Episode 3.3, "His Last Vow"

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

 

Goodness, I do hope my intuition is wrong and Moriarty is dead, after all.

 

  Pretty much hoping the same thing. As it has been mentioned before in these threads, it would a cheap and dirty trick if they have Moriarty alive after all the hype about how he couldn't have survived that head shot. I'm really hoping it's someone out for revenge or another enemy to Sherlock using the gif to lure him back hoping for some kind of nefarious evil doing.

[Slithytove]

So, is the general consensus that John is no longer in awe of Sherlock and no longer finds his deductions amazing? If so, I find that a bit sad. There are other people - clients, etc - to be dazzled, of course, but Sherlock seemed to bask so happily in John's admiration. I always found the original Watson's humble respect for Holmes's genius to be rather touching.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

It was and one of the things I loved about Dr. Watson. Holmes was a constant source of wonder to him.....and he even tried his best to apply Holmes's methods with limited success but in this day and age, would that hold up? Our John is more....I don't know.....edgy? Yeah, Sherlock can still talk him into stuff.....like bringing along his service pistol on cases which he isn't supposed to have in the first place....but will Sherlock always be able to wow his Watson?  Wouldn't it wear very thin on this modern audience?

[Zain]

But it's true, in a way, isn't it?

John hasn't been impressed by Sherlock lately. Maybe because he hasn't gotten over Sherlock's faked death yet. Or rather: Over Sherlock's return. He seemed to have accepted his passing.

It's why I liked Lestrade hugging Sherlock. He was rightfully angry but he showed that he was glad to have Sherlock back. I somehow missed this reaction from John. They could at least have him say "I am glad you didn't die."

I suppose John who before had a weak spot for Sherlock's "brilliance" now is so thoroughly disillusioned that he has a hard time acknowledging Sherlock when he does something right. It comes easy to him, however, to see when Sherlock is doing something wrong. Before, he was looking for Sherlock's "good moments", and now he is primed to expect Sherlock to mess up.

For example when John isn't impressed with Sherlock's deductions at his wedding, but he is very "not impressed" with Sherlock not remembering the room number. Or that he lashes out at Sherlock for his stupid comment about "It's what you like."

 

It's a bit of a change from the "usual." In s1 and s3, we had our moments when Sherlock dismissed John. And in s3, John is dismissing Sherlock. I feel like their positions reversed in s3. Sherlock became the, well, dependent character.

 

 

[T.o.b.y]

It was and one of the things I loved about Dr. Watson. Holmes was a constant source of wonder to him.....and he even tried his best to apply Holmes's methods with limited success but in this day and age, would that hold up? Our John is more....I don't know.....edgy? Yeah, Sherlock can still talk him into stuff.....like bringing along his service pistol on cases which he isn't supposed to have in the first place....but will Sherlock always be able to wow his Watson?  Wouldn't it wear very thin on this modern audience?

 

Well, I've known at least one pretty amazing person for more than half my life now, and I have certainly not seen the day yet where my wonder and awe died away... But this is beside the point. Unless I mean to say that I'd find it totally believable if the dynamic of the original (which was, however, varied and not quite consistent) were to continue on this version.

 

It does, though, to a certain point. As John himself said, with Sherlock, it's always the unexpected. John has gotten used to the deductions, to a certain degree, of course, but that does not mean he can now predict Sherlock's actions or see through his behavior. As Mary hinted in The Sign of Three, he's also become no better at detecting his friend's little variations on the truth.

 

What I find hilarious is that now it seems John expects Sherlock to be brilliant and in control and he gets irritated to a point where it seems almost accusing if that's not completely the case. "Sherlock, do we have a plan?" "What do we do now?" "How can you not remember?" It's as if Sherlock's self-important, vain-glorious act is backfiring a little... He's cast himself in the role of the superhuman commanding officer, and now he'd better live up to it. It's still fairly easy, though, to get a "WTF?" face out of John: Sherlock taking drugs, having a girl in his room, getting engaged to said girl only to gain access to her boss's office, drugging his entire family and shooting Magnussen - those were all great moments in that respect.

 

Yes, Freeman's John is very edgy. I like him that way.

 

[Arcadia]

Well, pooh. While I was writing this T.o.b.y. slipped in and said it all so much more succintly! But hey, I spent quite a while attempting to master multiquotes, so here you go anyway!

 

So, is the general consensus that John is no longer in awe of Sherlock and no longer finds his deductions amazing?....

... will Sherlock always be able to wow his Watson?  Wouldn't it wear very thin on this modern audience?

 

Just speaking for myself, no, I don't see that at all! I just think S3 wasn't about Sherlock's brilliant brain, but about his heart. I'm trying to think what deductions Sherlock made in S3 when John was around; the one about the train in TEH; figuring out Sholto was the victim in TSo3; that's about all I can think of that John was witness to. And I wouldn't have said he was unimpressed by those. He just seems to accept that of course Sherlock will be amazing, and doesn't have to burst out saying it anymore.

 

But it's true, in a way, isn't it?  John hasn't been impressed by Sherlock lately.

 

Oh, I don't think it's true. John's not unimpressed; he's just used to it. It's like watching Usain Bolt win a race; it's awesome to see, but it's hardly a surprise.

 

...I liked Lestrade hugging Sherlock. He was rightfully angry but he showed that he was glad to have Sherlock back. I somehow missed this reaction from John. They could at least have him say "I am glad you didn't die."

 

Somehow I thought "I asked you not to be dead," "Yeah, you're my best friend" and a hug at the wedding covered all that pretty nicely. These are two men who aren't very adept at expressing their feelings, I thought this was rather effusive for John! (And I too loved Lestrade's reaction!)

 

I suppose John who before had a weak spot for Sherlock's "brilliance" now is so thoroughly disillusioned that he has a hard time acknowledging Sherlock when he does something right. It comes easy to him, however, to see when Sherlock is doing something wrong. Before, he was looking for Sherlock's "good moments", and now he is primed to expect Sherlock to mess up.....in s3, John is dismissing Sherlock. I feel like their positions reversed in s3. Sherlock became the, well, dependent character.

 

Wow. Typically for me, I completely missed anything like this! Would you be willing to go into this in a little more detail? I'm interested to know what you saw that I missed.

 

What I do see is that John has always known that Sherlock, while brilliant, is also frequently full of bullsh*t. Witness this exchange from ASiP:

"Shoulder! I thought so." "No you didn’t." "The left one." "Lucky guess." "I never guess." At which point John laughs at Sherlock and says "Yes you do." I think it's one of the reasons Sherlock likes him; John's not intimidated by him, and is always happy to try and take him down a peg. And Sherlock loves a game of one upmanship.(Especially when he wins, which is usually.)

 

It also makes sense that John would be less than trusting of Sherlock, given the latter's propensity to lie about ... well, almost anything. Yet John DOES trust him, apparently, in spite of having good cause not to. He goes along with Sherlock in HLV not because he knows what's going on, but because he believes in Sherlock. I don't find that dismissive at all, I see it as trust and faith in his friend. But, like John, I am a romantic. I tend to interpret things as all sunshine and bunnies.

 

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to sit here and nitpick your arguments. It's just you all seem a little down about the show and I thought it might be useful to see it thru someone else's eyes. Someone with rose-colored glasses, maybe, but hey.

[Slithytove]

I'm still happy overall with the show, despite the irritating aspects! It would be remarkable for any show to run for several seasons and not have some unsatisfactory developments, unless it was one of those which repeats the same formula over and over again. I don't want Sherlock to become predictable, even if it annoys the hell out of me at times.

 

The balance of power between John & Sherlock does seem to have shifted a bit since the latter's return. Maybe it's because he is no longer the centre of John's world, or because of lingering anger about the Fall, or maybe John just tends to take for granted now the brilliance that used to amaze him. As T.o.b.y. says, there is still the "WTF?" reactionbut this is more to do with Sherlock's unexpected behaviour, such as dating Janine, than a response to Sherlock's genius. I would like to see a return to something more like the Watson-Holmes pattern and I think it could be done without making John look dim. If I knew someone as brilliant and unpredictable as Sherlock, I think I would still be dumbstruck by his deductions, however long I had known him, and I don't see why modern, edgy John can't still be impressed.

[Arcadia]

I agree, the balance of power has shifted. But I'm not sure it's because John is less amazed by Sherlock, maybe it's that John has grown more than Sherl has. He's more his own man now because Sherlock's absence allowed him to finally move on into his own life, instead of a life that circled around one S. Holmes like a teddy bear in a garden.

 

But I thought when they were "on a case" that the old pattern was still there; Sherlock kept him in the dark, and John blindly followed him. Because of loyalty, but also because he still trusts Sherlock to be clever enough to solve the problem. At least, until Appledore. We never really saw what John thought about that, other than his initial horror. I'm wondering if that will change his perception of what kind of person Sherlock is, or if he'll just move past it, like he appeared to do with Mary. Hm, possible fodder for S4!

[T.o.b.y]

he still trusts Sherlock to be clever enough to solve the problem. At least, until Appledore. We never really saw what John thought about that, other than his initial horror.

 

No, we didn't, and more's the pity. I'd love to know. My best guess is, angry. But anger seems to be John's default reaction, anyway. The way he's played, it seems that if he can't quite make sense of what he's feeling, he just resorts to that.

 

[Arcadia]

That's a good guess! I'm opting for "a swirling mixture of emotions", because that's what I feel...  

[Zain]

 

 

Wow. Typically for me, I completely missed anything like this! Would you be willing to go into this in a little more detail? I'm interested to know what you saw that I missed.

 

 

 

What I do see is that John has always known that Sherlock, while brilliant, is also frequently full of bullsh*t. Witness this exchange from ASiP:

"Shoulder! I thought so." "No you didn’t." "The left one." "Lucky guess." "I never guess." At which point John laughs at Sherlock and says "Yes you do." I think it's one of the reasons Sherlock likes him; John's not intimidated by him, and is always happy to try and take him down a peg. And Sherlock loves a game of one upmanship.(Especially when he wins, which is usually.)

 

It also makes sense that John would be less than trusting of Sherlock, given the latter's propensity to lie about ... well, almost anything. Yet John DOES trust him, apparently, in spite of having good cause not to. He goes along with Sherlock in HLV not because he knows what's going on, but because he believes in Sherlock. I don't find that dismissive at all, I see it as trust and faith in his friend. But, like John, I am a romantic. I tend to interpret things as all sunshine and bunnies.

 

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to sit here and nitpick your arguments. It's just you all seem a little down about the show and I thought it might be useful to see it thru someone else's eyes. Someone with rose-colored glasses, maybe, but hey.

 

It's not like you are truly nitpicking my arguments. It's more like you are enriching them and you are fueling the discussion.

It would be rather boring if everybody just nodded my statements off and said "yeah, sounds about right." It's much more interesting to bounce off ideas, to see what people make of one's theories.

 

Elaborating, well... ehm.

In this case, though, I have to admit that this particular theory is not a product of careful reasoning and deliberation like most of my theories. It's "gut instinct." So I am afraid this explanation may not be up to my usual standard. I'll attempt to make it more accessible, though. Please bear with me. I hope this will not be as horrible as I fear.

 

My post (for reference - and my sake, mostly ):

 

 

 

I suppose John who before had a weak spot for Sherlock's "brilliance" now is so thoroughly disillusioned that he has a hard time acknowledging Sherlock when he does something right. It comes easy to him, however, to see when Sherlock is doing something wrong. Before, he was looking for Sherlock's "good moments", and now he is primed to expect Sherlock to mess up.....in s3, John is dismissing Sherlock. I feel like their positions reversed in s3. Sherlock became the, well, dependent character. 

 

I emphasized the "important" bits.

 

1. Going all the way back to ASiP. Before continuing, I'd like to make a crucial distinction between product and process. Sherlock's deductions are a product, Sherlock's ability to deduce is the process. I'll be referring to this in the next paragraph, this is important to understand what I am on about.

John was different from most people Sherlock associated with. When Sherlock deduced other people, they reacted defensively. They took offense in the deductions, the product (or result). They did not acknowledge the process behind the product which is Sherlock's ability to deduce them. John was different in that regard: He was impressed with Sherlock's ability. He acknowledged that there was some sort of process happening between "stranger knows nothing about me" and "stranger knows about my life." He acknowledged that there was an ability involved, and he was impressed with Sherlock's ability to deduce things. It's why he asked "How did you do that" instead of reacting defensively, "Piss off." 

 

2. Sherlock's fall did not, and this is interpretation, hit John as hard as the implication behind Sherlock's return. That he had been a mere pawn in Mycroft, Sherlock and Moriarty's game. We mustn't forget that John knows even less about the fall than we do. Sherlock refused to tell him about the snipers. About what he did during his absence. We, the audience, at least strongly suspect less selfish motivation. Sure, Sherlock's explanation somehow confused us but there are still some things about the fall that make it hard to condemn it. There definitely had been snipers, and there definitely is something deeply wrong with Sherlock's explanation of the fall. We've established that some things do not add up, such as Sherlock's reason to jump and the comment about negotiating with John's sniper. John does not have any insight into these matters. He has no reason to suspect that Sherlock was driven by less selfish reasons.

At the end of s2, we know that John held certain expectations of Sherlock's character. He believed him capable of love/deep appreciation/good intentions/whatever. That's why he was appalled when Sherlock refused to leave Barts to rush to Mrs Hudson's side. He had a very human image of Sherlock. John was aware of Sherlock's character flaws, and about the fact that Sherlock messed up, and when he did, usually big time. But he also considered him a "good man", to use Lestrade's words. He couldn't believe that Sherlock would not rush to Mrs Hudson's side.

When Sherlock returns, it certainly doesn't improve this updated image of Sherlock. During s3, John and Sherlock have many moments that show their bond getting closer. But we never get to see John expect Sherlock to react like a "good man" would. Maybe he doesn't think Sherlock capable of that any longer. Whenever someone points out that Sherlock feels a certain way, John rejects that idea (like when Mary says that Sherlock is nervous). His image of Sherlock is different from before. Disillusioned. John's mental speculations about Sherlock's emotions have ceased. He only thinks of Sherlock as a working unit. Here I'd like to get back to Toby's theory which makes a lot of sense and is quite close to what I think (highlighted from a different angle). John expects Sherlock to function. He isn't very patient when Sherlock messes up or is unable to "perform" because he doesn't see it as a symptom of Sherlock being human, of having emotions, of "being a good man." He doesn't consider the possibility that Sherlock is influenced by emotional entanglement, stress, distraction. Or that the deductions are a trained ability. They don't come naturally to him. He has to work for it, even if some deductions come easily to him because he exercised a lot in his life. I believe, as stated above, that John's image of Sherlock no longer includes those parts. And that's why he does not sympathize when Sherlock fails to observe certain things. He expects Sherlock to function, to work. Like a machine.

3. And -  picking up right after 2. - because he expects a flawless "execution", every blunder is badly received. Like when John blames Sherlock upon finding out about Mary's deceit (he should have noticed earlier). Or when Sherlock doesn't remember the room number in s3e2. 

 

4. Concerning their positions. I actually don't think it is necessary to go into it at this point. I've brought up this argument before, and you probably didn't refer to this part of my post.

[Arcadia]

Thanks, Zain! I do see your point. I did notice John was more restrained in some way, but haven't put careful thought into it.

 

Do you think it would be fair to say, that when Sherlock said "don't put me on a pedestal", that John took him at his word? And so they have a more equal relationship now?

[T.o.b.y]

Whenever someone points out that Sherlock feels a certain way, John rejects that idea (like when Mary says that Sherlock is nervous).

 

Interesting observation... Now I'll "have to" go and watch series 3 yet again and see whether I think that is true.

 

Of course, it would make a lot of sense. Sherlock never did tell John why he used him as a witness for his fake suicide and left him in the dark for two years. So I suppose "he's just a hopeless sociopath who doesn't know any better" is the best explanation John could come up with on his own. It is also the least hurtful. (By the way, I wish Sherlock had at least let the audience know.)

 

Only, if John still thinks so by the time the Magnussen case comes around, then where was his brain at the wedding? I mean, how more obvious can you get?

 

 

[Arcadia]

2. Sherlock's fall did not, and this is interpretation, hit John as hard as the implication behind Sherlock's return. That he had been a mere pawn in Mycroft, Sherlock and Moriarty's game....

Zain, I reread your post and it makes even more sense to me this time. Especially the part I quoted above ... of course John would be shattered by Sherlock's "death." But learning it was all a trick would really strain his belief in Sherlock's decency. Very interesting.

 

I was remarking somewhere else that one of the key scenes, for me, in the whole series, was Lestrade's remark: "some day, if we're lucky, Sherlock will be a good man." That's what I keep waiting to find out, I think; if Sherlock can learn the value of "goodness" over "greatness." And since I identify John as representing the audience in the story, I naturally look to him to make that call; to decide if Sherlock is "a good man", or merely a great one.

 

So right now I would say the jury's still out, but possibly leaning towards "greatness", not "goodness." Which was sort of the conclusion I was coming to anyway, but I think I see the "why" more clearly now. Thank you.

 

It IS a little sad, isn't it? That's okay, I enjoy sad stories too. One thing I love about this show is the way it tugs at your heart strings.

[Arcadia]

 

Whenever someone points out that Sherlock feels a certain way, John rejects that idea (like when Mary says that Sherlock is nervous).

 

Interesting observation... Now I'll "have to" go and watch series 3 yet again and see whether I think that is true.

 

Of course, it would make a lot of sense. Sherlock never did tell John why he used him as a witness for his fake suicide and left him in the dark for two years. So I suppose "he's just a hopeless sociopath who doesn't know any better" is the best explanation John could come up with on his own. It is also the least hurtful. (By the way, I wish Sherlock had at least let the audience know.)

 

Only, if John still thinks so by the time the Magnussen case comes around, then where was his brain at the wedding? I mean, how more obvious can you get?

 

 

 

John was sort of rejecting the notion that Sherlock had "normal" feelings even before S3, wasn't he? I'm thinking about a sequence between him and Mycroft in Scandal .... I can't remember it exactly, but Mycroft was wondering if Sherlock would be upset to learn that Irene was dead, and John says "he doesn't feel things like that." And earlier he said something similar to Irene. And before, they'd had that argument in TGG about having feelings....

 

Altho after Hounds you'd think John would've gotten a clue that not all is as it seems ....

 

Not going anywhere with this, it just suddenly struck me in light of what you and Zain have been saying.

[T.o.b.y]

John was sort of rejecting the notion that Sherlock had "normal" feelings even before S3, wasn't he? I'm thinking about a sequence between him and Mycroft in Scandal .... I can't remember it exactly, but Mycroft was wondering if Sherlock would be upset to learn that Irene was dead, and John says "he doesn't feel things like that." And earlier he said something similar to Irene.

 

Yes, it seems that Sherlock's act worked and continues to work a bit too well on John. He really "believes in Sherlock Holmes", doesn't he.

 

I doubt the writers thought it all through this far, but to me it makes a lot of sense that way if you consider that John has had to bear the brunt of Sherlock's rudeness and deceit. It must a be a lot easier to accept being treated like that by a total psychopath than by someone who should be capable of some empathy and feeling... And Sherlock seems to encourage that. When John won't forgive him in The Empty Hearse, he pulls that completely inacceptable bomb prank as if to say, come on, you know I'm always like this, how can you expect anything else from me? And it works, doesn't it.

 

 

[Arcadia]

Because it's what John likes?  >:-)

 

Lord, now even I'm starting to think John's a psychopath ....

[Zain]

Thanks, Zain! I do see your point. I did notice John was more restrained in some way, but haven't put careful thought into it.

 

Do you think it would be fair to say, that when Sherlock said "don't put me on a pedestal", that John took him at his word? And so they have a more equal relationship now?

 

Yes and no.

I think it is possible to interpret it that way but to me, season three shows how unequal their relationship has become. I've explained my opinion on that part before, especially when I advocated my pet project, bringing Victor Trevor into this mess. At this occasion, I hope it does not seem too narcisstic to quote myself.

 

 

One more reason why I want Victor Trevor to make an appearance. John does not feel the imbalance in their friendship because Sherlock's complete attention rests on him whenever he gets around. I'd like him to be the one to feel left out for once. The one to leave in silence while Sherlock's having fun. Just to get some sort of balance back into their friendship. And to see him make an effort. He's allowed himself to be swept away by Sherlock's decisions. Even at the end, it's more of an "okay, let's not change anything" decision when he takes Mary back.

 

This should be possible with any other character, e.g. Lestrade, but I feel like it would work best with someone John totally cannot relate to. A stranger who makes him feel left out but who reminds him enough of something familiar (Sherlock, himself, Harry, whatever...) for it to make him deeply uncomfortable

[...]

Season three is about Sherlock's loss and John's gain. I think that's heart-breaking, in a way. It has put their relationship in imbalance. And John did not measure up, in the end. He chose to keep his gains instead of going down with Sherlock. It's human, I guess. Nobody likes loss. But it makes their friendship seem more fragile than ever. I feel disillusioned. I see cracks I didn't anticipate. And I wonder if behind all the glory... if it's hollow. Because isn't it meaningless to call somebody a friend if you are not ready to go down with them? I fear this will influence how I look at the previous episodes.

 

And for the first time, I truly feel like caring is not an advantage. It hasn't been for Sherlock.

That makes me... I don't know. Feel hollow myself. It's not what I want for life. And it's not what I want for Sherlock and John.

 

 

 

 

Interesting observation... Now I'll "have to" go and watch series 3 yet again and see whether I think that is true.

 

 

Thank you Glad I inspired you. I am looking forward to your comment on it once you rewatched s3.

 

 

 

Zain, I reread your post and it makes even more sense to me this time. Especially the part I quoted above ... of course John would be shattered by Sherlock's "death." But learning it was all a trick would really strain his belief in Sherlock's decency. Very interesting.

 

I was remarking somewhere else that one of the key scenes, for me, in the whole series, was Lestrade's remark: "some day, if we're lucky, Sherlock will be a good man." That's what I keep waiting to find out, I think; if Sherlock can learn the value of "goodness" over "greatness." And since I identify John as representing the audience in the story, I naturally look to him to make that call; to decide if Sherlock is "a good man", or merely a great one.

 

So right now I would say the jury's still out, but possibly leaning towards "greatness", not "goodness." Which was sort of the conclusion I was coming to anyway, but I think I see the "why" more clearly now. Thank you.

 

It IS a little sad, isn't it? That's okay, I enjoy sad stories too. One thing I love about this show is the way it tugs at your heart strings.

 

 

I, too, think that Lestrade's comment is somewhat foreshadowing. It is guiding us through the series. Lestrade sums up Sherlock with two specific characteristics: He has got everything needed to be a good man. But he isn't quite there yet. We all expect him to take inappropriate actions along the way but we also expect him to do the right thing at the very end. Because, as Lestrade pointed out, Sherlock is about Sherlock's development. Actually it is a rather clever way to guide the audience into a specific direction.

 

I also thought John was the character the audience was supposed to identify itself with. I think this has changed, though. In s3, we got quite a shift in POV. John has become less accessible to us than in the previous seasons while Sherlock has become our "reflector." The audience now is on a higher level than John. We know specific things he is unaware of. It seems like a very deliberate move, as if the writers decided on this shift. Maybe it is important for the upcoming season. Maybe John for once is supposed to keep a secret from the audience. Before, we were kept "apart" from Sherlock because he needed to keep things from us without tricking the audience. Now we are much closer to Sherlock than to John. Just some food for thought.

[by the sea]

Maybe John is meant to represent some kind of social voyeur ... he's so fascinated by how completely out of step Sherlock is with respect to social conventions and personal interactions that he needs to follow him around just to see what he'll do next.  Assisting in Sherlock's process kind of falls to him just because he's there.  Putting up with Sherlock's rudeness and peculiar behaviour and general lack of consideration for John and his feelings is a requirement to stay close so he can keep up with his observations.   

 

Debbie  

[Arcadia]

 

I also thought John was the character the audience was supposed to identify itself with. I think this has changed, though. In s3, we got quite a shift in POV. John has become less accessible to us than in the previous seasons while Sherlock has become our "reflector." The audience now is on a higher level than John. We know specific things he is unaware of. It seems like a very deliberate move, as if the writers decided on this shift. Maybe it is important for the upcoming season. Maybe John for once is supposed to keep a secret from the audience. Before, we were kept "apart" from Sherlock because he needed to keep things from us without tricking the audience. Now we are much closer to Sherlock than to John. Just some food for thought.

 

Yes, I noticed this too. I remember remarking somewhere else that I sort of "missed John" this season, as if he was on screen less than he actually was. I admit I've always identified with Sherlock more than John anyway, but never more than in S3. But of course; it's because we're seeing more through Sherlock's eyes.

 

 I like the idea that they did it for future plot purposes, rather than just to show Sherlock's p.o.v. for a change. Although I really enjoyed that too, I liked roaming around in his funny old head. Anyway, I'm now revisiting my brief fantasy that it was John who faked the Moriarty gif in order to rescue Sherlock from exile. That could be the secret he's keeping! John as the Big Bad in S4! Awesome!

 

I just remembered Mycroft's remark about John could be the making of Sherlock, or he could make him worse. I wonder which way he thinks it's going now?

[Caya]

Well given that (from Mycroft's perspective) his little brother became a murderer for John, it's not exactly hard to guess which way, imho.

[Arcadia]

Yup. More foreshadowing? Do these guys really think that far ahead?

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

It would seem that they do....or if they don't.....at least when they are preparing the scripts for a new season they are pulling out threads and themes from the previous episodes and splicing them in.

[Zain]

And don't we love this series for it? It is very easy to feel the writers' enthusiasm, and it spills over.

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

 

And don't we love this series for it? It is very easy to feel the writers' enthusiasm, and it spills over.

 

  Yes! Without question!