Episode 3.2, "The Sign of Three"

[BLS_Pro]

Just finished watching.  And I must say the episode was very uneven (and like 3.1 relied on coincidence far too much for good storytelling).  But this episode does serve to confirm everything I said about HEARSE.  The man who gave that speech is not what everyone excused Sherlock as being in HEARSE.  He was not an idiot about human nature, about John, and about being able to either identify or admit his feelings to John.  (Nor was John, as demonstrated in his response to the speech and when asking Sherlock to be his best man.)  They were both able to freely admit their love for one another - in public no less!  So all the claims that HEARSE was a result of their inability to do such things is a complete contradiction of what they did - without problem - in this episode.

Sherlock's speech fit his character as it had been written in the first two Series completely.  HEARSE, on the other hand, was a complete contradiction of all that had been established before HEARSE - and is further reinforced here in THREE.

Whoever it was that the writers manufactured in HEARSE, it was not the Sherlock Holmes (nor the John Watson) of "Sherlock".  It was bad writing.

 

[Karie]

Just finished watching.  And I must say the episode was very uneven (and like 3.1 relied on coincidence far too much for good storytelling).  But this episode does serve to confirm everything I said about HEARSE.  The man who gave that speech is not what everyone excused Sherlock as being in HEARSE.  He was not an idiot about human nature, about John, and about being able to either identify or admit his feelings to John.  (Nor was John, as demonstrated in his response to the speech and when asking Sherlock to be his best man.)  They were both able to freely admit their love for one another - in public no less!  So all the claims that HEARSE was a result of their inability to do so is a complete contradiction of what they did - without problem - in this episode.

 

Sherlock's speech fit his character as it had been written in the first two Series completely.  HEARSE, on the other hand, was a complete contradiction of all that had been established before HEARSE - and is further reinforced here in THREE.

 

Whoever that was that the writers manufactured in HEARSE, it was not the Sherlock Holmes (nor the John Watson) of "Sherlock".  It was bad writing.

 

 

Not at all arguing with the points you made, because I don't disagree, but to play Devil's Advocate for a moment... it could be argued that the events of SoT take place months after TEH, in which John and Sherlock have not just come off of an extended separation, but have had months to reestablish their bond and grow more comfortable with each other again. 

 

I do tend to agree that Sherlock's behavior, particularly, in TEH was a bit of a WTF moment for me. But, as Benedict said in an interview, he's been away for two years, alone, away from the one person who "saved him" from himself, and he has regressed. I'm going to kick all that in TEH under the rug by assuming that it was only because of that isolation, and now things are back on track (and better than ever) in that relationship. Maybe you're right, and it's just bad writing, and the writers never intended or even considered Sherlock's reason behind his behavior,other than they thought it would be funny (this is, sadly, most likely). I have to find a way to excuse the behavior for my own enjoyment of the series. 

 

 

On another note, I currently am $6 and some change away from a qualifying free shipping purchase for these dvds. Why do they have to make it such a random number??? 

[BLS_Pro]

Not at all arguing with the points you made, because I don't disagree, but to play Devil's Advocate for a moment... it could be argued that the events of SoT take place months after TEH, in which John and Sherlock have not just come off of an extended separation, but have had months to reestablish their bond and grow more comfortable with each other again.

 

Except the general excuse that people made for HEARSE was that Sherlock was simply being oblivious about human nature in general, and John in particular.  Time away didn't make him ignorant.  If anything, it can easily be argued that it made Sherlock more aware of the value of friendship and of John in particular (his conversation w/ Mycroft for example). Thus, far from the separation making it difficult to admit his feelings, one can easily argue it served to make it, well, easier. 

 

The other excuse used was that neither of them is capable (not uncomfortable w/ but simply not emotionally mature enough) to express their emotions to each other, even in private.

 

Both of these excuses are contradicted by the episodes before and after HEARSE.  That's (along with numerous other reasons) is why I say it was bad writing.

 

At this point, my only hope is hope Moffat can rescue this third series with VOW.

 

 

I do tend to agree that Sherlock's behavior, particularly, in TEH was a bit of a WTF moment for me.

Since pretty much everyone else was universal in their acceptance/excusing of it, I would really enjoy hearing why you thought Sherlock's behavior in HEARSE caused you to go WTF - ie didn't fit his character and/or the storyline.

 

 

On another note, I currently am $6 and some change away from a qualifying free shipping purchase for these dvds. Why do they have to make it such a random number???

 

That's why I do Amazon Prime.  I get it each year and never once regret it.  If you make more than a few purchases a year, it ends up more than paying for itself (not to mention the free movie streaming and free kindle book rentals you can get with it), I highly recommend it. 

 

[Karie]

 

Since pretty much everyone else was universal in their acceptance/excusing of it, I would really enjoy hearing why you thought Sherlock's behavior in HEARSE caused you to go WTF - ie didn't fit his character.

 

 

 

It just didn't seem in keeping with the character development he'd made up to that point. The bit with the train was unnecessarily cruel, especially.  We've seen Sherlock be obtuse, we've seen him be an ass when he's showing off and making deductions.  But I can't remember him ever going out of his way to be mean FOR A JOKE. It all came across very much as if the writers just said,"Hey, you know what would get a laugh from the audience?" Like there wasn't really any consideration for canon characterization there, and I hate that. It's one of my pet peeves. We see it a lot in shows with lots of different writers, and someone new will pen an episode and the characterizations will be way off, and it drives me up a wall because all I can think is,"You work on this show. You get paid to write for it. Was it really too much trouble to actually watch all of the previous episodes and get a feel for the characters you're writing, so you don't make them behave as if they've been body snatched?" 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's why I do Amazon Prime.  I get it each year and never once regret it.  If you make more than a few purchases a year, it ends up more than paying for itself (not to mention the free movie streaming and free kindle book rentals you can get with it), I highly recommend it.  

 

 

I've been considering Prime lately. I'd be more swayed if their instant viewing selection was larger. I wish they would work on that! 

 

I ended up scrapping all of the random stuff I had added to my cart and just throwing in the season one dvds. It would be nice to have my own copy of the unaired pilot (my favorite) to watch in HD on my 55" television, instead of on a grainy, 14" laptop. 

[BLS_Pro]

It just didn't seem in keeping with the character development he'd made up to that point. The bit with the train was unnecessarily cruel, especially.  We've seen Sherlock be obtuse, we've seen him be an ass when he's showing off and making deductions.  But I can't remember him ever going out of his way to be mean FOR A JOKE. It all came across very much as if the writers just said,"Hey, you know what would get a laugh from the audience?" Like there wasn't really any consideration for canon characterization there, and I hate that. It's one of my pet peeves.

 

...don't make them behave as if they've been body snatched" 

I agree completely.  The train sequence simply made no sense whatsoever - for Sherlock or for John.  Just as Sherlock's actions were unjustifiable, John's acceptance of them was even more unjustified.  If someone betrays you, you don't forgive him because he betrays you again.  Putting it in terms of justice, repeating a crime gets you a harsher punishment, not a pardon!

 

None of it made either character sense or story sense.

 

This is why I say the video recording of that sad excuse of a "solution" was inserted in the middle of that scene - so that Sherlock's betrayal wouldn't slap the viewer in the face so obviously.  In fact, much of the humor in the episode was used, not for story purposes, but to obfuscate story problems (not all of the humor, mind you - ex. the humor in the initial reunion sequence actually does serve a story purpose, and is not, as some claim, a result of Sherlock being obtuse.  He smartly did it on purpose, as he indicates to Mary afterwards).

 

I've been considering Prime lately. I'd be more swayed if their instant viewing selection was larger. I wish they would work on that!

Indeed.  Even considering amazon and netfix together, the streaming options are not nearly as rich as they could be.

 

[Karie]

Watching it again (yeah, work is gonna be super fun in the morning), and something that's slightly irritating to me...

 

That woman was a nurse.  Are we to assume she couldn't tell, immediately, that those guys were totally hammered? And she tried to take them out to solve a case in the middle of the night? I probably would have said,"You know what, I'll try back tomorrow when you've hopefully sobered up..." 

[wildwoodflower]

My favorite line (of a bazillion lines that were great) is Mrs. Hudson saying "your mother has a lot to answer for."  I laughed so freaking hard.

[Karie]

"I have a list. Mycroft has a file." 

 

LOL, poor Mrs. Holmes.  She must have constantly been wringing her hands. If she, as Sherlock claims, barely understands a thing, I'd wager it's because of damage from years of alcohol abuse. Those two certainly would have driven her to drink! 

[RV0889]

Aaaah, after last episode which was a tad disappointing i feel the real Sherlock is back as a series. What an episode!! Did Moffat write this one? I think the difference just shows.

 

I think this episode is among the top 2 in the 8 episodes so far.

 

Sherlock's speech as the best man. Sherlock be my best man, will you?!   The brotherly love,sherlock constantly iterating that Watson saved him. Just brilliant. There have been only 2-3 scenes of Mary and Sherlock together but the chemistry is just something. I think i am just in love with Mary as a character. I just hope that these guys don't kill/harm her

 

The short build up to the wedding was good as well, the small part where they solve the bloody guard together. Since, the wedding is said to be in early spring, i think there was enough time for sherlock and watson to get comfortable with each other again.

Linking up the murders was just brilliant in itself. I knew they would somehow connect the various anecdotes in sherlock's speech to the main case and the same happened.

 

Mrs. Hudson is so funny.

 

P.S. Jenine (bridesmaid) was hot, esp when she said "Can I keep you?" to Sherlock.

[BLS_Pro]

One note about Mary besides those already mentioned: pay attention to her reaction to the news of "three".  It isn't pleasure but worry.  It's obvious that her deception (whatever it might be) suddenly has ramifications far beyond any she anticipated.

[T.o.b.y]

Yes, I was surprised as well that it seemed like bad news to her. I mean, happily married to the father, no job security problems to worry about (since he's also her boss), financially secure, no health issues (we know about) - why would a woman in that situation be anything but happy to find out she was going to have a child soon?

 

And yet, she seemed more than just a bit surprised. Worried was my impression as well.

[Karie]

I don't know, I think I'd be a bit panicky/worried to find out I was pregnant, no matter how secure I was in my life/relationship.  Some people don't just immediately get all thrilled at the news that they're having a baby, especially one that was unplanned. That's a huge change to everything you know. Your life will never be the same. 

 

Although, on a somewhat parallel note, I have seen people mentioning on tumblr in the last week that they thought Mary was pregnant because of how she made a point to stick with water at the proposal dinner.  I don't know if that's relevant and maybe she's known for a while, and was more upset that Sherlock had deduced it, or if that water thing was a random thing in the script with no real meaning. 

 

I don't know why she'd have wine at the rehearsal if she was avoiding it at the restaurant, unless she was making a point to tell everyone how awful it tasted so she'd have an excuse for not indulging in it. After all, I have seen many pregnant women take a sip here or there. I wouldn't, myself, but I suppose some people think that such a small amount won't do much damage. 

 

Seriously have to go to bed now!! It's after 1am here and I work in the OR and thus have to be up ridiculously early. Maybe I'll just watch the stag scene one more time... 

 

Oh, wait... right before I hit post, I realized that about 7 months have passed between TEH and SoT. So Mary wouldn't have been pregnant at the proposal dinner. So, just forget that! 

[Let's_have_dinner]

I don't see the writing or characterisation as uneven in these two episodes as they take place six months apart - Sherlock and John have grown closer again, and the initial awkwardness of their reunion is over. Plus, it's John's wedding - a life changing day for both of them - so of course they're a bit more emotional/honest.

 

I've had less than 5 hours sleep but am off to work - but I just want to watch this episode over and over again!!

[julia5]

Another point about Mary--did it seem weird to anyone else how she didn't do more to get John out of the bonfire in TEH?  She stood back while Sherlock actually dug through to John.  In light of her possible involvement with CAM, the part in the telegram about wishing her "family could have seen this" seems possibly even more sinister, now that we know she's pregnant....

 

I really really like Mary but there are so many little but super suspicious details about her!

[sh_fan]

Hello everyone - I'm new here - just wanted to get that out of the way!  I had to post my thoughts, and I am very happy to see that a number of people share my feelings - especially about TEH!

 

Overall, I am enormously disappointed with both episodes, but far moreso with TEH.  I am a newcomer, relatively speaking to Sherlock Holmes.  Not being a "mystery" fan, I'd not read the stories until I ran across this series.  However, having read them more than once by now - and knowing what dedicated fans Gatiss and Moffat are to the stories, I simply cannot figure out what the deal was with Sherlock's cruel treatment of John in the train scene in TEH.  Sherlock was mean to John throughout the episode, but the train scene was horrible.  I felt that when John said, "If this is another one of your tricks..." that that was a setup (for the audience) as if Sherlock does these sort of "tricks" on a regular basis.  I just didn't see that - at all - in the stories.  Sure, Sherlock might get John in sticky situations in their adventures, but he'd never be intentionally cruel to John (yes, I know he's not really aware of others' feelings, etc., but he purposefully extracted that emotional confession from John and then laughed at him.  The "real" Sherlock would never have been so awful to John, IMO).

 

I also didn't like this new "funny" Sherlock.  It's not him.  I saw something with Gatiss & Moffat where they talked about Sherlock "growing" and "learning" in these areas of deficiency he has with human interaction.  I could be wrong, but I simply don't recall that in the stories.

 

Additionally, the episodes felt disjointed and chaotic to me with all of the jumping around they did.  I was left with the impression that, perhaps Gatiss & Moffat felt the pressure of the enormous expectations that people now have of them with this show and that they "tried too hard" to make it "shinier" for lack of a better word.

 

Another thing I completely didn't get was the scene with Mycroft and him in Baker street and that odd conversation about friendship and loneliness.  With all that was going on in the episode, if they wanted to make the point - and an out of place one at that - that Sherlock sees the benefit of friendship and is encouraging Mycroft in that direction, did they have to take up so much time?  After that scene was over, I was confused as to why it was there in the first place.  (Plus, I love Sherlock, not Mycroft, so I don't like being reminded that Mycroft has "seven times the deductive powers" as Sherlock!)

 

Finally, I seriously didn't appreciate the blatant mockery of the fans.  The way they portrayed Anderson, plus all of the theories (and what Sherlock told him was simply a compilation of the more plausible ones) was uncalled for, I thought.  It's true people go crazy over this show - I understand that.  But do Gatiss & Moffat not understand whence comes their success in this?  It's not generally advisable to bite the hand that feeds you.

 

Of course there were things I liked - everything about the way Sherlock behaved / reacted with regards to his best man duties, of course the speech, the hug, him playing the violin for John & Mary (a piece which he composed and left for them on the music stand) - all that was within the normal "Sherlock" character (although I don't think his reaction to the bridesmaid was).

 

I only hope "Vow" will be better.  I have been really looking forward to this one, too!  Depending on how closely they stick to the story.

 

I'd love to have someone convince me that I'm incorrect in the way I'm reading all of the things I have problems with!  This is what is so perplexing to me - because G & M know the characters (and stories) so well, I'm hoping I'm missing something - especially in the way Sherlock treated John in the first episode.

 

Thanks for letting me spill!

Edited January 6, 2014 by Undead Medic
Minor possible spoiler for "Vow" removed.

[sherlockandjohn]

I've watched the episode again, and as with TEH it certainly grew on me.

 

My favorite part is Sherlock's entire speech. We have heard John say twice how much he regards Sherlock, and I exptected some reciprocation from Sherlock in the best man speech, but never to this extent. It was funny, embarassing, charming, and warm. I melted like butter. Having Sherlock be so open and honest is a lovely surprise for us fans. It would be difficult for me to point out my favorite parts, but I guess there might be three moments that stand out: 1) Sherlock's account of how John asked him to be his best man This was very funny, and very sweet. 2) The part where he is surprised to have made people cry - "What's wrong, what happened?" - and John's hug. 3) The part where Sherlock states how incredible it is for someone like him to be befriended by a man like John. (One could argue that John is every bit as fortunate, though  ) It is very touching when he says of himself that he is "a ridiculous man... redeemed only by the warmth and constancy of your friendship."

 

I'm not keen on the stag night, though it was funny to see Sherlock attempting to solve a case while drunk, especially going over the possible clues. Chair, leather, sleeeeep had me laughing! But it was too 'normal' for Sherlock. I prefer him not being like a regular 'bloke'. It kind of made up for it when he got sober and said, annoyed, that he had wasted the best case in months. Now, there's the Sherlock I know!

 

It's heartbreaking right from beginning to finish how Sherlock struggles with doubts about his continued friendship with John. The ending is hard to watch, yet I am glad this subject is treated with such sincerity.

 

The detective work in this episode is an improvement from TEH, in which it was more action than deductions.

 

All in all a wonderful episode. I can't help but feel like I've lost something of the old Sherlock (both the series and the man), though. I definitely enjoy the new, but I also miss the old.

[T.o.b.y]

...I can't help but feel like I've lost something of the old Sherlock (both the series and the man), though. I definitely enjoy the new, but I also miss the old.

 

I've decided that the old just couldn't be continued. It was perfect, there was nothing to add. They could either have stopped the show or gone in a new direction. And now I'm very glad they did the latter. The Sign of Three is just... special. I have no idea why or how, but those 90 min just hit me in some place I didn't even know I had. Really hard. I almost hyperventilated. Sorry, but I don't see how I am going to have any kind of objective, rational discussion about this bit of television. I'm just glad they made it. And the "new" Sherlock doesn't detract from the old. We can still enjoy the previous episodes (okay, except for The Reichenbach Fall. That has been kind of spoiled for me by The Empty Hearse).

 

I really, really like the ending. It's just perfect. If they mess up the show after this, I won't care a bit. I can just stop right there and be happy. I've wanted a proper ending for Sherlock (Holmes) ever since I've known that character and now they've gone and given it to me. That's almost the best part.

 

[Loekie]

I got tired of all those mimics on all those faces. I was disappointed. I got the idea that filming Sherlock was done apart from filming the wedding guests. I'm going to see this episode one more time with subtitles, but not three times like the other episodes.

[sherlockandjohn]

Oh, I forgot to say how much I loved having S & J on a case together again It felt more like a 'real detective case' than the one in TEH. Love how Sherlock says, "Don't you worry about a thing, I'll get you out of this", like he was the one doing the favor Cute!

[sherlockandjohn]

 

...I can't help but feel like I've lost something of the old Sherlock (both the series and the man), though. I definitely enjoy the new, but I also miss the old.

 

I've decided that the old just couldn't be continued. It was perfect, there was nothing to add. They could either have stopped the show or gone in a new direction. And now I'm very glad they did the latter. The Sign of Three is just... special. I have no idea why or how, but those 90 min just hit me in some place I didn't even know I had. Really hard. I almost hyperventilated. Sorry, but I don't see how I am going to have any kind of objective, rational discussion about this bit of television. I'm just glad they made it. And the "new" Sherlock doesn't detract from the old. We can still enjoy the previous episodes (okay, except for The Reichenbach Fall. That has been kind of spoiled for me by The Empty Hearse).

 

I really, really like the ending. It's just perfect. If they mess up the show after this, I won't care a bit. I can just stop right there and be happy. I've wanted a proper ending for Sherlock (Holmes) ever since I've known that character and now they've gone and given it to me. That's almost the best part

 

Isn't it great when you can enjoy an episode or a movie without rationalising it, though?

You're right; they could end the series now, but I'm glad they're not Well, at least for now I'm glad...

 

[T.o.b.y]

Oh no, I don't necessarily want it to end now. I'm really curious what they've made of Milverton, for example. There never can be a real ending for Sherlock Holmes. He's immortal and will never rest. But I personally need endings in the sense of the perfect place to stop. The lack of those is my main problem with serials and I didn't expect one for Sherlock because the original doesn't have it and this series is so prone to cliffhangers. But tadaaa! The Sign of Three proved me wrong. (Yes, I am aware that a lot of people will not think this is a perfect ending or an ending in any sense. It just gratifies my individual taste.) I won't stop watching of course, but I love to know that I could.

 

It was so weird, watching this. My brain went off duty after the first five minutes or so. I didn't get all emotional, didn't even cry, but I started really reacting physically just as if somebody had punched me. Really odd. Embarrassing as hell, too. Glad nobody saw me. God, this is stupid entertainment TV for pete's sake, it shouldn't have this kind of effect!

[Loekie]

I want to say to the producer that the mimics are too much over the top all the time. We are not stupid. I can see subtly things on a face too. It don't has to be so obvious.

 

And I think that a drunken Sherlock is totally out of character. It's stupid, and not funny, certainly not thirty minutes long.

 

The plot was fine, that was a relief.

[sherlockandjohn]

 

It was so weird, watching this. My brain went off duty after the first five minutes or so. I didn't get all emotional, didn't even cry, but I started really reacting physically just as if somebody had punched me. Really odd. Embarrassing as hell, too. Glad nobody saw me. God, this is stupid entertainment TV for pete's sake, it shouldn't have this kind of effect!

 

If it was just stupid entertainment, if wouldn't have that effect, would it? We grow to love the characters. But yeah, I get your point, of course

 

I keep thinking of more stuff I'm glad about. The Empty Hearse (however much I loved it) still left me wanting more sentimental reciprocation from Sherlock, seeing as we've twice heard John say what a great man Sherlock is. And, boy, did we get sentiment in The Sign of Three! I seem to have a constant lump in my throat... *coughs*

[sherlockandjohn]

I want to say to the producer that the mimics are too much over the top all the time. We are not stupid. I can see subtly things on a face too. It don't has to be so obvious.

 

And I think that a drunken Sherlock is totally out of character. It's stupid, and not funny, certainly not thirty minutes long.

 

The plot was fine, that was a relief.

 

True, there were less subtleties this time, not just in facial expressions. I actually felt it made Sherlock seem a little less intelligent than usual.

 

Drunk Sherlock was out of character, and I would have preferred not having the stag night. I did laugh at some of it; it was funny enough, but like I've said before, it just makes Sherlock too 'normal' for my taste. Next time I watch the episode, I think I'll just skip right past it I think it ruins quite a bit for me.

 

Definitely a satisfying plot.

 

[T.o.b.y]

And I think that a drunken Sherlock is totally out of character. It's stupid, and not funny, certainly not thirty minutes long.

 

I think everybody is out of character when they're drunk... Although I think I see what you mean - it's unlike him to get drunk in the first place, right? Well, he is a human being. And this is "Sherlock versus real life", as the writers announced it would be. I really liked the game of "who am I". It continued the topic of "who and what is Sherlock Holmes, anyway?" that they began in The Empty Hearse.

 

I'm getting the impression that during the first two seasons, we've seen Sherlock more or less through John's eyes, like we do in Doyle's stories. Watson the narrator portrays Holmes in a certain way: cold, distant, reasoning machine, indestructible, habitual winner, enigmatic etc. But Holmes keeps remarking that it's far from the truth. What if the Sherlock we meet in this season is supposed to be what the writers thought might have been the truth?