Holiday-Special News ("Abominable Bride")

[besleybean]

Well we won't really know until we've seen the Special.

[sfmpco]

Even Madame Petrova looks a lot like the bride in the special.  

[Inge l-w]

Oh, I certainly hope not! In their various interviews, both scriptwriters have expressed their admiration for that rather mediocre rendition of Sherlock Holmes, but if the Christmas Special is anything like that, they will have lost a devoted viewer! Anything, even Michael Caine in Without a Clue, or Sherlock Holmes's Smarter Brother would be better than this! Couldn't they simply go with anything from the Rathbone films, they seem to like equally well?

Please, any higher power out there listening, NOT that particular source of inspiration! I would rather listen to Benedict read the phone directory, or excerpts from the Bible or something!

[besleybean]

I trust our writers.

[J.P.]

In Mofftiss we trust.

 

Yet another T-Shirt...

[jadpdr]

It seems I reached my maximum likes for the day, which is not mentioned in the rules, just following this thread! But I would definitely NOT want to watch anything from the Billy Wilder film reworked into a Special, of all things.Period costume is perfectly OK, nonsense from the 60s with such a colorless rendition of Sherlock is not. Something new, innovative and original within the ACD framework, please!

[besleybean]

I'm sure we will not be disappointed.

[T.o.b.y]

I hardly know what to be disappointed in. This Victorian thing is playing havoc with my expectations. Perhaps that was the point... :lol:

[sfmpco]

But we know it's not entirely Victorian as there are Setlock pics that have John and Mary at a graveyard in the same clothes they wore when seeing Sherlock off on the jet...

 

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

Okay, so this is just pure SPECULATION, but as i am watching "The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes," I am starting to wonder if the special isn't somehow an homage to that film....

 

Oh, I certainly hope not! In their various interviews, both scriptwriters have expressed their admiration for that rather mediocre rendition of Sherlock Holmes, but if the Christmas Special is anything like that, they will have lost a devoted viewer!

 

I would definitely NOT want to watch anything from the Billy Wilder film reworked into a Special, of all things.Period costume is perfectly OK, nonsense from the 60s with such a colorless rendition of Sherlock is not.

 

And yet you've both chosen "Scandal in Belgravia" as your favorite Series 2 episode -- despite its bearing a certain resemblance to that same movie.  When Moftiss borrow from a source, they don't actually adapt it as a whole, they just borrow bits and pieces, then arrange those bits and pieces to suit themselves.

 

[sfmpco]

And it is mentioned that Sherlock was engaged to his violin teacher's daughter who died just before the wedding.

[Inge l-w]

Dear Carol,

I see that some explanation is in order. I have chosen Scandal because I never liked the Baskerville thing, even as a novel, even in the Jeremy Brett series, and The Fall is unbearably dark and disturbing, possibly on a par with Last Vow, so I chose the one which includes the least anguish, from Series Two. As for Series Three, The Empty Hearse fulfills the same criteria. Last Vow is out of the question, and Sign of Three is almost equally unbearable, because the hitherto childish genius goes through an accelerated puberty phase to full adulthood as he makes his speech, realises his true feelings for Dr Watson and has to leave early and alone because he has pushed his friend into the arms of Mary, whom he genuinely likes, so he cannot declare himself as he might wish and instead turns it into a joke about parenting, looks wistfully at Janine, whom he has equally pushed towards the sci-fi fan and rather than become the spectre at the feast, fades into the night.

It is a personal choice on the principle of picking the lesser of two (in this case, three) evils.

[besleybean]

I can't even conceive of anything remotely to do with BBC Sherlock being considered anywhere near 'evil'.

The writers do seem a bit obsessed with violence for me...but I'm sure that's only in TV world!

[Inge l-w]

Evil as in causing severe heartache and feelings of helplessness in the face of what the scriptwriters are doing to your favourite detective, dear besleybean. It is a famous dictum, always pick the lesser of two evils, I hope you have heard of it! I much prefer to be entertained by the shows I watch rather than go into a decline because of them.

[besleybean]

I couldn't even pretend I would allow a TV show to so affect me.

I actually prefer my TV shows to make me think, being entertained would simply be a bonus!

Obviously I'm aware of that particular idiom, though perhaps not the one I would have used in this particular instance.

Possibly I would have stuck to: you pay your money and make your choice.

[sfmpco]

Dear Carol,

I see that some explanation is in order. I have chosen Scandal because I never liked the Baskerville thing, even as a novel, even in the Jeremy Brett series, and The Fall is unbearably dark and disturbing, possibly on a par with Last Vow, so I chose the one which includes the least anguish, from Series Two. As for Series Three, The Empty Hearse fulfills the same criteria. Last Vow is out of the question, and Sign of Three is almost equally unbearable, because the hitherto childish genius goes through an accelerated puberty phase to full adulthood as he makes his speech, realises his true feelings for Dr Watson and has to leave early and alone because he has pushed his friend into the arms of Mary, whom he genuinely likes, so he cannot declare himself as he might wish and instead turns it into a joke about parenting, looks wistfully at Janine, whom he has equally pushed towards the sci-fi fan and rather than become the spectre at the feast, fades into the night.

It is a personal choice on the principle of picking the lesser of two (in this case, three) evils.

 

Hang on... that all sounds rather Johnlock-ish.  His true feelings for John?  Friendship?  Not eros love.  Pushed John into the arms of Mary?  Hardly.  John and Mary were a two-some before Sherlock came back into John's life.  Sherlock totally respects John's choice in Mary.  Sherlock really likes Mary.

 

It is, however, the end of an era for Sherlock.  He's going back to living alone and solving a lot of cases on his own because John is just not going to be as available, especially when there's a baby.  You don't see Sherlock moping about it.  He just carries on. There is a loss, but Sherlock was never IN LOVE with John. Sherlock didn't even know how to have a friend let alone be one.  His brain completely went on tilt when John said in TSOT that Sherlock was his best friend.  He had never even considered such a thing. But he's not gay.  Socially backward, even in friendships, yes, but not gay.  Declare himself as he might wish?  The creators have said he's not gay.  Ben has said Sherlock is not gay.  It was only ever meant as a joke.  It's even joked with in "The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes" but only in that case because Sherlock was not willing to donate his sperm to a Russian ballet dancer so she could get pregnant in exchange for a Stradivarius.

 

I would almost be willing to make a bet that there will be some involvement with a woman in S4 for Sherlock.  Because the BBC Sherlock is NOT the ACD Sherlock, and purists have to let it go and accept the modern version for what it is.  Any attempt to try to reconcile the two incarnations is a bit ludicrous.  

[besleybean]

Will they involve him with another woman? Or bring one of the known ones back?

[sfmpco]

Will they involve him with another woman? Or bring one of the known ones back?

 

I have no idea.  It's just a hunch.  They have, however, said they would not bring Irene back since it would be too cozy to have her around the corner.  They have said that if he had a function to attend, it's possible he would make enough amends with Janine to get her to go with him, but Sherlock at a function -with people????  He can barely tolerate the Scotland Yard press conferences.  Who they bring back in the special - that's a totally separate animal.  How they are doing a Victorian thing in the middle of a modern Sherlock, I have no idea, but I know it will be good.

 

If we look at the Sherlock who shakes John's hand at the airplane compared to the Sherlock in ASIP, he's really evolved in his humanity, and that's a lovely thing.  I just think S4 will continue that.

 

Sherlock has a personal network of people around him who are safe: John, Mary (shooting aside), Molly, Mrs. Hudson, Lestrade, Anderson, his parents, even Mycroft (who isn't entirely safe but still cares about him).  He has a little bubble he can grow in, and all those people are there as buffers and safety nets.  Before ASIP, he didn't have all that.  Now he's surrounded by a group of people who actually do love him despite himself, and their love is constantly chipping away at the shell around his heart, making him less able to control his emotions and sentiment - because let's face it, Sherlock is actually quite sentimental although he would chafe at the suggestion.

 

They have promised S4 is quite dark, and I think that darkness (whatever form it takes) is naturally going to further crack Sherlock.  Of all the characters who grow, Sherlock will have the most growth.

[Inge l-w]

Dear sfmpco, socially backward to the point of arranging the whole marriage? Yeah, right! Subconsciously or not he picked a swan motif for the serviettes. Black swans are the most tiresomely same-sex partners, even forcing females to have intercourse and then snatching the resulting eggs and bringing up the hatchling as their own. He will NEVER admit his feelings, but the creators have demonstrated he is not Spock, that is why Janine responds with "I wish you weren't whatever it is you are" in SoT, and then taunting him with their fake relationship at the hospital in HLV. I strongly suspect Mr Gatiss had a hand in creating this tantalising thread of thought, but it is there, on screen, not in subtext. Platonic is what it will remain, with so many female fans out there, and Mary expecting a baby and even having a family, but I repeat, if you watch how the speech unfolds, it is there.

He was still in his childish phase before the ceremony, that is why he could not relate to being someone's best friend and had such rapport with Archie, but by the time he has finished the speech, he has become an adult, and treats Archie as he would have liked to have been treated as a precocious child himself.

[sfmpco]

I've listened to the speech many times.  But like SH said in TRF... it's hard to kill an idea once it's planted in  your head.  That doesn't make the idea legitimate, however.  And you're likely reading far too much into the swan thing.  That's a bit over the top even for Mofftiss.  He will never admit his feelings because he doesn't have those kinds of feelings for John.  It isn't there in the best man speech.  He doesn't even bother to hug John back when John hugs him.  He doesn't really like to be touched like that from anyone unless he initiates it or is faking it to get what he wants.  Janine also says, "I wish you weren't whatever it is you are" while still at the reception.  She really doesn't know anything about him at that point.  He's not giving her any vibes whatsoever, but he never does give out those kinds of vibes to anyone... well, except a bit for Irene's mind and his openness with Molly as their friendship progresses.  She knew enough about Sherlock a month later to have had a reasonable expectation that sex might be forthcoming because she said, "Just once would have been nice."  Of course he put her off completely not because he was gay but because he was only using her for information (and nicking her key card), and he had enough conscience about the situation not to use her sexually for information.  That really would have turned the Sherlock fandom on its ear had he been that much of a cad.  I suspect they had a little touchy-feely in the bathroom by her squeals, however, so it wasn't a total loss for her or for him.

[jadpdr]

Dear Inge, when I saw the swan motif, it floored me, biology and zoology being my areas of expertise! I could not make anything of it until I read your explanation of the concept. Makes perfect sense, in a way, the same way he reacts jealously to Mary's comment about neither of them being the first in Dr Watson's heart, and the way he looks over to John the moment Janine asks if he has a vacancy in solving murders. Double entendres in both cases, it seems!

Dear sfmpco, he has trained himself not to respond to physical intimacy, but that does not preclude his brilliant mind from going on adventures of its own, and he is not one to be reticent, so he blurts out what he feels in the speech.

[sfmpco]

Yes, he blurts out his friendship feelings, nothing homo-erotic, not even close.  He basically echoes what John said at his gravesite and on the tube car when John thought they were going to be blown up.  And for one man to admit he loves another man is not about being gay.  John is his best friend.  Best friends are allowed to say that.  Doesn't make them gay.  He's not IN LOVE with John.  Big difference.  I suppose if it hadn't been a swan but a lotus you'd both have subscribed some Freudian thing to that too.

[Inge l-w]

Dear sfmpco, the problem is it is a swan! The whole Black Lotus concept went into the Blind Banker, if one wants to make something of that.

Sorry, never liked psychology, as a subject or as a topic of discussion. However, having had to wade through Kraft-Ebbing's massive volume of Psychopathologia Sexualis, The Dreyfus Affair and the Crisis of French Manhood ( 1895 definitely NOT a good year), Ronald Pearsall's Worm in the Bud, about Victorian sexuality, and a dozen volumes on homosexuality through the ages, I can discern hints, just hints, mind you, or an undercurrent, if you like, that at least one of the creators is nodding to that part of the fans. I would particularly like to find out, for example, who of the two picked the name "Molly" for the cute pathologist, because in Victorian times, male brothels were called Mollyhouses.

[besleybean]

What are you suggesting?!

[Arcadia]

Okay, so this is just pure SPECULATION, but as i am watching "The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes," I am starting to wonder if the special isn't somehow an homage to that film... will give more thoughts at the end of the viewing.

Having just finished watching this very film (thanks for the link, sfmpco!) I am wondering the same thing. Particularly as it's easy to see how the entire first two seasons could be construed as an homage to that film!

 

I quite liked the concept of the film, by the way. I agree that's it's not a very high end production, nor as funny as I thought it would be, but it's still a valid interpretation of Holmes, imo, and an entertaining plot. Does anyone know ... some of those lines, such as "I envy you your placid mind..." -- are those from ACD? Or did Moftiss nick them directly from Billy Wilder?

 

As to the Johnlock debate ... I wondered off into a blog one day that picked apart every little scene in Sherlock and showed how it meant that Johnlock was real. That quip meant this, this gesture meant that, the image over there meant something else. Essentially, it was all some vast conspiracy between Mark Gatiss, Arwel Wyn Jones and other members of the production team to tip off the perceptive viewer to what was really happening.

 

For myself, I find conspiracy theories preposterous. The idea that that many people could keep that many secrets for that long ... ha. Not in the universe I exist in.

 

At the same time, I can't deny that some of their arguments were pretty persuasive. On the other hand, there wasn't a single argument they gave that I couldn't come up with a non-Johnlock explanation for. And I'm sure they could come up with plenty of counter-arguments, as could I. But what's the point? It won't change anything.

 

I don't believe in Johnlock myself. I see a lot of sly jokes about it but no direct evidence. But then, I wouldn't, would I? I'm not gay nor part of any "gay culture". And I don't want John and Sherlock to be gay, mostly because I'm sick and tired of the idea that any and all attraction between two people is solely about sex. So I'm pretty biased towards a non-slash interpretation. That's who I am. But I do try, when I can, to remember that that IS my bias; there's always the possibility that I'm wrong. If and when I see John and Sherlock hold hands, look into each other's eyes and declare their undying love, I'll be disappointed but not entirely surprised, because I know, whether I believe in it or not, the possibility exists. And then I'll act like a grown up and congratulate them.

 

Okay, now I'm hopping off the