Episode 3.3, "His Last Vow"

[T.o.b.y]

One thing I will give Sherlock (the show) is that, even though you have to suspend disbelief on some of these things (and I don't mind that), they do enough research that things more or less hang together.  

 

They really do! I've seen scenes and props in drama series about hospitals that were a lot less accurate.

 

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

Right, and plots (in other mystery programs) are explicitly based on inaccurately-portrayed scientific and technological principles.  Sherlock really does much better than most shows in that regard.

 

[sfmpco]

I'm slow, and I say I'm slow all the time when it comes to the episodes, but I just had to change something in my book... couldn't include MP John Garvie who questioned Magnussen at the beginning of HLV because when SH and JW go to break into Magnussen's offices, as they walk into the building there's a news bit on that says Garvie has been arrested for corruption.  

 

Not a wasted word in those episodes.

[SherlockedCAMPer]

I'm slow, and I say I'm slow all the time when it comes to the episodes, but I just had to change something in my book... couldn't include MP John Garvie who questioned Magnussen at the beginning of HLV because when SH and JW go to break into Magnussen's offices, as they walk into the building there's a news bit on that says Garvie has been arrested for corruption.

 

Not a wasted word in those episodes.

 

Definitely not a wasted word. Also good to catch any issues with words & characters included before publishing.

[sfmpco]

 

I'm slow, and I say I'm slow all the time when it comes to the episodes, but I just had to change something in my book... couldn't include MP John Garvie who questioned Magnussen at the beginning of HLV because when SH and JW go to break into Magnussen's offices, as they walk into the building there's a news bit on that says Garvie has been arrested for corruption.

 

Not a wasted word in those episodes.

 

Definitely not a wasted word. Also good to catch any issues with words & characters included before publishing.

 

 

Although it's unclear what the corruption would be.  Maybe something with his finances since he has 41% debt.  Pressure point is his disabled daughter... I think Magnussen would have continued to pick the people off in that room one by one.

[SherlockedCAMPer]

He probably would have. That seemed his style.

[sfmpco]

Well, we know he got to Lady Smallwood's hubby because he committed suicide.

[Boton]

Well, here's today's stupid admission about this episode, because only you guys would understand on whatever level:

 

HLV was the first episode where I became conscious that I was watching Sherlock Holmes.

 

Yes, the first time through the series, I was watching things in order and generally enjoying that I was watching this quirky detective named Sherlock Holmes who I very much liked.  But I didn't seem to carry any expectations or backstory baggage into that first viewing with me.  I was just on a good adventure.

 

We got to HLV, and got to the hospital scene, and part of my total TV-induced panic was "Oh, my God!  Someone has shot SHERLOCK HOLMES!  You don't go shooting Sherlock Holmes!"  And all of a sudden, I could see all of the previous Holmeses I knew about sort of superimposed on our poor Sherlock in that hospital bed, and I'm sitting there holding a half-crocheted sock in one hand and a crochet needle in the other (both totally forgotten), saying, "Buddy, heads are going to roll, because you do NOT shoot Sherlock Holmes!"

 

[Arcadia]

That's funny, because when I was watching a couple of episodes last week I realized I didn't give a fig whether it was Sherlock Holmes or not, I just enjoy it. They could be named Beavis and Butthead and I'd still be watching it (assuming I ever started watching it in the first place with names like that! )

 

But I don't know if this is a good thing or a bad thing. I sort of feel I'm missing out on a level of the fun by not associating it with any other particular incarnation of Holmes. I don't have time to go back and re-watch the Brett series, but maybe I'll take in a Rathbone version or two during the holidays. Or (gasp) read another ACD book....

[Carol the Dabbler]

Which one's Beavis and which one's Butthead?

 

On second thought, no, please don't answer that! 

 

[T.o.b.y]

We got to HLV, and got to the hospital scene, and part of my total TV-induced panic was "Oh, my God!  Someone has shot SHERLOCK HOLMES!  You don't go shooting Sherlock Holmes!"  And all of a sudden, I could see all of the previous Holmeses I knew about sort of superimposed on our poor Sherlock in that hospital bed, and I'm sitting there holding a half-crocheted sock in one hand and a crochet needle in the other (both totally forgotten), saying, "Buddy, heads are going to roll, because you do NOT shoot Sherlock Holmes!"

 

 

Right, he never does get shot in the original, does he. He's actually never in grave peril, except that one time in "The Illustrious Client" where he's violently assaulted. But even then, no hospital. He just lies back at home and has the papers exaggerate his injuries to fool the baddie into thinking he's won and become imprudent. According to his account of things, he wasn't even harmed during his encounter with Moriarty at the Reichenbach Falls, although someone did try to throw a heavy rock on him. And both those things happen off stage. I can think of a few instances where Holmes could have died due to his own reckless behavior (nearly sinking into the moors in "The Hound of the Baservilles", nearly being strangled by Moran in "The Empty House", but Dr Watson and Lestrade got him out of those plights within the next sentences, so you didn't really get the sense that the hero was in big trouble).

 

I've never seen another Sherlock Holmes adaptation (I always refused because I liked the original character so much and have a very specific vision of him), but Sherlock works really well as a modern reincarnation of my beloved detective for me. I don't get them mixed up in my head, it's more as if our Sherlock was Mr Holmes' great-grandson, or something like that.

I love the many canon references. Most of them are really clever, too. I'm sure I'd like the series just fine if I'd never read Doyle, but as it is, there's a whole extra level of enjoyment.

[Boton]

 

We got to HLV, and got to the hospital scene, and part of my total TV-induced panic was "Oh, my God!  Someone has shot SHERLOCK HOLMES!  You don't go shooting Sherlock Holmes!"  And all of a sudden, I could see all of the previous Holmeses I knew about sort of superimposed on our poor Sherlock in that hospital bed, and I'm sitting there holding a half-crocheted sock in one hand and a crochet needle in the other (both totally forgotten), saying, "Buddy, heads are going to roll, because you do NOT shoot Sherlock Holmes!"

 

 

...

 

I've never seen another Sherlock Holmes adaptation (I always refused because I liked the original character so much and have a very specific vision of him), but Sherlock works really well as a modern reincarnation of my beloved detective for me. I don't get them mixed up in my head, it's more as if our Sherlock was Mr Holmes' great-grandson, or something like that.

I love the many canon references. Most of them are really clever, too. I'm sure I'd like the series just fine if I'd never read Doyle, but as it is, there's a whole extra level of enjoyment.

 

 

And I'm not a huge Holmesian, or I wasn't.  I started reading ACD concurrently with viewing Sherlock, and I had never really seen any other incarnation of Holmes because I mistakenly thought those were "boy" stories that I wouldn't like, because I'm not a huge mystery fan.  But I just had this picture in my head from popular culture of Holmes as being something about one or two levels below a super hero, kind of like a James Bond with extra intellect instead of an extra handgun, and he's bloody well supposed to be able to take any kind of physical abuse and pretty much repair himself with a styptic pencil and a band-aid.  Seeing Sherlock in that hospital pretty much was the end of me.  Kind of still is.

[T.o.b.y]

And I'm not a huge Holmesian, or I wasn't.  I started reading ACD concurrently with viewing Sherlock, and I had never really seen any other incarnation of Holmes because I mistakenly thought those were "boy" stories that I wouldn't like, because I'm not a huge mystery fan.  But I just had this picture in my head from popular culture of Holmes as being something about one or two levels below a super hero, kind of like a James Bond with extra intellect instead of an extra handgun, and he's bloody well supposed to be able to take any kind of physical abuse and pretty much repair himself with a styptic pencil and a band-aid.  Seeing Sherlock in that hospital pretty much was the end of me.  Kind of still is

 

Mhm, I think I see what you mean. Old Mr Holmes was certainly a lot less vulnerable than Sherlock, body and soul, and while his world could be plenty dark, it still seemed like he was pretty far above and beyond all that. When I was a young teenager, he was my knight in shining armor. Sherlock Holmes could take care of anything, he always showed up at the right moment, he explained away fear and superstition, exposed the villains, and restored balance to the universe. Okay, sometimes he failed to save his clients. Some of them died before the mystery was solved. But hey, that's the way it goes.

 

Now I am nearly two decades older, I have different needs, fiction-hero-wise. Sherlock came along just at the right time for me, with his more realistic, more fragile, insecure, morally dubious and borderline insane version of the great detective. He's got a depth to his character that Doyle wouldn't have been able to write, I think. Yet he's still brilliant and amazing, and so far, he's never failed to save the day. With Sherlock, I get the same old feeling of "oh whew, you're here, now everything is going to be alright" as I always did with his literary ancestor. He's a modern hero, but still a hero, in spite of anything he might say to the contrary.

[Boton]

Just so, Toby!  And yes, this Sherlock definitely functions in a hero role for me, even if I believe him when he says he's not one of the angels.  I like him better that way.  

[Carol the Dabbler]

... I just had this picture in my head from popular culture of Holmes as being something about one or two levels below a super hero, kind of like a James Bond with extra intellect instead of an extra handgun, and he's bloody well supposed to be able to take any kind of physical abuse and pretty much repair himself with a styptic pencil and a band-aid.  Seeing Sherlock in that hospital pretty much was the end of me.  Kind of still is

 

Mhm, I think I see what you mean. Old Mr Holmes was certainly a lot less vulnerable than Sherlock, body and soul ....

... or maybe Watson just wrote him up that way? The dear Doctor seems to have been a bit of a hero-worshipper, even after all those years and all those cases. Perhaps he didn't want to tarnish the public image of Holmes -- or perhaps he was actually unable to see some of the man's weaknesses.

 

There's also the Victorian sensibility to consider. Certain things simply would not be mentioned.

 

[T.o.b.y]

 

Mhm, I think I see what you mean. Old Mr Holmes was certainly a lot less vulnerable than Sherlock, body and soul ....

... or maybe Watson just wrote him up that way? The dear Doctor seems to have been a bit of a hero-worshipper, even after all those years and all those cases. Perhaps he didn't want to tarnish the public image of Holmes -- or perhaps he was actually unable to see some of the man's weaknesses.

 

Theoretically, that's a good idea, but I don't think Doyle was that sophisticated a writer. I don't believe he spent much thought on Watson as an unreliable narrator, although he does have Holmes remark on several occasions how his friend's accounts are romanticized and how he's a bit glorified in them.

 

Speaking of public image, that was a great concern of Dr Watson's, especially in the Milverton story, where he's worried that if Holmes gets on the wrong side of the villain, his precious reputation might suffer. I'm reminded of that every time I hear John yell "Sherlock Holmes in a drug den - how's that going to look?"

 

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

It really wouldn't take much sophistication on Doyle's part -- he'd have the Victorian sensibility automatically, and I think there's a lot of Watson in him as well.  And I'm not saying his Watson was an unreliable narrator, not exactly, just writing from a certain point of view, not wanting to embarrass his friend, etc.

 

[Boton]

 

 

Mhm, I think I see what you mean. Old Mr Holmes was certainly a lot less vulnerable than Sherlock, body and soul ....

... or maybe Watson just wrote him up that way? The dear Doctor seems to have been a bit of a hero-worshipper, even after all those years and all those cases. Perhaps he didn't want to tarnish the public image of Holmes -- or perhaps he was actually unable to see some of the man's weaknesses.

 

Theoretically, that's a good idea, but I don't think Doyle was that sophisticated a writer. I don't believe he spent much thought on Watson as an unreliable narrator, although he does have Holmes remark on several occasions how his friend's accounts are romanticized and how he's a bit glorified in them.

 

Speaking of public image, that was a great concern of Dr Watson's, especially in the Milverton story, where he's worried that if Holmes gets on the wrong side of the villain, his precious reputation might suffer. I'm reminded of that every time I hear John yell "Sherlock Holmes in a drug den - how's that going to look?"

 

 

 

 

I always think that Watson is writing things up perfectly fine, and Holmes is projecting a little bit of false modesty and a little bit of a lack of understanding of how stories are told.  But for whatever reason, I feel like Watson is a reliable narrator.  

[sfmpco]

Lots of HLV interesting stuff in here.

 

http://www.denofgeek.us/tv/sherlock/241667/111-things-you-might-not-know-about-sherlock-season-3

[Carol the Dabbler]

It's nice to have those tidbits from the commentaries & featurettes all in one easily-referenceable place.  I may have a few comments on their comments on the commentary, such as:

 

 

 

4. The real-life Speedy’s Sandwich Bar And Café café around the corner on Gower Lane now does a roaring trade thanks to featuring in the series....

 

Speedy's does indeed seem to be benefiting from its Sherlock exposure.  But it's right there on North Gower Street, not "around the corner on Gower Lane."  It's not on a corner.  And if there is a Gower Lane, it's nowhere near Speedy's.

 

 

 

8. Martin Freeman hated the moustache John Watson wore in The Empty Hearse....

 

We were fortunate enough to be on North Gower when John's return to Baker Street was filmed, and I can somewhat verify that.  Mr. Freeman kept fussing with the mustache.  Presumably it was either threatening to fall off or else it itched but he didn't dare scratch -- or both!

 

 

 

16. The restaurant supposedly inside London’s Landmark Hotel is really in Cheltenham....

 

... and (as I recall from internet chatter when that scene was filmed) it's actually called The Daffodil.

 

 

 

20. According to Sue Vertue, Mary Morstan’s line “Well, he would have needed a confidante” is our first hint that the character isn’t exactly who she says she is....

 

Good heavens -- any woman who exhibits common sense is obviously a retired assassin?

 

 

 

28. According to Moffat, Molly’s long, striped scarf is not a deliberate reference to Tom Baker’s Doctor Who costume....

 

Are people saying that?  I suppose they are, but that'd be a pretty flimsy reference.  Though if it were a long multi-colored scarf....

 

 

 

43. Sherlock’s first real departure from canon is the inclusion of the Holmes parents, played of course by Wanda Ventham and Timothy Carlton....

 

Did they phrase it that way on the DVD?  It's hardly their "first real departure from canon" -- in the first place, the show departs from canon pretty freely, and secondly Mr. and Mrs. Holmes must have existed in the canon universe, in order for their son to exist.  If you want an actual non-canon character, I refer you to Molly Hooper.

 

And I'm only halfway down the list!  I'll probably be back later with more comments.

 

[sfmpco]

Can't wait to hear some more from you, Carol!

[sittything]

 

What is with the M. I. 6 under brother?  Is that because of Mycroft's connections to MI6?

 

[T.o.b.y]

Well, it is under "brother", so I assume it refers to Mycroft being part of MI 6 in a way, yes.

 

Wait a minute. How does Magnussen know about what happened at Baskerville? And how can he possibly know about Redbeard? Mycroft...! Have you been talking to the villain again?

[Boton]

 

What is with the M. I. 6 under brother?  Is that because of Mycroft's connections to MI6?

 

Yes, I think so.  Since Magnussen is all about understanding how to reach people in influential positions through chains of other people, he realizes that Sherlock is a first order connection to someone either within or closely allied with MI6 (Mycroft).  Since Magnussen wants to be able to affect dealings on an international stage, he is interested in Sherlock as somone that close to MI6 with that many pressure points.  

 

(Although, it's always bothered me that they scroll the pressure points on a continuous loop.  There are only 6 of them, and how in the world would you ever use Redbeard against Sherlock realistically?  "Do what I want, or I'll threaten your already-dead dog?")

[T.o.b.y]

(Although, it's always bothered me that they scroll the pressure points on a continuous loop.  There are only 6 of them, and how in the world would you ever use Redbeard against Sherlock realistically?  "Do what I want, or I'll threaten your already-dead dog?")

 

:lol: I think it's more that Sherlock is really embarrassed about Redbeard, the crippling kind of embarrassment that only our childhood follies leave us with. I mean, wasn't the idea that someone fed little Sherlock the story about Redbeard having gone to live in a wonderful place when they'd actually put him down? And our super-sleuth genius believed it?

 

Magnussen later admits that it was very hard finding a pressure point on Sherlock, so that list must have been more a collection of possibilities than anything else.

 

It's hardly complete, either. If all people a person cares about are pressure points, then why weren't the same gang on it whom Moriarty had snipers on? Plus Molly, plus Mary, plus maybe even Janine? And Sherlock's parents?

 

By the way, I can barely believe that series 3 outright called John Watson a damsel in distress and Sherlock Holmes a drama queen. This I should frame and put in the canon references thread. I mean, it's an implicit reference. I've thought the exact same thing sometimes reading those old stories...