ha" episodes. Sure, it has funny moments (such as 90% of the dialogue out of Crowley's mouth). But there's no real shining comedy episode. There were ones I think were MEANT to be the big comedy episodes, "Dog Dean Afternoon" and "#THINMAN", but they both fell flat. "Dog Dean Afternoon", while having a funny premise (Dean links minds with a dog so they can communicate with him and he starts acting doglike, hijinks ensue). But it was kinda unremarkable and (to me) was tainted by Ezekiel/Gadreel showing up for the fifth episode in a row when it really wasn't necessary (other than to plant the seed of suspicion in Sam) (and I was already sick of him at that point. WE GOT IT AT THAT POINT, WRITERS! SAM HAD AN ANGEL IN HIM! QUIT BEATING US OVER THE HEAD WITH IT! WE ARE CAPABLE OF MEMORY!)

(on a side note: I would have included Gadreel on the list for his role in the first few episodes and his sudden but inevitable betrayal, but I voiced most of my complaints about the former months ago in my "Angelus Ex Machina" rant, and the character DOES slightly redeem himself in the end, so...)

 As for "#THINMAN", it was a really funny episode, and had everything going for it: The Ghostfacers returned, we had generic, off-brand Slenderman, and there was a lot of Internet humor. Heck, I remember seeing the first two things would be there and thought "okay, if this episode doesn't deliver..."  Yeah, halfway through, there's a huge tonal shift, with the Ghostfacers breaking up because of lies (in a less than subtle parallel to The Winchesters' own relationship at the time). While, granted, "Mystery Spot" and "Changing Channels" both had tonal shifts, too, the humor had been strong and notable enough before it that it didn't kill the humor. This one? not so much.

 I think this season really could have benefitted from a good, old fashioned crazy comedy episode. (Especially if they got Crowley in it. I don't think we've ever seen him in one of those episodes. I want to see that.) It would have maybe made some parts of this season easier to swallow.
 

8. The Gabriel Fake-Out

 Hoo boy! So, in the episode "Meta Fiction", fan-favorite character Gabriel (AKA The Trickster) makes a sudden return after being believed to be dead (his dead body and wing outline shown and all). At first, this is great. He's just as hilarious as ever (his banter with Castiel being the highlight) and even seems to retain his character development from "Hammer Of The Gods" by telling Cas he's more or less going to stop running from Heaven and accept his duty as the sole remaining Archangel and run Heaven now. Then trying to give his "little brother" encouragement to rise up and take on Metatron himself when it seems Gabriel's backed into a corner by Metatron's goons.

 Then it turns out was all a dream.

 Well, to be specific, it was an illusion set up by Metatron to get Cas to lead his own flock of angels in his "elaborate plan" to rule Heaven, and... *sigh* I'll get to the Umbridge of Angels later. The point is, Gabriel wasn't there. WAY TO SAY "F YOU" TO THE AUDIENCE, GUYS! *slow clap*

 Well, they do make it ambiguous as to what Gabriel's real fate is, when Cas asks him if he's really still alive or not and Gabriel just gives him a look. And there is supposedly a tweet from a writer where they say Gabriel is still alive. But honestly, the damage is already done. They yanked the fandom's chain. And if that tweet was real, if I have to look at that stuff to get that sort of information, that's unfair to the people without the access. Heck, (Hannibal season 2 spoilers) even Bryan Fuller won't confirm if Chilton's alive, he just lets the fandom wait for the answer. And he didn't say "Freddie Lounds is alive, guys!" after loudly implying her death (even if it would've gotten him out of some of the hot water he was in for that episode...)

 Anyway, I just felt like that was pretty rotten of them to give the fandom what they wanted then take it away just as quickly.

 Now, the other problem that cropped up in "Meta Fiction"...
 

7. Metatron becoming a Mary Sue

 Yes. So, in "Meta Fiction", Metatron reveals that, since he has the Angel Tablet, he basically has power near God's. And he proceeds to show off his OP powers to The Winchesters by BLOWING OUT A HOLY FIRE RING THEY TRAPPED HIM IN and then, just to flip them off more, removes the warding and trapping sigils from The Impala's trunk and free Gadreel.

 Plus he makes Cas get pop culture references. The cad.

 Yeah, Metatron basically becomes a Mary Sue. (And from now on, I'm gonna call him "Meta Sue".)

 And it's not just the whole "way overpowered" thing. It seems like every little thing Meta Sue does completely works for him. His plan to paint Castiel in a bad light and make him loose his flock? Works. Get Gadreel to betray Dean and company even though Dean has been downright generous to the angel he barely knows? Works. Pretend to be a miracle-working hobo and thousands of homeless people (and maybe others) to be his own little overtrusting army of homeless people to protect him, beat up an angel who tries to expose him, and idolize him? Works. Fight Dean when he's all hopped up on The First Blade? Heck, he freakin' kills him. Yeah.

 And this is not at all helped by the fact Metatron was far from a popular character from the start of the season, probably being one of the few villains fans actually hate. Yes, people actually love Lucifer more than Metatron. (Hence my "Umbridge" remark.)

 Now, on TV Tropes's YMMV page for Supernatural, they say Crowley is a "Villain Sue". Well, I would agrue against that by saying Crowley does not always win. There are just as many times that the boys and company have got one over on him as he has them. Metatron, on the other hand? He's only beaten at the end of the season (in an admittedly satisfying and almost funny on a meta level way I'll talk about in another post). And even then he doesn't get ganked like most of the fandom undoubtedly thinks he deserves.

 It's funny, in "Meta Fiction" Meta Sue goes on about how he's "the hero" of the story and "what makes a story work'. Too bad he didn't know not to make his self-insert an overpowered Mary Sue.
 

6. Pacing

  The pacing is awful this season. It feels like no progress to start solving the problems gets done most of the season. Only towards the end. They either seem to forget "Oh yeah! we got fallen angels, Metatron, and Abaddon running around! Gotta do that!" After establishing the problem in the first three episodes until "Holy Terror". It's like, "Guys, can... Can we forget the boys becoming "born again virgins" on a case only for Dean to loose it instantly because lolz? You kinda got BIGGER PROBLEMS HERE!"

 I mean, say what you will about season 7, at least we had at some development to the conflict with the Leviathans (how to kill and fight them) before what I presume was the season break. Season nine? Nope! Little to nothing until "Holy Terror"!

 Then it seems like we have some progression in "Road Trip" and "First Born". But then we go forever before much of the plot happens, besides "yeah, Mark of Cain (and possibly no love from Sammy) make Dean go crazy". And what does happen feels more like repeating what we know they should be doing. "Metatron's a dick (pardon my language), we gotta stop him!" "Abaddon's evil as all get out, we gotta stop her!" Heck, to me, it feels like Castiel and Crowley move the plot along more when they appear than our heroes do.

 And of course this is in no way helped by the blatent (failed) pilot for a spin-off, "Bloodlines", that happens THREE EPISODES BEFORE THE END OF THE SEASON. If this had been earlier in the season, I'd be fine with this, but seriously! The season was almost over and things were down to the wire. Is that really the time to send everything screeching to a halt to try and test out your attempt at expanding the universe? But yeah, they leave everything to happen in the last three episodes.

 If they'd have tried harder to keep up the plot more often, I'd be more forgiving, but it was really bad this season. Too much filler, not enough plot.
 

5. Too Many Subplots and Plot Holes/Continuity Errors 

 

You and me both, Gabe.

 Speaking of which, there was a bit too many plot threads this season. To count, we had:

• The Angels having fallen to Earth
• Metatron
• Gadreel's stuff
• Abaddon trying to take over Hell
• The Civil War between Bartholomew and Malachi
• Cas running around on his own (then his Civil War with Metatron's forces)
• The Mark of Cain
• The Winchesters Fight For The Gazillionth Time

 That, coupled with the poor pacing, really hurt the season on an objective level. The Bartholomew and Malachi plot even proved to have little purpose, other than to push Cas to rise up and fight and give him some of his powers back. (You know they were useless otherwise when we need to be told Malachi was killed off-screen by Metatron to tie up the loose ends).

 To me, Supernatural works when it keeps its conflicts simple. Let's look at my three favorites: Season 2's conflict was stopping Yellow Eyes and finding out what was up with Sam and the Special Children. Season 5 was stopping The Apocalypse. And Season 8 was mainly sealing the Gates of Hell with the subplot of stopping Naomi and her brainwashing. That also helps make the "filler" episodes a bit more tolerable.

 Also, the story was riddled with plot holes and continuity errors, both for itself and the season. To name a few:

• So if souls couldn't get into Heaven according to Kevin in "Captives", how is it Charlie clearly describes what matches the established canon for Heaven after she "dies" in "Slumber Party" way before that?
• They establish that supposedly Heaven's doors are sealed to angels permanently to presumably everyone but Meta Sue with The Angel Tablet's translation, yet there's a portal later? (though admittedly, that one could be chalked up to Crowley or Metatron being a jerk or Meta Sue's typos people pointed out before the episode (see, he IS a Mary Sue writer!)...)
• If the Angel Tablet can practically make and angel God according to Meta Sue, why didn't Cas exhibit that (or maybe, I don't know, USE IT TO STOP NAOMI, GATHER THE ANGELS TO WORK OUT THEIR ISSUES AND SAVE EVERYONE HALF THE CONFLICT THIS SEASON) when he was carrying the darn MacGuffin in his stomach a season ago?
• WHY DO THE FREAKING SHIFTERS IN THE "BLOODLINES" EPISODE/PILOT (which I may review on its own someday) NOT HAVE TO PEEL THEIR SKIN OFF TO CHANGE APPEARANCE AND INSTEAD CLEANLY CHANGE ON A WHIM WHEN THEY NEVER ESTABLISHED THAT!?

 There's more, including one that I'll address later in the list, but those are the ones that come to mind most.

4. The Waste Of "Human!Castiel"

 At the start of the season (and end of season 8), it's established that now that Cas lost his grace thanks to Meta Sue,  he is now 100% human. I (and most of the fandom) were pretty psyched about this. The fandom because of the domestic opportunities (which, yeah, were appealing). And I for the chance to see Cas grow as a character. I wanted to see him adjust to human life, realize more about it, and use it to both develop and maybe strengthen his relationship with the boys, now that he can empathize with their human plights. It would've be cool to see Cas around more often, too, given that, as a human, he was no longer a game breaker and could help the boys out with "saving people, hunting things, the family business". And, of course, the humor of Cas trying to learn "how to human" and the brothers trying to help the adorkable fallen mess.

 Instead, Cas got thrown out the plot (again) unceremoniously, only popping up once more in human form before showing up again in "Holy Terror", where he steals an angel's grace and gets some mojo back, ultimately disappearing after "First Born" again until his off and on appearances until the end with his subplot, but by then he was pretty much a (nerfed) angel again.

 The cherry on top of this failberry pie came in "First Born", actually. In that episode, he and Sam work to extract the residual grace in him left by Gadreel to try and track down the turncoat. However, (in one of the narmiest (but in a sweet way) scenes ever), Cas decides not to extract further when he sees the process is not only killing Sam, and Sam is intent to continue. When Sam asks why, Cas says how his time as a human "changed him", how he "sees the value of human life" and how fragile they are and he can empathize and blah blah blah. While this is all well and good, the writers forgot one key rule of storytelling.

SHOW. DON'T. TELL.

 Seriously. This scene would've been much more profound if we'd have seen this change over time. Instead of his two episodes "Heaven Can't Wait" and "I'm No Angel" then the writers assuring us, "yeah, he's changed." No. That's not how you do character development. While he keeps the development, they gave it to him in a bad way. And, of course, wasted a great chance for something new and exciting in the story for more of the same.
 

3. Overuse of show's clichés

  And more of the same is a problem. This season relied on the show's old clichés, essentially beating some dead horses one to many times for my tastes. "One of the brothers hides something from the other". "The brothers split up/fight." "Angels are terrible." "Dean is super-protective of Sam", "Cas is banished from the plot."

 On the subject of the brothers fighting, that especially irked me. I feel they dragged the already tired plot we'd seen many times before on the show, but usually contained to a few episodes before they reconcile. No, when they fight over Dean saving Sam against his wishes, it lasts the rest of the season, with Sam going so far as to say Dean is no longer his brother, say he'd let Dean die if he were in that position, and treat their relationship as just professional. It bugged me because, while in my opinion Sam did have some right to be angry at Dean for taking his agency (yeah, Team Free Will everybody!) (though he was a bit harsh), we KNEW they would make up. And you could SEE Sam still loved Dean, despite his words. But this lasted until the last episode. I spent most of the time wanting the boys to get over themselves and hug it out.

 I feel I should also mention "Bloodlines", since it, too, used show clichés, which is probably part of the reason it was so ill-received. The "the woman I love was killed and it forced me to be a hunter". "I don't want to be part of the family business, but I'm stuck like the mafia!" "My dad disappeared!" Blah blah blah...
 

2. "I'm No Angel"

 Okay, to be honest, these last two are interchangeable, I just sorted them by what drew more immediate anger out of me. This one, while initially infuriating (and by far a worse episode than the number one pick), is sort of a slow burn. It's like "The Blind Banker" episode of Sherlock: the more I think about it, the more it annoys/irritates me. (Heck, one of the things with number one makes this episode worse!) I feel like I need to review this episode on its own, just to fully discuss it, but besides the whole "Cas is kicked out by Dean and left to fend for himself" thing, this episode is rife with unfortunate implications and double standards. Mainly about men and sex. There's also a bit of out of characterness for Cas, and arguably a slap to the face for anyone who shipped Megstiel if you think about it too much. (And you know who loves to think too much!)

 Yeah, you know how I said "Bugs" was bad writing? Well, it still kinda is (Indian burial ground? It's the 21st century. And seriously, just Google when the sun rises in Oklahoma, writers...), but otherwise, it was just a bland episode. "I'm No Angel" is a heck of a lot worse. Trust me on this.

 Now, my number one issue:
 

1. "Stairway To Heaven"

 Now, before I begin, I'll admit this episode is a pretty decent episode aside from my main problem with it. Like "A Scandal In Belgravia" from Sherlock. However, "Stairway"'s issue is MUCH worse than "Belgravia"'s.

 It completely retcons Reapers into a faction of angels with no explanation.

 Seriously, there's no throwaway line of "Reapers are actually one of us" line from Cas or his flock. There's no reveal like there was for The Trickster being Gabriel in "Changing Channels". They just say "to the depths with continuity! It can stand in an endless line for eternity! Let's just act like this has always been!"

 To make matters worse, it's Dean who says this. Dean, who's had the most interaction with Reapers, especially Tessa (who he was addressing). It's just really bad, and I feel it's an unnecessary retcon, and (and I know I'll sound like a stereotypical strawman fangirl) spits a bit on the mythos established by The Kripke Era. Along with other complete contidictions to the mythos around Reapers. (This especially bugs me, since Reapers are among my favorite non-angel, non-demon creatures in Supernatural, along with shifters.)

 They could have had Tessa and the Reapers working with Cas some other way! They didn't need to make them angels. They could've just said "we had Reapers working for Bartholomew's flock, and when Cas killed them they joined us, too." Or "The Reapers have allied with us to stop Metatron, who they hate because he's keeping souls from Heaven, disrupting the natural order!" ANYTHING! But no. Retcon.

 And to top it off, they completely destroy Tessa's character. They have her brainwashed by Meta Sue to be his suicide bomber/"Castiel's reputation tarnisher". Then they have Dean kill her with The First Blade/her kill herself with the First Blade. Way to stay classy, respect a long-lasting character (and a female one, no less), and stuff another woman in the fridge, people! Have a cookie! Wait, I'm out of them. I gave them all to writers who earned them.

---

 Look, sorry I'm so filled with bile with this (I'm also kinda tired). This season just infuriates me more than any other season of the show. But were there an good things in this terrible season?

Well, that's another post...

Ezekiel: Angelus Ex Machina (Or:Dear Supernatural Writers, Please Stop With Ezekiel The Angel Of Bad Writing And Ruining Everything)

*WARNING: SPOILERS FOR THE SEASON EIGHT FINALE AND SEASON NINE OF SUPERNATURAL*

  *sigh* I came into season 9 with such high hopes. Granted, it's only been six episodes going on seven, buuuut it's kind of a mess. Why is it all the seasons divisible by three are less than stellar? It's like the fabled Star Trek movie curse. I'll get into my problems a little more when the season's over and all's said, done, and sorted. But there's kind of a big one I have vent about...

 Ezekiel.

  Hoo boy, Ezekiel.

  Okay, so to recap, at the end of season 8, the angels are forced from heaven, Cas is brought down to human, and Sam collapses dramatically. So, in Season 9's premiere, Dean gets desperate to bring his baby bro back (despite Death himself telling him what happens every time they pull this stunt... But hey, it's Sammy, the little brother he literally gave his life for, I can understand the irrationality...), even praying to the newly fallen angels for help. One angel comes to answer the holy ad, seeming to genuinely want to help. His name's Ezekiel.

  So, Ezekiel offers a little deal: he possesses Sam as a vessel to recuperate from the fall (switching between his and Sam's consciousnesses, Sam never needing to know he's there, otherwise he'd reject him from his body and die) and he heals Sam from within. Okay, that seems alright so far. The consent's dubious (yeah, Lucifer had more consent to possess Sam... I'll let that sink in...), but it could be interesting.

  Then he became what I call "Angelus Ex Machina" (or would it be "Angelus Ex Moosina?").


  In the second episode, he takes down a group of demons with his holy power. I was okay with this, the effect was pretty cool (I dug the ratty wings) and I figured we would occasionally get angelic smiting wrath of the divine. Then came the third episode, where Cas temporarily dies and Zeke revives him. Eh... That was okay... I guess. Then comes episode four, where out of nowhere Zeke comes up for no other reason but to revive Charlie when she died. (Really? You pulled the "LOL Not Dead" thing twice in a row, writers?) Are you starting to see my issue here? Then EPISODE FIVE, ZEKE POPS OUT OF FREAKIN' NOWHERE YET AGAIN TO HEAL SAM'S NECK WOUND, NEARLY EXPOSING HIMSELF AND LEADING HIM TO HAVE TO FIX SAM UP AGAIN...

 Yeah, basically, Ezekiel has been killing all the suspense in the show. It says a lot when one of the reasons I liked the okay-but-flawed sixth episode, "Heaven Can't Wait" (besides the stuff with Crowley and the stuff with Cas) is that Ezekiel didn't come in like a wrecking ball. I mean, I can understand occasionally using him or referencing him, but this is obscene. And it cheapens death even more in this show, where the three major characters practically have two-way fast passes for the afterlife. (I'm getting tired of writers not killing off characters for real in general lately. LET'S SEE SOME BLOOD SPILT FOR REAL, MAN!)

  Also, this is exactly the reason I think they sent Cas away or nerfed his powers all the time back when he was an angel: it's a game breaker. I know that nothing can ever be easy for Sam and Dean. It's part of the drama, seeing how the boys get out of their predicament of the week. I understand from a story perspective. Having an angel around kind of tips the scales too much, since all he has to do is smite the monster and then they can go out for beer and ice cream. In short, it'd be boring. Congratulations, You're illustrating why having Castiel around all the time wouldn't have worked from a story perspective... Now it's "how's the angel going get them out of this?" instead of "how're The Winchesters going to get themselves out of this?" If you wanted to do this, you could've just kept Cas an angel, instead of making him a human and pushing him aside, as if to say, "Hey, you're not an angel! You serve little to no purpose to us anymore!" Way to show him love...

  Third, he throws the known power levels out of whack. I seem to recall when Cas more or less "fell", he couldn't heal people. Zeke's healing people left and right, and he's supposedly "so weak". Granted, it's a different situation, but still. I'm assuming Cas and Zeke were at least at a similar level. Also, if he's able to revive the freaking dead, couldn't he just hop into Dean a while (he's the Michael Sword, he can take it), fix Sam (who's sure to have what Zeke's been doing to him still working a little bit), and go find someone more willing to host him? Is he really still "so weak"? Seemed fine to me after those two times. Unless they're gearing up to reveal he's an archangel (most are guessing Lucifer, based on his 2014 prophesy. But hey, Lucy lies. I'm hoping for Gabriel, who's rumored to return...), I'm finding my willing suspension of disbelief being tested, here.

  Basically, if any of the writers are reading this, just... do away with Ezekiel. Or at least don't pull him out for every little thing. I know Jared Padalecki (Sam/Ezekiel) is all excited about doing something new, I respect that. Just, please... You can write so much better, guys. Just look back at season 8! Or season 5! I'm hardly a professional writer, TV or otherwise, but I know good writing when I see it. And this... Isn't it... Please. I love this show. Don't ruin it with this sort of thing...

Why I'm Less Than Pleased About The Ending Of "I'm No Angel"

  Okay, so last night I was watching Supernatural. And I got to say, the ending I found to be not okay. The rest of the episode was pretty alright (though Cas having sex with a woman he'd only barely met... twice... was a little irksome, especially given his characterization...). But the ending was just... No.

 So, I'm going to explain why I don't like this. Needless to say:

 So, at the end of the episode, the now human Castiel finally gets back with The Winchesters and goes to stay in the bunker. However, Ezekiel (an angel who's currently partially possessing Sam, loooooong story), says that, no, Dean can't keep his boyfriend friend. Because, Cas (despite him getting an anti-angel tracker tattoo) is a huge beacon to the other angels, all of whom are ticked that he helped cast them down. And they would go after Ezekiel, too, seeing as he's helping him and his friends. And then Zeke would have to leave, and Sam would die without the angel healing him from inside. So Dean is forced to throw his soul mate best friend whom he shares a profound bond with out.

No. No no no! NOOOOOO!!!

  Okay, I'm ticked with this for a number of reasons. Mainly because of this: I'm tired of the writers coming up with excuses to make Cas leave. I mean, I could understand finding reasons to keep Cas from long-term stays with the boys when he was an angel. He was kind of a game breaker as an angel. Nothing can ever be easy for the leads is one of the first rules of writing. But now he's human, he's vulnerable, he's on the same level as The Winchesters (well, technically not Sam half the time, now...) (And he's actually quite valuable, still having the knowledge of an angel 24/7.) But nope, we gotta kick him to the curb!

(Not from this episode, but...) Lookit this face. Would you kick someone out if they made that face? 

  Second, like I said, Cas is human now. He doesn't fully know how to deal with being human. This whole episode kind of proved that. The face he makes when Dean tells him to go! He's like a lost puppy out there. And, again, while he still has his Angel Blade, he's still vulnerable. EVERY FREAKING ANGEL WANTS TO TRACK HIM DOWN! Seriously, I almost think it'd be better to keep Cas at The Bunker. They have more weapons, I'm sure the boys could set up some sort of "anti-angel room" or possibly find something in The Men of Letters' archives (I'm sure they have to have at least something on angels...). Maybe they can find some more holy oil for emergencies. And the boys have Angel Blades, too. Heck, Crowley (who I remind everyone is CURRENTLY LOCKED UP IN THEIR BASEMENT!) developed an anti-angel gun from an Angel Blade last season, just get how he did that from him! Seriously, I think dumping Cas out to fend for himself is possibly a worse idea. Way to look out for your brother, Zeke! Dean Winchester you ain't...

 Plus, Zeke showed in this episode that he's at least powerful enough to revive the dead, as seen with Cas shortly before. If he did have to leave because of Cas, couldn't he just say, hop into Dean a little bit (he was Michael's intended vessel, he can probably take it, and it's Sammy, he'd be willing to do it to help save his baby bro), heal Sam, and go find someone else to hold him while he recharges? Okay, that last one might be nitpicky, but still...

 I also take issue with this, because I feel the reason's... flimsier than his previous reasons. Here have been some of his reasons to leave before that:

• "I'm trying to find God..."
• "I'm fighting a civil war against Raphael in Heaven..."
• "I'm a bit insane at the moment..."
• "I need to serve penance for my actions..."
• "I need to protect The Angel Tablet from Crowley and Naomi and I don't want you guys caught in the middle..."

  I think those were better reasons. This... isn't, for the reasons I've said earlier. I know Dean would do anything for Sam, budding roman- BROMANCE! I meant bromance! - with Cas or not. But I feel like this is just wrong to do. And it's not of Cas's own will! It's just drama for the sake of drama.

 I'm hoping they at least don't drag this out needlessly long. That's one thing I can give Elementary credit for: not dragging out "Joan's secretly not his sober companion anymore" thing. And I'm pleased Agents of SHIELD didn't drag the "Skye's a mole" thing out too long either, and handled it pretty well last night. And I hope that Dean at least explains the situation to Cas, and leaves him somewhere safe, like with Garth. Heck, he can leave him with Charlie! Them interacting I'd love to see. If he just leaves him to fend for himself, I'll just... GRAHAHWJRGTAENGLJBAGFFF!!!!

Loveable Freak Blathers On About Elementary One More Time Because Why Not?

  So, next month is when Elementary starts season 2. I figured maybe now I should look back on the show overall (now that I've cooled down a bit) and settle the big question: was/is the show any good?

  First of all, I feel the need to apologize about my rant about "Dormiarty". She really wasn't THAT terrible of a Moriarty, looking back. I think my harshness just stemmed from my general frustrations with the episode, tiredness from watching/reviewing it, and expecting a lot more. I guess if she comes back, things could be better. She was new, so she was a target. (And there's only so many ways to pick on Millerlock...) Just need to get it out there.

  That out of the way, I figure I should discuss the two elements. (I may end up comparing a lot, so...)

STORY/WRITING:

  This is sort of a big problem for me. The writing on this show is very... hit and miss. Sure characters may get good lines, but the stories can be rather lackluster, and often at times feel formulatic (especially early on). If you look back, VERY few episodes were fantastic this season for me. I think only 5 episodes out of the whole 24 episodes ever got me truly invested (though there were some honorable mentions...). Heck, the first episode was incredibly lackluster when compared to, say, the first episode of Sherlock or the first episode of Hannibal. And let's NOT discuss "Dirty Laundry", shall we? (that, "Bugs" from Supernatural, and "The Blind Banker" episode of Sherlock are my standards for bad TV writing...)

  I'm especially disappointed in how the "story arc" was handled. It was pretty much all but forgotten until late in the season. And it started off so well, but kinda lost steam. Compare Supernatural (a show with a similar "episodes a season" count). They always try and keep some semblance of the seasonal story arc going on, but still take the occasional "filler break". If Elementary wanted to be more episodic, fine! Just don't tease me and leave me hanging.

 Though, to be fair, I did hear they chose to start the "Moriarty" arc at episode twelve so, in case they WERE cancelled, they could end on a mystery. Then they got the extra episodes for the season picked up. Then two more added to that. So perhaps it was more of a timing thing, not having a whole hiatus to plot out everything for the season. Plus, more episodes meaning they needed more filler. If that's the case, then it's that sort of stuff that makes me ticked off at executive meddling. Hopefully, given that they've had all summer to work out what they want (and knowing that they're in a good place with the network), maybe season 2 will handle any and all story arcs better.

CHARACTERS

  Hoo boy, characters...

  You all know I love Joan Watson. She is definitely one of my favorite interpretations of Watson so far. (And to think I was worried). Heck, I'd almost prefer would prefer the show if it was just her character. Lucy Liu does well as her, and I almost wish she was in another adaption than this. I like that she's competent (almost to the point I wonder why she doesn't do more solo work (besides friendship)). And I like how her relationship with Sherlock has developed. And they kept it platonic, not even doing that much teasing at something more romantic (even though it'd be less "taboo")! I pray that the freaking execs and crew keep it that way. We need more platonic guy/girl relationships on TV! Not every duo has to hook up down the line! Pleeeeeeeeeeeease?

Plus, she's in my most-exploited gif! :D

  As for Millerlock... Oh boy... If Joan's one of my favorite Watsons, Millerlock's one of my least favorite Holmeses. Jonny Lee Miller, to be fair, does do well at certain things in this role, and plays his character as written fine. He has some good snarky lines, some refreshingly human moments, and does some impressive things. But in the beginning, the character seemed unsure what kind of Sherlock he would be. An anglamation of his current fellow Sherlocks? Something all-new, all-different? It was distracting. He eventually settled on "broken genius". Which, to be fair, was fine. But the big thing is, that while he could convince me he was Sherlock at some points, he would then do something that to me is very Un-Sherlockian. I'd be watching and the illusion would be broken by him having a prostitute over/discussing his... *ahem* exploits, or even just those emotional breakdown/comprises he was having with "Irene"/Moriarty. He's just... not THE Sherlock for me...

  Finally, the supporting characters... Sweet merciful Doyle, the supporting characters. They're either underdeveloped or hardly used. Seriously, how much can you say about Gregson or Bell? It's hard for me to feel much attachment to them when I'm given so little about them to get attached to. Heck, in "The Rat Race", after Sherlock and Gregson's conversation at the end, I was hoping for more development in their relationship, like him developing into a surrogate father to Sherlock "Daddy Issues" Holmes (a la how Bobby is to The Winchesters on Supernatural). But then "The Red Team" crushed that with his "mistrust". Which, even that was more of an informed trait that was barely ever mentioned again!

  There's kind of an opposite problem when it comes to the other supporting characters introduced later on: they're not used enough. Seriously, characters like Ms. Hudson or Alfredo, who have the potential to be interesting, get forgotten for episodes on end. Or, in the case of my beloved Sebastian Moran, get unceremoniously killed off in their second appearance... (SEBASTIAN! YOU MADE THIS FUN! NOW SOME OF THE FUN HAS DIED! And I was singing, "Bye bye, Mr. assassin guy....")

 
  ....Sorry about the big lipped alligator moment, there...

  I mean, take shows like Sherlock, Supernatural, or Hannibal. I'm far more invested in almost all the characters and care more about them. Their respective writers do good to ensure that. I care plenty about Sherlock's supporting cast. I've put effort into remembering the names of the forensics team on Hannibal. Even on Supernatural, where death doesn't necessarily mean "gone forever", I feel attachment to the characters and am sad when they suffer/die (except Bela Talbot. I did not like her. She was on there too long...). Here, I feel little attachments besides to Joan, the turtle (who even he doesn't appear much), and maybe Ms. Hudson (and her one appearance.); and unless they had much impact or are a regular, I don't remember many names...

 ---

  So, ranting and accentuating the negative aside, is Elementary very good?

  I say it's very middle of the road. It has potential, and sometimes it lives up to it. But for the most part, it can be very "eh". But, if it's getting people into other Sherlock Holmes-related things, who am I to fault it? I feel that if an adaptation can get someone into whatever the source material is, it's done something right. For example, you know that movie adaption of  Fantastic Four? The first one? A lot of people didn't like that one. But believe it or not, it's what helped get me into superheroes and comics. I can't fault it for that. (the second one can rot at the bottom of a Wal-Mart $5 movie bargain bin, though... and ironically, guess which one I own? *sigh*)

  So I guess what I'm saying is, it's fine, but very flawed (Elementary, I mean...).

  Now, the big thing: will I actually watch season 2, and will I review it like last season?

  First of all, yes, I think I will casually watch season 2. Some shows improve with time (heck, even "New Who" and the first season of Supernatural weren't that good in the beginning (forgive me, dearest Christopher Eccleston, I enjoyed your season in the end)...), but got better as time went on. I think maybe now that they have better footing, the show good be better.

  Second of all, no, I will not be reviewing the show episode-by-episode like last time. It was a little draining, and I felt they got a bit repetitive (there's only so many ways a girl can say "this was alright, but not awesome"...) I know a lot of people read them, and it was nice to have a post up on almost a weekly basis, but I can't put myself through that again. I may review/share my thoughts on the season as a whole later, possibly. 

  But I doubt they'll have much to pull me... What's that? They're adding Mycroft to the show next season, starting with episode one? And he'll be played by Rhys Ifans, the guy who played both The Lizard in The Amazing Spider-Man AND Luna Lovegood's dad in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows?

  DARN IT, DOHERTY! YOU DRAGGED ME IN AGAIN!

Dear Recent Writers For Irene Adler: Why, Just Why? Sincerely, A Sherlockian

 Okay, so I'm trying to expand my horizons and write more than just Sherlock-related stuff. I really am. In fact, I have a post planned about a recent show and my thoughts on it tomorrow in lieu of an Elementary review. But I felt the need to say this. To get this out there…

What is up with two of the recent Adlers?

There's something I've noticed about two of the recent ones: a sort of double-standard that's employed. Allow me to explain...

I've made it no secret that I dislike BBC Sherlock's Irene Adler. Seriously, Moffat? You've written/created girl characters I like:

 Amy,

  Clara,

River,

Molly,

Madame Vastra and Jenny...

 

 Why'd you have to drop the ball on the classic female character I already like?

Sorry.

I could talk about how I felt she was over sexualized, and about the possible unfortunate implications I've read regarding her sexuality (Eek! Who'd have thought I'd be using those words and "prostitute" so many times? Talking about SHERLOCK HOLMES!? Ye gads). But I wanna talk about something I realized. It has to do with when Irene is escaping her house, the authorities, and our favorite duo...

When Irene tries to get her phone back, she stabs Cumberlock with a giant needle full of drugs, and beats him with a riding crop until he goes down. She then strokes his face with said riding crop, saying she wants him to remember her as the woman who beat him. this is treated as not too terrible a thing.

Totally No Big Deal...

 

So what's the problem? Well, let's just picture this scene with the genders switched. With Sherlock as a "Sherline" and Irene as an "Ian". Had it been that way, I think the scene wouldn't be treated lightly. It'd be treated for drama. There may have been an outrage. But no, since she's a woman, he's a man, it's no big deal. It's pretty much the double standard that men don't get abused, let alone by women. Or that they don't get raped, either.

Speaking of which...

I realize I neglected to mention something I noticed, but kinda sidestepped about the Rachel McAdams Adler. But since I'm going here, I can't ignore this. The scene where she and Downeylock are in the hotel. She drugs him and it's strongly implied, if not outright stated, that she and him... Did it. Yeah. Let's face it, she pretty much raped him. Seriously, think about it.

Again, if they were different genders, it probably would've been a bigger deal. I admit, I found the following scene with Downeylock, his pillow, and the chambermaid funny. But still! If nothing else, he treats it as a minor annoyance. (which probably has it's own issues) Who knows? Maybe for him and her, that's normal... I know Downeylock has feelings for her, but we never see him give consent. Rape is rape...

Don't get me wrong, I still like a lot of things about Movie!Adler, but I really wish they hadn't done that. It's unnecessary and has double-standards...

My lord! No WONDER Millerlock is a man-tramp into that sorta thing! These previous Irenes' actions to his predecessors must've messed up his psyche! (Though I still believe it's because they didn't want Joan Watson to be labeled a tramp if they kept the "three continents" trait from the original male version, so they just gave it to Millerlock instead. Which would be, in itself, a double standard...)

Now, I may not be the best person to talk about this. I may not be qualified. Someone could put this into words better. I'm just some random young woman on the Internet who fangirls and is to much of a shy, introverted nerd in real life that it's a wonder I can function in society. In fact, maybe I'm coming off as some whiny soapbox sadie. But I felt this needed to be said. To be put out there for thought...

So, Elementary writers, please, do not pull this sort of thing with your Irene Adler (who recently got cast. Please for the love of Conan Doyle let her be better than Pulver's). So far, the only bad thin is her being a "woman in the refrigerator" for Millerlock to give him pathos. Please don't make it "worse".

In fact, any future Sherlock Holmes writers, don't pull this crap with Irene. She never did ANYTHING like this in the canon! Who thought that needed to be a thing with her?

That's all I have to say. If anyone out there cares to discuss, please kindly do so.