The Johnlock Conspiracy

[T.o.b.y]

I knew it was fake because I knew the original Millerton story. If I had believed it was for real, I think I would have puked.

 

This commentary, btw, is a perfect example for why I avoid interviews with and statements from Mr Moffat. I resent his "you want this", "you like" and "you didn't expect". No, Mr M., I actually don't want Sherlock to have a girlfriend, I am ambivalent at best about Mary and I did expect her to turn out to be trouble in some way (you put "Liar" on her face the first time we saw her, remember that?). But if I am not the viewer you expect or want, I am just "not the audience". Thanks a ton!

 

It was weird to realize that my favorite show which seemed to cater to my taste so perfectly, was actually written by a man with a totally different vision. Kind of funny, too.

 

Thank goodness he is a brilliant writer. Just to fully enjoy his work, I kind of have to ignore his comments on it, which is actually the case with many artists.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Yeah, but his spin on it is usually pretty interesting. Just don't take it too seriously.

 

Once more, Sherlock reminds me of my other favorite show. I always maintained that Gene Roddenberry didn't understand Star Trek either.

[J.P.]

I keep catching myself thinking that if I was a writer, I would use Moffat's tricks and exactly for the same reasons. I am evil too

It's the little extra that makes me love his writing. I seem to recognize my own… don't really know how to call it, it's not ideas, but the way to play with the reader's heart.

 

And this is how I looked like watching the whole sequence for the first time. This is probably also John's inner face :D

 

[Pseudonym]

Is that a real video you took of yourself reacting? ;)

 

Btw, is 'Appledore' from canon? Because I think it's an awful name for a house. 

[Arcadia]

Actually, that's the one of me reacting. Don't you recognize my shadow? Oh right, the ears ... well, those fell off, I was so amazed. :d

[Fantasy Lover]

J.P. is a CAT?! 0_0

[Pseudonym]

So, uh, does that mean JP was behind the sofa secretly filming you?  :o

[Arcadia]

I knew it was fake because I knew the original Millerton story. If I had believed it was for real, I think I would have puked.

 

This commentary, btw, is a perfect example for why I avoid interviews with and statements from Mr Moffat. I resent his "you want this", "you like" and "you didn't expect". No, Mr M., I actually don't want Sherlock to have a girlfriend, I am ambivalent at best about Mary and I did expect her to turn out to be trouble in some way (you put "Liar" on her face the first time we saw her, remember that?). But if I am not the viewer you expect or want, I am just "not the audience". Thanks a ton!

 

It was weird to realize that my favorite show which seemed to cater to my taste so perfectly, was actually written by a man with a totally different vision. Kind of funny, too.

 

Thank goodness he is a brilliant writer. Just to fully enjoy his work, I kind of have to ignore his comments on it, which is actually the case with many artists.

 

I used to feel the same way, but after watching (not reading, never read his interviews!) him in this and that, I rather grew to love the guy. He doesn't mean half of what he says the way it looks in print, when you watch him you realize he's mostly just teasing people. Also finding out he was extremely shy helped me understand him more. Not sure why, but that's when my opinion of him turned around.

 

He also uses words in a much more general way than some people. It's all over his writing ... that's why people can't agree on what some scenes mean, I think. He's a master of suggesting rather than showing. I love that, but I can see why it leads to misunderstanding.

[Arcadia]

Yeah, but his spin on it is usually pretty interesting. Just don't take it too seriously.

 

Once more, Sherlock reminds me of my other favorite show. I always maintained that Gene Roddenberry didn't understand Star Trek either.

You've mentioned that before. Care to elaborate? I don't really know much about him, except that his show implies to me that he was profoundly optimistic.

 

So, uh, does that mean JP was behind the sofa secretly filming you?  :o

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

... is 'Appledore' from canon? Because I think it's an awful name for a house.

 

Yup, it's canon. Milverton lived in Appledore Towers, which I take to be an apartment complex.

 

 

I always maintained that Gene Roddenberry didn't understand Star Trek either.

 

You've mentioned that before. Care to elaborate? I don't really know much about him, except that his show implies to me that he was profoundly optimistic.

Yes, he was, and come to think of it, that may be his greatest contribution to the show. I mean, look at most other space operas of the era.

 

But you asked why I keep saying he didn't understand ST. The show grew way beyond his original concept, thanks to the contributions of other people. And I think what most of us mean when we say Star Trek has more to do with those other contributions.

 

For example, consider Spock. GR's contribution was his green blood and pointed ears, plus his great intelligence. He said the crew needed a character who was obviously an alien, to constantly remind the audience that they were in outer space, in the future. If you watch either of the pilots ("The Cage," incorporated into "The Menagerie," and "Where No Man Has Gone Before"), you'll see Roddenberry's Spock. He grins, he shouts, and in general is just another character except for the ears.

 

When the first regular episode ("The Corbomite Maneuver") was being filmed, Nimoy was going to play Spock the same as before until director Joe Sergeant said hey wait a minute -- this guy is supposed to be extremely intelligent, right? Instead of yelling about how interesting this guest alien is, wouldn't he be more cerebral? Wouldn't he calmly take it all in and then just quietly say "Fascinating"?

 

In that first episode, Spock is kind of a hybrid. But after that, Nimoy took Sergeant's idea and ran with it, quickly becoming the Spock we know today.

 

Roddenberry always thought that Spock's great appeal was due to the ears, and I'll admit that those don't hurt a thing. But I think that by far his greatest appeal is due to Sergeant's concept as fleshed out, embodied, and protected by Nimoy (and also added to by subsequent writers and directors).

[Ozgood]

This seems to be up there with the Paul McCartney is dead conspiracy.

[Ozgood]

Is that a real video you took of yourself reacting? ;)

 

Btw, is 'Appledore' from canon? Because I think it's an awful name for a house.

What does "Appledore from canon" mean? What is canon?

[T.o.b.y]

In this case, "canon" refers to the original Sherlock Holmes stories and novels by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Right. There's also "BBC Sherlock canon," meaning the aired episodes.

 

If this were a Harry Potter forum, then "canon" might refer to the seven novels and/or eight movies. And so forth.

[Arcadia]

 

 

I always maintained that Gene Roddenberry didn't understand Star Trek either.

You've mentioned that before. Care to elaborate? I don't really know much about him, except that his show implies to me that he was profoundly optimistic.

 

Yes, he was, and come to think of it, that may be his greatest contribution to the show. I mean, look at most other space operas of the era.

 

But you asked why I keep saying he didn't understand ST. The show grew way beyond his original concept, thanks to the contributions of other people. And I think what most of us mean when we say Star Trek has more to do with those other contributions.

 

For example, consider Spock. GR's contribution was his green blood and pointed ears, plus his great intelligence. He said the crew needed a character who was obviously an alien, to constantly remind the audience that they were in outer space, in the future. If you watch either of the pilots ("The Cage," incorporated into "The Menagerie," and "Where No Man Has Gone Before"), you'll see Roddenberry's Spock. He grins, he shouts, and in general is just another character except for the ears.

 

When the first regular episode ("The Corbomite Maneuver") was being filmed, Nimoy was going to play Spock the same as before until director Joe Sergeant said hey wait a minute -- this guy is supposed to be extremely intelligent, right? Instead of yelling about how interesting this guest alien is, wouldn't he be more cerebral? Wouldn't he calmly take it all in and then just quietly say "Fascinating"?

 

In that first episode, Spock is kind of a hybrid. But after that, Nimoy took Sergeant's idea and ran with it, quickly becoming the Spock we know today.

 

Roddenberry always thought that Spock's great appeal was due to the ears, and I'll admit that those don't hurt a thing. But I think that by far his greatest appeal is due to Sergeant's concept as fleshed out, embodied, and protected by Nimoy (and also added to by subsequent writers and directors).

 

Okay, I think I get what you mean ... Star Trek outgrew his original "Wagon Train to the stars" concept, but he never quite got that, right?

 

The social commentary ... was that part of Roddenberry's concept, or did that just grow out of the scripts/etc. too?

 

I don't know if the optimism was his greatest contribution or not, but it's certainly my favorite thing about Star Trek ... although I thought in Next Gen, it became rather smug, at least at the beginning. We could use a little more of that and less of this dystopian stuff, imo. I realize the latter is probably more "realistic", but pffft, reality is overrated. :D

 

Meanwhile, back on topic ... just finished Hounds. The Johnlock jokes were laid on rather thick there! As much as I love Gatiss, I have to admit Moffat is by far the better writer; there's Johnlockary in Scandal too, for instance, but it's far, far more subtly handled and open to thoughtful interpretation. I've come to frankly admire what Moffat does with the concept of love in Scandal; Irene and Sherlock are really brutal with each other, which is a strange way to express love in my mundane little corner of the universe. But that episode sure makes you think.

[Pseudonym]

I read a weird interpretation on Hound the other day, that when the inn owner (Gary?) says he's sorry he can't do a double the interpretation I read was that meant they had to share a bed - ie couldn't have a double room. I took it as couldn't have a double bed, hence separate rooms and/or beds. I never even thought that anyone would think it would mean they had to share a bed since the whole reason Gary (?) is apologising is because he things they're a couple and he can't put them up together. It was from a fairly ardent TJLC person though, who seemed delighted it meant they had to share a bed. 

 

I know there are some pretty infamous 'gazing lovingly' stills from Hound. Can't think of anything else blatant off the top of my head in that ep...? Though I have seen the 'being mysterious with your cheekbones' bit being explained as flirting, though I take it more as best mate ribbing/ eye rolling. 

[Carol the Dabbler]

Okay, I think I get what you mean ... Star Trek outgrew [Roddenberry's] original "Wagon Train to the stars" concept, but he never quite got that, right?

Yup, exactly -- I don't think he got it.

 

The social commentary ... was that part of Roddenberry's concept, or did that just grow out of the scripts/etc. too?

He was big on social commentary, but in my opinion his plot ideas didn't always work out so well. For example, he wrote "The Omega Glory" and "The Savage Curtain," and Shatner clearly based his script for ST5 on one of GR's unused episode ideas.  I've seen some good social-commentary scripts by Roddenberry, though, for instance an episode of either Bananza or Have Gun Will Travel about a young Chinese couple's challenges in the Old West.  I saw it only once, decades ago, but as I recall, it was very nice.

 

I don't know if the optimism was his greatest contribution or not, but it's certainly my favorite thing about Star Trek ... although I thought in Next Gen, it became rather smug, at least at the beginning. We could use a little more of that and less of this dystopian stuff, imo. I realize the latter is probably more "realistic", but pffft, reality is overrated. :D

I've never understood why bad things are supposed to be more realistic than good things.  Guess it depends on how one sees the world.

 

Agreed about ST:TNG.  I was thrilled to see that the staff included DC Fontana, David Gerrold, and some other old ST hands who aren't coming to mind just now.  But the first season seemed like a lot of ST:TOS retreads, plus -- as you say -- some truly weird attitudes (like the one where Wesley accidentally steps in a flower bed).  There was some really good stuff too, though, and it got better as it went along.

 

Meanwhile, back on topic ... just finished Hounds. The Johnlock jokes were laid on rather thick there! As much as I love Gatiss, I have to admit Moffat is by far the better writer; there's Johnlockary in Scandal too, for instance, but it's far, far more subtly handled and open to thoughtful interpretation.

 

I think I disagree with you.  Either that, or I'm not remembering the bits that you're talking about, because I don't offhand recall any Johnlock jokes as such.  There was the scene that Pseud mentions, but I found that sort of touching.  The inn owner assumes that S&J are a couple, and John nearly issues his standard rebuttal, till it occurs to him that Gary is apparently gay and might take that as a put-down, so he puts the brakes on just in time.  Then there's Louise's comment about John and Bob What's-His-Name, but that's neither Johnlock nor a joke.

 

And I still haven't made up my mind whether I think Moffat is the better writer or merely hands himself all the plum assignments.  I'm leaning toward the latter, because I think Great Game is a really good episode, and I'm not all that fond or either Scandal or Last Vow.

[Arcadia]

I read a weird interpretation on Hound the other day, that when the inn owner (Gary?) says he's sorry he can't do a double the interpretation I read was that meant they had to share a bed - ie couldn't have a double room. I took it as couldn't have a double bed, hence separate rooms and/or beds. I never even thought that anyone would think it would mean they had to share a bed since the whole reason Gary (?) is apologising is because he things they're a couple and he can't put them up together. It was from a fairly ardent TJLC person though, who seemed delighted it meant they had to share a bed. 

Same here ... in my version of English, "can't do a double" means there were no rooms with a double bed, they each had to have their own rooms with a single bed. Which makes it a rather weird kind of inn by American standards (do single beds even exist anymore in American hostelries?) If he's assuming they normally share a bed, then he has nothing to apologize for. This is rather like the "I don't mind" remark, don't you think? ... grammatically speaking, it's so contorted it's hard to tell what the speaker means.

 

I know there are some pretty infamous 'gazing lovingly' stills from Hound. Can't think of anything else blatant off the top of my head in that ep...? Though I have seen the 'being mysterious with your cheekbones' bit being explained as flirting, though I take it more as best mate ribbing/ eye rolling.

Gah, I've watched two more episodes since then, am I expected to remember what I saw!!!!?!?!????! :D Um ... right now I can only come up with only one other thing, which was the shrink believing they were gay (with Dr. Frankland's timely intervention.) Anyway, what I meant was, whatever Johnlockary there was, it was a rather blatant joke, not subtle innuendo.

 

Agreed about ST:TNG.  I was thrilled to see that the staff included DC Fontana, David Gerrold, and some other old ST hands who aren't coming to mind just now.  But the first season seemed like a lot of ST:TOS retreads, plus -- as you say -- some truly weird attitudes (like the one where Wesley accidentally steps in a flower bed).  There was some really good stuff too, though, and it got better as it went along.

I thought their best episode by far was "Best of Both Worlds." In fact, it's the only one of which I can remember the name or plot (sort of). I liked the series, but I didn't love it, not like I did the original.

 

 

Meanwhile, back on topic ... just finished Hounds. The Johnlock jokes were laid on rather thick there! As much as I love Gatiss, I have to admit Moffat is by far the better writer; there's Johnlockary in Scandal too, for instance, but it's far, far more subtly handled and open to thoughtful interpretation.

 

I think I disagree with you.  Either that, or I'm not remembering the bits that you're talking about, because I don't offhand recall any Johnlock jokes as such.  There was the scene that Pseud mentions, but I found that sort of touching.  The inn owner assumes that S&J are a couple, and John nearly issues his standard rebuttal, till it occurs to him that Gary is apparently gay and might take that as a put-down, so he puts the brakes on just in time.  Then there's Louise's comment about John and Bob What's-His-Name, but that's neither Johnlock nor a joke.

 

She wasn't making a joke, no, but it was a joke in the sense that poor John was once again thwarted in his wooing by the woman concluding he was in a relationship with Sherlock. Although perhaps that's only funny if you believe John is genuinely straight, I don't know. Same with the innkeeper; for anyone to assume two guys must be a couple simply because they're in the same place together ... maybe joke isn't the right word, but it's certainly a poke at the way people think. Imo.

 

And I still haven't made up my mind whether I think Moffat is the better writer or merely hands himself all the plum assignments.  I'm leaning toward the latter, because I think Great Game is a really good episode, and I'm not all that fond or either Scandal or Last Vow.

Fair enough ... I should say his writing is more to my taste. He's more indirect, and therefore, to me, more challenging, and his episodes bear more watching because so much is left unsaid ... you have to tease out some of what he means. I realize another way of saying this could be that he simply doesn't plug all his plot holes, but I would contend that's deliberate; he doesn't answer all the questions he raises because he's trying to elicit an emotional response more than a logical one. Which is an interesting tack to take in a show about a man who values logic above all other virtues.

 

Let me just compare two scenes: the above-mentioned inn scene in "Hounds", and the meeting between John and Irene in "Scandal." In the first, whether you find it funny or touching or whatever, the meaning is clear: the innkeeper sees two men enter together and assumes they're a couple. John protests. End of joke. The scene with the shrink is similar.

 

In "Scandal", Irene uses it as a weapon against John to get under his skin. She implies they're a couple; John protests. And Irene counters with "Look at us both." You're not gay, I am, and yet we both helplessly orbit around him. And John has no response to that. I think Irene, in that scene, represents what Moffat is trying to say about love ... it takes all forms, it can't be pinned down, there's no set, specific way to do it. It's not a humorous scene, but I find it fairly profound for a TV show.  It's a mystery of the heart, rather than an actual mystery. And it's taken me multiple viewings to come to that conclusion about that scene, and my conclusion might alter with more viewings. That makes it a lot harder episode to understand, but apparently that's what I like about it; at any rate, my admiration for it goes up with each viewing.

 

By the way, remember when you said something along the lines of how 'Sherlock' was a different show when they got to S3? This is the first time I've seen all the episodes in quite a while now, and it's the first time I've watched them so close together (hours apart instead of days/weeks apart.) What I'm noticing this time around is that Ben's performance is different in S3 ... he's more relaxed into the role, not trying as hard to make himself stand out. Or another away of putting it ... he's playing Sherlock as more "normal." He smiles a lot more, for one thing. He's calmer. And the voice is a little different too, but I can't quite figure out how. I haven't reached HLV yet, though, I'm curious to see if it's because the first two episodes are played for laughs more than anything else, or if it's a genuine change in how BC interprets the character.

 

There's a good chance I could watch these shows next week and not notice any difference at all, too.

[Ozgood]

In this case, "canon" refers to the original Sherlock Holmes stories and novels by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.

Thank you.

[Inge l-w]

At this moment in time, TJLC seems to be dead on the water, but we shall have to wait till the end of S4 to be certain.

[J.P.]

Well, Conspirations are tought beast. Hard to kill.

[Fantasy Lover]

At this moment in time, TJLC seems to be dead on the water, but we shall have to wait till the end of S4 to be certain.

*checkes Tumblr* its heartbeat is faint, but there seems to be some excitement for the next episode.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Careful, everyone. :D You're treading kinda close to "what's in series 4 (or rather what's not in it)" territory.

[Sh_Sharon]

Waiting for the last of seaon 4.  You know what makes me mad about Moffet and Gatiss?  They act like the viewers have made up Johnlock when they have been WRITING it since the first episode.  If you don't want the viewers to think Sherlock and John are in a relationship (and not good friends)  don't have someone in the every episode imply that they are.  Can 2 straight men in England not do things together without everyone thinking they are gay?   I do not think we are going to see any signs of a confirmation in this last episode, this season has been a total deviation IMO of anything that was done before.  And to me a disappointment.  I would not be surprised if this is the last season.  And I'm very ok with that.

[Caya]

To echo Carol, above, any specific discussions of S4 are, for the moment, to take place in the episode threads only. Your post doesn't contain any real spoilers, Sh_Sharon, but if you want to go into any further details please take the discussion there.

 

As to your point, that's one thing I honestly don't understand about the pair of them either. I'm not a Johnlocker (conspirative or not), but I don't get how Moftiss can happily have everyone and Mrs. Hudson ship them in-universe, then turn around and act shocked, shocked! I say, that any viewers might get Johnlock-y ideas.