Episode 4.1 "The Six Thatchers"

[Arcadia]

I think it's easier to come up with theories like that when you already have a particular outcome in mind before you even see the show. ;)

 

I really don't dare venture too far into those realms; the level of Mary-hate is very upsetting to me. But this is the age of "gloating is good," now, I guess. :(

[SherlockedCAMPer]

Initial reactions after 2 viewings:

• Still laughed for most of the 1st 30 minutes  (quick questions are Ginger Nuts the equivalent cookie that many Americans call Ginger Snaps?  They looked like that same.)
• The daisy over John's ear was cute based on how it got there.
• John was an idiot (having been the wife in a similar situation, I can say that with all honesty), glad he realized his error.  Seemed like he was about to admit his error when Sherlock beckoned them to the aquarium.
• Liked the map route for the dog trail since they had issues with said dogs.
• Saw somewhere (forget if it was here or on social media) where someone described John's grieving after Mary's demise as sounding like a Constipated Donkey. After the 2nd viewing, I can see why they say that.
• I haven't cried yet at the ending, but I sure came close both times.
• Thankful for my Sherlock inspired blanket. Technically kicked it off my bed early Tuesday morning, but I don't blame that on Sherlock.  Maybe I can blame it on Moftiss even though I've sent it to the floor a few times in the last month.
• Will likely watch it again before PBS re-airs it Sunday evening.
• Liked how Mycroft's fridge is the equivalent of Sherlock's if he didn't have experiments in it.
• So looking fwd to the next 2 episodes complete with fear and trepidation over what Moftiss is going to send our way.
• Also want to know if Molly was just babysitting Rosie or if she had temporary custody (aka babysitting for a few days/weeks) while John tried to get his new life figured out.
• And I want to know if there was anything on that DVD Mary sent between her telling Sherlock to save John and telling Sherlock to go to hell.
• Also the PBS crazy credits strike again.  Spells out the original ACD story title of Six Napoleons. (haven't read the thread hardly at all so don't know if that was posted hear yet)
• It took the 2nd re-watch to figure out the whole Sherlock telling Mrs. Hudson to say Norbury thing.  I missed some of Sherlock's words to Mrs. Hudson so it through me the 1st time.

Might post more after another re-watch.

[Arcadia]

I actually had to watch with the captions on a couple of times. I've never had that much trouble following the show before; I hope it's just the way they filmed it, and not a sign that my hearing is going! Did anyone else have trouble understanding the words they were using? Or was it just me?

[Arcadia]

There was a little clip of the filming of the christening, where Mark says several months had gone by at that point. But I can't find the link again, sorry.

 

Okay, it's popped up on YouTube. No spoilers.

 

 

 

Mark:"This is somewhat the calm before the storm and explaining what's been going on in the intervening months since the birth of the baby."

 

But does what he says make sense? Do people really wait months after the baby is born to have a christening?

 

Also, I found out what the big joke is at the end of the christening scene; when Molly digs Sherlock in the ribs and some mechanical voice answers ... apparently she's activated his Siri? I've heard of it but have very little understanding what it is. I have to admit I didn't find it funny so much as totally annoying, but hey.

[T.o.b.y]

I don't know about the UK, but here in this part of Germany, people do usually have the christening when the baby is already a few months old and not right away. I asked my husband why, because I thought the original idea was to save the little soul in case it died in infancy and he didn't know. I guess people thought that very new babies were so innocent they didn't need saving yet? Anyway, it takes a bit of planning and there usually won't be an appointment available right away so maybe that's the real reason.

 

I thought Rosie's christening was hilarious. And I think at least one person in the room (Mary) was amused as well.

 

I did not cry when she died (to be honest, I rolled my eyes), but this episode did manage to make me like Mary a lot more than formerly. I think she was just always out of place on the show. She's in a whole other league than Sherlock and John while trying to be a secondary character. I guess they figured out this couldn't work long term and that was why she had to go.

 

I would have just let her run, though. Run and disappear; sacrifice herself in a different way by sacrificing her happiness for the safety of her family.

 

But I guess that wouldn't have been atonement enough for many people.

 

I wonder whether John's apparent affair won't turn out to be something different and we were purposely misled. Not that I wouldn't put it past him, in fact, I think it's quite plausible (he's just a man after all and I have never seen him as the good guy) but I have a gut feeling there's more to it.

[Inge l-w]

Given that Dr Watson (NOT Mr Freeman), is Evangelical or CoE, it was a perfectly logical timeline. Only the Catholics rush off and do it in about two months of age, since all Christian branches have to observe the first forty days of a baby's life as preparation for it, and the Orthodox branches can and do wait up until a toddler's second year for a Christening.

As for E, she will pop up as the Lady in Red somewhere this Sunday. And at the moment, I would bet on Hell, Norway, if you remember the screen shots released by SetLock, showing both Sherlock and Dr Watson on a very similar fishing trawler to the one Mary climbed aboard; the one which jokingly got the music from Titanic in screencaps.

It is not so much a Mary-hater thing, as a Mary-does-not-belong in a Sherlock Holmes universe for very long.

[Fantasy Lover]

I actually had to watch with the captions on a couple of times. I've never had that much trouble following the show before; I hope it's just the way they filmed it, and not a sign that my hearing is going! Did anyone else have trouble understanding the words they were using? Or was it just me?

It's not just you, I had trouble as well. I hope the script is released soon.

 

Also, I found out what the big joke is at the end of the christening scene; when Molly digs Sherlock in the ribs and some mechanical voice answers ... apparently she's activated his Siri? I've heard of it but have very little understanding what it is. I have to admit I didn't find it funny so much as totally annoying, but hey.

siri is a device that uses your voice to send messages, make calls send reminders and so on.

[Arcadia]

Thanks, gang! So it does make sense. That's one thing about the Sherlock fandom; you keep learning new stuff from them! I feel a little better about the time frame, then. I thought days had passed, not months.
 
I'm afraid I rolled my eyes when she died too; wayyyyyy too melodramatic for my taste. Ughh. And everyone just standing around instead of making some effort to save her.

[J.P.]

Siri is the annoying ghost in a machine. It reacts on your voice, can answer questions or execute simple tasks like calling people etc, so you don't have to use your hands and eyes. I don't have one, but my boss had it on his phone for a while, and "she" had the tendence to ask: "I could not understand your request" in the middle of him talking to someone else. It was funny only for few days. That's what happened in the church.

 

A quick idea: what if TST is the story Sherlock tells Ella at the end of TST? We've had this theme already popping up through the whole series, the Anderson theory, the Big Blue version Sherlock told him, in TAB it's woven into the story on both levels. Who's telling who's story? What is the truth? Even the doctored video from Appledore is about manipulating reality.

 

Is it Sunday yet?

[J.P.]

Houston, we have a transcript!

At least part one ot it

 

http://arianedevere.livejournal.com/86813.html

 

This fandom is all loonies. :D

[sfmpco]

I generally listen to each episode at least once with the captions on because I do tend to miss a lot.  I miss a lot partly because my two parakeets get very chatty when the TV is on.  Normally not a problem, but Sherlock is different, and their night cover went on their cage for a bit.  

 

I can't think that Sherlock was doing all that manic texting just for humor.  I think he's up to something.  Maybe he's laying bait on social media.

[Arcadia]

Houston, we have a transcript!

At least part one ot it

 

http://arianedevere.livejournal.com/86813.html

 

This fandom is all loonies. :D

 

Yes, we are. That's what makes us so (in Sherlock's sing-song voice) awwwwwwesommme!!!!

[Fantasy Lover]

I think this is the proper place to post this, there has been some criticism of The Six Tatchers: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/jan/03/sherlock-slowly-perversely-morphing-into-james-bond-benedict-cumberbatch and this was Mark's reply: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/jan/04/to-an-undiscerning-critic-from-mark-gatiss?CMP=twt_a-culture_b-gdnculture bless him.

[bedelia1984]

Even though I agree with some of what the Guardian guy said, you can't deny Mark Gatiss is the absolute best for responding in verse!!

[Arcadia]

That's basically what I was going to say! I don't mind seeing Sherlock in action (far from it ) but it's the secret agent/assassin/gun waving stuff that really, really irks me. I liked Mary, a lot, but I'm praying with all my heart that her demise means we won't have to sit through any more covert government operations ... I want to watch Sherlock be a detective, not a global super spy.

 

I also like what the critic said about how it affects the reality of the show. It has been said over and over on this forum that one reason we love Sherlock so much is that, in spite of all his quirks (or maybe because of them) he still seems very real to most of us. But I think they've lost that, this time around. :( I'm hoping it's so we'll appreciate it more when they get it back.

 

Whatever ... Mark's response was brilliant.

[J.P.]

Somehow it sounds again like another "the series is bad because I don't like where it goes" kind of thing. And we don't really know what's going on yet.

[Inge l-w]

It's bound to happen: More Bond, less Sherlock with every season. The critic was right to comment on their decision to make Mary an ex-assassin, he should also have commented on the ridiculous ease Sherlock obtained his get-out-of-jail-free card! But what can we expect when they alienate the whole JLC community; the fans who love the original stories too much; those who would go for period Holmes over modernised Holmes; so that Janine's retort to Sherlock: You lied and lied, applies to both fanboy creators, who, alas for 'brainy is the new sexy' that Irene uttered in one of their better episodes, are also huge fans of James Bond.

Bide a wee until after the 15th of the month. Then, the bludgeoning can commence with valid arguments and even screen caps.

And writing doggerel verse is just a cheap retort. Kudos to the Guardian for printing it; Mr Gatiss's reasons for writing it remain a mystery to me, since it is an almost Anderson-like reaction: it lowers the IQ of the whole cumulative creative effort.

[Arcadia]

Somehow it sounds again like another "the series is bad because I don't like where it goes" kind of thing. And we don't really know what's going on yet.

 

Yeah, I hope no one thinks I'm saying the series is bad. I'm just not liking this episode very much. When you only get three episodes every three years, it's sort of painful when you don't love them all equally, you know? So I'm venting my pain. You all get to be splashed with it, isn't that fun? :D

 

If I dislike the next two just as much, though ... :cry: Buckets and buckets. But Steven's writing is usually more to my taste than Mark's anyway, so I'm hopeful. But not too hopeful, in case my hopes are crushed.

 

By the way, did anyone else feel like there was something off about 221B in this episode? Like part of it was missing, or something. Or the colors were duller. Something. It felt .... low budget. Like they couldn't afford enough bulbs to light the set, or something. I can't quite pin it down. That scene where Lestrade and John are teasing Sherlock about being a baby, and they're coming down the stairs ... the wall looked wrong, like it was made of cheap plywood. Like it was obviously part of a set, instead of the interior of a house. It really jumped out at me.

 

There's little things like that all over the episode. I can't help but think either the director or the cinematographer made some poor choices, or they were genuinely under-funded for this episode. Because they put more of their budget into the other episodes, maybe? It looks to me like there's going to be more effects shots in the other two. Guess we'll see. Or maybe I just need new glasses.

[bedelia1984]

I think I feel exactly the same- there is so much to love about the show, still, but I just expected more from that first episode. I also expected way too much because I was anticipating it for so, so long.

 

 

Somehow it sounds again like another "the series is bad because I don't like where it goes" kind of thing. And we don't really know what's going on yet.

 

Yeah, I hope no one thinks I'm saying the series is bad. I'm just not liking this episode very much. When you only get three episodes every three years, it's sort of painful when you don't love them all equally, you know? So I'm venting my pain. You all get to be splashed with it, isn't that fun? :D
 
If I dislike the next two just as much, though ... :cry: Buckets and buckets. But Steven's writing is usually more to my taste than Mark's anyway, so I'm hopeful. But not too hopeful, in case my hopes are crushed.
 
By the way, did anyone else feel like there was something off about 221B in this episode? Like part of it was missing, or something. Or the colors were duller. Something. It felt .... low budget. Like they couldn't afford enough bulbs to light the set, or something. I can't quite pin it down. That scene where Lestrade and John are teasing Sherlock about being a baby, and they're coming down the stairs ... the wall looked wrong, like it was made of cheap plywood. Like it was obviously part of a set, instead of the interior of a house. It really jumped out at me.
 
There's little things like that all over the episode. I can't help but think either the director or the cinematographer made some poor choices, or they were genuinely under-funded for this episode. Because they put more of their budget into the other episodes, maybe? It looks to me like there's going to be more effects shots in the other two. Guess we'll see. Or maybe I just need new glasses.

 

 

 

The thing about the spy stuff is that it is not the show's natural forte- in my opinion a show like Homeland already does that kind of international espionage thing way better.  There were similarities to things Homeland has done actually, the woman in headscarf with weapon creeping around anonymous houses in foreign cities- but it fits with the story, and it is believable in the universe. It is true, that's not what I watch Sherlock for. But if you're going to go there, do it right! Benedict's fight scene was brilliant and really well filmed/ executed, so there are aspects they did well, but a lot of the stuff with Mary as super spy felt hokey.

 

And I agree that things looked cheaper. Though I was watching it in my parents house on their cheap second TV, so that might be to blame for part of it (I had to avoid the excess chatter, much like sfmpco's parakeets).

 

 

[J.P.]

I was talking about the critial article. A professional should have some better arguments than "I'm disappointed"

 

I was a bit disappointed too, but I'm not a pro. :P

 

Anyway, Arcadia, the oddness of the whole visual side was the first that I noticed. That's why I've had an impression that it's all MP. EVERYTHING looks strange. Everything is blue-ish. The perspective is different, its apparently shot with different lenses than usual and with filters/heavy postproduction. I hardly recognized John's bedroom. The bed looked HUGE.

I will be more disappointed if it all turns out to be just the new director/cinematographer combo. (need to check on the second, and maybe look through other films of R Talalay)

[Surelock]

I think this is the proper place to post this, there has been some criticism of The Six Tatchers: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/jan/03/sherlock-slowly-perversely-morphing-into-james-bond-benedict-cumberbatch and this was Mark's reply: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/jan/04/to-an-undiscerning-critic-from-mark-gatiss?CMP=twt_a-culture_b-gdnculture bless him.

 

 

And writing doggerel verse is just a cheap retort. Kudos to the Guardian for printing it; Mr Gatiss's reasons for writing it remain a mystery to me, since it is an almost Anderson-like reaction: it lowers the IQ of the whole cumulative creative effort.

 

Gatiss wrote his response as a poem because he was referencing Sir Arthur Conan's Doyle's own 'To an undiscerning critic' poem (published in 1912) that was a response to a critic that complained about how Doyle had written Sherlock Holmes to criticise other fictional detectives.

[J.P.]

I would really like to watch the new episodes with my overanalysing and hanging on every detail stupid fangirly brain switched off.

I would like to watch the story instead of watching for clues.

 

We are much too involved. It's fun but it's also makes us expect something that the show can never be - our own personal version of it.

 

If you watch the whole show as a given one, there is no discussion about where it should go in the future. There is no open end.

… I wanted to write something more but I'm too tired.

 

Well, maybe we ALL, fans, makers and critics are just the reality imagined by Victorian Holmes. Or maybe even Dr Watson's who actually invented it all. Or it's all the illustrator's fault. :P

[Arcadia]

 

I think this is the proper place to post this, there has been some criticism of The Six Tatchers: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/jan/03/sherlock-slowly-perversely-morphing-into-james-bond-benedict-cumberbatch and this was Mark's reply: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/jan/04/to-an-undiscerning-critic-from-mark-gatiss?CMP=twt_a-culture_b-gdnculture bless him.

 

 

And writing doggerel verse is just a cheap retort. Kudos to the Guardian for printing it; Mr Gatiss's reasons for writing it remain a mystery to me, since it is an almost Anderson-like reaction: it lowers the IQ of the whole cumulative creative effort.

 

Gatiss wrote his response as a poem because he was referencing Sir Arthur Conan's Doyle's own 'To an undiscerning critic' poem (published in 1912) that was a response to a critic that complained about how Doyle had written Sherlock Holmes to criticise other fictional detectives.

 

 

That is brilliant!!!! Thanks for sharing that, Surelock!

 

[Arcadia]

I think I feel exactly the same- there is so much to love about the show, still, but I just expected more from that first episode. I also expected way too much because I was anticipating it for so, so long.

Yeah, and knowing that it's going to be gone again in another week or two ... boy, being a fan of this show sure sucks, doesn't it? :D

 

And I agree that things looked cheaper. Though I was watching it in my parents house on their cheap second TV, so that might be to blame for part of it (I had to avoid the excess chatter, much like sfmpco's parakeets).

Well, that's two of us, so maybe it really is something in the show.

 

Anyway, Arcadia, the oddness of the whole visual side was the first that I noticed. That's why I've had an impression that it's all MP. EVERYTHING looks strange. Everything is blue-ish. The perspective is different, its apparently shot with different lenses than usual and with filters/heavy postproduction. I hardly recognized John's bedroom. The bed looked HUGE.

I will be more disappointed if it all turns out to be just the new director/cinematographer combo. (need to check on the second, and maybe look through other films of R Talalay)

And that's three of us. Okay, I'm calling it ... they short-changed the budget! Fire Sue! :D

 

Now that you say that, JP, I think that was one of my first complaints as well (but I'm too lazy to go back and look at what I said) -- I really had trouble feeling a sense of place in this episode. Except for Mary's epic journey (and I really liked the visuals of that, by the way), it all seemed to be on some non-descript set. Even the aquarium, which should have been awe-inspiring, was just ... blue. And that water motif everywhere throughout the episode was weird ... but I'm guessing it ties into something further down the road.

 

We are much too involved. It's fun but it's also makes us expect something that the show can never be - our own personal version of it.

Ah, but that's part of the fun too, right? Comparing what we think we want with what we get, trying to figure out why everyone's visions don't match, analyzing scenes and why they do/don't work ... it's a hoot! As long as no one commits murder (or suicide), we're all good, yeah?

[bedelia1984]

And that water motif everywhere throughout the episode was weird ... but I'm guessing it ties into something further down the road.

 

 

Of course my first thoughts at the water motif were Carl Powers, the swimming pool and The Great Game.

 

I'm confused as to why things looked so different, because I would think they store their Baker Street sets and re-use them? Were there some comments I have remember from the set designer about interchangeable sets? Mycroft's office/ city pad was a bit cut-price looking too, come to think of it. And then Sherlock's weird new bolt hole. Maybe there is some reason they were choosing all these odd locations, besides saving money?

 

The money thing seems odd to me because TAB looked so lush, and they were only providing a set for a single standalone- or maybe that leaves more money than stretching to 3 episodes?

 

Like, it would make sense, if this was a story Sherlock was telling to someone he did not particularly trust- change the location of Mycroft's city pad, change his own bolt hole... and maybe change a few other things that seem odd?

 

How is it only Wednesday, Sunday night is too far away.