[SPOILERS] The curious thing about "The Blind Banker" is that its mystery was far better than last week's relatively simplistic case, but the added intricacy didn't help matters. The plot almost seemed to get in the way, giving the adventure a heavier feel compared to last week's light-footedness. And while everything came together by the denouement, the story seemed to wander down some confusing alleys and, in the cold light of day, you have to wonder why the villains stuck to such a convoluted plan.To explain; Sherlock (Benedict Cumberbatch) and John (Martin Freeman) were summoned to investigate a break-in at a bank, where the intruder left a strange cipher in yellow spray on a painting. Sherlock deduced that the symbol was positioned to be seen by a bank employee called Van Coon, who was working late. Van Coon was soon found dead in his flat; supposedly a suicide because the doors were locked and there was no sign of forced entry, but Sherlock reasoned the banker was murdered because Van Coon was left-handed but the gunshot was to his right temple...
So began an investigation with Sherlock trying to locate and decode more cryptograms, which started appearing around London as a kind of warning to those intended to see them before they're killed. What do the signs mean? Who is painting them? Why does seeing them result in imminent death? And what links those people who appear to have been targeted?
It's perhaps unfair to go into more detail with a series like Sherlock, which relies so much on a sense of discovery to keep you watching and enjoying the sensation of a deepening mystery being carefully dissected and explained. Suffice to say, writer Stephen Thompson (The Whistleblowers) did a good job filling 90-minutes with fun deductions and observational genius, which is half the allure of a show like this. Simple things like Sherlock noticing a sodden Yellow Pages on a doorstep (indicating that the resident hasn't been home in three days, since it last rained) were beautifully sewn into the episode, surely encouraging the audience to improve their own powers perception.Cumberbatch remains excellent in the title role; a pitch-perfect interpretation of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's sleuth, whose lizardy performance would fit the traditional period costuming but doesn't look alien in a modern context. The character is particularly compelling because there's a comfort in knowing the scripts treat his genius seriously and won't let the logic stray too far into a "magical" realm. One thing that often tarnishes Doctor Who is how The Doctor can solve a crisis by spouting technobabble (because the writers have authority on the pseudo-science that fuels that show and can improvise the rules governing that show), whereas Sherlock takes place in our world the writers simply can't pull that trick. Sure, there are times when Sherlock's powers of observation become preternatural (noticing the details of a man's wrist-watch to deduce a recent holiday, say), but it's all within the realm of possibility.
With Cumberbatch continuing to excel, I was a little disappointed to find Martin Freeman lean on his Tim-from-The Office shtick more noticeably this week. "A Study In Pink" was filmed last in this three-part production, so maybe it took Freeman awhile to find the character of John Watson. He wasn't terrible here, he was perfectly fine, but there were undoubted more amusing moments that Freeman tackled in a manner that reminded me of his comedy past -- such as John's awkward date to a travelling Chinese circus with Sarah (Zoe Telford), a doctor at a local surgery he's joined, with Sherlock playing the oblivious gooseberry.
"The Blind Banker" (which owed a debt to the Holmes novella "The Dancing Men") was a disappointment considering the nimble strength of the first episode, but hardly a disastrous one. The mystery filled the time far better than last week's, but it was a pity this episode didn't give its characters more room to breathe. The John/Sarah relationship felt particularly curtailed, which was a pity because Telford's a good actress whose character will hopefully continue to be a source of mild irritation for Sherlock (who almost looked jealous he now had to share John's attention with her).
The direction from Euros Lyn (Doctor Who, Torchwood) was actually more kinetic than Paul McGuigan's last week, but less assured and inventive overall. The difference between a television director and a world-class film director (turning his hand to TV) was evident, but Lyn's work was still very good and I personally found the show's trick of superimposing words/images onto the screen (to signify Sherlock's thoughts) was employed better here.
Asides
- I'm not sure I like those shots of London vistas that are shown to break-up scenes, mainly because half the screen is "smudged" and the action sped-up. Just aesthetically, I don't like the choice to give modern London an old painterly feel by blurring things.
- You may recognize actress Zoe Telford from her recent guest-appearance in episode 4 of Ashes To Ashes' final series.
- D.I Dimmock (Paul Chequer), the clichéd detective who doesn't trust Sherlock or believe his theories. I understand it's better for the drama if Sherlock faces official obstacles (rather than get a free pass with advocate D.I Lestrade), but what annoyed me here was Dimmock's sheer obstinacy when his own investigation was clearly achieving less than Sherlock's freelancing.
- This marked the second appearance of actress Gemma Chan over the weekend; she also appeared in Friday's IT Crowd as a sexy Star Trek character.
- C'mon, it's just inherently cool that Chinese gangsters calling themselves The Black Lotus were involved in this adventure. It gave everything a Tintin feel.
- Does everyone own a copy of the London A-Z in the capital, then?
WRITER: Stephen Thompson
DIRECTOR: Euros Lyn
GUEST CAST: Una Stubbs, Louise Brealey, Zoe Telford, Paul Chequer & Gemma Chan
TRANSMISSION: 1 August 2010 – BBC1, 8.30PM / BBCHD, 9.30PM
