bedelia1984

Love Happy Valley, especially the lead, she is wonderful, so lacking in vanity, and also the villain, James Norton, he's very charming in Grantchester, too, incidentally. Father Ted is a true masterpiece (but of course I'm biased).

This is a pet peeve of mine as well. Some shows are much worse than others though. Catherine on CSI and Beckett on Castle are ones that come to mind as classic offenders. Speaking of that article and CSI, that’s the only American show I can think of a with a Sherlolly shipper type of appeal in Grissom/Sara. I definitely don’t think the plain girl getting an extraordinary anti-hero man is common in American TV. Then again I don’t think anti-hero’s are that common in American TV. Usually it’s the classic good vs. evil, at least in crime shows. Yes, they were definitely two who came to mind- especially Beckett. I can see Grissom and Sara- well actually I can see it in the sense that I imagine it was quite controversial with the fans too, and also because the male lead is so unique and beloved that the fans feel very strongly about who he should end up with. He even had his own Irene- Lady Heather. I've actually noticed the same, and it is quite hard to know why- but a lot of the most adored british actresses are probably the character actresses- people like Maggie Smith and Judi Dench. It always surprised me, for example, that Colin Firth was such a runaway success after Pride and Prejudice and Jennifer Ehle didn't get much of a look in? She's still a very pretty actress, but apparently the English rose type just doesn't have that box office draw in Hollywood? I think Grissom wasn't quite extraordinary, but he had that quality on TV that is almost better- where there is something indefinable about the character that causes people to warm to him even when he's not the most like-able in terms of his actions. This reminds me what I didn't always like about Grissom/ Sara- he could be very stodgy and controlling, so I felt like that type of age gap relationship was prone to bring out his worst qualities. Now, I thought it played nicely onscreen for the most part- especially because Petersen is a very strong performer and managed to make it not seem weird. And about Beckett- that performance was part of the problem there, I think, the character was just a bit inauthentic in appearance and behaviour.

Is that last bit true? I don't see enough British TV to make that call, but I haven't noticed it so much on the things I have watched. But then, when I see Brit TV at all it's usually crime drama, the girls usually wind up either dead or in jail. :P I 100% agree- with the quotes, on my phone so will read the article later. I see the comparisons with Austen, Bronte, Bleak House... And it doesn't hurt that LB shares qualities with many of the actresses in those period BBC pieces. I would also see some comparison to Scully in the X files with Molly. But British dramas especially just make their heroines differently and I think it's seen more as a sign of cool to not care how pretty you look (Helen Mirren in Prime Suspect, the heroine of Happy Valley, etc) as opposed to a cry for help from your fairy godmother. It's actually a pet hate of mine on American TV to see female detectives totter on high heels with giant heads of hairsprayed hair and about an inch of makeup on. For me, that rings false. Not that you can't look like a fashion model and solve crimes, but something about them and the large numbers of them onscreen feels false.

What makes you think Sherlock had genuine feelings for her though? The only time that Sherlock was himself around her was in the hospital and he was quite unaffected by the whole thing so it would seem his feelings were superficial at best, more like she was fun girl to be around but rather indifferent otherwise. Everything else was an act if you go by the hospital scene. Or just look at how he talked about her to John. “Convenient to meet her at the wedding” which I always took as he knew who she was from the beginning and started the act off the bat. I thought that when he met her at the wedding he didn't know she worked for Magnussen straight away, and that he liked her then. Purely from BC's performance- things like the look he gave her on the dancefloor before leaving the wedding looking a bit forlorn (and when he threw her that flower, or whatever it was), and during their flirty exchanges. It seemed like she was the one to make the first move with him- the best man/maid of honor jokes etc, which was why I thought at that time he didn't know it was her and was genuinely at least taken enough with her to have a more friendly chat that he generally does with the normals. I'm not sure Sherlock is the type that considers many a 'fun girl to be around'- so I still think it's special that he clicked with her- but it's just part of my reading of the character, I can understand others differing.

Why would she have done the opposite? I’m not sure i follow your logic. I meant, why if she is only seeing Sherlock to get info for Magnussen why would she let him in to the office, which seems to have the opposite effect- i.e. getting Sherlock info on Magnussen instead? And she's risking herself getting fired as well, strange for a proposal she sees as a bit of fun, to go to that length for it? Given that Sherlock didn’t feel remotely guilty for anything he did (it was even in the direction of that scene in the script that he had no shame) then why would him not sleeping with her have to be for gentleman reasons? It could simply be he didn’t want to, yes? Of course, anything's possible, for me it's not what I believe based on what I saw of their scenes- but I can see why you might think so.

Oh yeah, the consent issues would have been crazy. I've already noticed that if you look back at shows from the 90s and watch them in the post #metoo era, consent issues are rife. I've been re-watching The X files and there is at least one clunker when it comes to that. It's amazing how much views have changed since then. It's probably weird to speculate to this degree over something that didn't happen- but say if Sherlock had slept with her, and we'd known about it? That would have been, if you take Janine and how it affected her out of it, a pretty shocking development. Presumably Janine had a fairly normal sex life and had had a few partners, perhaps, whereas for Sherlock it would have been quite the anomaly. I wonder how he would have felt about their comparitive levels of experience? He doesn't seem like a character who enjoys feeling out of his depth. The decision for him not to, of course, was all about what it would do to his character, the idea that Sherlock Holmes sees the body as merely transport, and yet also is too chivalrous to take advantage of women... he sure has a lot of reasons not to have sex. They were never going to go there, especially not just for a plot device.

Yes, in a way that (not sleeping with her) redeems him, though arguably he just felt too guilty about what he knew was a lie to take things any further? Because I don't believe he had zero interest in Janine: there was chemistry there. But the fact he didn't sleep with her- perhaps because he'd know she'd feel used later, to me also shows he knew he was in questionable territory. There's still something annoying paternalistic about that- I'll protect her feminine feelings so that she won't feel as used when she finds out I actually did use her for good, logical, manly reasons. Ugh.

That's true- she could have been lying and still been angry (though I don't see it in the character or the writing, personally) Added to them loving to lord their cleverness over the fans, there is also that little smidge of Moffat taking some pleasure in having Sherlock act like a cad and get away with it- Sherlock's insults in Scandal, his treatment of Janine- I think there is a small part of Moffat that actually likes the idea of a male hero who can get away with treating women poorly and they still want him- this weird boys will be boys and girls will love them anyway thing, which for me sometimes comes across in his writing. In fact, it's almost like he thinks it's a bit of a Bond-like trait- you know, treat them mean, keep them keen? I'm not a fan of that attitude; it is tempered by other aspects of the show and writing- but it's there. For me, Janine is more irksome that Molly because this is the sum total of how Sherlock deals with her, and it's all bad. Yikes. But yes, Moffat may actually think that. And then you've got Irene, an ideal of a slightly different kind, but again, very much available for whatever men might want, with little insight into what else makes her character tick, or whether she can genuinely enjoy it (as a lesbian?!) Did they have a relationship? Who proposes or accepts a marriage proposal over an intercom? They had a relationship, yes, whether it was casual or not is open for interpretation, but they were spending time together, they were affectionate towards each other, she was familiar with his home.. And I don't think she accepted, but rather let him upstairs- so maybe she wouldn't have, maybe she thought it was a joke- to me it's one of those scenarios where she was probably incredulous but intrigued- but she liked him and was interested enough to let him in, in a situation where had she been working with Magnussen against Sherlock she surely would have done exactly the opposite?

All Magnussen had to is say when you meet Sherlock Holmes at the wedding see what you can find out about him. That doesn’t have to be anything about sex just simply befriending like Mary and Janine did since Magnussen is always looking for information on people which should come as no surprise if she’s his assistant. It could be that after she met Sherlock that she liked him and the rest was her choice. I’ve seen that storyline on several shows and movies. Mr and Mrs Smith had a very similar storyline, for example. Again, that doesn't gel with what I saw onscreen- why does Janine make an issue of the fact Sherlock lied to her, if she was doing the same? Especially after he's been exposed in his lies, and their relationship is dead in the water, and there is nothing left to gain by speaking to him? What is the point of that scene at all, if their relationship was just a bit of fun for both of them, if they were both complicit in the dishonesty? I found it a bit unusual that they brought Janine back, actually, and the only reason for it I could see was because it was another time where they realised that actually Sherlock's treatment of a woman was something that couldn't just be brushed off, that he needed to be challenged on it.

There's still the question of when she became aware of that though, isn't there? It's not clear (at least to me) if she knew all along that Sherlock would never marry her (or that she would never marry Sherlock), or if it's only something she's realized afterwards, in hindsight. (Granted, I haven't read the script, so maybe I'm missing something.) I think on my initial viewing of the scene, I just thought those lines were a bit of banter, like when I hear people say something like, "When are you going to _____?" "When the Vikings win the Super Bowl." "But that's never going to happen!" That was totally my reading of the scene too. I thought Janine was saying that in retrospect that obviously wasn't going to happen. Part of the reason this doesn't sit well with me is the exchange between Janine and Sherlock about sex- where she mentions it would have been nice (I think?) and he says he was saving himself for marriage (right before the other exchange we've interpreted differently about how it wasn't going to happen). I actually can't believe he was enough of a cad to make a marriage joke to her after the fake engagement too! Geez. I'm just reading Ariana DeVere's transcript and semi-seething at some of the Moffatisms: JANINE (looking angrily at him): Sherlock Holmes, you are a back-stabbing, heartless, manipulative bastard. (Sherlock presses the button on a remote on the bed and the top of his bed rises, pushing him into more of a sitting position.) SHERLOCK: And you – as it turns out – are a grasping, opportunistic, publicity-hungry tabloid whore. How can he possibly call her an opportunistic tabloid whore (!!!!!!), when he was the true opportunist? And the way they have Janine partly play it off as in 'we're good'- though she does adjust his morphine, and good for her, in my view, that's total, Moffat, she probably went off and shagged someone 101. Ugh. To me- if we take Janine at her word, and for one I do think she's sincere, this makes her a bit vulnerable- she was spending time with him and wanted something physical, and he wasn't being forthcoming, but she was still interested in him, as a person, enough to be spending time with him. To me, that's someone who wants a relationship with a person, not just a bit of fun. They had a bit of a rapport at the wedding, so I don't see it as beyond the realm of possibility if she was thinking they could get on well enough to date or have a relationship. To me, she didn't act like she wanted to use him at all. I don't buy that her boss was paying her off to do it- she was afraid of Magnussen, according to him, so if he had intimidated her into seeing Sherlock, I just don't see her having fun with that, and looking for something more in a physical sense- Magnussen being involved would turn that idea into near- prostitution, it would make everything creepy. It's very interesting to consider this. Molly is a good friend to both Sherlock and John- we see this when they need her help. So she's nice like that. Socially, it seems like she often tries too hard, and doesn't know how to act normally- like at the party, or telling Sherlock about 'Jim from IT'- I feel like the more normal she tries to make herself seem, the weirder she seems- but of course, I like her for it.

It might be a bit cultural, too. In Ireland 'slagging off' your friends is a fairly widespread practice, across both men and women, in fact it's often seen as a form of affection. Of course, it's not the same as what Sherlock does, exactly, because the primary purpose is always humorous (though it can often be mean, or go too far). But because that's the norm here, what Sherlock does doesn't go that far beyond it- it is beyond it, but not as much. Some of the things people say to each other as 'slagging' here would probably count as emotional abuse elsewhere.

Yes, definitely overbearing, as Mycroft kept a secret from him that was potentially very defining for Sherlock's character, choices and issues. Of course, it really might have been better to protect him from Eurus, as if he was fragile when younger, knowing the truth could have put him over the edge?.

Personal insults intentionally directed at me will always be harder to brush off. About Lestrade, I’m curious on why you think that? Lestrade wasn’t the one cheating, though I’m sure it would hurt him and his pride that his wife was cheating but Lestrade is the wronged party in this case. If anything it would inspire pity. It was insensitive and rude to embarrass Lestrade by airing dirty laundry in front of everyone but if anything Sherlock was insulting the wife. I suppose for me- when Sherlock gives his digs to people about how they look/ plays on their insecurities, I do find him rude, but I also think, so what, how qualified his he to make these judgements, how seriously can anyone take them? And also, I don't find the insults to be reflection of his real thoughts- about Mycroft being fat, or Molly's mouth being too small- I think he picks up on other people's all too obvious insecurities, and exposes them to show off his observation skills. I think I've mentioned this before- for me his tone-deaf insults betray more his own insecurity, not knowing how to be social, so the only thing he can do in make wounding 'observations' of things everyone else has, he doesn't seem to realise, already noticed, but the others are too wise and kind to say them, in a misguided attempt to seem like he knows about people. Whereas to me, Lestrade is genuinely trying to make his marriage work, he's already had enough troubles he's overcome with the wife- he's excited about his life taking a turn for the better, for once, and Sherlock takes the opportunity to publicly pull the rug out from under him? To me, my longterm partner cheating is a life- changingly bad piece of news, yet Sherlock acts like it's a fun fact. I'd rather hear his nasty opinions on my dress and make up than have him publicly tell me my life as I know it is a sham, personally (though ideally: neither). Slight O/T but does everyone think Tom dumped Molly???! Totally thought it was the other way round, and that at the wedding she realised he wasn't intelligent enough for her? Again, probably similar to Lestrade, I just don't like this because it's this girl's real life. Hopefully she didn't take the proposal very seriously- but you just don't do what he did, if you're a gentleman. Especially not the ongoing relationship, wasting her time and potentially toying with her emotions- especially not when she was always very nice and decent to him. It's real-life bad form, and just because someone seems okay, doesn't mean they are- that kind of lying can seriously affect your ability to trust a new partner. And he's way too emotionally tone deaf to be making a call about who can be toyed with and who can't, in my opinion.

You’ll never get an argument from me that Sherlock’s a jerk to nearly everyone. There are different ways to be a jerk though. It’s just to me, personal insults like you’re ugly, dumb, fat, evil, etc., are worse than embarrassing someone by outing their spouse’s infidelity publicly or being unnecessarily rude. So to that end I think he’s the worst to Mycroft and Molly. He was a jerk to Janine by lying but he wasn’t rude.. in that case he actually used charm to be a jerk. Who knew that was possible?! Whereas for me, some of his personal remarks/ taunts, for some reason, I would find easier to brush off, whereas the idea that he would expose Letsrade's wife's infidelity, which I think he wasn't supposed to know about, in front of everyone, is a worse level of cruel? What he says to Molly is unacceptable, but when he taunts John about his moustache, say, or Mycroft about his weight- for some reason I expect a bit of that between men- well actually between immature men. Ditto for Mycroft taunting Sherlock about his lack of sexual experience. It may not be nice, but I hear guys slag each other off like that all the time- not all men, but to me its a remnant of the schoolyard? I suppose part of what make's Molly's worse, is that women are more judged on how they look- perhaps unfairly, so it seems especially churlish to take shots at her. But Janine- honestly, for me, Janine is the worst of all, because if Sherlock Holmes, the Benedict Cumberbatch version, said he wanted to propose to me and then, after getting my hopes up I find out that I was just a hapless pawn- and even the dating bit had been a lie, and hanging out while he splashed around in the bath, (perhaps most devastatingly of all), was just a lie- it would be upsetting on a whole different level from someone telling me my lipstick and dress were trying too hard. I know Janine bounced back fairly well- and got her revenge, but that must have really stung.

Eh, I think maybe on occassion he does want to hurt people- like in Scandal, when he's hating the party and wants everyone else to be miserable too... But I just can't stay angry at him for it. I blame BC.

Well sure J.P. but I think maybe Science can be a form of entertainment for Sherlock?

I would have loved to see Mrs. Hudson and Lestrade get more time too- though at least Mrs H did get some cool moments- Lestrade was largely absent. But is it consistently applied in his other friendships/interactions with Mrs. H, Irene, Janine, etc? I know he’s been sarcastic with John about intelligence but I can’t remember deliberate insults. Was the friend conversation in HOB an insult? I’m not sure. Hurtful definitely though. He also definitely enjoys insulting Mycroft whenever possible for sport. The most I can remember with Lestrade was the you see but you don’t observe or whatever that line was but I wouldn’t consider that an actual insult. I can think of several with Molly though which is why he comes off like a bully to me towards her with the xmas scene taking the cake. ...... It’s one thing to say nothing specific like Molly you’re a good friend and the other extreme of being a total asshole to her. Is there really nowhere in between? How can anyone expect you to believe the former if you act like the latter? Yeah for me, Sherlock is an equal opportunities jerk to nearly everyone- except possibly Mary? And Irene too, I suppose, though it's just one episode, and he does try to embarrass her at least at bit with the passcode thing. There are plenty of moments with Sherlock, and some with Mycroft (rudeness to Mrs. Hudson: so not cool, Mycroft), where I can't quite believe that these adult men were well brought up by their seemingly very nice parents. For Sherlock, things like his digs to Lestrade about his wife's infidelity, his digs at Mycroft for being overweight, the fake engagement with Janine was appallingly ungentlemanly, drugging John as an experiment... In general, Sherlock will observe a weakness and exploit it for his own entertainment, in most people close to him- not an admirable trait, but I think it is mostly consistent across those close to him.

I might have to watch the scene again but I remember taking the scene as one of those things he didn’t care about and weren’t worth his time, like the solar system. But even if your interpretation is the intended take, why did his retort have to be spoken with an insult to her? I guess because Sherlock is kind of a jerk sometimes, even, or maybe especially to people who matter to him, and especially when he feels vulnerable? And it's not an excuse, I think it's just a deliberate character flaw from the writers. On why she counts- we do disagree. I guess for me, it's about the context, when she says that her father hid his health problems from everyone, like Sherlock is hiding his anxiety- Sherlock points out that he hasn't hidden it from her. So when she says she doesn't count- to me it is clear that she is saying that she is not someone he cares about enough to hide his feelings from- and then, when he contradicts her, ergo he's saying actually she does matter in his life- not as someone who can be of use in his career, but as someone whose opinion and feelings would matter to him (and yes, that was a bit surprising given how he treated her before that). I could go on, but likely would not convince you! As an aside- appalled PBS cut out some of my favourite lines! The editors who work for these channels are butchers, they routinely axe out my favourite parts (probably because they are always more character than plot-based.) LOL! Truthfully, I’m still not sure how I feel about his reaction to her line. He did seem suprised but at the time, after the xmas scene in ASIB and the previous episodes like the Jim from IT scene in TGG, I thought the same thing as Molly, that he was pretty indifferent about her. Well, as Joel Coen said 'it's a fool looks for logic in the chambers of the human heart' (!) :D Sherlock often seems to expect people to have kept up with his logic when he's said nothing aloud- so it makes some sense for me that he would have recognised Molly was a good friend and a decent person, and decided she mattered more than most of the tiresome people he came across, and expected her to know that without ever in any way telling her. I do think before then, there were more bad moments than good- Scandal apology: good, Scandal insults: bad, Repeated devious flirting: bad, I mean, Sherlock is no saint, especially in season one...

I thought in TEH, in the stairwell scene, when he told her that she deserved to be happy, that showed exactly the kind of concern that you're talking about? And also, the invitation to work with him- it might be arrogant of Sherlock but I think it's probably the highest compliment he could pay to another human, the idea that he would like to work on cases with her- in his world view, I'm not sure it gets any better than that. The exchange about her father- for me, Sherlock immediately sensed that Molly was going to ask him about how he was feeling, and he instantly went on the defensive. I wouldn't class it like the Scandal scene, because his tone his softer and his protests are almost half hearted, and then at the end when she asks if he wants anything from the canteen, and he does want to ask her, and she brushes it off- again, this is just my interpretation, but he actually appreciates that she has made the effort and noticed how he feels- he's surprised and also it makes him feel less alone- and of course that later leads to him telling her that she does count, that she's always counted and that she was right- which sends a strong message of the way in which he has come to value her. When Molly says to him that she doesn't count- he looks genuinely taken aback to me, as if he realises how cold he has come across to her, and it doesn't reflect how he really feels- again, it's open to interpretation and I'm guessing you may see that totally differently!

Seeing her there happy in a second flash doesn’t mean it’s believable or makes sense. You’re just taking it at face value which obviously works for you. Just for clarification what I meant by believably happy is the dynamic between them. Meaning is he actually different towards her or not? Is she still hung up on him or has she moved on? Does she actually have a legitimate reason to be that happy around him and want to be friends? You seem like you know the answers to those questions based on her existence in the montage but I don’t. I mean he said he was sorry in the Xmas scene but the dynamic between them remained the same thereafter. I’m sure you’d argue that he’s different now than he was in ASIB or whatever but he was mocking her as recently as TLD. I see no reason from a snippet of a montage how you’re supposed to infer anything one way or another. Moffat claimed Sherlock would be more sensitive to her in the future but I’ll believe it when I see it especially when he’s writing. I mean he wrote the xmas scene which was apparently even worse as originally drafted than what aired which is scary. Being more sensitive than the xmas scene wouldn’t be hard but that is setting a low bar! I can see we are coming from totally different points of view, and I do see your side too- it's very frustrating to be told conflicting things from what we see onscreen, and whilst I don't mind having to do a bit of handwaving of certain things Moffat says, I can totally understand the frustrations of it. For me, the way he touches the coffin, before he smashes it, isn't about Eurus, because it's a very gentle gesture, and I don't think he's feeling particularly gentle towards her- that gesture is definitely about Molly. The smashing is probably a mixture of anger at Eurus, and, for me, anger at hurting Molly. There has to be a reason why the Molly test in particular causes him to lose his cool, even though it's the only one where it transpires there was no mortal risk to anyone? It's hard to know where Moftiss would go next with the writing- and I would definitely have reservations that Moffat, as a writer is equipped or motivated to write Molly's scenes to the extent I would like to see them- to me, Moffat might see Molly as expendable after this season, whereas I would guess Gatiss would rather keep her in. I think this is partly because Gatiss just has better ideas for her, and more interesting ways into her character. I also think he sees the comic side of Louise Brealey's skillset and is able to implement little touches of that which lighten his scripts in a lovely way- like in TEH (one of my favourite episodes). Incidentally, I don't think their dynamic was the same after Scandal- so many really important things only happened after that, his asking her for help/ to solve crimes, her gaining confidence in dealing with him, challenging him on the drug taking- and I don't mean to say that it was done perfectly, the slap, I could live without, for example, but in general, I think they mean to show progress, and did show progress. This all leads on to where John identifies Molly as the one person who will be able to see through Sherlock, but that Sherlock won't have thought of her- but of course he has. To me, that's the change right there,- he was taken aback when she noticed how sad he looked in TRF, but by TLD, he expects her to be the person called on when they need someone who understands him and sees through his act.

Wouldn’t they have had to actually address the ILY call for Sherlock to express regret? I’m also not sure how you can tell from the flash in montage that anything really did change in that friendship dynamic. For me, we see that Sherlock is distraught when he breaks the coffin up. Of course, I would have loved a scene where he says that to Molly- but to me, at this stage, it's a given that he was upset that Molly had been drawn into that 'experiment', and that in some way, in the future, she would know that- even if you take into account that John was there too, it's no secret that he hated what he had to do to Molly. So, again, just for me, it's no great leap to say that either Sherlock told her himself- and he's apologised for hurting her before, so it's not such a big jump to doing so again, in fact I think his general sense of propriety would compel him to say something, probably something better than what Moffat described, too. But even if it wasn't said aloud, or if it was a text messgae, or letter, or he stammered around it, and never quite got it out, or they both did, and had an awkward moment- I think people understand each other without words sometimes too. I think Molly's very happy expression, in the montage, on visiting Baker Street is enough to know things are better- if they weren't, why would she be there at all?

To you, is the lack of ILY call a gap or ambiguity and how do you differentiate? Further, if in TLD, the episode ended after John saved Sherlock from Smith in the hospital and there was no scene at the end at Baker Street, would that have been a gap or ambiguity? Would just going from point A (hospital scene) to the beginning of TFP as best buds again (point C) been as satisfying without point B (Baker Street scene with ghost Mary)? And how is going from the ILY call scene (point A) to the montage (point C) satisfying without an equivalent point B scene? Yeah, that's a gap- in that i would have liked an actual scene with dialogue between Sherlock and Molly- there could have been a time jump, it wouldn't have to be expressly discussed (the ILY call), but somehow, they could have conveyed the way in which things now stand between them. Again, not necessarily in detail. But the montage just barely does that. So they just about pass, but they could have done a bit better, IMO. It’s funny to me because the montage even upon initial viewing (specifically the Baker Street scene) seemed so jarring and out of place I thought the actors were just hanging out on set and not in character at all. I can see that for the Baker Street scenes (though I disagree, to me they were just more natural, happy, relaxed- life had finally settled down)- but I thought the violin scenes with Eurus were blatantly saying that Sherlock is a changed man- he is being kind to his sister, in spite of what she put him through, because he can still empathise with her pain In this possibility do you see Molly still hung up on Sherlock? If so, how would it be good for Molly to still be friends with Sherlock? What would she get out of it given how he is towards her? Actually, no. The way I see it, the next time they met, they had to in some way address what had been said in the ILY call, or even if they didn't, in an unspoken way, things had still changed. So, either, from that point on, they've discussed how Molly feels, it's in the open, and she can assume Sherlock doesn't feel the same, because it'd been addressed and there's no follow up- and she can finally feel that she can move on, knowing she at least got to say how she felt. It might even make it better to know that he cares enough to have some regret at not feeling more. Or, (as I'd like better) he would have to tell her if he possibly felt the same, even to a small degree, and maybe they would try a relationship, which might or might not work out and we'll probably never get to see. :( Maybe the call doesn't change everything, but it has the capacity to, and in the montage Molly looked happier with the status quo between them than she did in TFP, so I'll take that. You got all of that out of BC’s performance in the montage? I’m not even sure what to say to that. I didn’t. As I said above, count me in with those thinking “that’s not the real Sherlock Holmes”. Maybe it was more like BC though. I am surprised that the what 2 minute montage would be satisfying to you character development wise for a perceived 4 series long character journey. Well, no, as I mentioned above, the prison scenes, but also his whole entire performance throughout the duration of the show, and a transformation which has been ongoing since he returned in TEH, and realised how much he had missed the people in his life, his recognition of loneliness in TSOT, his sacrifice of himself in HLV, his regret over Mary.... and many other little things along the way, which, in my opinion, led in a convincing way to a montage with is a bit like an epilogue, saying now that he has been through all that, here is the (richer) life that he can now lead- in tiny snippets, yet, but because it's a 'happy' ending, we can imagine that all is in general well. I don't think Sherlock is helping John with Rosie because he's fundamentally changed personality by the way- I think he's doing it because he loves John, and sees her as family, and recognises that in the absence of Mary, John needs support. In essence, because Sherlock is a good man.

Yes, and, there's still room for him to occasionally, god-willing, come out and have an old-style adventure- with Watson of course! Even just a one-off TAB style (but present day). There's a cynical part of me that suspects Moffat might actually keep Molly around just to have someone in the background to take care of Rosie as John and Sherlock return to their former glory for a case or two. I wonder has Una Stubbs retired now. Actually I prefer not to think about it- just looked up her age and see she's now 80- how incredible her performance was in season 4!

Not for me. If I wanted to imagine everything I’d read a book. This is a tv show so shouldn’t it be about seeing it happen onscreen? Seems like a generous excuse to justify a lack of logic from scene to scene when the reality is they just didn’t care enough about it (especially in comparison to Eurus to show any follow up). Doesn’t Moffat’s comments in EW pretty much spell that out.... She would just go shag someone! For me, I like for even television to allow for little ambiguity- but then I am a fan of grey areas, to me, that it a believable aspect of the human experience. I do think the writing left gaps where it perhaps shouldn't have- but then I think the performances from the actors carried it on- the ILY scene felt right in terms of tone, and so did the montage and both Sherlock and Molly being seemingly in better places in their lives afterwards. In whatever capacity, the idea that the talk they had could have been good for them- whether it was a catharsis, a epiphany, a new start, or closure- it's not out of the realm of possibility that in the wake of a difficult time a friendship survives and gets stronger. Again, what Moffat said- I'm not convinced he believed, and it he did, I consider him totally wrong, but I guess that's his prerogative! Even though I wanted to see more of Molly onscreen, I liked that we did get some mentions that she and the guys were still hanging out offscreen etc- you can interpret their friendships as you wish in that scenario. I think TFP, more than anything, was showing how much Sherlock has changed in this regard. Mary's death has been one catalyst- but also he's older, more experienced and has gained the ability to be a bit more vulnerable, to have more empathy. He even seems to be helping John out with his baby! I think a lot of people might have fely like 'that's not the real Sherlock Holmes'- but is is the one we have in the end sequence, nonetheless. I felt like BC conveyed all of that in his scenes in the prison- that old imperviousness had disappeared, and it's one of the best things about his performance and the journey he took with the character.

I agree with this. Especially (bringing us a bit back to the thread topic) how they handled Molly. I've said I don't much like or feel affected by the ILY scene, but I also don't know how in the world they expect us to make a logical leap between Molly crying brokenheartedly on the phone and her bouncing into 221B like everything is fine. What were we supposed to assume happened? ... To some extent, there is a sort of beauty in the fact that you have to wonder what happened to cause that flip in attitude. I wouldn't like to have it all entiredly spelled out. Though I of course would also have liked more clarity around Molly's side of the story. I'm picturing the montage happening a few months after TFP, not sure how accurate that is, though. I think it's worth remembering that Molly wasn't in a great place at the start of the call- she didn't want to take the call from Sherlock, at all. And from what we'd seen in TLD, she was really angry at his behaviour. Yet, they were still on good enough terms to celebrate his birthday. So, either he'd somehow particularly annoyed her recently offscreen, or perhaps something else had happened to her recently which was upsetting. I think that was a definite part of the Moftiss plan- not only does he call Molly, but it is Molly on a very bad day, not a Molly who is so easy to get around as she was before. In hindsight it makes sense now that they made her character a bit tougher and more brittle this season- it had to be believable that she wouldn't just give in to Sherlock, and say the words, trusting that he had good cause to ask her- god knows she's done more difficult things for him in the past.