bborchar

It's not an "ad blurb" - it's the official companion guide to the tv show written using the writers' own words. That makes it canon in relation to the show. If it weren't official, they would have never let the author use pictures, news paper clippings, etc from the actual show. It's full of "in-between" moments that we don't get to see in the show, as well as information about the show as it relates to the books, and how the writers work them into each episode. I have given every reason why I see the ending of TGG as happening the way it does, and if you don't agree with it, that's fine- but the sources I have used to back it up are indeed official. And since John Watson's EXACT blog is used on the show, I would argue that is indeed canon, flaws and all. It also has extras from filming that are not included in the show, but are important (videos of Moriarty breaking into 221B and BBC news reporting on the death of Sherlock). I don't see how those could not be considered as part of the show. And you couldn't be more wrong- I find Sherlock's character fascinating and interesting. He's an a**hole that fully admits it and doesn't care what others think about it. And I never said that his character doesn't change. There's a very clear arc to his character where he grows into a good man- but he's not a good man at the end of season one (which we are talking about)- he is very clearly interested in the game for its intellectual challenges and not because of the people who are getting hurt by it. Up until the pool scene, Sherlock is thinking that he and Moriarty are the same, but on different sides, and that it was his choice that he picked to be on the side of good- but then he realizes that he actually does care about someone (John) and realizes that he could never choose to be Moriarty. THAT is when we see the big change in his character, and he is never truly a "hero" until the end of TRF. If Sherlock were just your everyday good guy defeating the bad guy, the show and his character would be incredibly boring. I like it that he is flawed, and there is absolutely no problem with pointing out his flaws- that was the way he was written. Would I like him if I had to live with him? Doubtful, but then again, not many people could stand living with him. John is his best friend and can hardly stand living with him sometimes.

MAJOR spoilers today, but to be fair, Sue Vertue gave it away with her tweet (as did Gatiss).

I would call it unclear at best and in any case not Canon. However, Sherlock is still, at this point, operating with a bit of megalomania: like a kid who thinks he can drink and drive because he's not ordinary, he can "handle" it. So possibly he did take the plans or a copy of them, I suppose. Doesn't make him unpatriotic. It is part of the canon in the tv show (according to BBC's website, it is the "official guide to the series"). Just like John's blog website and Sherlock's website, it has little "extras" that we don't see in the show that are part of the story, such as what Sherlock said during Moriarty's trial that got him thrown in jail for contempt and forensic reports for various people. And it is clear to me that it says that Sherlock took the real plans. And I just don't think Sherlock cares about patriotism- that doesn't mean he isn't patriotic or is, it just means that he doesn't care one way or another (there are plenty of people like that). Sherlock cares about something when it affects him or a case, but he will only care if it is interesting.

From the dvd commentary (not in order, but from the end): Gatiss: And here we have Sherlock making a mistaken assumption, he thinks it's all been about the Bruce Partington missile plans the whole time, when in fact it's all just part of somebody's game. (ie: Sherlock is wrong) BC: I like the idea of him at least trying to convince John that he's into television, brilliant. (ie: Sherlock's lying to John) Add that in with the extremely telling paragraph from the casebook, it paints a simple picture: Sherlock takes on Mycroft's case because he thinks Moriarty doesn't want him to get the plans, he lies to John about giving them back to Mycroft, and then uses them to lure out Moriarty. By doing this he makes a mistake and almost gets John and himself killed, and is only let go because Moriarty finds something more interesting to do. Also, Moffat and Gatiss said that they had absolutely no idea how they were going to end the pool scene until they wrote the script a year later. They don't think ahead as far as people think they do, and they haven't gone back to revise old cases.

You have a link or an exact quote for me? I wrote exactly what it says earlier in the thread, but I will copy it here again: John: "And of course, Sherlock handed the plans straight back to his brother, didn't he? Didn't he? I mean he wouldn't be so stupid as to use them to try and flush out a psychopath obsessed with destroying him. No. Even Sherlock wouldn't be that reckless, surely?" Sherlock: "It worked."

Then why, in the casebook, does it say that he did take the plans?

The reason I don't think we are ever going to hear about those plans again is that this show does not revisit past episodes unless the episode was a cliffhanger, then it resolves it and moves on. Other than the characters evolving, there hasn't been one episode that has gone back to a case and said "Oh, btw, this didn't happen". And I seriously doubt it would happen a full two seasons later. There is a full 18 months in between series one and two, and I really think we would have been told about it. The writers haven't left out important information before, and that would have been pretty important. But add that to the fact that the casebook says Sherlock used the real one and BC says Sherlock used the real one, I just can't see why he didn't. Sherlock isn't a trustworthy man (especially not at that point in the story), and we've seen him doing bad things in order to solve a case or "win the game" (torture a dying man, sell out his only real love interest, drug his best friend and frighten him to death in a lab, etc). He wouldn't have even take the case from the royal family had it not involved an interesting woman like Irene Adler, so I just don't see how he cares about Queen or Country. I'm sure he gave Mycroft the wet memory stick afterwards, but Mycroft doesn't really "trust" Sherlock- he uses him to do the legwork that he himself doesn't have time for. Mycroft knows how to manipulate his brother (and pretty much everyone else, too), and Sherlock knows it, which is at least part of the reason he resents him. Mycroft only miscalculated the Adler case because he probably didn't think any woman capable of seducing Sherlock, and he was wrong. But Sherlock steals gov't property in that episode- he takes Adler's phone and keeps it.

Just a thought- but what if Sherlock had figured out the recall code? What if Bach's partita No 1 WAS what Moriarty tapped out on his knee, and it was the code? Sherlock says "Don't think for ONE SECOND that I am one of them". He emphasizes the "one second" very heavily. What if it was the second movement of partita no 1? If Sherlock does say "If I've got you" using the Bach motif, then the clue would have something to do with Bach. And since Moriarty mentions partita no 1, it could be a bar from the second movement. Really out there theory, but just trying to think of things that would make sense However, I'm almost convinced that whatever Sherlock says, he's tell Moriarty the recall code- because if Sherlock knows the recall code, that would tell Moriarty that Sherlock was playing him the entire time and that Sherlock knew what Moriarty was going to have Sherlock do and how he was going to force Sherlock to do it.

Yeah, the second cover looks like some teen-show you'd see on the Disney channel.

When I talk about the airbag with evidence, this is why I do so: As far as Mycroft goes, we don't know what he did, but we can guess at it. I agree that the confession wasn't recorded on a mobile - that's why I think Sherlock uses the wireless camera. I do believe Mycroft knows more than he says to John- that is apparent. But we don't have enough evidence in that episode to guess as to what kind of help he gives. Maybe the person shooting the assassins ISN'T an assassin- we never see the person doing the shooting. But I don't know, I don't have enough visual evidence to make a reasonable hypothesis. Sherlock at least has some clues in order to make his deductions- we don't have enough to figure out exactly what Mycroft's involvement is.

What Sherlock gets wrong is thinking that the reason Moriarty was doing all of the bombing games was in order to keep Sherlock from finding the missile plans, when in fact it was because Moriarty just wanted the mess with him. You can't predict crazy- that's why it's so scary. And while the Sherlock in the original stories did care about queen and country, this Sherlock doesn't- he and John even fight about it when Sherlock refuses to work on the case. He ends up only taking the case because he THINKS it's the reason Moriarty has been playing the game- in order to keep Sherlock from finding it before he does (again, this deduction by Sherlock is wrong).

I'm still iffy on this, but if that was the real one that Moriarty threw into the pool, Mycroft would perfectly happy just to have it back. They already had a copy (at least that's what he told Sherlock, or maybe it was John). They just didn't want the plans falling into the wrong hands. Horrible thought -- Sherlock is so rattled (or indifferent) that he forgets all about the memory stick in the pool. It's found by a couple of teenagers, who use the information to hack into the British missile system and ..... Just remembered a piece from the Sherlock casebook about that- it's written by John (with notes from Sherlock). Here's what he wrote about it: John: "And of course, Sherlock handed the plans straight back to his brother, didn't he? Didn't he? I mean he wouldn't be so stupid as to use them to try and flush out a psychopath obsessed with destroying him. No. Even Sherlock wouldn't be that reckless, surely?" Sherlock: "It worked." Just a little fun- it's a great book with lots of interesting facts and easter eggs (no notes from Sherlock on TRF, obviously).

Yeah, he wouldn't have told Mycroft he had it because Mycroft would have wanted it immediately. It wouldn't surprise me if they had given Mycroft a wet and ruined memory stick. I think Sherlock has a well-deserved beating coming from John

Actually, we did get pretty strong hint that the memory stick Sherlock hands Jim isn't the original -- Sherlock has already told John that he gave the real one to Mycroft. He was lying to John so that John wouldn't know what he was up to (John would have never let him do it if he had known). He's pretending to watch a trashy television show until John leaves - even saying he would buy the milk just to get him to go and not come back. This is all stuff that Sherlock would never do otherwise.

At what point did Sherlock even know that John had been taken as hostage? When John steps out of that changing booth, for a few moments Sherlock is taken back thinking that John is in fact the bomber? Many people think this is the case. So, Sherlock could not be giving up the plans just to save him. Moriarty: "I will burn you. I will Burn, the heart out of you." Sherlock: "I have it on good authority that I don't have one." Moriarty: "But we both know that's not quite true." In the dvd commentary, Benedict Cumberbatch says that Sherlock got it wrong, and when he first sees John step out, he thinks that John is Moriarty (until John shows him the bomb). Look at his reactions- he's clearly confused at first, and then angry. He really did get it wrong, and the plans aren't fake (the audience would have been told if they had been). Sherlock's plan wasn't to trick Moriarty with fake missile plans, it was to lure him out using them.

Just wanted to mention that these questions are thing that don't have any concrete evidence (from the episode) that would explain them. Such as the Mycroft question- we know what he says to John...but we know nothing else. We can "guess" as to what the answers might be, but I haven't seen or heard anything that gives them away yet. It's obvious that he knows more than he's letting on, but for what purpose? We'll have to wait to find out, but it's fun to guess The female assassin does not show up anywhere in the episode- that's another lady that John sees (I think that scene is just John suspecting everyone he sees). I've watched most of that episode on slo-mo and have not seen her anywhere in the background. I know the expression of angels means to be on the side of good, I just wonder if it isn't also a clue. It may not be at all, though. I don't think Moriarty acts intimidated by Sherlock at the end- in fact, he looks positively happy about it. That's what doesn't make sense to me. That's why I think Sherlock figured something out, something very important. And I do believe he is counting on Moriarty to commit suicide, otherwise he wouldn't be able to pull off the jump trick.

He did get it wrong. "This is what it's all been for, all your little puzzles, making me dance. All to distract me from this." Moriarty didn't want those plans (he threw them away). It's not much of a bait if the fish doesn't want it. Moriarty came out not because of the plans, but because he REALLY wanted to hurt Sherlock, and hurting John was the only way he could. Sherlock didn't care that those other people had died, he cared that he "lost" that round. He even says so to John, and they fight about it. To Sherlock, those victims are nobodies- the same way Moriarty feels about it. And Sherlock thinks that he and Moriarty are the same...until John becomes a hostage. Then Sherlock even gives up the plans just to try to save him. Sherlock only decides to blow up the bomb when there is no other possible solution and it looks like both he and John will die anyway.

I mean he loses because Sherlock got it wrong- he thought it was about the Bruce-Partington plans, when in truth, Moriarty was just playing a game with him. They only survived because Moriarty called it off- even if Sherlock was willing to die to take out Moriarty, it was because Moriarty was forcing him into it.

Oops, sorry- I accidentally hit "post" before I wrote my reply (I'm on my mobile so I can't edit). Actually, Sherlock loses the last one, too. He thinks Moriarty has tried to keep him from finding the missile plans because he wants them- and when he sees John strapped to the bomb, he gets visibly upset. That is what makes Sherlock different from Moriarty- that's why Moriarty looks down on him: because Sherlock genuinely cares about other people. I don't think that Moriarty is scared of Sherlock torturing him on the roof- I think Sherlock convinces Moriarty that he would do anything to win the game - including letting his friends die. Because that's what makes them different.

Reply fail- my reply is in my next post, sorry!

Could be anything that you can't figure out, or something just bugging you I think I've pretty much worked out a working theory for Sherlock's fall, but there's a few things I'm still stumped on: 1. Why do we never see the female assassin? 2. Why doesn't Mycroft mention the assassin watching Mrs. Hudson? 3. Who are Moriarty's "people" supposedly watching for Sherlock to fall? 4. What does "IOU" really mean? 5. Why does Moriarty talk of "angels"? 6. What does Sherlock say or do to convince Moriarty that he has figured out the riddle at the end? 7. Why does Mycroft warn John about the assassins and tell Moriarty what he needs to know to destroy Sherlock, but then do nothing to help him? 8. Why would the assassin watching John even be there? None of the other assassins are trying to kill Sherlock's friends- they wanted Sherlock alive. What makes this guy different? Of course I have a few vague theories, but nothing with evidence. Feel free to state your own or elaborate on these

I thought about Parachutes at first, but it's not a song that Sherlock would know, and even the tune he sings in isn't the same. He said himself that he doesn't keep up with popular culture. I'm putting more emphasis on the Bach motif because it fits with the Bach motif that is going on throughout the episode.

Sherlock has deduced that there is a recall code, but Jim thinks he's safe because even Mycroft's people weren't able to make him talk. Sherlock points out that he isn't as civilized as Mycroft, he's like Jim himself, willing to do literally whatever it takes. Jim realizes that he wouldn't be able to stand up under his own brand of torture, so Sherlock really is threat after all. He prevents himself from talking in the only way left, and dies believing he's beaten Sherlock. Yes, but the key is HOW does Sherlock convince Moriarty he's not as dumb as he seemed only a few seconds ago? I somehow doubt just looking deeeep into his eyes would do it Sherlock has said or done something to convince Moriarty that Sherlock was playing him all along on the rooftop. Moriarty's reaction to Sherlock's statement is odd, very odd, and has always struck me as "not quite right". I'm still trying to figure out exactly what it is that Sherlock does that is out of character which Moffat mentions. He does so many things that are out of character in this episode it's hard to pinpoint what it is that will explain everything

I listened to the ringing noise when John was hit- but it just sounds like tinnitus to me (not surprising given that he is probably mildly concussed from the fall). It's why they call it "getting your bell rung"...people seem to hear a ringing sound when they hit their heads. Moving his arms and legs is probably helping him to steer himself to the landing spot. But I think it also doubles as a way to make the audience realize that it's a live person jumping, not a corpse or dummy falling. There would be time for another body to be put there- if it's done while John can't see them. Drag it out while they are still talking on the phone. I personally think that the "close up" shot of Sherlock falling on the ground is either the body being tossed on the ground, or Sherlock taking his position on the ground. However, the noise we hear may have nothing to do with the picture at all- it could be the sound of him hitting the airbag (which will still make an impact sound). I think the truck being there is a red herring to make people think he jumped into the truck. Notice how we never see a clear shot of the area near the garage the whole time John is rounding the corner? That's because the people helping him run across the street and take the airbag with them. I do think he jumped onto an airbag. After a little research, it looks like they can be inflated and deflated very quickly (in less than a minute for some models).

When Sherlock sings "If I've got you", the tune he uses is very distinct- the Bach Motif: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BACH_motif When transcribed- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_signature_names_and_translations It spells "Bach" (when translated in German). Now, Sherlock could just be using the motif as a reference TO Bach, or he could be hinting at a code that we've all missed. I worded it badly when I said that the Bach motif was a cryptogram- I meant it more that using the motif itself could mean that Sherlock has solved a riddle that we haven't, and that Bach could be the clue to it. Hope that makes it clearer Maybe the fact that he got Moriarty to tell him that the fingering was Partita #1? Lol, no idea