Series 4 News

[Arcadia]

Another theory is that John is in protection mode ... scanning the area for dangers to his pal.

[J.P.]

Am I having a deja vu?

We've heard something like this before haven't we...

 

 

Mark Gatiss says we’ve missed “blindingly obvious” clues about Sherlock’s future

Years of planning have gone into the new series, the series co-creator and star says

Mark Gatiss says we’ve missed “blindingly obvious” clues about Sherlock’s future

By Huw Fullerton
Tuesday 13 September 2016 at 11:44AM

We have a few months to wait until we see more of hit BBC drama Sherlock, which will return in January for a trio of adventures that are currently being kept firmly under wraps (barring one very mysterious trailer).

However, according to co-creator and star Mark Gatiss there are some pretty obvious clues that could have told us exactly what we could expect for Benedict Cumberbatch’s sleuth in the new year – if we’d only been able to focus on the real hints rather than speculating over random unrelated details.

“There are things that come to fruition in this series which we’ve been planning for years,” the actor and writer (who also plays Mycroft Holmes in the series) told the audience at a Victoria & Albert Museum members’ talk last night.

“But people also find things that aren’t there. Which is my favourite. And then miss the blindingly obvious things that are there. People read an awful lot into it.”

Gatiss went on to discuss one of the more bizarre theories he’d seen over the years, which he said exemplified the kind of frenzied speculation he saw from many fans.

“I did read someone’s theory about Moriarty’s suicide, which was all based on Grimm’s fairy tales,” Gatiss recalled.

“And it would have required a dossier – like a really annotated episode guide. That’s obviously not going to happen, because this has to be something for the casual viewer, who’s not going to say ‘Oh I see…’”

He concluded: “Sometimes I’m made aware of these things and I think the level of invention is amazing, but it’s amazing that you think it’s going to turn out to be that – because it really isn’t.”
 

source: http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2016-09-13/mark-gatiss-says-weve-missed-blindingly-obvious-clues-about-sherlocks-future

 

Well, the clues are obvious when you know the future! <_<

Or not. We are still waiting for some explanations, I hope that's what Mark means by fruition. :D

[Arcadia]

Yes, we have heard that before, and out of Moffat's mouth. And I distinctly remember Gatiss giving him an "oh, you think so?" type of response at the time. The little devils.
 
Blindingly obvious, eh? Well, then, no wonder I can't see it, if I've been blinded by it! :P

[Inge l-w]

Maybe he meant that we will finally, finally Minister (dear old BBC series), find out the truth about Moriarty's fate and Sherlock's real solution out of the famous thirteen routes to survival! That, and why the most intelligent person ever created, bar his older brother, decided that pulling a gun on a defenseless man was a logical solution, no matter how slimy the victim was!

[T.o.b.y]

The thing is, I really, REALLY doubt the writers know of every fan theory out there. They can't possibly be aware what we have and haven't "missed". Which is fine, btw (I rather hope nobody involved with the series knows of our cares about my obsession with their work, thank you very much; I'd be more than a little embarrassed).

 

So statements like this aren't really clues. They help create hype and anticipation, that's it. Which is also fine. It's still months until the next series airs, they have to find some way to keep people interested (personally, I would prefer another trailer, though. Or a few more promo pics. Or something like that.)

[Arcadia]

The thing is, I really, REALLY doubt the writers know of every fan theory out there. They can't possibly be aware what we have and haven't "missed". Which is fine, btw (I rather hope nobody involved with the series knows of our cares about my obsession with their work, thank you very much; I'd be more than a little embarrassed).

Heck, I doubt even the fans know every theory that's out there! I think there's some that are more, um .... provoking ... than others, though, and I wouldn't be surprised if that's not the ones they're usually referring to. You know, the ones the press love to describe as ... let's see, what's the word in this particular article? Oh, yes ... "frenzied".

 

So statements like this aren't really clues. They help create hype and anticipation, that's it. Which is also fine. It's still months until the next series airs, they have to find some way to keep people interested (personally, I would prefer another trailer, though. Or a few more promo pics. Or something like that.)

 

Patience, young padawan. Those will come too.

 

Won't they?

 

Eventually?

 

Meep?

[Inge l-w]

Oh, please, dear shadowy teddy bear: don't turn into an R2 droid! We need you to verbalise your thoughts. Not all of us learned its programming language ever since 1977 (I have a perfectly good excuse, as I was one year old, then!). Can't you be more like Han Solo?

[Arcadia]

But ... but ... but ... the hiatus is so loooonnnnnnnnnnnggggg!!! :cry:

 

Boop bip.

[Fantasy Lover]

GUYS!!! WE GOT EPISODE TITLES!!!! THE FIRST IS THE SIX THATCHERS AND THE SECOND IS THE LYING DETECTIVE!!! I'M SCREAMING!!! *hyperventilates*

[Carol the Dabbler]

Interesting. Wonder if the first episode's plot is anything like the case already reported in John's blog (which is a parody of "The Six Napoleons")?

 

Second ep's title should be a relief to those who've conjectured that borrowing the villain from "The Dying Detective" might mean Sherlock would die in S4 (even though Holmes does not actually die in TDD).

 

What do we know so far about episode 3? Anything?

[Carol the Dabbler]

Just verified the two titles with PBS's Facebook page (the only official source I could find). Oh. I see why it's all over the fan sites and not yet on the BBC or Sherlockology sites -- the titles were just announced at the convention.

 

Added: Plus, I'm probably the only person on this forum who didn't already know that it's all over Twitter (including the BBC page).

[Inge l-w]

Well, in SDCC, Mr Gatiss was holding the card with Thatcher on it, Ms Abbington the one with Smith, and Benedict the one with Sherrinford. If Mrs Watson survives this series and they introduce a third brother, knowing that Sherrinford was a first attempt at Sherlock, they will have broken with ACD canon once and for all. In a way, that will be liberating! The same way I have not watched their Dr Who, I shall drop this version and go back to my beloved Granada adaptations!

The Lying Detective tops everything! We flipping well KNOW that Sherlock Holmes feigned illness in The Dying Detective and knowingly spread rumours of his worsening condition in The Illustrious Client! Are they running out of steam, on top of everything else?

[Arcadia]

Added: Plus, I'm probably the only person on this forum who didn't already know that it's all over Twitter (including the BBC page).

 

Nope, you're not. ;)

 

[Amber§]

I didn't understand, do you think Sherlock is going to die in this series?

[Carol the Dabbler]

No I don't, not at all. He's Sherlock Holmes! He's functionally immortal.

 

However, when some people heard that baddie Culverton Smith was from Conan Doyle's story "The Dying Detective," they immediately deduced (apparently without bothering to read the actual story) that the title meant Sherlock would die in S4. Of course Moftiss have now titled the episode as "The Lying Detective," which is actually a better description of the Conan Doyle plot and may alleviate some of the panic.

[Amber§]

ok, that sounds better, I think that, if Sherlock dies in S4, me too, I'm going to die

[Carol the Dabbler]

Even if Moftiss decide someday that they're ready to do the final series of the show, I cannot imagine that they'd kill off Sherlock. They're both huge Holmes fans since childhood, so I imagine they'd come up with some spin on keeping bees on the Sussex Downs (like the original Holmes) instead.

 

Of course, I've been wrong about Moftiss's intentions before. And even "they said they wouldn't" doesn't seem to prove much where those two are concerned. But still....

[Alex the Dabbler]

Just verified the two titles with PBS's Facebook page (the only official source I could find). Oh. I see why it's all over the fan sites and not yet on the BBC or Sherlockology sites -- the titles were just announced at the convention.

 

Added: Plus, I'm probably the only person on this forum who didn't already know that it's all over Twitter (including the BBC page).

 

https://twitter.com/BBCOne/status/780092985501507584

[Arcadia]

ok, that sounds better, I think that, if Sherlock dies in S4, me too, I'm going to die

 

We might as well, there won't be anything worth living for anymore ... :p I kid!!! I kid!!!

 

[jadpdr]

Hey, you lot could do with a bit of comedy from bygone years! Try the Don Camillo series with Fernandel and the Gendarme series with Louis de Funes, and if you want a bit of mystery, try the Fantomas series, one with Jean Marais and one with Helmut Berger.

[Boton]

 

Just verified the two titles with PBS's Facebook page (the only official source I could find). Oh. I see why it's all over the fan sites and not yet on the BBC or Sherlockology sites -- the titles were just announced at the convention.

 

Added: Plus, I'm probably the only person on this forum who didn't already know that it's all over Twitter (including the BBC page).

 

https://twitter.com/BBCOne/status/780092985501507584

 

 

Did you guys see that the title of the first episode is one of the cases written up on John's blog?

 

(There, hope that's non-spoilery enough to warrant no spoiler tags.)

[Carol the Dabbler]

Don't worry -- if it's a spoiler, we'll blame either the BBC (for encouraging John to post the blog) or Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (for writing a blatant rip-off called "The Six Napoleons").

[T.o.b.y]

Oh! So that's what "Thatcher" was referring to! Now I am wondering whether they will be objects (like in The Six Napoleons) or people.

 

And "The Lying Detective"? That sounds promising! :D Like I have said before, I don't think Sherlock could pull of a fake death or illness again in front of his friends. Enemies might be fooled, but Mary will prevent John for falling another prank and Molly sees through him anyway.

[Alex the Dabbler]

 

 

Just verified the two titles with PBS's Facebook page (the only official source I could find). Oh. I see why it's all over the fan sites and not yet on the BBC or Sherlockology sites -- the titles were just announced at the convention.

 

Added: Plus, I'm probably the only person on this forum who didn't already know that it's all over Twitter (including the BBC page).

 

https://twitter.com/BBCOne/status/780092985501507584

 

 

Did you guys see that the title of the first episode is one of the cases written up on John's blog?

 

(There, hope that's non-spoilery enough to warrant no spoiler tags.)

 

 

http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2016-09-26/is-the-plot-for-this-sherlock-series-4-episode-already-online

 

[sfmpco]

S4 release date

 

http://www.chattsportsnet.com/entertainment/tv-shows/sherlock-season-4-release-date-january-1-2017-new-big-bad-introduced/15172/