Moffat's "we've missed it" statement...

[sfmpco]

I do believe they haven't written the scripts but I also believe they have a very firm outline of it and that they have shared some of that with the cast.

[jadpdr]

I tend to agree that the main characters have a very broad idea, since in the article Mr Motfat says that BC and Mark Gatiss more or less dissuaded him from doing a Dr Who crossover, which would have been distinctly off-putting. J.P. definitely needs to create a file, not that there will be any concrete answers forthcoming from such old pros, but just for fun!

[T.o.b.y]

You know, Moffat always makes a "you missed it" statement, and then the fandom tears itself apart trying to rewatch and figure out what we didn't see.  Mostly, I assume that Mofftiss spends enough time thinking about things and plotting things out that there's nothing really to "miss," but there's a place where they have the pieces they need to pick up the story and make it continue in an organic way.

 

:lol: You're probably right... but speculating is just way too much fun to give it up. Cryptic hints like that latest one are great for keeping us occupied between seasons. Only I can't think of anything right now. A hard day's work has left me with nothing in my brain besides "chocolate", "blanket" and "tea".

 

[Boton]

 

You know, Moffat always makes a "you missed it" statement, and then the fandom tears itself apart trying to rewatch and figure out what we didn't see.  Mostly, I assume that Mofftiss spends enough time thinking about things and plotting things out that there's nothing really to "miss," but there's a place where they have the pieces they need to pick up the story and make it continue in an organic way.

 

:lol: You're probably right... but speculating is just way too much fun to give it up. Cryptic hints like that latest one are great for keeping us occupied between seasons. Only I can't think of anything right now. A hard day's work has left me with nothing in my brain besides "chocolate", "blanket" and "tea".

 

 

 

I absolutely agree that this makes it fun to speculate, and I think that's the creators' intent with their cryptic comments.  But I just can't imagine that two people who've been Sherlock Holmes fanboys for going on 40 years or so don't have everything pretty well mapped out in their own heads.  So I feel pretty confident it will move forward on the schedule they need it to move forward.

[Inge l-w]

Dear fellow members,

After reading plaidadder's analysis of Season 3 in both AoO and Tumblr, given her insights into Dr Who, I finally realised what is basically wrong with the modernised version, why it has the inherent problems which have sparked off so much discussion in the past and will doubtlessly continue to do so in the future:

The whole concept in Mr Moffat's devious mind is to recreate The Three Musqueteers saga in a Holmes universe. Substitute Sherlock for D'Artagnan, impulsive, impetuous, loyal to a fault; Mycroft for Aramis, devious, secretive, belonging to one of the most powerful organisations on earth, the Jesuit order, Lestrade for Porthos, loyal, less brilliant than D'Artagnan, always obliged to call on the others for help, Dr. Watson for Athos, older than Sherlock, a battle-scarred veteran, also the one who fatally falls for the dangerous Milady de Winter, aka Mary, with a murky past and a shady present, the Cardinal's agent ( Moriarty or CAM, which I hate to admit, having admired the real person ever since I was a teenager) take your pick, Molly is the adorable Constance, for whom D'Artagnan has feelings but never oversteps the limits. Milady actually lays a plot to kill D'Artagnan and he barely escapes her ploy.

So, ACD storylines are worked into the extremely rich Dumas pere fabric, and if in the end it does not make sense to Sherlock Holmes fans, Mr Moffat can laugh up his sleeve and serve up another improbable episode.

Plotholes, what plotholes? It's not even permissible! Both Dumas and Ponson du Teraille were notorious for convoluted storylines and improbable escapes! Even the Byronic curls reek of Romanticism, and as for us, "Well, good luck with that!"

[J.P.]

There are no plotholes in Sherlock. They are fan-pitfalls.

[T.o.b.y]

There are no plotholes in Sherlock. They are fan-pitfalls.

 

:applause:

[Inge l-w]

Very droll, Prime Minister, as Sir Humphrey would say.

[besleybean]

Indeed and I agree!

[T.o.b.y]

Very droll, Prime Minister, as Sir Humphrey would say.

 

Oh my G... You know Yes Minister! Hurray!

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

... why would MI6 want to send Sherlock on a fatal mission? Does Sherlock have an enemy somewhere in that organization, as a consequence of something he did?

 

Maybe it wasn't so much that someone in MI6 wanted Sherlock dead -- but more like they had a dangerous job that needed doing, didn't care to risk any of their own operatives on it -- and Sherlock was considered expendable.

 

After reading plaidadder's analysis of Season 3 in both AoO and Tumblr, given her insights into Dr Who, I finally realised what is basically wrong with the modernised version, why it has the inherent problems which have sparked off so much discussion in the past and will doubtlessly continue to do so in the future:

The whole concept in Mr Moffat's devious mind is to recreate The Three Musqueteers saga in a Holmes universe. Substitute Sherlock for D'Artagnan, impulsive, impetuous, loyal to a fault; Mycroft for Aramis, devious, secretive, belonging to one of the most powerful organisations on earth, the Jesuit order, Lestrade for Porthos, loyal, less brilliant than D'Artagnan, always obliged to call on the others for help, Dr. Watson for Athos, older than Sherlock, a battle-scarred veteran, also the one who fatally falls for the dangerous Milady de Winter, aka Mary, with a murky past and a shady present, the Cardinal's agent ( Moriarty or CAM, which I hate to admit, having admired the real person ever since I was a teenager) take your pick, Molly is the adorable Constance, for whom D'Artagnan has feelings but never oversteps the limits. Milady actually lays a plot to kill D'Artagnan and he barely escapes her ploy.

Wow, I may have to actually read The Three Musketeers!  From your description, the plot does indeed sound familiar.

 

[Arcadia]

 

... why would MI6 want to send Sherlock on a fatal mission? Does Sherlock have an enemy somewhere in that organization, as a consequence of something he did?

 

Maybe it wasn't so much that someone in MI6 wanted Sherlock dead -- but more like they had a dangerous job that needed doing, didn't care to risk any of their own operatives on it -- and Sherlock was considered expendable.

 

Oh, you're probably right, I'm just trying to think outside the box! However, it also doesn't make sense to me they would recruit a loose cannon like Sherlock for an "important" mission. Nope, uh uh, doesn't wash. (Just call me suspicious!)

[SherlockedCAMPer]

 

 

... why would MI6 want to send Sherlock on a fatal mission? Does Sherlock have an enemy somewhere in that organization, as a consequence of something he did?

 

Maybe it wasn't so much that someone in MI6 wanted Sherlock dead -- but more like they had a dangerous job that needed doing, didn't care to risk any of their own operatives on it -- and Sherlock was considered expendable.

 

Oh, you're probably right, I'm just trying to think outside the box! However, it also doesn't make sense to me they would recruit a loose cannon like Sherlock for an "important" mission. Nope, uh uh, doesn't wash. (Just call me suspicious!)

 

 

Maybe they wanted a loose cannon to get done what they wanted accomplished even though it would likely prove fatal in the long run.  Knowing Sherlock with his famous: "You know my methods, John. I am known to be indestructible." he likely would have found someway to survive the mission.

[Arcadia]

Mycroft seemed pretty certain death was inevitable. Ooooh, maybe it's Mycroft who has enemies and this was their way of trying to get back at him.... (hee hee hee, conspiracy theories galore .....)

[Inge l-w]

 

 

Very droll, Prime Minister, as Sir Humphrey would say.

Oh my G... You know Yes Minister! Hurray!

All three Yes, Minister and two Yes, Prime Minister BBC series, and they were produced regularly with a minimum of fuss, unraveling bureaucratic problems without driving fans round the bend. And you must admit that Sir Humphrey's speeches were no less difficult to master than Sherlock's deductions, yet they seemed part of him, although as a character he was closer to Mycroft .

As for the mission, it seems have been in place before the Christmas incident, so Mycroft simply substituted Sherlick's name after the fact. On the porch, he tells Sherlock clearly that he should like him to decline the offer, which fits into the Dumas universe from the Twenty Years Later novel, where another Cardinal, Mazarin, sends D'Artagnan to quell the Parisian Fronde revolt almost single-handedly.

[J.P.]

Regarding the mission: Maybe Mycroft was the only one who was able to foresee that the mission would be fatal. He asked Sherlock to reject it.

[Yusree]

i not think the Mycroft is foresee or predict the dangerous

But maybe he just concern about his baby brother go far away doing a mission that not involved him (maybe)

 

[Yusree]

AGRA....Marry initial, I think that was refer to Agra Fortress the place you can read in Conan "The Sign Of four"

in TSOF everyone think about one suspect but Sherlock deduces that there are actually two man involved

 

so, maybe (i think) CAM has his accomplice that used Moriarty name so that Sherlock will need to come back

(if Sherlock go to the mission he supposed to go, CAM accomplish can't get his revenge, that is why he used Moriarty image)

so maybe that is what we all miss, there will be no Moriarty or his brother........season 4 is all about CAM accomplish

 

[besleybean]

Some how I don't see this. It would rather weaken the tremendous sacrifice Sherlock was prepared to make for John.

[jadpdr]

I agree, and the evident silences during he airport scene are evidence of the great attempt he is making to keep John in the dark, combined with what he does tell the good doctor "Six months, my brother estimates" "The game is never over".

To add to the Dumas parallel, D'Artagnan is also prompt to make snap judgements and insult everybody around, with his Gascon impatience of fools.

[sittything]

 

Substitute Sherlock for D'Artagnan, impulsive, impetuous, loyal to a fault; Mycroft for Aramis, devious, secretive, belonging to one of the most powerful organisations on earth, the Jesuit order, Lestrade for Porthos, loyal, less brilliant than D'Artagnan, always obliged to call on the others for help, Dr. Watson for Athos, older than Sherlock, a battle-scarred veteran, also the one who fatally falls for the dangerous Milady de Winter, aka Mary, with a murky past and a shady present, the Cardinal's agent ( Moriarty or CAM, which I hate to admit, having admired the real person ever since I was a teenager) take your pick, Molly is the adorable Constance, for whom D'Artagnan has feelings but never oversteps the limits. Milady actually lays a plot to kill D'Artagnan and he barely escapes her ploy.

So, ACD storylines are worked into the extremely rich Dumas pere fabric, and if in the end it does not make sense to Sherlock Holmes fans, Mr Moffat can laugh up his sleeve and serve up another improbable episode.

 

Yes!  Sherlock and Molly whatever confirmed.   ;)

[Carol the Dabbler]

Some how I don't see this. It would rather weaken the tremendous sacrifice Sherlock was prepared to make for John.

 

Sort of like, oh say if they'd revealed that Sherlock's friends were never in any real danger from the "Reichenbach" snipers, because Mycroft "invited" them to "reconsider" shooting.  Nope, Moftiss would never introduce anything like that.  So we're safe.  <_<

[Caya]

 

Just kidding, Carol . You have a very valid point there, unfortunately.

[besleybean]

Nope, I meant Sherlock blowing somebody's brains out in front of witnesses, fully prepared to serve a life sentence.

[Arcadia]

Regarding the mission: Maybe Mycroft was the only one who was able to foresee that the mission would be fatal. He asked Sherlock to reject it.

Yeah, that could be. I just prefer to think MI6 is up to no good, I guess.

 

so, maybe (i think) CAM has his accomplice that used Moriarty name so that Sherlock will need to come back

(if Sherlock go to the mission he supposed to go, CAM accomplish can't get his revenge, that is why he used Moriarty image)

so maybe that is what we all miss, there will be no Moriarty or his brother........season 4 is all about CAM accomplish

 

I like this idea, but I have a hard time imagining CAM with an accomplice -- would anyone trust him enough to work with him? But maybe an accomplice of Moriarty's?

 

 

Some how I don't see this. It would rather weaken the tremendous sacrifice Sherlock was prepared to make for John.

 

Sort of like, oh say if they'd revealed that Sherlock's friends were never in any real danger from the "Reichenbach" snipers, because Mycroft "invited" them to "reconsider" shooting.  Nope, Moftiss would never introduce anything like that.  So we're safe.  <_<

 

Snrk!