John Watson

[Arcadia]

Right. They're guys.

 

Regarding John's increased prickliness and aggressiveness in S3 and 4, I assume you mean in HLV and thereafter. Other than headbutting Sherlock (several times), he seems to me like the same good ol' John prior to that.

 

After the big reveal, I think John is sorta shellshocked. He's not really himself, in a sense. He's feeling betrayed, and is therefore understandably defensive.

No, I mean in the whole of S3. It makes sense in TEH ... what Sherlock did to him was truly awful, imo, he deserved John's anger if not the physical violence. But there's things like the "drama queen" remark in TSo3, which I found unnecessarily harsh. There's other examples but they're eluding me at the moment ... but there's a sense that John is less tolerant of Sherlock than he used to be. Again, understandable, even sensible, but there's an undercurrent of repressed anger that's unsettling to me ... until TFP. Then he's the John I remember. So I can't help but think it's intentional, that we were supposed to sense it was there, waiting to come out; and in TLD, it finally did.

 

I never thought John's beating of Sherlock was "just" about Mary's death, I've always thought it was an expression of everything in his life that he felt had gone against him, including Sherlock's abuse of his friendship, Mary's lies, and his own failures as husband, friend and human being. It all came out at Sherlock, but it wasn't all about Sherlock, imo. He was just the "safe" target that John could vent his anger on ... because as everyone around here has observed, Sherlock never fights back. Not when it's John.

 

I don't exactly think Sherlock believed he "deserved" it either ... it's more that he just accepted it. I think Sherlock understands John pretty damn well (isn't that what TLD told us? ) and that included John's "need" to hurt someone, to make someone else feel the way he was feeling. That look he gives John when his says "I killed his wife," ... that could mean so many things, not just guilt. To me it's almost a look of compassion, mixed in with a lot of other complicated emotions. BC's good at making me feel that way, though. It's one of the things I enjoy about his acting ... I feel like there's a ton of things going on underneath the surface of his characters. God help me, I'm attracted to ambiguity.

 

At any rate, it wasn't a very healthy situation between the two of them ... but by the time the events in TFP rolled around, I also felt like they'd got it sorted out, and John had worked out most of his problems. Although come to think of it, he was working with Eurus as his therapist, wasn't he? Oh God.

 

 

Actually, I don't assume Sherlock apologized to Molly; I have no idea what to make of that particular oversight (not showing us the aftermath of the ILY phone call.) I feel like it's completely open-ended, which is weird considering almost nothing else is left that way.

I'm not sure who wrote the ILY call between Moffat and Gatiss but according to Moffat that call was insignificant so much so that they could just go back to being friends like nothing ever happened so I doubt Moffat considers it open ended. I'm not sure how anyone can believe that when one person conveys romantic feelings that the other person may or not reciprocate it would have zero affect on their friendship but that's what Moffat believes. It's like Moffat sees Molly/Sherlock's friendship like John/Sherlock's so Sherlock would just be able to say oh Eurus made me so they could go back to the status quo which would make sense for J/S type of friendship but not M/S.

 

If I may (loosely) quote you ... I'm just going by what's in the show, not by what Moffat said (which was appallingly insensitive, worthy of Sherlock at his worst! ) It may have been insignificant to him, but it sure meant a lot to a lot of fans. I'm not a shipper of any of the characters, but I adore Molly, so I'm interested in seeing how her story pans out. But it didn't, it just stopped. :(

[gerry]

If I may (loosely) quote you ... I'm just going by what's in the show, not by what Moffat said (which was appallingly insensitive, worthy of Sherlock at his worst! ) It may have been insignificant to him, but it sure meant a lot to a lot of fans. I'm not a shipper of any of the characters, but I adore Molly, so I'm interested in seeing how her story pans out. But it didn't, it just stopped. :(

It's the same for me regarding Molly and shipping but the two second happy Molly snippet in the montage at the end of TFP was in the show and implied at the very least that they went back to being friends post the ILY call just like Moffat's quotes indicated. The Moffat quotes only confirmed the implication from what was shown in the show. It was completely unbelievable to me based on real life situations but that's Moffat for you.

[Arcadia]

Some people think she was smiling because she and Sherlock are now a couple, not just friends. I think she could be smiling at Rosie, not at Sherlock. Etc. It's pretty open to interpretation, imo.

[gerry]

I disagree. If they intended to progress the friendship to a relationship post ILY call because the ILY call was some sort of epiphany they would have shown a scene making that clear. Instead she was just included in a happy montage with the rest of Sherlock's friends (Mrs H, John, Lestrade) implying no long term ramifications where she's happy to be a part of the group. I'm not sure what's left open ended. It just conveyed what Moftiss always do, there's never any character driven consequences to anything that happens. They are just moments that happen in a vacuum, apparently, which is why I hate the end of TFP.

[mishab]

It's a cause and effect thing. If John is less 'pricklier' in TFP, its because Sherlock has matured a lot in this episode. He is no longer ordering john around and even asked him if he is ok more than once where the old Sherlock wold not have bothered at all.

[Pseudonym]

I think my assumption of the Molly relationship is just that Sherlock explained why he had to do what he did, he thought he was saving her life, I think he would have to apologise, and things would be awkward for a while but eventually go back to normal. To say that it was unimportant is just crazy talk, it was important to Molly, and Sherlock looks gutted. 

 

As for John being unnecessarily harsh a line that sticks with me is the 'tell me where my wife is or I'll punch your lights out' from TAB. Yes, it's Sherlock's representation of John rather than John himself, but isn't that just as disturbing that Sherlock expects John to say things like that to him?

 

I'm surprised they didn't make more of Eurus having such access to John. It seems such a missed opportunity on her part. She wants to mess with Sherlock and hurt him, we know she has no reservations about killing a friend of his. If we are to believe her abilities about being able to talk anyone into anything she could have talked John into hating Sherlock, attacking him maybe (oh, wait, she didn't need to). The point is just shooting John with a tranq gun and letting him go is a real missed opportunity - hell, John could have been the villain if Eurus had convinced him he had to kill Sherlock to avenge Mary or something equally as dramatic. It's not like the motive really has to make much sense.

[gerry]

.... and things would be awkward for a while but eventually go back to normal.

Maybe but in the time implied by the montage? Rosie hadn't aged that much. In real life, friendships often end entirely based on Molly type admissions if the feelings aren't reciprocated. I also don't think Sherlock was gutted by Molly's feelings. He's never been shown as empathetic.

 

The point is just shooting John with a tranq gun and letting him go is a real missed opportunity - hell, John could have been the villain if Eurus had convinced him he had to kill Sherlock to avenge Mary or something equally as dramatic. It's not like the motive really has to make much sense.

But then she wouldn't have been able to put them through the trials with the ultimate "prize" of Sherlock having to choose between Mycroft and John. If she made John the villian she wouldn't have been able to witness Sherlock's choice and the resulting emotional context.

[J.P.]

The difference between Mary and John "correcting" Sherlock: while Mary says it directly (like when he says people are idiots), John will say to the couple in TST:

EMMA: Is your friend quite mad?

JOHN: No, he’s an arsehole, but it’s an easy mistake.

 

Oh, John, you were so much better on it in S1!

 

[Pseudonym]

It is after the Molly call that he loses it and smashes the coffin. Whilst I don't think the call was the sole reason for that it is clearly a contributing factor. 

 

We don't see Molly and Sherlock interact in the montage. Things could well still be awkward and stilted at that point. 

 

Yes, well, the less said about the trials in TFP the better in my opinion. It's a mess of an episode.

[gerry]

He doesn't lose it until Eurus says "you lost". Immediately after the call he was fine and wanted to talk to the imaginary girl.

 

If things were still awkward why would she be that happy to be there?

[Pseudonym]

She could easily be smiling at Rosie and barely be interacting with Sherlock. I still stand by what I said though, that I think things would be on the mend by then. After all it's a bit of an arseh*le move to refuse to speak to someone who said something to save your life.

[gerry]

Actually her house wasn't booby trapped so he didn't have to humiliate her to save her life. That's why he lost. Methinks that's why he got angry enough to smash a coffin.

 

I don't think it makes anyone an asshole to not want to be close friends with someone who has rejected their romantic feelings which I imagine would be very painful. I actually think it's a lot to ask someone to suppress or deny those feelings after admitting them verbally in order to maintain a friendship.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I suspect nothing in TFP (or the entirety of Sherlock, for that matter) is going to hang together well unless we view it with the understanding that emotional scenes as such are unlikely to be shown, simply because Moffat doesn't seem to feel that they add anything to the story.  So unless the emotions happen to occur in conjunction with some physical or intellectual event, we'll need to look for clues that they occurred offscreen.

 

For example:  As Arcadia pointed out, Sherlock and John seem to be on good terms in TFP, better than they have been since pre-Reichenbach.  Therefore something must have happened to mend their friendship.  They presumably sat down and had a talk, although considering that they're both guys, it may have amounted to something like "Sorry, dunno what came over me."  "That's OK, I've been asking for it."  "Is there any milk in the fridge?"

 

Likewise, we see Molly relaxed and smiling in Sherlock's presence in the epilog, so something must have happened to relieve the tension between them.  They're both scientists, so I wouldn't be surprised if it were more of an explanation than an apology.  After all, Sherlock thought he was saving Molly's life.  It doesn't matter that Eurus may have been bluffing, because he didn't know that at the time.  He did what he thought he had to do to save Molly, and I don't see how she could hold that against him, no apology needed.  Admittedly, things could still be a little awkward between them, but what else is new?

 

[gerry]

It goes without saying it happened offscreen. The question is whether you as a viewer find it believable and satisfying entertainment knowing the types of scene they leave offscreen vs the stuff they show onscreen and thus consider important in light of what preceded it in the episode or previous one.

 

Also, my thoughts about Molly/Sherlock's friendship isn't about punishment for his humliating her (or holding it against him as you put it). The fact is regardless of how it came about, she made an admission. How can that just be ignored and status quo maintained? Do you know anyone in real life that would especially given the timeline insinuated by the montage? It comes down to believability for me. There are things a tv show or movie tries to sell that don't work for me. This one one of them.

[Van Buren Supernova]

 

But the missing thing is, John realizing the actual damages he had done with his accusations and actions to Sherlock. I fail to feel his remorse.

Couldn't the same be said for Sherlock? He didn't feel truly guilty about anything until Mary died. Sherlock rarely realizes or cares about the affect his actions have on others so I don't often feel sorry for either of them or at least not about what they do towards each other.

I probably look at TEH a bit differently than you. I don't see what Sherlock did to John and made him grieved for two years is that unforgivable. He had his reason, and one of it for John's safety. I don't find it a stretch that he needed to be presumed dead to get close to his enemies. And correct me if I'm wrong, I remember even canon Sherlock doesn't believe in John's ability to lie (which is a compliment, John).

So I don't think TST & TLD is comparable to TEH. They are totally different matters, different guilt, different accusation and hurt.

And I also don't think Sherlock doesn't realize or care. The beginning of TEH, yes, he acted as if it's okay to jump out from a cake after being dead for two years. But when he saw how upset John was, he retreated back and tried to mend his attitude, in mess up way that he knows, but he tried.

And he was still apologizing in his own mind in TAB, and how low he interpret John's view about himself means how hard he was at himself.

It makes sense in TEH ... what Sherlock did to him was truly awful, imo, he deserved John's anger if not the physical violence.

No. Sorry. I admit I found it funny in TEH because that how it's portrayed. But like it or not, TLD changes the way I look at that scene, and I hate that. I hate that things that we are discussing about John keep coming back to TLD, but as much as I avoid it, it's never going away apparently. And even when you guys said that the scene is just what it is, it's all good now (and I believe you guys that is what the writers intend to) but it's not really, is it? It's still mentioned again and again and get into the character's analysis for everyone. It sticks with John's character now, and needs a lot more to shake it off, if it's ever possible.

 

This reminds me of (spoiler of GoT, nah, I don't care) a scene when a f*up love making scene (in a book) is interpret as rape in the show. It's a rape, in every definition, yes, so as book reader I watched with my jaw dropped. What the... well this is not rape in the book! So when the public protested, the showmaker said no, it's not, it's consensual. They swear they intend it that way, put away all the controversies, the scene, eventhough most public are aware of the writer's intention, is always discussed as rape. And it changes the characters involved, it changes the way we see them, eventhough it's not supposed/intended to be.

Just like personally, to me, this changes John.

... It all came out at Sherlock, but it wasn't all about Sherlock, imo. He was just the "safe" target that John could vent his anger on ... because as everyone around here has observed, Sherlock never fights back. Not when it's John...

 

I don't exactly think Sherlock believed he "deserved" it either ... it's more that he just accepted it.

...

that included John's "need" to hurt someone, to make someone else feel the way he was feeling.

I get what you are saying overall.

But the things above is what make it disturbing.

 

It's a cause and effect thing. If John is less 'pricklier' in TFP, its because Sherlock has matured a lot in this episode. He is no longer ordering john around and even asked him if he is ok more than once where the old Sherlock wold not have bothered at all.

I agreed that Sherlock has matured a lot, he is actually the most sensible one the whole episode.

But I believe Sherlock did bother before. The one I remember is how he ask John is he is okay after he shot the cabby, the frantic way of him asking and checking if John is okay after Moriarty left the swimming pool (Loveeee S1) and I believe there are other examples but I can't think of it now.

He doesn't lose it until Eurus says "you lost". Immediately after the call he was fine and wanted to talk to the imaginary girl.

I see it differently, I thought he was very stressed all along but kept his composure together to get things done and ensured that Molly and the girl were still safe.

When it's confirmed that they were, the emotions that he suppressed was unleashed.

[Van Buren Supernova]

I was choosing between different thread to put this, but maybe I stick to John's as this could be relevant. Maybe.

 

I think we generally agree that they f*up Mary's death, and with that, it affects other things as well. Mostly not favorable.

Some (including me) are happy that they do it on the first episode.

But since almost everyone seems to bet that she'd be dead anyway sometime in S4, I wonder if they could do it differently with that in mind.

 

How if, rip the bandage right at the start.

S4 open, bam, Mary is dying. And then the story slowly move to unveil events that lead up to that.

It's delicate, but done right, could be very appealing. (Although they still have to find a better way to kill her obviously).

 

I remember in Hannibal, they show a spoilery event right at the start of the season and then take 13 episodes to construct the stories leading up to that, and it works well, eventhough we know what would happen, the suspenses are there. When and how it's going to happen, and there are always other cards to play. Would she really die? Who and how?

Aiz, not to look that far, TRF is using this in a way. And TRF is one of the best episodes of Sherlock.

 

Just a stray thought.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Yeah, I like that (though I'm OK with the way they did do it). But as you say, and as I was thinking before you said it, that's the approach they used in TRF, so maybe they figured been there, done that.

 

Actually, though, I suspect they wanted to leave us expecting her not to die till the third episode. (They love to think they've fooled us.)

[Pseudonym]

I was choosing between different thread to put this, but maybe I stick to John's as this could be relevant. Maybe.

 

I think we generally agree that they f*up Mary's death, and with that, it affects other things as well. Mostly not favorable.

Some (including me) are happy that they do it on the first episode.

But since almost everyone seems to bet that she'd be dead anyway sometime in S4, I wonder if they could do it differently with that in mind.

 

How if, rip the bandage right at the start.

S4 open, bam, Mary is dying. And then the story slowly move to unveil events that lead up to that.

It's delicate, but done right, could be very appealing. (Although they still have to find a better way to kill her obviously).

 

I remember in Hannibal, they show a spoilery event right at the start of the season and then take 13 episodes to construct the stories leading up to that, and it works well, eventhough we know what would happen, the suspenses are there. When and how it's going to happen, and there are always other cards to play. Would she really die? Who and how?

Aiz, not to look that far, TRF is using this in a way. And TRF is one of the best episodes of Sherlock.

 

Just a stray thought.

 

That could have been really interesting, and different for Sherlock, in a *good* way rather than the different they gave us. It makes me think of How to Get Away With Murder, the beginning of episode one shows a group of people getting rid of a body but you don't find out who it is, how they died, or why these people are involved until the end of the series. 

[gerry]

I probably look at TEH a bit differently than you. I don't see what Sherlock did to John and made him grieved for two years is that unforgivable. He had his reason, and one of it for John's safety. I don't find it a stretch that he needed to be presumed dead to get close to his enemies....... The beginning of TEH, yes, he acted as if it's okay to jump out from a cake after being dead for two years. But when he saw how upset John was, he retreated back and tried to mend his attitude, in mess up way that he knows, but he tried.

I could believe it wasn't unforgivable but them I remember that Sherlock told Molly, his parents, his homeless network and Mycroft. His parents didn't go to his funeral (like that's not suspicious!) but Mrs. Hudson, Lestrade and John couldn't know? If I were John I'd find that unforgivable or like John said no time in the ensuing 2 years could Sherlock let him know he was alive? It's one thing to let them believe he's dead initially but it needed to be dragged on for 2 years?

 

I did believe Sherlock when he said he was sorry to John but I also don't think he truly understood what he did and how truly hurtful it was. The ending scene on the train didn't scream accountability to me because it didn't appear Sherlock took John's anger or feelings all that seriously.

 

 

He doesn't lose it until Eurus says "you lost". Immediately after the call he was fine and wanted to talk to the imaginary girl.

I see it differently, I thought he was very stressed all along but kept his composure together to get things done and ensured that Molly and the girl were still safe.

When it's confirmed that they were, the emotions that he suppressed was unleashed.

He didn't know that the girl was safe and not real until he solved the riddle after the fourth trial and he knew Molly was safe immediately after the call because he thought he saved her but it wasn't until Eurus said you lost did his face immediately fall and he begin to lose control of his emotions.

[Van Buren Supernova]

I could believe it wasn't unforgivable but them I remember that Sherlock told Molly, his parents, his homeless network and Mycroft. His parents didn't go to his funeral (like that's not suspicious!) but Mrs. Hudson, Lestrade and John couldn't know? If I were John I'd find that unforgivable or like John said no time in the ensuing 2 years could Sherlock let him know he was alive? It's one thing to let them believe he's dead initially but it needed to be dragged on for 2 years?

 

I did believe Sherlock when he said he was sorry to John but I also don't think he truly understood what he did and how truly hurtful it was. The ending scene on the train didn't scream accountability to me because it didn't appear Sherlock took John's anger or feelings all that seriously.

It happens that Mrs.Hudson, Lestrade and John were exactly the enemies had their eyes on, and their lives could still be in danger because they most probably still kept them in watch. The enemies didn't consider the rest to be valuable leverages for Sherlock so it makes sense if he wanted to keep it that way, like maintaining the perception that he was not that close with his parents.

It's said Sherlock finally managed to dissolve the network after two years, and that's the time he needs to keep them in the dark. I understand it's too much of the spy story recipe, but it's not totally made up either. I'd think that if Sherlock dropped John a hint, a single hint, he could put everything in jeopardy. I don't think good old John would just sit there, be quiet and let Sherlock faced everything alone eventhough Sherlock asked him/included warning for him not to do so in the hint. Those who are professional, they noticed anomaly in what a target does, once suspicion arose, they could very well conduct full investigation and John was no match for them.

He would try to look for Sherlock, or looked for another hints or tried to help in his own way, which in turn, could blow Sherlock's cover, and again, made John a leverage. In selfish way of understanding, Sherlock didn't need the enemies to have leverage because they knew it worked. It's either all in or not at all. Stay alive and fight it openly, or play dead and keep dead until the problems are dissolved. Somewhere in between, it's indecisive, too much redundant risks and efforts.

 

Sherlock didn't understand how hurtful it was in the beginning. I defend his reason to do so, but I agree he has trouble getting the impact of what he did. But that is what makes me sympathize with him. He didn't value himself that highly to be missed and mourned that much. The last time he grieved, he turned everything off and forgot what it's like, and he never dealt with someone who genuinely cared about him that deep.

To me, his attitude in the train and everything he did to make up to John, were his messy ways of trying. He didn't know better. I once said I'd do the same with him in the train, trying to use humor to make it less awkward, because how else I don't know? A hug? But of course, look at the other's party situation to see whether humor fit them and how receptive they would be in that situation. Not only I do that to others, that's how people I know use to cheer me up. It doesn't always work but I'd say the same with sobber approach. 

 

And! 

I thought it was okay then. They are all good. Anyway, John definitely had thought of forgiving him after the bonfire, so that is the closure.

I thought.

Then apparently it's not? That many of you say that John is still angry about TEH, and that contributes to TLD.

I disagree with that actually. As much as I'm mad at John in TLD, I give him bigger credit that he is bigger man and has moved on from TEH. He is a feeler I believe, but I don't think he holds grudges like that. Especially again, because Sherlock had valid reasons.

 

He didn't know that the girl was safe and not real until he solved the riddle after the fourth trial and he knew Molly was safe immediately after the call because he thought he saved her but it wasn't until Eurus said you lost did his face immediately fall and he begin to lose control of his emotions.

No he didn't know yet, but he knew at least at that point the girl was still alive, meant there was hope  for her.   But that also meant that Eurus was still dragging and continuing to torture him to make difficult decisions. And I guess he was very upset that she managed to get what pushed his button. I don't think at that moment the game was even important to him anymore, it's not the type he wanted to play. We see how different he was with that girl and the kid in TGG. It's not fun anymore. Ever, with Eurus. (And that uber genius keeps thinking why noone wants to play with her!). With 'losing' it also meant more people were still in line for danger, and Eurus made up the rules as she wished. Her game sucks. If many of us saw it coming, Sherlock should know what would Eurus demanded them to do next.

 

Actually her house wasn't booby trapped so he didn't have to humiliate her to save her life. That's why he lost. Methinks that's why he got angry enough to smash a coffin.

It certainly contributed to his anger, but mostly I also think that he also knew this time he really f*up Molly's feelings. It's not the usual banter and ambiguity anymore. And I also think Sherlock still doesn't know how he feel, I suppose at the same time beside worry for Molly, he faced the strange unknown territory because he realized that he actually cares about Molly that much. All those mixed together, with the stress from previous situations and imminent upcoming ones, I'm surprised he didn't wreck the TV and wall altogether.

 

 

Actually, though, I suspect they wanted to leave us expecting her not to die till the third episode. (They love to think they've fooled us.)

It seems like sometimes they are undecided in regarding us as 'too dumb' or 'too smart' audience.

[Arcadia]

 
I would hug you right now, VBS, except I think you'd squeak and run away. :P

[J.P.]

What I cannot forgive how John apparently forgot that at the end of HLV Sherlock actually killed a man (with all consequences) to keep him happy.
Okay, I also think that he really liked Mary as a person, not only as an extention of John.

[Carol the Dabbler]

What leads you to believe John forgot that?

[T.o.b.y]

What I cannot forgive how John apparently forgot that at the end of HLV Sherlock actually killed a man (with all consequences) to keep him happy.

 

You mean John never showed much gratitude for that? I guess it was the kind of favor, from his point of view, that he never asked for and would have happily declined if he had had any say in the matter. I don't think John had a better plan for dealing with Magnussen but my impression is that, like many of us here on the forum, he would have really appreciated it if Sherlock had had one and since he's Sherlock Holmes, clever plans are sort of his job. Which, from John's perspective, I guess he failed to do.

 

John does kind of take it for granted (by now) that Sherlock will save the day and when he doesn't, John gets upset. It does smack a bit of "if you can't live up to your image, what the heck are you good for and why do I put up with your behavior?", which is not exactly the kind of unconditional affection you'd expect from a best friend, but... on the other hand, Sherlock tends to raise expectations by being all cocky and (at least outwardly) confident and by making big vows and promises, so a certain level of disappointment on John's part is understandable.

 

John strikes me as a person who will almost never openly apologize for anything or express gratitude beyond a laconic "thanks". That doesn't mean he never feels guilt or thankfulness. In fact, we know that he is very capable of both from the way he talks about (and to...) Mary after she dies.

 

I wonder whether John doesn't say sorry to people because apologies don't really change anything - the harm is done and you can't turn back the clock. Some people feel that way and it's particularly hard for them to deal with guilt, especially if they have very hight expectations of themselves.

[J.P.]

And yet he wants Sherlock to beg for forgiveness. And people say he's Sherlock's moral compass, a fluffy man with a big heart. Ok-kay… :P

Actually I like John less and less as the show progresses.

 

Sorry, Carol, have overseen you!

I don't know, it's like it's never happened. But then, John shot a man for Sherlock and it didn't have any consequences either. Maybe I'm only annoyed by the way the incident was "resolved" at the beginning of TST, and how John's reaction seemed to be… OTT.