Watch Sherlock Online Free. Sherlock Episodes at watchepisodes4.com

Was going to vote, but that's not enough... A MUST FOR ALL!

1 /10

It's after 2am and I have just registered on IMDb after watching the first ep of Sherlock as I was compelled to get it out there that this show prese ...

See Full Comment

Started quite good, ended very badly

10 /10

It all started quite good - first episode was really interested, second and third - not so much. Second season was much worse though. Typical for Mof ...

See Full Comment

WTF - - - WTF - - - Utter Failure

10 /10

This was one of the worst British series I ever saw. Trying to make Sherlock Holmes living in the modern times is a challenge, and if executed proper ...

See Full Comment

Not bad, not brilliant

7 /10

Decent start to a new series. Freeman and Cumberbatch were solid and seemed to fit well as a team. Kept enough nods to the classic versions while upd ...

See Full Comment

Are you serious?

10 /10

After all these great honors, spectacular reviews and messages we lost 1,5 hour watching this thing. I really don't know what's wrong with you people ...

See Full Comment

Overrated

10 /10

Potentially the most overrated program I have ever seen, it beggars belief that this is a more critically acclaimed program than Dexter, Arrested Dev ...

See Full Comment

So ... we have new clone of Dr. House

6 /10

First - sorry my English. Someone do a lot of work. Many things was carefully well chosen. So, Dr. House series are brilliant. This is not. Sherlock ...

See Full Comment

Dr House indeed

10 /10

I never really liked the prospect of an updated SH but I eventually, due to good reviews, gave it a go and watched the first episode of series 2. Wit ...

See Full Comment

Not quite so elementary! Brilliant indeed!

10 /10

When someone pointed me to Sherlock- a new series on BBC I was, to say the least, a bit skeptical. On top of that, I was told that this Sherlock live ...

See Full Comment

When someone pointed me to Sherlock- a new series on BBC I was, to say the least, a bit skeptical. On top of that, I was told that this Sherlock lived in London in 2010 and was fond of texting on his Blackberry and hosted a website? Color me confused! But I gave it a looksie –after all how bad could it be- Holmes is Holmes. On screen appears a lanky young fellow in a trench coat, getting high on nicotine patches who I am supposed to believe is Sherlock Holmes? This was, as far from my favorite pipe smoking, deer hunting cap wearing image of Holmes, as it could be. I rolled my eyes-this is going to be cheesy. But then in one swift sequence " the lanky young Holmes" in his first meeting with John Watson describes him, his profession , his relationship with his brother and his brother's marital status-all by one look at his cell phone (that's right his cell phone). BANG! I was hooked. This is Sherlock Holmes through and through.And that in essence is why Sherlock is so, so good. Holmes is not about the Victorian costumes and the environment in which the mysteries unfold. It's about the characters and the events that make the stories the defining mystery novels of so many generations. And Steven Moffat & Mark Gatiss' take on Conan Doyle's master detective captures the essence of Sherlock Holmes magnificently. The stories are essentially the same (the first episode-A Study in Pink is a take on A Study in Scarlet-the first Holmes novel) but given a contemporary twist. This contemporary take (which I thought was going to be cheesy initially) is what shows the duo's exemplary creativity. The modern outlook does not take away anything from the essence of Sherlock Holmes- it adds to it. The three 90 minute episodes breeze past you at a breath taking speed- challenging your intelligence and making you yearn for more. The episodes have distinctly dark and brutal settings but are also filled with moments of wry humor that make the experience completely satisfying. The concept of using images and visual pointers in the scenes were Holmes makes his superb deductions is excellent and helps the viewer see and think with the ace detective.As for the cast, Benedict Cumberbatch is not the kind of guy who would strike you as Sherlock Holmes when you meet him in a street, but man, does he own the show! Oozing charisma, Cumberbatch plays the Holmes character to a tee-arrogant, self centered, brilliant genius. There is an air of superiority about Holmes that makes him pity the vacant minds that don't see and understand the things which seem so obvious to him and Cumberbatch brings that out beautifully. Martin Freeman as John Watson on the other hand plays a perfect foil to Cumberbatch's eccentric genius-the everyday man. Looking for meaning and purpose after returning from the War in Iraq, Watson gets swept into Holmes' mad cap world of brilliance and chaos. Freeman's earnest and subtle performance complements Cumberbatch's Holmes beautifully.Sherlock though, is not about acting performances. It's about bringing the experience of the world of Sherlock Holmes to the world we live in. Moffat and Gattis recreate the world of the Victorian detective in a completely new setting and do it superbly. Nothing about it is elementary-it is pure genius!

A Study in Picture Gallery Red

-/10

What we have here is a very interestingly rendered modern version of Holmes' first appearance, A Study in Scarlet, in which he meets Watson, they tak ...

See Full Comment

What we have here is a very interestingly rendered modern version of Holmes' first appearance, A Study in Scarlet, in which he meets Watson, they take the rooms in Baker Street and successfully investigate a series of murders. The story is rarely adapted for two reasons. The first is that the murders don't make sense without the dull, rambling back story which no one wants to dramatise. The Valley of Fear has hardly ever been dramatised for the same reason. The second is that this is Conan Doyle's first attempt and he introduced significant character changes to both Holmes and Watson in the short stories. Holmes, in A Study in Scarlet, is rather more deranged, more like Cumberbatch's Holmes than Brett's, much more an aggressive, painful thorn in the side of the police rather than the unseen assistant of later stories.So people who haven't read the book or have only seen Holmes on screen need to give this a bit of time. 21C technology aside, it's actually quite a faithful adaptation, even though they ditched the back story and gave the murderer another, more credible motive. Knowledge of the original isn't at all necessary, but it does change the viewpoint. While some were congratulating themselves on beating Holmes to the punch in spotting the profession of the murderer, readers of the original were being conned into believing that his next victim was going to be the American he was driving (the victims in the original are all American). In the original, the word 'Rache' appears at the crime scene, also in an empty house in Lauriston Gardens, written in blood. The police jump to the conclusion that the victim was trying to write the word 'Rachel'. Holmes knows that 'Rache' is German for revenge. Moffat turns it neatly and humorously around. In the original it's a red herring, in the new version, it's a vital clue. These riffs on the original abound and are almost always imaginative and amusing and often more than that. Mycroft as Sherlock's Big Brother, for example.Moffat and Gatiss treat the characters with all the loving respect that an author could wish for and serve up an adaptation which re-imagines everything that Conan Doyle put into his plots and yet delivers something very close to to their original purpose and effect. Holmes and Watson are products of their time, as they should be, but they are recognisably the descendants and inheritors of the originals. The baby is still gurgling happily in the bathwater.There's a lot more here than initially meets the eye and I have a sneaky feeling it'll get better.If it does, it's going to be very, very good indeed.

Sunday nights have suddenly become interesting again

10 /10

I've been a Sherlock Holmes' fan for what feels like forever, and, like others, was concerned that this modern version would be a disaster. I needn't ...

See Full Comment

Sounds like a bad idea, right? Think again. The more things change...

10 /10

As a die-hard fan of the source material, I have tracked down and went through nearly every radio, television, film, and comic book interpretation of ...

See Full Comment

As a die-hard fan of the source material, I have tracked down and went through nearly every radio, television, film, and comic book interpretation of Sherlock Holmes - which run a mean gamut regarding quality, as you probably already know - and so I approached this incarnation skeptical but sanguine. Doubtful it would match the eminent Jeremy Brett series in quality, but hopeful it might preserve Conan's tone - something I think that series did well and the Downey Jr. movie did not.To my surprise, and delight, this show just so happens to be the bomb-diggity. Let me explain.Ever notice how lots of Agatha Christie fans complain when screenwriters change Poirot and Marple stories? I'm not one of them. I like new and different interpretations of those stories because otherwise, in the case of literary characters brought on screen, what's the point? What's the point if we film and re-film the same story, the same story which we've already read once, twice, maybe three times? Especially in many cases, what's the point when it's been done so perfectly before? In the case of Sherlock Holmes, The Hound of the Baskervilles has been filmed at least 24 times according to Wikipedia. So another iteration won't thrill me. However, one that takes liberties with the source material, i.e. bringing the characters into the 21st century, I'm all for it. Surprise me. That's what I say.And there are two things I really love about this series. 1) For longtime fans there are many, many "Easter eggs" to discover in each episode. And, best of all, 2) My boyfriend loves this series. And I can't pay him to watch a Jeremy Brett episode. He did enjoy the Downey Jr. movie (as did I, I just prefer a less swashbuckling Holmes - one reason among many that I didn't love the film), but he's never excited to watch Sherlock anything. This series is different. He loves it. For any Sherlock fan that would like to get their significant others on the band wagon, this is a great gateway. (And my boyfriend's actually a very good barometer for high-quality mainstream television shows. Usually, if something's firing on all cylinders, he knows it. More risky fare - he's off-put.)And, you may rightly ask, why should I give a crap what my boyfriend likes? Good question. I happen to be of the mind that TV and film can accomplish what my favorite art form - literature - cannot. The TV and film experience can be enjoyed by a group. Sure, book clubs discuss books, but with TV and film you and whomever you want to hang out with, experience story at the exact same time, in real time, and you can easily observe each other's initial, unguarded reactions. Plain and simple, it's fun to enjoy the mediums with others - to laugh together, to be scared, sad, thrilled, etc. It enhances the experience. I think literature's strength is the opposite. For me, the best thing about settling into a good book is that I'm alone. Just me and the test, together making up a story.Well, if anybody has read this far, I apologize for the rant. But if you're on the fence about buying the DVD or renting it or whatever, take a chance. Take a tip from me. You'll be pleasantly surprised. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

A masterpiece

10 /10

One word to describe this show..'excellent'. A true master piece. I am a huge fan of the original Sherlock Holmes books and TV shows. When I sat down ...

See Full Comment

Brilliant!

10 /10

I think it is always a bit uncertain and tricky when a 19th century series or film is modernised and most of the time it doesn't work, especially if ...

See Full Comment

Unique and well done

10 /10

I have been an avid fan of Sherlock Holmes from a very young age, and my first reaction upon hearing of a modern TV remake was "oh bugger, they are s ...

See Full Comment

Was going to vote, but that's not enough... A MUST FOR ALL!

10 /10

It's after 2am and I have just registered on IMDb after watching the first ep of Sherlock as I was compelled to get it out there that this show prese ...

See Full Comment

Nailed it!!

10 /10

To my surprise they absolutely nailed it. Cumberbatch is a fantastic choice for Sherlock Holmes-he is physically right (he fits the traditional readi ...

See Full Comment

Will have Conan Doyle spinning in his grave...............

10 /10

..with delight. A brilliantly written, well acted programme. Well done to all concerned. The story had me hooked from the start.All the elements of H ...

See Full Comment

Includes Spoiler

CurieCat

Utter cancer. Fuck this show.

thoughtsfar

Great suspense! It's the best TV show i've ever watched. Sherlock's my forever fav fictional character, splendidly played by Benedict. It's simply AMAZING!!

WandRaver

Why do people don't like season 4? I liked it because it proves that Adlock is the real deal. I just hope for a season 5 with Irene, hopefully Adlock in it!

fantastic!

davidbassem

Loved it

Tolly64

Addictive show with awsome twosts and plot. Not a suprise, since it's done by Moffat and Gattis

Daaavid

What a nice show!

Lordaa

GIMME MORE SEASONS!!!!!

KConnorG

I personally love the long episodes. I have a craving for it. I do not have much hope there will be more episodes more frequently. I wish the seasons were a little longer too. All the released episodes right now could basically be in one season as it is. I love Benedict Cumberbatch in all his roles he plays. He is one of my favourite actors. I love the "thought" process and how it shows texts/math/ whatever on the screen that it gets you thinking. It makes me interactive with the show in a sens

SupergirlBarry

Amazing show, great story, and amazing actors. LOVE IT