Episode 4.2 "The Lying Detective"

[sherlockandjohn]

Referring to the spoiler-free review of The Final Problem on Sherlockology, I'm just gonna post my reactions to various parts of it here. I know it's a spoiler-free review, but considering that some of you may not want to read it anyway, I will post bits of the review in spoiler boxes and my own comments below each box. If you would prefer for me to also post my comments in a spoiler box, please let me know!

 

 

"With the arrival of The Final Problem, Sherlock has reset back to a similar tone to what we loved best about the show - a detective and a doctor running around together, solving mysteries.

To that end, the characterisation is as you love it most too. Sherlock Holmes is a motor mouth, frantically probing and solving clues in the most desperate of circumstances. John Watson is the conflicted, noble man again, a layer of sadness pervading him thanks to the loss of his wife, but once again truly the steadfast and loyal Army Doctor."

 

 

Yay, yay, and yay again! The boys are back in town! So relieved to read this part of the review. Though, obviously I might disagree after watching the episode, but it certainly sounds promising.

 

 

"The Final Problem is perhaps the single most tension filled (and indeed, fueled) episode of Sherlock ever produced, relentless in its pacing, and it truly feels like all bets are off in this one. Director Benjamin Caron has created a hugely cinematic ninety minutes filled with thrills and adventure that will likely make you clutch whatever furniture you are seated on extremely tightly. If it's the floor, you may bury your face in it."

 

 

This is when I - once again - have to wonder whether or not to watch the episode on Netflix on Monday afternoon (that's when it's available here), rather than on Sunday late evening. I fear I will not be able to sleep for hours after watching this!

 

 

"It is easily the best episode of the fourth series, and at risk of overhyping it the best episode since The Reichenbach Fall, with a wonderful, perfect ending that may or may not be as final as the title of the episode suggests."

 

 

If this is the final episode, as I think it will be -  - I could not have wished for better words about the episode than the above!

[BLS_Pro]

 

1. The pool fight. There were parts of it that were shot from so far away, and in the dark, that you couldn' tell who was doing what to whom. At one point I couldn't see which one was being pushed under water, Sherlock or Ajay, until they switched to a close up.

 

Compare that to ... oh, the scene in TBB where Sherlock shows up to rescue John and Sarah. It's in the dark, you see Sherlock from far away,  ... but you know it's him and where he is because the director makes a point of showing his iconic silhouette. When he moves forward at a run, you can barely see a thing, but you still know exactly what he's doing because of the camera angle, the sound effects, the reaction shots, etc. That doesn't happen by accident, it's a choice.

 

First, the pool fight is an example of the bad writing I'm talking about.  That went on for a uselessly long time.  It was almost all filler.  It is one of the two points where I actually fast forwarded to get to the actual only 'meat' (ie the breaking of the bust by Sherlock).  As such, I had to go back to see what you meant, because even at a faster speed I didn't recall a problem following the action.  In fact, even sped up, it seemed much of the action was actually too slow).

 

In the entire fight in the pool, I see two very quick shots which correspond to your description.  They are not "so far away" but are rather are shown to be about 5 feet from the water's edge (and another 5-7 feet from the fight).  In this context they would qualify as med or med wide shots.  Both of them occur AFTER one already knows where the fighters are relative to one another.  And they are purposefully obscured by water on the lens to artificially induce a sense of 'immediacy' to the fight - that one is 'in' the action and struggling to keep up.  

 

In addition, I see two very quick shots from the alternate end of the pool, used to establish that they are in the vicinity of the whirlpool.  Perhaps these are what you referenced as "so far away" (20-25 feet)?   They are the ONLY shots not directly 'in' the fight.  Again, these fleeting shots are not used to establish individual -character- position, because the OVERLOAD of med close and close shots give far too much very slow detail in that regard.  They are used solely to establish the fight as close to the whirlpool, and to establish where the whirlpool is to the window that they will exit through in a few moments after leaving the whirlpool.  It is a geography establishment shot.

 

Further, it should be noted these shots are also another issue with the watery location chosen by the producers.  There is no place ANY  director could have placed their cameras BUT where they were placed in order to get the wider shots (ie any shot that wasn't a couple feet away from the actors).  They could ONLY shoot from three general angles on the wider shots. 

 

And the editing of them - ie the inclusion or exclusion of them - is, again, ultimately not the director's say.  The producers/show runners have final say.  They are the ones who were there on the day, approved them, liked them, decided it was a good idea to use them in this form of edit, etc..  What we see on screen is NOT the 'director's cut' of any of the episodes (though of course they do have a say in the cutting).  The editor has a massive say in how this is done - putting things together for both the director and the show runner on a daily basis.  And the show runner has FINAL cut.

 

Pointing to TBB's example is not a fair comparison, because this scene in T6T does all that you point to in the TBB scene.  The T6T scene simply had a TON more (wasted) time and (meaningless) action the writer forced the director to cover as well and so had to do a LOT more than the TBB description you provided.

 

 

2. 221B. It looked like a set, not like I remembered it at all. The colors were desaturated

Trust me when I say any change as radical as this is not only sanctioned but requested/insisted upon by the producers.  This goes back to the continuity issue and the show runner I previously mentioned.  And I personally know shows where even the show runners get 'yelled' at by the networks for too bright, too dark, etc.  There is a whole CHAIN of command above the director which is responsible for the consistency (and deviation from consistency) between episodes.  That is NOT the discretion of the director.  That is the choice of others - and, as such, is WHY a particular director is chosen: BECAUSE the producers WANT the look.

 

Given today's digital technology, we can't even say this desaturation wasn't done after the fact - ie not by the director/DP at all - but done by the producers in post production against how it was conceived of by the director.

 

WHY they want it?  I cannot say.  But to blame the director for giving them the look THEY wanted is placing the blame in the wrong spot.

 

 

How many other episodes have we seen the camera travelling up and down the stairs with them? It's a signature image!

Perhaps you can point to an instance of such travelling in another episode.  They didn't make as much of an impression upon me as they obviously did for you, so I'm not recalling where they are in order to review them again and compare them here.

 

 

3. Sherlock's appearance....That's a makeup and lighting issue, I can't fathom why no one involved picked up on it and said something....the director and the show runner should have noticed that things were off...just makes T6T look like ... a mistake.

I will not disagree that it looks different from the rest.  I will just point out that the director does NOT have the final say in it looking the same or different.  If the show runner doesn't like the look, the show runner will not allow it.  So this is a look the show runners chose - not only by choosing the director, but by ACTIVELY sanctioning (if not explicity specifying) to ALL departments, what would and would not be done.  The differences did NOT slip by ANY one.  The photographic records alone that the different departments make and maintain simply make it impossible.  It is a CHOICE - and the show runner is the one who ultimately makes it.

 

 

It's not in the script

We do not know this one way or the other, not having seen the script.  But the writer can indeed indicate the fracturing in his descriptions for a scene if not for a shot.  And he can certainly include it in his character description.  Do not believe the director comes up with the idea on his own, any more than the T6T director came up with the 'intuition' blue water reflected on Sherlock's face idea on her own.  That IS the script.

 

 

 

Arcadia - at work right now so on IPhone and can't deliver my full response at the moment. But concerning your point 5, that is the script and show runner. The script dictated the aquarium. There were only a couple angles they could use there. As such the director was constrained by the location due to the script. That's why the angles were pedestrian and the editing etc were all constrained- and why montage had to be used in introducing and leaving the scene.

Possibly. But I'd love to have seen Paul McGuigan or Nick Hurran have a go at that episode. I can almost guarantee that it would have looked different.

Basically, they had two and a half-walls to work with.  Regardless of director, the look would not have been too different.

 

Look - my point here is not to claim T6T's director was brilliant.  As I stated in my first post after the episode aired, the writing AND directing of T6T were 'pedestrian' at best.  I'm simply saying that this is not ultimately due to the directors choices, but to the writer/producer's (Gatiss' specifically here) choices.  He (and Moffat/Vertue) hire a director who will give them the vision THEY are looking for in an episode.  THEY, not the director, are responsible for ALL the choices ultimately made here.  And I don't mean this in a 'The Buck Stops Here' manner - ie 'I'll take responsibility for the problems and mistakes of others'.  They are directly making and/or directly overseeing EVERY single decision being made before, during, and after production (that's why you see them constantly on set in all the BTS vids).  They can and do override the director and the DP et al if they are not getting what THEY want.  So the end result is THEIRS more than ANYONE else's - including the director.

 

I work in the industry.  I see this every single day.

[Carol the Dabbler]

From another thread:

 

I suspect we will learn a great deal in the next episode, such as the true meaning of something said in HLV (which I will not mention here because it could be spoilery).

 

Is there anywhere else you can post the thing you are referring to? You've made me curious ;)

 

Aaaand here we are!  I haven't been following this thread, so this may very well have been mentioned already.  I was talking about what Sherlock said toward the end of HLV, about when he and his brother were kids, and Mycroft was forever saying that the East Wind was coming to get him.  I'm thinking now that was almost certainly a reference to Euros (or Eurus, as some sites seem to be spelling it, perhaps to avoid confusion with European currency) that went right over young Sherlock's head.

 

And now I'm gonna disappear again for a while.

[sherlockandjohn]

From another thread:

 

I suspect we will learn a great deal in the next episode, such as the true meaning of something said in HLV (which I will not mention here because it could be spoilery).

 

Is there anywhere else you can post the thing you are referring to? You've made me curious ;)

 

Aaaand here we are!  I haven't been following this thread, so this may very well have been mentioned already.  I was talking about what Sherlock said toward the end about when he and his brother were kids, and Mycroft was forever saying that the East Wind was coming to get him.  I'm thinking now that was almost certainly a reference to Euros (or Eurus, as some sites seem to be spelling it, perhaps to avoid confusion with European currency) that went right over young Sherlock's head.

 

Yes, I agree! Which would mean that Sherlock either did not know about Eurus (and I don't think that's the case; it doesn't seem plausible) or he didn't know the meaning of her name. Or he did know, and Mycroft was threatening him that his sister would come and get him, which is really mean.

 

[J.P.]

Twin smilies? 

 

http://www.sherlockforum.com/forum/topic/2278-221-baker-street/?p=113871

 

Still working on it! :D

[Pseudonym]

Ah, right. Ta :)

[BLS_Pro]

 

Yes, I agree! Which would mean that Sherlock either did not know about Eurus (and I don't think that's the case; it doesn't seem plausible) or he didn't know the meaning of her name. Or he did know, and Mycroft was threatening him that his sister would come and get him, which is really mean.

 

I keep getting the impression they will be going for 'repressed memories'.  So Sherlock may have known about Eurus as a young boy, but as an adult has no memory of her at all  - except maybe the flashes we keep getting of kids playing near the water - which should be clues to him.  That we don't see him thinking about them at all as clues to something is the only thing which 'seems implausible' to me.  For the man who regards his mind so crucially, anything in his mind which he can't account for should jump out at him as important, especially if it keeps repeating. 

 

[J.P.]

I need a second view to spot the lie in Lying Detective. Some ppl I'd read, stil haven't get it.

 

From Ariane's Transcript:

 

JOHN: Sherlock, what was he doing to you?
SHERLOCK (breathlessly): Suffocating me, overdosing me. (He points weakly towards the drug stand.)
JOHN: On what?
SHERLOCK: Saline.
JOHN (frowning round to him): Saline?
SHERLOCK: Yeah, saline.
(He props himself up onto one elbow, still breathing hard.)
JOHN: What d’you mean, saline?
(He goes over to look at the drip bag. Sherlock groans and breathes out shakily. Smith looks worriedly towards John’s back.)
SHERLOCK: Well obviously I got Nurse Cornish to switch the bags. She’s a big fan, you know? Loves my blog.
(John frowns down at him.)
JOHN: You’re okay?
SHERLOCK (having now caught his breath): No-no, of course I’m not okay. Malnourished, double kidney failure, and frankly I’ve been off my tits for weeks. (He squints up at John.) What kind of a doctor are you?

 

Which makes Sherlock's fear of dying a lie (oh, you bastard!), and Sherlock a beeping fine actor.

[BLS_Pro]

 

 But yeah, where were Sue and Mark and Steven during screening and editing? I assume they noticed the difference and decided to let it pass. :(

Their work neither begins nor ends with the "screening and editing".  As you see in all the BTS, they are there throughout.  And they are there from conception through pre-production as well.  It is NOT the case they were unaware of what was going on UNTIL screening and editing.

 

The problem here is the assumption they are not in charge of EVERYTHING - including the director and his/her choices in every episode.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Regarding Euros, remember that Mycroft is older than Sherlock -- canonically, seven years.  If Euros is just a few years either older or younger than Mycroft, she could have been out of the family picture by the time Sherlock was even born.  Or he might have *very* young memories of her, which he interprets in some other way (cf. Rain Man).  She could have been the original "Redbeard," for example.

 

BLS_Pro, he wouldn't necessarily realize that his childhood memories were not literal representations of what actually happened.  Kids are really good at rationalizing things.

[BLS_Pro]

 

BLS_Pro, he wouldn't necessarily realize that his childhood memories were not literal representations of what actually happened.  Kids are really good at rationalizing things.

I wasn't suggesting anything about 'literal representations'.  The point had been made that it was surprising he didn't recognize his own sister.  I simply provided an example of how this could be possible, from the perspective of the direction I think the writers are driving.  And my comment about 'implausible' was made in that specific context - how, if it IS repressed memories of Eurus, then why the flashes of memory surfacing aren't like atom bombs going off in Sherlocks head, making him follow those MASSIVE loose threads, is problematic.

 

Of course, if the writers don't go with the idea of Eurus as a 'repressed memory', then the whole issue of my specific concern about the implausibility of Sherlock not noting and following those completely disconnected memories evaporates.

[BLS_Pro]

Also have you guys heard of that theory on reddit of Redbeard not being real?

 

It's based on what Sherlock tells Henry about the hound at the end of The Hound of Baskerville. Sherlock said that there was no hound and Henry just imagined it because when he was a child he had trouble rationalising the traumatic experience of watching his father die.

 

Some people have speculated that Sherlock is subconsciously speaking from experience when he said that. Basically when Sherlock was a kid he saw Euros go insane and watched as she was taken away and locked up in a mental asylum or something like that. Sherlock had trouble understanding all this when he was a kid so his brain rationalised all of it as Redbeard. Basically Sherlock thought he had a dog named Redbeard instead of a sister named Euros and Redbeard being put down was actually Euros being taken away after going insane.

 

This sounds like a plausible theory. What do you guys think of it?

 

I was hoping this would not be the case.  I don't like the idea and having such a bizarre, uncommon thing be EXACTLY what happened to Sherlock (down to representing a person with a dog mentally).  It would be an example of the NUMEROUS coincidences (BAD writing) the show sometimes relies upon.

 

I say 'was hoping' because I now believe that is EXACTLY what it will be.  I kept wondering WHY the thatcher statue would cause 'premonitions' for Sherlock.  And it goes back to THoB episode.  MAGGIE (thatcher) was the clue which helped unlock the case of the repressed/tramatic representation substitute memories.  It is his subconscious linking maggie with approaching death - the East Wind - Eurus.

 

I think, combined with the 'vampire' reference in Eurus' txt w John, we've got a pretty good idea now of the whole backstory here.  :(

 

 

 

[J.P.]

There are so many paths in this episode and so many little tiny funny bits - we will have our fun with it forever. :D

 

This is the old good Sherlock for me: first you just watch and go with the story and emotions. Second time you notice something isn't quite right, so you watch again to discover things might be not what you thought they were.

 

There is something bothering me about the note. Faith have written it three years ago, and Sherlock deducted it's history. Does it mean that Faith indeed moved into a flat with a tiny kitchen, or was the paper prepared? Because in the mortuary* she didn't look like she's in any kind of trouble or alienated from her father.

Then, there is a moment when Mycroft's spooks clean 221B and the note falls on the floor. It looks a bit like it could be deliberately dropped. I don't suggest Mycroft was for E or Moriarty's spy, but the spook could be.

 

Do we have another parallel versions of the story like in ASIB? (Sherlock grieving after Irene vs Sherlock knowing she's alive) Because the way it is shown, Faith could as well be a hallucination.

 

BTW, watching it for the second time, I couldn't believe I hadn't seen that Faith and the Lady in Red are two different women!

 

*didn't they use the word morgue for the rooms at St. Bart's?

[Surelock]

Just a heads up: the final episode has been leaked via a Russian website. Be careful of where you visit on the internet because people are trying to post up spoilers. 

 

There are still about 24 hours until the episode officially airs. This will be 'The Final Problem' that we have to face until watching the season finale.

[BLS_Pro]

There is something bothering me about the note. Faith have written it three years ago, and Sherlock deducted it's history. Does it mean that Faith indeed moved into a flat with a tiny kitchen, or was the paper prepared? Because in the mortuary* she didn't look like she's in any kind of trouble or alienated from her father.

 

I'm a bit bothered by that too, though Eurus did say she intentionally made some clues for him to follow.  So it sounds like she purposefully manufactured many of the elements he deduced about the note.  Just as she purposefully manufactured the one thing he missed on the note.

 

[J.P.]

…or it has been added later. ;)

 

Who is manipulating whom and how long already - that's the question.

[Arcadia]

Re John.

 

Sorry for the delay, but sneaky Arwel and his twin smilies hijacked my attention for a while.

 

Well, WE have seen it. We have a whole thread about John and his issues. They were hidden in plain sight, because John still looked normal compared to Sherlock's weirdness.

 

Yes, he was a ladies man. He flirts with every woman he can see. He cannot recognize their faces though, like we have seen in ASIB.

 

He needs action, because just being needed - as we assumed - is not exciting enough. So, maybe he is an adrenaline junkie after all.

 

And he has massive problems with anger and aggression. But he is also shown as someone with an iron self control. So he masters his inner Donald Duck most of the time, until it breaks out as snarky remarks (especially in TAB!), or even violence - may it be against a chair, Wiggins, or even Sherlock in ASIB. Once he lets his anger out, it's impossible for him to stop (was there, did that). That's what happens in the morgue, John goes over the top, and all his accumulated anger about Mary's death, and that he himself couldn't prevent it either, that he cannot cope with his grief - his fury explodes and hits Sherlock, because he seems to be the easiest person to blame.

 

I wasn't surprised at all.

Well, as I said before, I was both surprised and not surprised ... surprised because it didn't occur to me that they would go so far as to show John becoming physically violent (it surprised me in HLV, too, but since he was disarming the guy, not as much).  But it didn't surprise me, in that the moment it happened, it made perfect sense for his character, imo. I like your point about John's iron control; of course that's what makes him seem safe. But everyone has their breaking point, and they'd put John through a helluva lot even before Mary died. I think this development was rather beautifully pulled off, if hard to watch.

 

What I'd love to know is if they had this character arc in mind for John all along, because we can certainly see his level of frustration escalating since practically the first episode. The big difference is, they've nearly always played his anger for laughs before. Until HLV and TAB. (And I remember thinking he was a little over the top in TAB, too. But it was still verbal.)

 

I keep thinking back to Mycroft's line about John being the making or breaking of Sherlock, and I've often wondered which way he thought it was going ... clearly John's been good for Sherlock in some ways, but Sherlock ended up killing Magnussen for John; not so good. But I didn't wonder much about whether Sherlock was good for John or not. Their relationship has suddenly become far more complex, which I really like.

 

Re Mary's ghost. To me she was an inner representation of her, but an idealized one. She's so clever, so wise, so forgiving. Johns looks up to her for an emotional advice the same way how Sherlock uses his inner Mycroft. And I see Sherlock saying bye to her, is not that he also sees her, but he acknowledges that John does.

 

But I don't think that John only accepts he wants to be the man that Mary thought he was. He accepts he isn't that man, and that is okay. That's why Sherlock says "even you". Even Johns is just a human being in the end. And I find it so incredibly beautiful coming from Sherlock - another one who tries to live up to impossible standards.

THIS.

 

 

 

That's a makeup and lighting issue, I can't fathom why no one involved picked up on it and said something. They pulled off the right appearance for him in the plane scenes in TAB, and he looks like the same old Sherlock in TLD

 

Many people complained about it, and Claire (the make-up artist) was surprised and terryfied herself. I have a little theory. I suspect the problem might be the lighting.

 

As it always was with film, also digital cameras see colors differently than human eye (do you know you can use your digital camera to see a remote control device firing IR rays?) Human eye also much better adjusts to different lighting conditions, also based on our memory about how things suppose to look like. So, if they have used another kind of lamps to add to the blueish tone of TST, rather than leaving it to post production, cameras could react differently to the make-up pigments, and this yellowish tone on Ben's face could be invisible for anyone on set, and appeared on the recorded material first. It's not only Ben, btw, if you look at other faces closely. Ben just needs much more make-up than others so it's more visible.

 

 

JP, are you saying that the other episodes were shot on film, but T6T was shot digitally? Because that would explain almost everything that's bothering me right there, except for this ... surely someone must have noticed at some point. Why wasn't an adjustment made then? "Money" is the most obvious answer, but I have a hard time understanding why this wouldn't have been caught the first time anyone watched some of the footage. At any rate, I've seen a few other things shot digitally, and they had the same effect on me ... they look cheap. I think there was an episode of ... oh geez, I don't remember now, some cop show or something. I remember them making a big deal about how it was their first episode shot in digital ... and I thought it looked awful.

 

I don't care much for digital animation either, I generally prefer the hand-drawn stuff. Although it's been getting better, I thought Zootopia worked well. But I guess I'm just an old fogey. *sigh*

 

Hope it's okay to post a link to a spoiler-free review of The Final Problem here: http://www.sherlockology.com/news/2017/1/13/final-problem-review1-130117.

 

I will comment more on it later, as I think it is super exciting, but I'm on my mobile phone, so long posts are exhausting.

 

Not looking, not looking!!!! :D (Thanks for the spoiler box!)!

[J.P.]

 

JP, are you saying that the other episodes were shot on film, but T6T was shot digitally?

No, sorry for not being clear. I'm saying that both methods of filming have issues with color (and other things, btw). I think all Sherlock was shot digitally, but in TST they might have used different light that was a bit not good, because the camera saw the colors differently that people who were on the set. Why it wasn't dealt with in post-production is another question.

 

BTW, it's not that I know everything about filming. It's only guessing, based on the bits about photography I know and LOTR documentaries ;)

[Arcadia]

@BLS_Pro: rather than requoting your whole piece, let me just respond briefly. I can't argue with your conclusions, because you clearly have more knowledge of the process and the terminology than I do. And I don't disagree that ultimately the final product relies on a number of factors outside of the director's control. Heck, I'm sure even the show runners don't get everything their way all the time.
 
But I wasn't really intending to imply that I thought only the director was at fault. What I really meant to do was try to figure out why T6T disappointed me; and what jumped out at me, over and over again, was the way it looked.

 

And of course, some of the plot points and dialog were not to my liking, either. And some of the performances were off, here and there. It's just that those things didn't bother me as much as the visuals did.
 
So no insult to anyone in the industry intended, k?  And I'll take your word for it on the whys and wherefors of filmmaking, I certainly wouldn't know. Although I do find it fascinating, so it's nice to have your insight.

[BLS_Pro]

So no insult to anyone in the industry intended, k?

 

Oh, I never took any of your comments as insults to anyone.  As you say, you were complaining about the "look" and attributing it to the director.  I was just trying to explain how, especially on television, the "look" is more attributable to the show runner (and writer, since they are essentially the same in this instance).  That's all.  No offense and no worries. 

 

[T.o.b.y]

Sorry for just jumping in without quotes, I am on my phone and I haven't figured out how to multiquote using this little machine yet.

 

Personally, I think it would be positively brilliant if Sherlock's words to Henry ("you were just a child, you couldn't cope") would turn out to apply to him as well in regards to his memory of Euros and Redbeard. I love foreshadowing. For me, that's the opposite of bad writing.

 

About Mary: I get what they mean her to represent, I just don't find the way they did it convincing. It's one of those instances where I think I know what they're trying to show me, I just think the picture looks like something else and it bothers me.

 

But I do love how Sherlock acknowledges her presence at the end. It's his way of letting John know he understands what's been going on with him and it's all fine.

 

I love Sherlock's character development. I miss the sociopath but I am glad to get more and more glimpses of the original Mr Holmes. And he will never be ordinary.

[BLS_Pro]

Personally, I think it would be positively brilliant if Sherlock's words to Henry ("you were just a child, you couldn't cope") would turn out to apply to him as well in regards to his memory of Euros and Redbeard. I love foreshadowing. For me, that's the opposite of bad writing.

 

Foreshadowing isn't what I am identifying here as bad writing.  My problem is having UNIQUE and IMPROBABLE events replicated and tied together by nothing but coincidence - from repression of a tragedy as a child being transformed into an entirely other event, right down to the detail of another person being mentally transformed into a dog, to another individual who knows the truth purposefully keeping it from him.  That is NOT 'foreshadowing'.  It is bizarre 'coincidence' of the WORST sort.

 

It's like one character having a relationship with another, moving on, then years later discovering they each had separately and coincidentally been shipwrecked, orphaned, and raised by apes from birth. That isn't foreshadowing.  That's just REALLY BAD writing.

 

[Arcadia]

I keep getting the impression they will be going for 'repressed memories'.  So Sherlock may have known about Eurus as a young boy, but as an adult has no memory of her at all  - except maybe the flashes we keep getting of kids playing near the water - which should be clues to him.  That we don't see him thinking about them at all as clues to something is the only thing which 'seems implausible' to me.  For the man who regards his mind so crucially, anything in his mind which he can't account for should jump out at him as important, especially if it keeps repeating.

 

All I can think is that they ARE jumping out as important. He just hasn't been able to make the connection. Because we haven't reached that part of the story yet. :D

 

 

I need a second view to spot the lie in Lying Detective. Some ppl I'd read, stil haven't get it.

 

Which makes Sherlock's fear of dying a lie (oh, you bastard!), and Sherlock a beeping fine actor.

 

You're just now getting that, are you?

 

 

There are so many paths in this episode and so many little tiny funny bits - we will have our fun with it forever. :D

 

This is the old good Sherlock for me: first you just watch and go with the story and emotions. Second time you notice something isn't quite right, so you watch again to discover things might be not what you thought they were.

 

There is something bothering me about the note. Faith have written it three years ago, and Sherlock deducted it's history. Does it mean that Faith indeed moved into a flat with a tiny kitchen, or was the paper prepared? Because in the mortuary* she didn't look like she's in any kind of trouble or alienated from her father.

My theory is, it means Euros obtained it some time ago, and she's the one who pinned it to the wall. Before that, Smith (or someone) kept it in a book. (Why did Smith keep it, that's the big question.)

 

And I further deduce that's why her living space was so small that the paper was bleached the way it was; because she was in a prison cell or sanitarium room, or something like that. Not a kitchen. Although I'm not sure why the cooking smells would be there, in that case.

 

Do we have another parallel versions of the story like in ASIB? (Sherlock grieving after Irene vs Sherlock knowing she's alive) Because the way it is shown, Faith could as well be a hallucination.

I think that's what we're supposed to believe at first, but when Sherlock finds the note, he realizes she was real after all. I still think someone was interfering with the video feed so that the watchers couldn't be quite sure she was there. But she definitely was, imo.

 

BTW, watching it for the second time, I couldn't believe I hadn't seen that Faith and the Lady in Red are two different women!

I know! As ever, I see but do not observe!

 

*didn't they use the word morgue for the rooms at St. Bart's?

Yes, but a mortuary is a different thing from a morgue. So -- assuming they were using the terminology correctly -- where Molly works is a morgue; which is where autopsies take place. The place in TLD was a mortuary, where the bodies are prepared for burial.

 

 

JP, are you saying that the other episodes were shot on film, but T6T was shot digitally?

No, sorry for not being clear. I'm saying that both methods of filming have issues with color (and other things, btw). I think all Sherlock was shot digitally, but in TST they might have used different light that was a bit not good, because the camera saw the colors differently that people who were on the set. Why it wasn't dealt with in post-production is another question.

 

OKay, thanks. And yes, that is my ultimate question ... why the decision to have that episode look so different. *sigh* I suppose we'll never know.

[BLS_Pro]

 

I keep getting the impression they will be going for 'repressed memories'.  So Sherlock may have known about Eurus as a young boy, but as an adult has no memory of her at all  - except maybe the flashes we keep getting of kids playing near the water - which should be clues to him.  That we don't see him thinking about them at all as clues to something is the only thing which 'seems implausible' to me.  For the man who regards his mind so crucially, anything in his mind which he can't account for should jump out at him as important, especially if it keeps repeating.

 

All I can think is that they ARE jumping out as important. He just hasn't been able to make the connection. Because we haven't reached that part of the story yet. :D

Except this is the man who can't leave a random "loose thread" alone.  He will focus on it to the detriment of everything else.  And that is when it is about seemingly unimportant things - like something missing on a table.  If it something as important to him as his MIND, then for him to not be shown doing ANYTHING about them -  just SEEING them but never being shown to consider them again in ANY way - is BAD characterization.  So, if you are correct and the flashes of memory ARE jumping out to HIM as important, then the LACK of him pursuing them (while pursuing every other imaginable, unimportant case) is a betrayal of character by the writer. 

 

And I would suggest that they are NOT jumping out at him as important because, if he was puzzling over something of such import but couldn't get anywhere with it then, as Mrs. Hudson pointed out, it would be stabbed on the mantle.  ;)

 

(Edit: that last is intended as a joke, because Sherlock does NOT do that with every problem he can't solve.  Mrs Hudson was in on the Game and pointing John in the right direction - as Sherlock had been having her do all through the episode.  She'd seen the video and knew what it said and where Sherlock had put it and what he was doing to himself for John because of it etc.)

 

we haven't reached that part of the story yet

Which would mean the writers are sacrificing characterization to plot - one of the major problems with T6T.  They're moving pieces around the board without regard to HOW they get there - simply because they need them to be in certain positions for the plot to work. :(

 

 

that is my ultimate question ... why the decision to have that episode look so different.

Probably the same unknown reason the episode was written so differently, especially the stepping outside of the story with those Sherlock Narrations at the beginning and end. 

 

As you say, we may never know.  :(

[BLS_Pro]

 

 I still think someone was interfering with the video feed so that the watchers couldn't be quite sure she was there. But she definitely was, imo.

 

She was there, as Eurus explicitly admits.  As to someone "interfering with the video feed", I might buy that if the writers hadn't also had Mrs. Hudson ask 'What friend' - which exists for the sole purpose of giving the -audience- the impression Faith was a figment of Sherlock's imagination, when in fact it was just a COINCIDENCE (again) that Mrs H HAPPENED not to see Eurus because she'd already stepped outside. 

 

As to the video feeds, that's just another cheat by the writers.  Recall both Sherlock AND Eurus are standing in the middle of an empty street when the helicopter flies overhead and sees them them.  She might be able to avoid or interfere with the cameras, but she is NOT invisible.  So even if the writers later try to use the excuse that she did mess with the feed so Mycroft and others who might recognize her wouldn't see her, that just won't fly.