[Note: I tried to be vague, but if you haven’t watched the 3rd episode, don’t read on or you may spoil a fun reveal]
I have come to expect a particular level of quality from Elementary after only three episodes, but I also find it hard to describe. When Sherlock is doing aerobics with Watson as a way to stave off sleep deprivation, or when he matter-of-factly explains that he used to talk to a marble bust to better hear his thoughts out loud (Though he now favors Watson of course), this is what I usually think of. Like with him burning that violin previously, these moments bring the actor out of the character so that you can better connect with them, and as long as a show provides ample quantities of these, they are good to go.
However, this is the second time where the actual plot of the episode has caught me so off guard that it overshadows even the crazy antics of Holmes and Watson. “Child Predator” pulled a trope that I can’t remember being used since a particularly twisted episode of “Angel,” and implemented it in such a way that I realized it made the entire episode better.
The emotional confrontation between the kidnapper’s victim, (Props to Johnny Simmons, who you may remember as “Young Neil from Scott Pilgrim) and their determination to protect their “Father” was very well done, showcasing a truly terrible instance of Stockholm syndrome, that becomes brilliant in hindsight. Not only did it have logic to it, but it explained inconsistencies that nagged at my mind, and this made the final confrontation between Sherlock and the kidnapper feel like he’d finally found an equal in terms of intellect. Not a “Moriarty” per se, but a dark “Son” whose power of deception fooled even the master deductionist. But only once.
Next week: Sherlock’s been ‘napped and Joan of New York is on the case! For all you Lucy Liu fans, this will be the one to watch;)