Leaderboard

I do too -- up to a point!

But I'm sure he looks much cuter than a literal interpretation of your description might imply!

Hello! It's hard to believe, but in 2010-2017 this whole series passed me by. I first watched it in 2023 and mistakenly started with the pilot episode. That is, I am the only person who got to know Sherlock from the pilot, and not from the broadcast versions. I really liked the pilot. Deduction, modern details like telephones, young actors, unlike the elderly Holmes and Watson familiar from other film adaptations of ACD books - I really liked all this, and I continued to watch the series with pleasure. I watched the broadcast version of Study in Pink in full only after season 4. Undoubtedly, technically SiP is made much better. It is a gift of fate that the first series had to be reshot, because the authors saw and corrected their shortcomings. However, the script is more harmonious in the UP. I consider the late insertions - the press conference, John and Mycroft's dialogue, the taxi chase, the drug bust - successful on their own but rather unnaturally inserted into the context of the first episode. Sherlock in the UP is completely different - smiling, charming and calm. However, his appearance is less attractive. Although he is wearing the same coat, shaggy hair and jeans exclude the idea of impeccable style, which is inherent in his on-air episodes. The camera does not try to choose the most advantageous angle for BC's face, as we see it in the series itself. However, I like both versions of Sherlock - the pilot and the broadcast one. It is a joy to see the very young Martin and Benedict in their roles. I do like one little moment at the very end, when they leave for dinner, Mrs. Hudson shouts something after them, and John answers, barely holding back laughter, it turned out very sincerely.

Works just like you described for me too, yes.

That's the whole website? Holy cow. We're doing this wrong.

Maybe it's a golf ball factory, so when they test their golf balls...... 😊

I think maybe that belongs in the WTF thread too. 🙄

You sure this doesn't belong in the WTF thread? Moral of story: Don't spit while committing a crime.

I don't know what it is, but there's a fence very similar to that not far from here. It doesn't enclose anything, it just runs alongside the road, and on the other side is a golf course. It's to keep stray golf balls from hitting cars. Could there be anything like that inside that fence? Putting range, maybe?

OK, I should have said "any non-immortal persons now living."

Even Keanu Reeves ? Just kidding, he’s far too kind to be a murderer.

Hello Carol, Your request shouldn’t take long as there is no evidence but sadly this can be par-for-the-course in the Whitechapel Murders case - especially in recent years. Certain writers resort to finding someone that was alive at the time and living reasonably close-by and then weaving a ‘case’ around them. If it can be shown, for example, that the suspects father had left while he was young or that the suspect had some kind of illness then ‘bingo!’ We’re now getting close to the position of wondering who hasn’t been suggested as a suspect by now (Dr. Barnado, Lewis Carroll, poet Francis Thompson, Oscar Wilde, Vincent Van Gogh and (horror of horrors) Conan Doyle!) The latest nonsense is the suggestion that it was a police officer called Endacott. He had absolutely no connection to the case but earlier had been involved in quite an infamous case after he’d arrested a young woman for soliciting on completely spurious grounds. The woman was provably not soliciting and there was justified outrage at her treatment. The guy claims that this was some kind of ‘trigger’ (yawn) for Endscott to murder prostitutes. Anyway, on to Holmes. Mudgett claims to have inherited diaries which ‘experts’ have shown to have been written by HH Holmes (although I’m unsure if he’s ever actually produced them?) In them Holmes claimed to have been in London at the time of the murders (this can’t be backed up with evidence despite Mudgett’s efforts) with another man who was some kind of assistant. Holmes instructed him to commit the murders as some kind of distraction to his own murders (in London?) and to discredit the police. Mudgett also claimed to be terminally I’ll due to a tumour which later magically disappeared. While he still had the tumour he was getting seizures which produced hallucinations where he heard his grandfathers voice. The theory is completely baseless Carol. It can’t be shown that Holmes was even in London and, whilst all murders are horrible, the ripper murders were of a very different type. Holmes was a maniac but not the Whitechapel maniac.

I'm thinking of ideas for a new tattoo, and I had the thought: In a world where Sherlock is tatted up, what would he get to honor his friendship with Watson? I'd like to get that tattoo! It can be an image related to a case/adventure, it could be a quote, no wrong answers. I thought it might be fun to hear some ideas from my fellow Sherlock Holmes fans!

My pal's corgi looks exactly like my old border collie, but with its legs chopped off!

I just saw this in my news feed, sounds like it was scary but everyone's okay. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/benedict-cumberbatch-and-his-family-were-threatened-by-an-angry-chef-wielding-a-fish-knife-who-tried-to-attack-their-home-and-rampaged-around-their-garden-report/ar-AA1bRrde It's a crazy world out there, alas.

Hi, Herl, Trudging along here . . still alive so that's something. Are you still actively involved in your Ripper community? I guess as with Sherlock Holmes aficianados, there's no danger of interest in the Ripper dying down. I discount Mr. HH Holmes since I'm convinced that the Ripper was a man local to Whitechapel. A visiting American or even a visiting toff from the better parts of town would have really been disadvantaged in navigating the district. Not to mention the MO of the crimes that Holmes committed is worlds away from the Ripper's work, geographically and stylistically. It's really rare for a serial killer to alter his hunting grounds and his signature methodology that much. It's usually what trips them up in the end . . their little habits. One suspect I've always felt incredibly sorry for is Montague Druitt, who seems to have been targeted for no other reason than because his body was found in the Thames shortly after the murder of Mary Jane Kelly. No less a personage than the Assistant Chief Constable of the Met published his theory that Druitt was the Ripper. Druitt was accused of 'sexual insanity' . . which I believe meant that he was a homosexual. He had been dismissed from his post as a a schoolmaster owing to having been outed, and killed himself in despondency, at least so it seems to me. His unfortunate death was coincidental to the cessation of the murders but because people theorized that the Ripper had stopped because he'd drowned himself in the Thames, Druitt being found there was convenient 'evidence' of the theory. Evidently some of Druitt's associates/family members even accused him posthumously of these crimes. I think they must have been looking for notoriety and profit from a man who could not defend himself against the charges, because apart from the fact that Mr. Druitt lived a considerable distance away from Whitechapel in Kent, he had rock solid alibis for several of the killings, having been away as far as Dorset playing in cricket tournaments. To have boarded a train and done a round trip of some 200 miles each way to cut up some wh*ores in Whitechapel and make it back to the cricket pitch seems . . well, fantastical. I hope that poor man has found some peace. If he was actually the Ripper, it would have been quite a feat to pull off. Seems unlikely that a barrister/schoolmaster would have chosen that milieu.

A week or so ago we got another letter from them, saying (once we translated it into normal English) that on the form we submitted this year, we had overlooked a fairly sizable tax credit that we're eligible for. Then they said we had to reply to their letter within 20 days -- counting from the date it was written, not when it was mailed nor when we received it. Nor is it really clear whether they mean that we need to literally send our reply within that time, or that they need to receive it by then. We had never heard of the additional form they wanted us to fill out, and it took us a little while to figure out what it meant, but we got together everything they had asked for, took it to the post office, and sent it via Priority Mail (supposed to arrive in two days), with tracking and with a signature required at the other end. That was Wednesday the 5th, and they said it should arrive on Friday. Whew, all taken care of! But Friday night I checked the tracking website, and saw that although our letter had gotten to the big postal facility near the IRS center on Thursday afternoon, it showed nothing after that. Now, four days later, it still doesn't show any indication of delivery or any signature of recipient. Did the post office lose the letter? Was it shredded in their machinery? Did they deliver it but fail to update the tracking info? So we made new copies of everything that was in the first envelope and wrote a cover letter explaining that these are duplicates, so please ignore if they already got the originals. We'll take all that to the post office again tomorrow. Hopefully they have a more reliable way of tracking letters, and they'll say it got there fine last Friday (but the website isn't updating properly). Otherwise we'll have to hope that the Postal Service gets it delivered this time.