Episode 3.3, "His Last Vow"

[Carol the Dabbler]

Nope, with that attitude, either he's NOT overpaid or else he'll go out of business soon enough.  Depends on whether he's as good as he thinks he is.

 

[joanneta1]

I keep thinking when Sherlock makes the "4G wireless" comment about Magnussen's glasses that one day in the very near future, that will seem incredibly antiquated for power.

A friendly nod to a particularly witty observation, which should have alerted Sherlock to the possibility that if they are ordinary glasses, Magnussen MIGHT have another method of storing information and then into battle.

[joanneta1]

There is a whole alternate explanation of HLV' s ending which has to do with Moffat, like every Sherlock fan, loves The Speckled Band but may feel that due to its peculiarly Victorian restrictions, it is not suitable for his young hero. He first used it as a throwaway gag in Scandal (the Speckled Blonde) and then worked as much of it as possible in the Magnussen story.

a) Sherlock specifically requests that Dr. Watson should bring a gun to his parents' Christmas celebration (presumably not to protect themselves against Magnussen's bodyguards, and probably not to commit murder) but it ties directly into the story : "I should be very much obliged if you would slip your revolver into your pocket".

b ) He particularly wants to see the Appledore vaults, just as in the story, he is particularly attracted to the large iron safe in the villain's room

c) He leaves Dr. Watson unprotected under Magnussen's petty torment in the flicking incident, just as in the story he is willing to let Miss Stoner return to the house of her brutish stepfather although he has himself ascertained how she is being treated.

d) in the story he is also responsible for the death of a man, albeit indirectly, not by shooting him at point blanc range but by driving the venomous snake back with his cane and awakening its snakish temper. There, he says " I cannot say that it is likely to weigh very heavily upon my conscience."

e) A very big IF: If the acronym on the USB stick is an insider joke for him and Mark Gatiss to chuckle over while the rest of us poor mortals discuss it ad infinitum, then it simply a combination of the actress's name and the name of Dr. Grimesby Roylott

f ) In the other original story, Holmes compares Charles Augustus Milverton to serpents : "Do you feel a creeping, shrinking sensation, Watson, when you stand before the serpents in the Zoo and see the slithery, gliding, venomous creatures, with their deadly eyes and wicked, flattened faces?" Modern Sherlock uses those expressions when comparing Magnussen to sharks (another gentle joke because Magnussen is a newspaper magnate?)

g) When Magnussen taunts Sherlok personally, is he not doing the exact same thing as Dr. Roylott in the story? " Holmes the meddler, Holmes the busybody, Holmes the Scotland Yard jack-in-office"

However the chips may fall, I have been a blind idiot not to see how this storyline reflects such a lot of The Speckled Band, hidden in plain sight, as it were.

Oh well, as Shadow Dweller reminds us, we are Sherlockians, speculation is all part of the fun!

[Zain]

That's brilliant. I love it. I like your mind

[joanneta1]

And there is another point which should be mentioned concerning the gun.
In both the Milverton and the Magnussen burglary attempts, Sherlock is very careful not to carry any weapons. In the episode, he specifically tells Dr. Watson NOT to bring his gun or a tyre lever but they will she how the evening goes. He is.of course, aware, like Raffles, that carrying weapons during a burglary immediately upgrades the crime. Anyway, in the modern version they were thoroughly searched at Holmes's flat, why would they not have been searched again upon entering Magnussen 's inner sanctum?
But with the encounter at Appledore he specifically requests it of John, and actually asks him if it is in John's coat pocket, so very like The Speckled Band sequence. Also, I found a little indication in The Sherlock Chronicles, p. 29, last e-mail at the bottom right hand corner, where the writer himself mentions it in a throwaway comment, but it is indeed intriguing why his mind picked that particular story from so many others that he then proceeded to realise!

[T.o.b.y]

I love how, with all the high drama that goes on in this episode, almost all the dialog is spoken in very low voices, sometimes almost whispers. That plus the music gives the whole thing a slightly haunting quality.

 

One of my favorite parts is where Mary approaches the house at Leinster Gardens. The music there plus Sherlock's voice...

[Zain]

But with the counter at Appledore he specifically requests it of John, and actually asks him if it is in John's coat pocket, so very like The Speckled Band sequence.

 

Some have interpreted this as a hint that Sherlock had planned to murder Magnussen from the very beginning. I am not comfortable with that interpretation, though it certainly has its right to exist. Would you, based on your theory that this is actually a reference to The Speckled Band instead of a hint at intent, then argue that he did not go there with the intention to kill?

I know that at least one of the two writers believes that the subtext of the original Milverton case implies that Holmes and Watson killed Milverton, and that the report is just a "cover up." On the other hand, they decided not to go with this: The "burglary" fails. However, Sherlock still kills - or murders depending on one's interpretation - Magnussen. Maybe they intend to let the murder be "covered up" in a similar way as their own interpretation with John claiming that there was a third person.

Though I still believe they should not have had Sherlock kill Magnussen. Whether that's their preferred reading or not. Before that, he may have been a liar, condescending, rude, selfish and/or arrogant - but he never stooped as low as Mary. If they truly meant for it to be murder rather than snap judgement paired with despair which led to violence, then I wish I had not seen the episode.

[joanneta1]

Oh, and do you happen to know which of the dynamic duo holds this belief? In that case, why would they show their allegedly favourite character behave like a complete psychopath?
If you factor in his glee at the beginning of the end sequence "I feel the same! Oh you mean it's actually Christmas!", then Donovan's assertion in Study in Pink would have been borne out completely and he gets his kicks out of killing wantonly as well. They could never do that to their fan base and get out alive. High functioning sociopath good, acting out of sheer desperation and utter sense of failure, wanton murderer bad, as Molly would say. Why would they then introduce the whole return of the plane? England does not need a psychopathic murderer as its dragonslayer. They would simply have stopped short with the fadeout of the plane leaving. But they cannot kill this particular goose that has laid so many golden eggs for them, created such a following (we wouldn't be having this discussion, otherwise) and made the main character into a hero?
Anyway, you have to bear in mind that the Charles Augustus Milverton story was published at approximately the same time as Mr. Justice Raffles, where the exact same thing happens, Raffles empties the whole contents of a moneylender's IOUs into the fire, the same as Holmes removes every last piece of evidence in Milverton's safe. The two brothers-in-law might have even discussed theory before putting pen to paper, albeit in a slightly different context.

[sfmpco]

I never believed Sherlock went with the intent to kill.  I think he was pretty self-confident that all could be fixed with a simple information exchange - and probably make it back home before all the drugs wore off (although how he would explain Mycroft's missing computer is another matter for conjecture).  Of course, he got to Appledore and things went terribly wrong.  Even when Magnussen revealed his own mind palace, I don't think Sherlock thought immediately of killing him.  It was when he was flicking John's face and revealing just how he now owned Sherlock, Mycroft, John, Mary and was going to bring all their worlds tumbling down (not to mention the fact that he reveals he'd flicked Janine's face too)... that then and only THEN did he sort it out in his head that he needed to use John's gun to kill Magnussen.  I really think he asked John to bring his gun in case they met trouble.

 

What I have never quite wrapped my head around is how quickly Mycroft was on the scene - in a helicopter.  With armed forces on the ground.  How did he even know where Sherlock would go?  How long was everyone out from the drugged punch and tea?  You would think Sherlock would have at least wanted them drugged for a decent amount of time.

[joanneta1]

You only have to watch the whole scene before they set off on that fateful helicopter trip! Sherlock's glee at getting a serious case, possibly beating Magnussen at his game, securing Mary's files and winning the case that way is far too obvious! "I feel the same. Oh, you mean it's actually Christmas!" does not fit anything except Donovan's original assertion in Sip. Not even Mary would have shown such high spirits if she were setting out to do one of her wet jobs for the CIA. This behaviour cannot be combined with their interpretation, either. High functioning sociopath reacting impulsively under extreme pressure, good, psychopathic murderer on the rampage, bad, as Molly would say. Talking of Molly, she might have noticed such manic homicidal tendencies as a doctor, instead of shunning him, she is his rock when the chips are down, entrusts her with his life both in the Fall and HLV mind palace.

Anyway, whichever of the dynamic duo thinks that in Charles Augustus Milverton the burglary went bad, should remember that Holmes NEVER carried a gun in the original stories they profess to love so. If they had gone down that path, the plane would never have returned. The whole airstrip scene would not have been possible and he would have been dispatched to Broadmoor or some such facility for deranged killers, but they cannot do that and get off unscathed under the combined wrath of the series' fans ( here we are having this discussion), and why should they kill their goose with so many golden eggs to feather their nests, if you will allow a mixed metaphor.

You should also bear in mind that the Miverton story was published practically at the same timecard Mr Justice Raffles. The same way Holmes burns all the letters, so does Raffles burn the IOUs held by another repellent character, a moneylender. Perhaps the two brothers-in-law even compared notes before putting pen to paper.

[sfmpco]

Yes, when all is said and done, Sherlock still "gets off on it" - solving crimes as an alternative to getting high.

 

However, he does have a violent streak - as shown in ASIP when he literally puts pressure on the cabbie's wound to force out a confession. Also throwing the CIA agent out the window (multiple times).  

 

When John comes after him in TEH, however, it's like two brothers fighting, but Sherlock doesn't fight back exactly.  Then in ASIB when Sherlock gives the first blow, John comes back at him and again Sherlock doesn't really fight back although he's made John fighting mad.  

 

Just don't get on Sherlock's bad side, because violence will happen.

[sfmpco]

I've always wondered a bit about that comfy chair where Sherlock sits in the kitchen area.  I sort of think it must have something to do with Mummy Holmes' remark that Sherlock "is just home from hospital" - and I imagine that she wanted him in the kitchen area where she could keep an eye on him and also wanted him to be as comfortable as possible.

[joanneta1]

I've always wondered a bit about that comfy chair where Sherlock sits in the kitchen area.  I sort of think it must have something to do with Mummy Holmes' remark that Sherlock "is just home from hospital" - and I imagine that she wanted him in the kitchen area where she could keep an eye on him and also wanted him to be as comfortable as possible.

 

He is not violent by nature but knows how to exercise pressure. He can hold his own in hand to hand combat with two trained assassins and ward off a real strangulation attempt in the Blind Banker.

[sfmpco]

Sherlock has pressure points - a big one being the mistreatment the women in his private circle.  He will use whatever force is necessary to protect them.

[Boton]

I've always wondered a bit about that comfy chair where Sherlock sits in the kitchen area.  I sort of think it must have something to do with Mummy Holmes' remark that Sherlock "is just home from hospital" - and I imagine that she wanted him in the kitchen area where she could keep an eye on him and also wanted him to be as comfortable as possible.

 

Regardless, I always think that's a really awkward place to put a comfy chair.

 

Mummy probably did want to ensure her boy's comfort and keep a pretty good eye on him.  I know you've explored in depth (and in a very entertaining fic!) one possible way the time between Leinster Gardens and Christmas could have been spent.  I've also toyed with the idea that Mycroft and Sherlock really were able to keep most of the truth from Mummy until right before Christmas, so it all feels pretty new to her even though it's old news to Sherlock (and probably Mycroft).  Thank heavens, Sherlock doesn't move like someone still recovering on Christmas, because he's limber enough to get rid of CAM.  

[sfmpco]

Yes, that's a very awkward place for a comfy chair.  Mycroft sits at the table in a less comfortable chair.  Mummy Holmes probably made Mycroft move that comfy chair into the kitchen area for Sherlock.  Can't let Sherlock do any heavy lifting, after all!  And that probably put Mycroft in a pissy mood to have baby brother be so pampered!

[Zain]

Oh, and do you happen to know which of the dynamic duo holds this belief? In that case, why would they show their allegedly favourite character behave like a complete psychopath?

[...] Why would they then introduce the whole return of the plane?

 

I am sorry, I cannot remember. I think it was an interview comment. However, I cannot place it in my memory, though it probably was one of the interviews pre-S3 and not in the context of Magnussen's death, but about their interpretation of Sherlock's character and why they decided to have Sherlock be a bit darker, less "gentleman-ly." Gatiss, for example, did a few rather deep interviews.

 

The thing is that few people think like me. A lot claim that Sherlock was justified in killing Magnussen, because he is disgusting, evil, and threatening Mary. Others interpret it as self-defense. It is a heavily debated scene, and I suppose if you ask 10 fans, you'll get 10 different interpretations of it.

I am not 100 % sure how the writers think about it, but I am fairly sure Gatiss actually posted "Sometimes someone has got to die" as a comment on twitter the day HLV was first aired. You can take that any way you want... to mean everything or to mean nothing at all. I haven't bothered with many interviews, because s3 didn't sit right with me, so it might be that they have already answered questions on the topic. But I do not know if they ever offered their own interpretation.

I have to admit, I now feel rather useless. I am quite out of the loop. Sorry.

Anyway, it might just be that they think Sherlock was doing the right thing, so the plane returns. Because he didn't "really" do the wrong thing... who knows. I've stopped trying to make sense of HLV. It's more brawn than brains, imo. And imo is stressed. I understand that some like it, and do see more going on in those scenes than I do.

[Arcadia]

I didn't think CAM's murder was pre-meditated until I read one of the posts Zain refers to. The "pre-meditated" theory makes sense, but it doesn't exclude other possibilities ... and I choose not to believe it. I have a hard enough time accepting a Sherlock who will pull the trigger in a moment of desperation ... I don't think I could take a Sherlock who would plan a murder. Fortunately for me, that scene (like so much of HLV) is vague enough that you can come up with almost any interpretation you like. For the life of me I can't understand why they'd want it to be that way, but there you go; it is.

 

I think it was Moffat who said "they", meaning both he and Gatiss, believed it was actually Holmes and Watson who killed Milverton. I've seen/read/heard the remark more than once, they may both have said it. Anyway, the implication is that they both agree on that point.

[Carol the Dabbler]

What I have never quite wrapped my head around is how quickly Mycroft was on the scene - in a helicopter.  With armed forces on the ground.  How did he even know where Sherlock would go?  How long was everyone out from the drugged punch and tea?  You would think Sherlock would have at least wanted them drugged for a decent amount of time.

Two possibilities:

 

1. Magnussen was right about the laptop having broadcast its location to Mycroft, and/or

2. Mycroft was in on the basic plan (though probably not the shooting-Magnussen part), and was perhaps only pretending to be drugged (to fool John, of course, the Holmes family national sport)

[sfmpco]

The only way that Mycroft could have known where they were going WAS to be faking it, and then follow Sherlock somewhat, at least to see the CAM helicopter.  Then he would have summoned his forces, including a helicopter, because he's actually not that far behind Sherlock.  Sherlock has only been at Appledore a very short amount of time when Mycroft comes onto the scene.

[joanneta1]

I can never keep up with their various interviews, but I do hope that they will stick to the spirit of the whole thing, which is an amateur gentleman with extraordinary faculties of observation and power to reason logically backwards (inductive reasoning), chooses to trust and confide in a lonely friend who is also a doctor (professional ethics and confidentiality apply) how he manages to solve several logical problems by applying his skills (deductive reasoning) and producing an all-round satisfactory explanation. Both the writers have repeatedly asserted that they love and breathe the original Sherlock Holmes stories, if they want to make him into a Jason Bourne or even worse, a James Bond one, then this latecomer to the show will revert to Jeremy Brett mode and canon.

By the way, sfmpco has a point about the women he chooses to protect being his pressure point, in both the stories and the series, but he essentially does not trust them in the stories, while in the series Molly has become indispensable.

Talking about chivalrous behaviour, the stories and the old (cobwebbed) versions are sometimes better in detail. In Scandal, he insists on having the camera-phone, but then puts it away in a drawer. But in the original story, where he acts as witness (best man?) to Irene Adler and Mr. Norton she gives him a crown, which, he tells Dr.Watson :"The bride gave me a sovereign, and I mean to wear it on my watch chain in memory of the occasion" , and in EVERY subsequent story it is there on Brett's watch chain, so that version of Holmes keeps not only the photograph(camera phone), which can be put away, but her sovereign each day of his working life by him. He must look at it every morning, when he dresses, and every evening when he takes it out to wind the watch. She is as close to his heart as possible.

[sfmpco]

I really must read the original stories.

[joanneta1]

This thing will not let me like any posts, so I shall have to write instead. Read the whole speculation thing about Mary in a black dress with a veil, if it is not a red herring, it's a dead baby, stillborn, because she is too far gone by the end of HLV. If the working title is WIM then one interpretation would be Woman in Mourning, but that is a very keen sword, not just double-edged, because John will have to suffer actual loss and be incapable of going on ANY adventure any time soon, let alone follow his friend and companion in his attempt to solve the Moriarty gif. Still, the only original that starts with a W is Wisteria Lodge, South American dictators and exotic locations being not part of the equation, given BBCs funding, I would like to turn this thing on its head and make it Murder in Whitehall, since you have all sorts of possibilities open to you and it follows some of the original stories, as well, like The Second Stain, The Illustrious Client and his work in The Beryl Coronet, The Priory School and The Six Napoleons, with very highly placed clients. By the way, that Inspector Jones Sergeant Donovan is referring to at the beginning of SoT, must be an oblique reference to yet another Scotland Yard detective, Athelney Jones. Forgot to include it in the right post, sorry.

[Boton]

Yes, that's a very awkward place for a comfy chair.  Mycroft sits at the table in a less comfortable chair.  Mummy Holmes probably made Mycroft move that comfy chair into the kitchen area for Sherlock.  Can't let Sherlock do any heavy lifting, after all!  And that probably put Mycroft in a pissy mood to have baby brother be so pampered!

 

Oh, heavens, can't you just see it??

 

"Now Mycie, go and get Father's chair from the sitting room and bring it in here for Sherlock where it's nice and warm."

 

"I fail to see why Sherlock can't get his own chair if these won't suffice."

 

"He's been shot, Myc!  I don't want him lifting things like that."

 

(Cut to Sherlock, who is taking care to lean slightly on the kitchen table and to take small steps wherever he goes, all with an evil glint at Mycroft.)

 

"Now, Sherlock dear, I've made your favorite mince pies....."

[Arcadia]

I think Sherlock would have been too busy rebuffing Mummy's attempts to baby him to gloat ... at least until the chair was in place. Then, yeah, I'll bet he made the most of it! No wonder John was hiding somewhere.....