bedelia1984

It occurred to me reading the chat on other threads, that it would be really cool if Moriarty and Eurus first met as children (perhaps in a therapist's office) and began to plot Sherlock's demise together at that time. It's sort of like childhood sweethearts gone wrong.

I will take my next thought on this over to TFP in case anyone wants to chat more about the above.

I'm not sure if its the story you are looking for, but Sherlock Holmes and The Adventure of The Pigtail Twist by MJH Simmonds seems to have some reference to silver polish on a footman's shirt in chapter 4.

I have very few problems with Eurus- I mean, sure, in my heart if the lost Holmes sibling was Mary, or Moriarty, I would have loved it, but to drive the story forward, it might make more sense to close those chapters and start something new. The only thing I'll be upset about is if we dont get any more. 😢

I agree about the fatalism, which to me is most pronounced by the time they introduce Eurus, which kicks up the nods to the ancient greeks more than a notch. To me, Moriarty and Sherlock are like old enemies from past lives. It's interesting to think what they must all have been like at that age, (the Carl Powers time) taking into account Eurus was already institutionalised and Mycroft probably as imperious as ever. Perhaps, as a criminal, Moriarty was from the start a particular kind of deranged mixed with devious that only Sherlock could understand and identify. Maybe, also, if we're allowed to fill in the backstory, having lost a hyper intelligent, criminally inclined sister, Sherlock might have started to subconsciously seek ingenius criminals elsewhere, whilst on some level really looking for her? (I know, it's giving them too much credit for planning!)

Oh wow, if that scene was ever filmed, it would be so amazing to see it! I just think their chemistry would be so incredible (the actors and the characters). I'm just the same, I always want there to be a reason that will make sense of everything, even Moriarty. Thinking he knew about Sherlock and Carl Powers instantly makes me think, but how and why and for what reason and how far back does it go? Frankly it's so exhausting I might need a Christmas sherry to recover from all the mental gymnastics.🤣

Oh Yes! Or maybe she got even with her husband's brother/cousin! I don't know enough about the Sherlock family tree to speculate further 😂 And before anyone says it, I do take note that this is Sherlock and not The Bold and The Beautiful.

Yes it's the most likely option. I used to have some kind of complicated backstory in mind that Moriarty was really the lost Holmes brother, or that he stole Carl Powers' identity (I still think the photo of him as a boy resembles Andrew Scott), but all we actually see is that something sparks with Sherlock in TGG. There are aspects of The Final Problem that throw things off for me as well- like for how long were Mycroft and Moriarty doing their backroom deals? I would have quite liked a flashback scene to show what their true relationship was, as Mycroft is a slippery fish, too.

Yeah I can see that. I'm never sure about Moriarty whether he became interested in Sherlock from the beginning, just based on hearing about him (and then maybe that case about the boy with the trainers, did we know whether that was him? Apologies that I've forgotten). Or whether the true 'bromance' if you'll forgive the term, took off from their first in-person meeting? I can imagine Moriarty obsessing about someone from afar, even stalking them, before meeting them, not sure why I think that about him.

I also always thought that Sherlock seems to be her favourite. This is a wild theory, but I did wonder if Sherlock could be a child from her revenge affair. Though that's complicated by how much he looks like his father.😂 This was my take too, though I thought it went a bit further, and Moriarty developed almost a love/hate obsession with Sherlock as a playmate. There are some minor characteristics that Sherlock and Moriarty have in common, that I feel like they recognised in each other (e.g. that detached love of 'the game'), and there was something magnetic about that dynamic.

It's a tricky one though isn't it? I can see why you would read her assassin-life that based on what they show of her career, and yet the whole business of her and John's residual tension hinges on her past being more seriously a dark secret- something that she withheld that might have cast her in a bad light/ caused John to rethink the marriage. I always thought her story stemmed from old school Moftiss logic, rooted in HLV, that notion some people out there deserve to be assassinated, and that Mary killed mostly that variety. Yes exactly, I think it's a way of cooking a frog in France, but that's the concept.🐸 Oh yes Sherlock always taking Mary's side- I do think most of this is Sherlock's innate narcissism- he sees much of himself in Mary, and therefore thinks like himself she is especially deserving of forgiveness and also it's for this reason that he thinks that she will make a good match for John. After TLD, one does doubt his forgiveness. Though maybe it isn't even about forgiving the lies- it's more the not knowing who she really is any more. Surely the comfort and intimacy of their relationship have to have been affected by her double life- I could see that making John feel quite lonely and lost. In general, I don't mind less John because I'm mostly there for Sherlock. However in terms of the structure of the show, they do start off with John's story of meeting Sherlock, they start with his efforts to find friendship and love, and his loyalty to Sherlock. So to the extent s4 was an ending, there could have been a little more of John's personal journey and where he has settled as a person, just to make teh show feel more whole. I hope there is still time and I do appreciate that some storylines may have been rushed together especially Mary's death, which made it necessary for John to stall a bit. Also, even though he has a daughter we don't get any impression of the significance of that relationship or even the sort of Dad he is. I feel like we were so much closer to John in the early years, we would have known much more about that side of his life back then. I would like them to try and re-balance some of this if there's more.

I like the witness protection analogy. The thing is, I do see what Mary kept from John as dishonest- but arguably she was more right to keep her secret- because people finding out really did do more harm than good, and the 'civilians' involved seemed ill equipped to meddle in her workd. The thing about Mary's identity too, is that it reminds me a bit of Sherlock dressing up as the priest in Scandal- a self portrait through a disguise. In many ways perhaps her new identity was more the real 'her' than her former life. We don't really know enough about her to tell. Still, whilst her reasons for deception may have been sound I'm not sure John would ever emotionally interpret it way, or that most people in a close relationship would. Hi! 👋 The more I think of it, Season 4 is truly the season of lies and the lying liars that tell them. And Sherlock's lie in TLD is again a self portrait, plus it works, and it drives the narrative forward, whilst revealing uncomfortable things about his character and his relationship with John. I also love that episode In a weird way, I wonder does Sherlock get any pass on lying at all just for being Sherlock? For any other friend, I totally agree, the trust would be gone. But are the inner rules of their friendship a little bit more skewed? Does John see Sherlock as somewhat extraordinary, and this let him away with things based on these heightened stakes? I always thought Sherlock drugging him in THOTB crossed a line, too, but this was quickly forgotten. And then, was Sherlock the starter liar (fake death) so that by the time he got to the biggest liar, Mary (assassin), John was like the frog in slowly boiling water? I'm not a fan of where they took John, either. I can't help but feel it was a quick route to create some drama and emotions from the often superficially handled Mary story. Also, maybe it's just me, but forget about John falling out of love with Mary, I got the impression that the writers had fallen out of love with John for all of season four. He became so functional- telling Sherlock to give love a try (hello cliche best friend in a movie role, though the scene is beautifully played), being the 'other man' Sherlock has to pick between with Mycroft, having an affair because it would make Mary's death sadder and more 'meaningful'. I don't have a problem with the basic concept of a man making grand speeches and in reality failing to measure up- that's all probably quite realistic. However, In the early seasons I felt like we got closer to who John was and his vulnerability, whereas I wasn't as satisfied by what we learn about him in season 4. MF's acting is as good as ever, but perhaps his material is not what it once was. There is a brief but terrific moment of bromance in TLD, but in TFP despite all the overt talk of how important John is to Sherlock I don't know that I feel it coming from the screen so much, they do too much telling instead of showing.

Hi again, everyone! I'm tempted to give them some leeway on John and Mary drifting apart... mostly because as you touch on later in your post, the lies Mary told John early on are possibly the sort of lies that over time would eat away at you... coupled with the idea of how John now discovers he's very committed (marriage plus baby) to someone he doesn't really know. For him to panic and contemplate cheating doesn't seem outside the realm of possibility. The sort of emotional clunkiness at work here pops up in several places in season four- making Sherlock choose between Mycroft and John is likewise ham-fisted IMO, as is the Molly being blown up thing- it's just all too extreme, and then the emotions conveyed lack the necessary complexity (in part because the series refuses to be pinned down into one telling of any side of the story). It was the lying thing that drew me in to answering this- because this has just happened to me, i.e. someone told a very big lie to me (actually several) and the consequences of it have been quite negative for myself and a few people I know. I'm finding it really hard to move past it and find a way to be able to co-exist with the person in question again (and unfortunately I sort of have to be around them). And exactly as you say, I can't think of anything that has made me more angry. I think there's an aspect of this that is about respect. On Sherlock, I think Moftiss have a hearty admiration for fibs- just look at their answers in interviews! But there are all different levels of lies too- but a lie so big you don't know who you are marrying, or the danger your wife and child might be in- that's pretty big. I think Sherlock, by the time we get to TFP, has something quite interesting to say about both lying and the arrogance of thinking you should decide who gets to know what, when (both Mycroft and Sherlock come to mind, they both pay prices for this sort of arrogance in s4). If you look at Mycroft keeping Eurus a secret- there was a feeling of superiority there, that he could handle information that no-one else could (and then of course he botched it), it's a similar thing with Sherlock in T6T going over Mary's head to solve his case, despite his lack of understanding of Mary's killer. So maybe when someone keeps something from you, part of the reason that's so annoying is that you feel they are placing themselves above you in a hierarchy of who really needs to know the truth, and who can do the best with it?

In Ireland, 20C is when the men start taking off their shirts and everyone is wearing shorts. And to suffice it to say, to quote Andrew Scott, we are not 'beach body ready' in the majority, sadly. But that doesn't stop anyone.

This is also me. It's 27 degrees here today and warmer in some areas. Sleeping at night has become so difficult. We're totally unused to this. Though, Ireland is so pretty in the sunshine.