And almost as quickly, I have encountered my first Irene apologist. Did I miss something? She was evil, right? I mean she wasn't "misbehaving" and she wasn't "drawn that way"? I feel like one of us missed something pretty big at the end there.

I'm trying to decide how I feel about today's Sherlock. Was the sexuality OTT and self-indulgent? Or...is that just part of the package?

Right? As soon as she was introduced as a dominatrix, I was like, what, way to Miller-ize her (à la Catwoman).

Did I miss something? She was evil, right? I mean she wasn't "misbehaving" and she wasn't "drawn that way"? I feel like one of us missed something pretty big at the end there.

I wasn't really sure by the end what her whole deal was and what exactly her involvement was in things, but I am fairly confident she was not just some mischievous minx and, in fact, cared very little for human life.

I am fairly confident she was not just some mischievous minx and, in fact, cared very little for human life.

Seriously. I mean, her downfall was that she seemed to be sincerely in love/obsessed with Sherlock, but she was doing dealings with terrorists, et al. In my reading the big reveal was that she was worse than we'd been assuming all this time.

Why Sherlock needed to rescue her I don't get, but it's not like he has an actual empathic moral code or anything.

Hm, in the original story, she's a mistress to foreign nationals, so I guess dominatrix doesn't come out of nowhere, at least. I'm looking forward to reading the original stuff and catching the references...in series three! Which I presume will happen.

she was doing dealings with terrorists, et al. In my reading the big reveal was that she was worse than we'd been assuming all this time.

Yeah, that was my read as well, but I couldn't tell where she stacked up against, say, Moriarty, who seems worse. Yet, she appears to basically get a thrill out of fucking with people, no matter who gets hurt. Moriarty hurts with intent; she just doesn't give a fuck if you die while she has fun.

a mistress to foreign nationals, so I guess dominatrix doesn't come out of nowhere

Yes it does! Being someone's (or multiple someones) mistress has nothing to do with BDSM, professional or not.

I couldn't tell where she stacked up against, say, Moriarty, who seems worse

Damning with faint praise. However, she freely works with him, so that doesn't bother her either. I am so not sure why this person is trying to convince me she's misunderstood. Convince me instead that Sherlock doesn't care (although Mycroft seemed to be implying that he did, huh?).

Yet, she appears to basically get a thrill out of fucking with people, no matter who gets hurt.

I think they recognised the similarities in each other, though at least Sherlock has something more of a moral code (witness his care for Mrs. Hudson). It was interesting that Irene "needed" Moriarty to start a properly criminal career though.

I thought that was a blast, no drop-off in quality at all. Loved her password.

It's all about the coat.

In Doyle, Irene Adler had an extremely strong if somewhat unconventional ethical code - though not unconventional in everything. Her word was good, and she was kind and compassionate. But since this is 21st century Sherlock, reasonable variation on the original is to be expected, though making Irene Adler into Catwoman(amoral/evil version) does not strike me as the best choice.

More complaints about Moffat writing female characters: [link]

Adler is not "a mistress to foreign nationals" as if that's her profession. She's a retired opera singer who had an affair. And she's a foreign national herself, for that matter.

I enjoyed this review. [link]

I don't like the equation of the fact she slept with whoever with a sexual profession. Even though she was using that material as leverage, it's just not the same thing.