How would you fix "His Last Vow"?

[Shadow Dweller]

Well, dear Shadow dweller, when I said that I would have liked to have had this kept in as part of Magnussen's overall scheme of ownership, the discussion got a tad too heated, so I didn't insist, it's still a free country and everyone is entitled to their opinion! I am in the process of watching the "cobwebbed" Sussex Vampire" and lo and behold, one of Jeremy Brett's very first observations is "We seem to have been switched on to a Grimms' fairy tale".

I think that they consider anything is up for grabs, but there are limits, as Sherlock himself says at the end of SoT.

*mischievous* Darn... that one is a perfect mood-setter (for me) :D

[T.o.b.y]

 

I do not think one's opinion on where to draw a line for fictional violence says anything about being good or bad. I did not intend to make you feel bad, and I doubt Arcadia had this in mind either. And neither do I believe that it deserves more respect than your stance. Any opinion voiced without the intention to harm others is equally of value. Here's a smiley for you to cheer up  ;)

 

Awwww. Here's one back: ;)

 

Don't believe I'm not cheerful. I delight in discussions (as long as they are discussions, and not a game of who knows more insults, which I don't think we've ever played here).

 

You know, I was just thinking, funny that this is always seen as such a modern topic. I mean, in this part of the world at least, we're living in pretty peaceful and civilized times. The very market place in my town, where people now park their cars and buy cabbage, used to be the place where people - real, live people - were publicly hanged or beheaded before the eyes of their families and neighbors. My grandparents on both sides witnessed incredible violence in person during the war (my grandfathers were even part of it, being in the armed forces at that time, and the funniest thing is, they were on two different sides... I sort of hope they never fought each other, you know...). Then their children married (and nobody voiced a protest based on nationality, which I think says a lot of good about those families), and gave birth to a daughter who never more than slapped anyone and who debates with other post-post-war children online whether it is acceptable to be glad a fictional man shot another fictional man. This doesn't sound like a bad development for me... Unfortunately, though, I do read the news and I know the world is as cruel and barbaric a place as ever, I just happen to be very, very lucky in my location therein.

 

Humans are just incredibly violent and destructive. It's in in our nature. I wonder whether enjoying violence in fiction maybe works as a vent for pent-up aggression and could actually help with being civilized in real life. Who knows.

 

 

Urk. That's why I always end up wishing I'd just kept quiet. I don't want people to think that I think I'm morally superior. Believe me, I know my own faults and hypocrisies. I'm really not trying to disparage other people's viewpoints, I'm just trying to clarify my own. As usual I get too emotionally invested, and out spew the pompous declarations. You'd think I'd learn.

 

Oh, but I love it when other people besides myself get emotionally invested in a debate. Makes me feel less of a fool, you know. Lets be pompous together! Please?

 

 

The shooting? No, he didn't even have a gun.

 

I know what you mean, I just ... don't think the circumstances warrant the solution.

 

Urk. That's why I always end up wishing I'd just kept quiet. I don't want people to think that I think I'm morally superior. Believe me, I know my own faults and hypocrisies. I'm really not trying to disparage other people's viewpoints, I'm just trying to clarify my own. As usual I get too emotionally invested, and out spew the pompous declarations. You'd think I'd learn.

 

 

The immediate circumstances? Meaning Magnussen flicking John's face? No. But the overall circumstances? Magnussen holding an entire nation at the gunpoint of his memorized scandals (or just potential scandals)? Magnussen driving people to commit suicide and threatening John's family? Hell, yes!

 

 

You know what's weird? If they had stuck to the outline of the original Milverton story, and Mary had shot CAM, and Sherlock had covered it up .... I think I would have found that acceptable. And that doesn't make sense to me -- helping to coverup a murder? -- but I think that's how I would have felt.

 

While I think that what makes Sherlock so heroic in His Last Vow is how he handles the whole situation with Mary and her attempt to kill Magnussen. First, I think Sherlock agrees with you all. No killing. Killing = bad, he spends his whole life clearing up murders and getting people who kill (for whatever reason) arrested and brought to justice. He originally got himself in trouble because he stepped in to save Magnussen's life. Magnussen's!

 

Sherlock thinks the whole time (like you) that there must be a better solution. Something elegant, something clever. He cooks up this elaborate plan with the laptop and the GPS locater and god knows what. He tries to negotiate with Magnussen, who basically laughs in his face for even trying that with him. And then it turns out in the end that damn, Mary was right all along - this man should be killed, and there is no other way. But Sherlock isn't going to do it secretly and get away with it. No, he is Sherlock F***ing Holmes, and he's going to show Mary how he thinks you commit murder if you absolutely have to: You wait until the police arrives and then you do it right in front of everybody, making sure that nobody else is accused, and you take full responsibility. At the same time, Sherlock beats Magnussen: Magnussen never dreamed he would be so much as harmed in front of witnesses. In his world, people always do bad things in secret, and that gives him power over them. He didn't allow for a hero who would lay his crime open for all the world to see, and sacrifice his own good name.

 

Not that I think Sherlock would have approved if Mary had done it like that. No, no, Mary must not commit any murders at all. John would be devastated. The only person who Sherlock thinks is okay to kill and go to prison is himself, because nobody needs him (he thinks). He's free to do these outrageous things because he's the man who left the wedding alone, you know? 

 

*Sigh*... I'm glorifying him again, I know.

[Inge l-w]

Glorifying as in leaving him without a back-up plan? That's John's query, by the way, not mine! It goes so much against the whole concept of the character, that every time I watch that T H I N G happening, I want to just throw something at the screen and scream that Moriarity was right all along with his Doofuss! exclamation. If this is Sherlock Holmes in ANY universe, a solution always relies on the little brain cells, grey matter, what have you, certainly not pulling a gun out of thin air, as I read somewhere else, and deliberately, though under provocation, commit murder.

[Boton]

 

 

 

While I think that what makes Sherlock so heroic in His Last Vow is how he handles the whole situation with Mary and her attempt to kill Magnussen. First, I think Sherlock agrees with you all. No killing. Killing = bad, he spends his whole life clearing up murders and getting people who kill (for whatever reason) arrested and brought to justice. He originally got himself in trouble because he stepped in to save Magnussen's life. Magnussen's!

 

Sherlock thinks the whole time (like you) that there must be a better solution. Something elegant, something clever. He cooks up this elaborate plan with the laptop and the GPS locater and god knows what. He tries to negotiate with Magnussen, who basically laughs in his face for even trying that with him. And then it turns out in the end that damn, Mary was right all along - this man should be killed, and there is no other way. But Sherlock isn't going to do it secretly and get away with it. No, he is Sherlock F***ing Holmes, and he's going to show Mary how he thinks you commit murder if you absolutely have to: You wait until the police arrives and then you do it right in front of everybody, making sure that nobody else is accused, and you take full responsibility. At the same time, Sherlock beats Magnussen: Magnussen never dreamed he would be so much as harmed in front of witnesses. In his world, people always do bad things in secret, and that gives him power over them. He didn't allow for a hero who would lay his crime open for all the world to see, and sacrifice his own good name.

 

Not that I think Sherlock would have approved if Mary had done it like that. No, no, Mary must not commit any murders at all. John would be devastated. The only person who Sherlock thinks is okay to kill and go to prison is himself, because nobody needs him (he thinks). He's free to do these outrageous things because he's the man who left the wedding alone, you know? 

 

 

 

^^^  This.  My feelings exactly.  

 

Toby has said this so eloquently that I won't try to repeat the point, except to say that I 100% agree that this is how Sherlock Holmes deals with a situation that requires killing:  in public and willing to face his punishment.  This is what elevates the act above simple murder for me: the public nature, and the fact that it is calculated to (as much as possible) bring the heartache down on Sherlock alone.

 

Boy, I leave you guys alone overnight, and I wake up to 2 pages of the most intense discussion.  I must read this in more depth after my morning class!

[Inge l-w]

Same here. It's about time for a commentary watching, Unlocking Sherlock/Sherlock Unlocked, and gag reel.

Oh, they are almost more fun than the episodes of Series 3, especially the out takes with Rupert Graves missing his footing and sliding down a whole flight of stairs, and the famous bedsheet fall. And you get the addition of some more insights on the subject, plus Benedict Cumberbatch being himself and not this exotic being they have created, Amanda Abbington, Louise Brealy and Lara Pulver analyse the women in his life, plus a real Sherlock film historian explains bits and pieces. Of course the creators hog the limelight, put it is their brainchild, so in this instance it's OK. If you have the Special Edition of S3, there is even more material to enjoy!

[SherlockedCAMPer]

I got the deluxe special with the mini-busts & art cards so I have the outtakes on a separate disc and some of the other bonuses while included with their series are also on there just because.

[sfmpco]

Oooooh... I want that set so much.  But I've heard some USA folks bought it and it wasn't Region 1.

[SherlockedCAMPer]

Mine is region 1 but there is the UK version as well. Got mine through the BBC shop.

[sittything]

I had no idea until I was looking for Sherlock discs online for my mom for Christmas that there were different regions disc-wise.  Crazy.   Does anyone know why/how that happened?

[sfmpco]

 

While I think that what makes Sherlock so heroic in His Last Vow is how he handles the whole situation with Mary and her attempt to kill Magnussen. First, I think Sherlock agrees with you all. No killing. Killing = bad, he spends his whole life clearing up murders and getting people who kill (for whatever reason) arrested and brought to justice. He originally got himself in trouble because he stepped in to save Magnussen's life. Magnussen's!

 

 

 

Sherlock thinks the whole time (like you) that there must be a better solution. Something elegant, something clever. He cooks up this elaborate plan with the laptop and the GPS locater and god knows what. He tries to negotiate with Magnussen, who basically laughs in his face for even trying that with him. And then it turns out in the end that damn, Mary was right all along - this man should be killed, and there is no other way. But Sherlock isn't going to do it secretly and get away with it. No, he is Sherlock F***ing Holmes, and he's going to show Mary how he thinks you commit murder if you absolutely have to: You wait until the police arrives and then you do it right in front of everybody, making sure that nobody else is accused, and you take full responsibility. At the same time, Sherlock beats Magnussen: Magnussen never dreamed he would be so much as harmed in front of witnesses. In his world, people always do bad things in secret, and that gives him power over them. He didn't allow for a hero who would lay his crime open for all the world to see, and sacrifice his own good name.

 

Not that I think Sherlock would have approved if Mary had done it like that. No, no, Mary must not commit any murders at all. John would be devastated. The only person who Sherlock thinks is okay to kill and go to prison is himself, because nobody needs him (he thinks). He's free to do these outrageous things because he's the man who left the wedding alone, you know? 

 

*Sigh*... I'm glorifying him again, I know.

 

 

TOBY, as always you present an excellent discussion on the matter!  

[Arcadia]

What a fascinating discussion! To answer Carol's original query, I would fix this particular episode by changing everything from the moment they enter Magnussen's office. No Mary as assasin, no Sherlock lying at death's door, no final confrontation that would necessitate turning the hero into a murderer! The possibilities were there, starting with Lady Smallwood asking for his help to retrieve some letters. It could have gone down an entirely different path, but they opted for sensationalism and pointless violence, because killing Magnussen does by no means make her safe from the past they chose to give her. And for me, it is quite a lame explanation to say that John is addicted to adrenaline rushes, and that is why he chose Sherlock as his best friend and a former CIA operative with a licence to kill as his wife. They couldn't or wouldn't create a more elegant episode, not just a more elegant solution to the whole blackmail arc. Now, they have to patch things up in a major way, because Sherlock needs a Royal pardon as a British subject, not just a perfunctory "come home, all is forgiven" from Mycroft.

Ooooooh, I wouldn't give up that mind palace sequence for anything. I thought it was brilliant. I thought Mr. Cumberbatch was brilliant in it.

 

I got to thinking ... if someone else had shot CAM, would I be as troubled by it? I mentioned earlier I don't think it would have bothered me as much if Mary had killed CAM, and Sherlock had kept quiet about it. But I was thinking about it some more this morning, and I realized ... it would bother me VERY much, however, if he lied to John about it. And I think it would bother me if John knew, but kept quiet about it. 

 

Then I started thinking: what if Sherlock had been right the first time, and it was Lady Smallwood in CAM's office? What if she were the one to kill CAM, and Sherlock kept quiet about it (as in the original story, apparently.) What if John kept quiet about it? Or to turn it around, what if one of them ratted her out? How would I feel about any of that?

 

True Perciever that I am, I notice my response changes depending on who's involved and in what way. What do you all think, does it make a difference WHO killed CAM? Is protecting (or not protecting) the killer any different than being the killer? Does it make any difference if it's someone "close to home", or if it's someone we don't really know? I haven't quite decided, actually. But I thought it was an interesting mind puzzle.

 

I think we all are assuming that he'll have a royal pardon.

I'm assuming the Queen is behind the Moriary gif. :P

 

Oh, but I love it when other people besides myself get emotionally invested in a debate. Makes me feel less of a fool, you know. Lets be pompous together! Please?

Awwww, Toby, you is da bomb. (That's a good thing, in case you're wondering! ) I will do my best to be as pompous as possible. :P

 

 

The shooting? No, he didn't even have a gun.

 

I know what you mean, I just ... don't think the circumstances warrant the solution.

 

The immediate circumstances? Meaning Magnussen flicking John's face? No. But the overall circumstances? Magnussen holding an entire nation at the gunpoint of his memorized scandals (or just potential scandals)? Magnussen driving people to commit suicide and threatening John's family? Hell, yes!

 

Actually, what I meant was: Sherlock had a gun. CAM didn't. Not a fair fight.

 

By the way, I'm glad CAM's dead. It's the manner of his death that bothers me. No, wait, that's not quite right .... it's the identity of the executioner that bothers me. See my ramblings above to see how confused I am about that at this point.

 

While I think that what makes Sherlock so heroic in His Last Vow is how he handles the whole situation with Mary and her attempt to kill Magnussen. First, I think Sherlock agrees with you all. No killing. Killing = bad, he spends his whole life clearing up murders and getting people who kill (for whatever reason) arrested and brought to justice. He originally got himself in trouble because he stepped in to save Magnussen's life. Magnussen's!

Actually, I don't think he gave a flip about Magnussen's life, any more than I do. I think he was concerned to keep Mary from ruining John's life by becoming a murderess. (Assuming that's what she was there to do, which I still wonder......)

 

Sherlock thinks the whole time (like you) that there must be a better solution. Something elegant, something clever. He cooks up this elaborate plan with the laptop and the GPS locater and god knows what. He tries to negotiate with Magnussen, who basically laughs in his face for even trying that with him. And then it turns out in the end that damn, Mary was right all along - this man should be killed, and there is no other way. But Sherlock isn't going to do it secretly and get away with it. No, he is Sherlock F***ing Holmes, and he's going to show Mary how he thinks you commit murder if you absolutely have to: You wait until the police arrives and then you do it right in front of everybody, making sure that nobody else is accused, and you take full responsibility. At the same time, Sherlock beats Magnussen: Magnussen never dreamed he would be so much as harmed in front of witnesses. In his world, people always do bad things in secret, and that gives him power over them. He didn't allow for a hero who would lay his crime open for all the world to see, and sacrifice his own good name.

This, I can agree with! Mostly....... :P

 

He sacrificed more than his good name, didn't he? He sacrificed his life, basically. I think he was well aware of what the consequences of his action would be.

 

Wouldn't it be awful if we discovered that his tears at the end of HLV turn out to be fake, like the ones he faked (or so Moftiss says) in TRF? If that turns out to be the case I might do something absolutely monstrous......

[T.o.b.y]

 

Actually, I don't think he gave a flip about Magnussen's life, any more than I do. I think he was concerned to keep Mary from ruining John's life by becoming a murderess. (Assuming that's what she was there to do, which I still wonder......)

 

But he interfered before he knew it was Mary! He addressed the assassin as Lady Smallwood. Told her that if she was going to commit murder, she should change her perfume.

 

 

[sfmpco]

While Mary says later in the episode, "People like Magnussen should be killed.  That's why there's people like me." - well, she could have killed him but she DIDN'T.  And Magnussen was clearly trying to negotiate his way out of the situation.  She was using her gun as a pressure point on him, and he was clearly afraid of being killed when it was just the two of them.  So if she really wanted to kill him, she should have just done it, no negotiating.  Hit style. The fact that she allowed him a certain amount of negotiation leads me to think that if they could have reached an agreement, she might not have killed him, but he's the last person you would want to make an agreement with as he's not trustworthy.

[SherlockedCAMPer]

I had no idea until I was looking for Sherlock discs online for my mom for Christmas that there were different regions disc-wise.  Crazy.   Does anyone know why/how that happened?

 

It's more or less to do with copyright laws and to control releases of movies/tv shows to prevent them from getting to certain countries if the powers that be don't want them there.  It's a great way for a company to make more money because you will need certain equipment for each region and have to re-buy the discs if you move out of region and get a new player for the new region.

[Arcadia]

 

Actually, I don't think he gave a flip about Magnussen's life, any more than I do. I think he was concerned to keep Mary from ruining John's life by becoming a murderess. (Assuming that's what she was there to do, which I still wonder......)

 

But he interfered before he knew it was Mary! He addressed the assassin as Lady Smallwood. Told her that if she was going to commit murder, she should change her perfume.

 

Good point. Okay, he was trying to keep Lady S. from ruining her life....   :P

 

While Mary says later in the episode, "People like Magnussen should be killed.  That's why there's people like me." - well, she could have killed him but she DIDN'T.  And Magnussen was clearly trying to negotiate his way out of the situation.  She was using her gun as a pressure point on him, and he was clearly afraid of being killed when it was just the two of them.  So if she really wanted to kill him, she should have just done it, no negotiating.  Hit style. The fact that she allowed him a certain amount of negotiation leads me to think that if they could have reached an agreement, she might not have killed him, but he's the last person you would want to make an agreement with as he's not trustworthy.

Yesh, still puzzled about that. Maybe she's just going soft? Plus there's a little part of me that keeps going "she's not really an assassin...." But it doesn't really make sense for her to negotiate with him either, does it? There's nothing to make him keep his word?

[T.o.b.y]

 

While Mary says later in the episode, "People like Magnussen should be killed.  That's why there's people like me." - well, she could have killed him but she DIDN'T.  And Magnussen was clearly trying to negotiate his way out of the situation.  She was using her gun as a pressure point on him, and he was clearly afraid of being killed when it was just the two of them.  So if she really wanted to kill him, she should have just done it, no negotiating.  Hit style. The fact that she allowed him a certain amount of negotiation leads me to think that if they could have reached an agreement, she might not have killed him, but he's the last person you would want to make an agreement with as he's not trustworthy.

Yesh, still puzzled about that. Maybe she's just going soft? Plus there's a little part of me that keeps going "she's not really an assassin...." But it doesn't really make sense for her to negotiate with him either, does it? There's nothing to make him keep his word?

 

I still think she wanted something from him, something he couldn't have given her if he was dead. Information, for example. She must have wanted to know how Magnussen found out about her past, and more importantly, from whom. She might still have killed him afterwards (she probably would have), but maybe she needed him to talk first.

 

 

[Zain]

Yes, exactly my thoughts. Mary was also acting on the assumption that Magnussen had tangible proof, not just a memory of having seen something incriminating. Who knows, maybe that's how she got the thumbdrive, and one of the A's is for "Augustus", and the G is actually a C for Charles. One new thought for the wilder theoretical approaches

 

[T.o.b.y]

Yup, I like to think she stole the drive from Magnussen, too. That would explain why it existed in the first place, and she was carrying it around with her.

[Zain]

Therefore the R.A. is Ronald Adair, and the proof of how Mary killed him is on the thumbdrive. After all, she is Moran... Yup. ^^ ... Or: No. Probably not. Though I'd LOVE it if there was a twist like this.

[sfmpco]

Yup, I like to think she stole the drive from Magnussen, too. That would explain why it existed in the first place, and she was carrying it around with her.

 

Hmmm... never ever considered that idea before but I like it!!!

[Carol the Dabbler]

Now, they have to patch things up in a major way, because Sherlock needs a Royal pardon as a British subject, not just a perfunctory "come home, all is forgiven" from Mycroft.

 

[Gatiss voice] Or does he? [/Gatiss]

 

That late scene with Lady Smallwood makes me think the entire thing is being handled in a very hush-hush way.  I doubt that Sherlock has even been charged with a crime, let alone put on trial.  So a pardon might be not only unnecessary, but actually impossible.

 

... during the war (my grandfathers were even part of it, being in the armed forces at that time, and the funniest thing is, they were on two different sides... I sort of hope they never fought each other, you know...). Then their children married (and nobody voiced a protest based on nationality, which I think says a lot of good about those families), and gave birth to a daughter who never more than slapped anyone and who debates with other post-post-war children online whether it is acceptable to be glad a fictional man shot another fictional man. This doesn't sound like a bad development for me... Unfortunately, though, I do read the news and I know the world is as cruel and barbaric a place as ever, I just happen to be very, very lucky in my location therein.

 

Humans are just incredibly violent and destructive. It's in in our nature.

 

I'm not so sure about that.  Some people work that way, sure.  But I think that by and large, the vast majority of people are honest, decent folks who just want to be left alone to live their own quiet lives.  One reason why the world seems a far more violent place nowadays is that any time something bad happens -- even if it's on the other side of the country or the other side of the world -- we not only hear about it, we see it happen.  I'm not saying this is necessarily a bad thing.  But it does make it awfully hard to live a life of serene contemplation.

 

I had no idea until I was looking for Sherlock discs online for my mom for Christmas that there were different regions disc-wise.  Crazy.   Does anyone know why/how that happened?

It's something that the movie studios and DVD-player manufacturers came up with, so they can control who can buy a DVD when. Let's say a movie has its first theatrical release in the US, then a couple of months later in Europe. They will release the Region 1 (US) DVDs about the time the movie leaves the theaters in the US. If Europeans could buy the DVD at that point, they would -- it's way cheaper than shelling out big bucks for the tickets, plus more for overpriced popcorn. But they can't, because the Region 2 DVD won't be released till the movie leaves European theaters.  (And that's what region-free DVD players are for.)

 

If companies were being hurt by this, it would be prosecuted (here in the US) under the antitrust laws. But it's only us individual consumers who are being pushed around, so who cares?

 

[Inge l-w]

While Mary says later in the episode, "People like Magnussen should be killed. That's why there's people like me." - well, she could have killed him but she DIDN'T. And Magnussen was clearly trying to negotiate his way out of the situation. She was using her gun as a pressure point on him, and he was clearly afraid of being killed when it was just the two of them. So if she really wanted to kill him, she should have just done it, no negotiating. Hit style. The fact that she allowed him a certain amount of negotiation leads me to think that if they could have reached an agreement, she might not have killed him, but he's the last person you would want to make an agreement with as he's not trustworthy.

So, basically you are saying that it is his fault, because everything that happens after his stumbling in in that particular scene is a direct result of Mary's plan not being known by him, the whole "I'll text you if I am free" "You are, I checked", because obviously she needed the evening free to infiltrate Magnussen's office.

[sfmpco]

 

While Mary says later in the episode, "People like Magnussen should be killed. That's why there's people like me." - well, she could have killed him but she DIDN'T. And Magnussen was clearly trying to negotiate his way out of the situation. She was using her gun as a pressure point on him, and he was clearly afraid of being killed when it was just the two of them. So if she really wanted to kill him, she should have just done it, no negotiating. Hit style. The fact that she allowed him a certain amount of negotiation leads me to think that if they could have reached an agreement, she might not have killed him, but he's the last person you would want to make an agreement with as he's not trustworthy.

So, basically you are saying that it is his fault, because everything that happens after his stumbling in in that particular scene is a direct result of Mary's plan not being known by him, the whole "I'll text you if I am free" "You are, I checked", because obviously she needed the evening free to infiltrate Magnussen's office.

 

 

That everything that happened is Sherlock's fault?  No, I was trying to keep Sherlock out of this equation as possible.  I really was just focusing on Mary/Magnussen and what was going on before Sherlock arrived.

[Arcadia]

I think what Sherlock is chiefly guilty of here is an excess of confidence. He thought he could control the situation, but he couldn't. That doesn't make it his fault, but he didn't improve the situation by pushing Mary to surrender to him, imo. A less arrogant man might have heeded Mary's words, and backed off. But if anyone's at fault, I would say it's Mary, for committing acts that put her in the position to be blackmailed; and CAM, for blackmailing her.

[joanneta1]

Arcadia dear, it's not arrogance, it's supreme self-confidence when it comes to his mental acuity and a lot of insecurity when it comes to family, including bet friend and their assassin wives, but following this thread brings me back to my original point: I couldn't care less who shot Magnussen, as long as it is NOT Sherlock, it's so out of character, however much our dear fellow members try to rationalize, romanticize or explain it away!

By the way, I am in the middle of watching the Golden Pince-nez, where Hardwick was unavailable, and he goes on this adventure with Mycroft (Charles Gary, another Bond baddie, Mr Blofeld himself) and there is such a Mycroft-Sherlock moment that I couldn't help but laugh out loud: Mycroft whips out a portable magnifying lens to inspect the scratches around the lock of the bureau, and Sherlock remarks: "That's father's magnifying glass! He gave it to you. How ironic"!