Episode 4.3 "The Final Problem"

[BLS_Pro]

 

Yeah, I have to admit, I feel bad that the writers are given such a hard time. I too have had little imagination concerning certain things... like how Mary didn't seem to be sorry for what she did to Sherlock in HLV (not until TST, anyway). But HLV didn't portray Mary as a villain, just a very desperate person, and Sherlock forgave her, so that should have been enough for me.

 

Point is, I get why people obsess over the little things - it's because we care so much about the show - but I also think the writers deserve more credit than they are currently getting over series 4.

 

Questions of psychology and motivation are complex - especially since humans can and do knowingly and/or unknowningly accept contradictions.  It isn't in areas where the writers are purposefully being ambiguous or requiring you to do some deep thinking that I was saying is likely insanity inducing for them (which is why I didn't attack jadpdr's other examples).  It is things which should require no explanation and certainly no miracles to explain - so long as even a LITTLE bit of thought is given to them.  Examples like this one are why the writers suggest people 'go read a children's book'.  While there may be MANY, MANY things which are a challenge the writers set for their audience to work understand, the above is not something adults should need explained to them.

 

[sherlockandjohn]

Actually, this episode made me like Mycroft and Sherlock's relationship infinitely more. Look at the fact that Sherlock remembered Mycroft's Lady Bracknell, and praised him for it- that shows a wonderful sort of closeness that I didn't realise they had. I think they spent a lot of their younger years sparring, but there has always been a lot of caring underlying it. Maybe Mycroft was misguided to keep so many secrets, but he went to such crazy lengths to protect Sherlock, that I can't dislike him for it. And Sherlock actually defends Mycroft to his parents. It is so lovely to see them finally, openly, on the same side.

 

I agree, and I thought it was one of the best things about the episode. I'm not even a Mycroft fan - he ridicules Sherlock too much - but I've always felt that he loves Sherlock... and I believed that Sherlock loves him too, despite his many scathing remarks directed towards his brother. It was nice to finally see Sherlock acknowledge their brotherly bond in several wonderful scenes.

 

Another BTW - Molly, in this episode, is the mirror of Eurus.  Both are a "unmarried woman, distant from her close relatives...acquainted with the process of death, but unsentimental about the necessity of disposal" "unmarried; practical about death; alone."  "I Love You" is "true" about how both Molly and Eurus feel about Sherlock.  Both love Sherlock but are not loved by him.

 

There was something about that line, "unmarried, practical about death, alone," that made me think of both Molly AND Eurus, but I hadn't had time to process it yet. I think you're right, and probably this is the reason Eurus included Molly in her "games" to get Sherlock's attention.

[BLS_Pro]

Another BTW - I like the echo in the S4 episodes - of "someone" "anyone" and "no one".  Cute. 

[sherlockandjohn]

Did anyone else scream at Sherlock, when John said, "Vatican Cameos," and Sherlock took out his earpiece?! Seriously, danger flags going up all over the place! Sherlock, you idiot!

 

I do think I understand why he did it, though. At least my interpretation of it is that he wanted to gain his sisters trust.

[Arcadia]

This has been a fascinating and instructional discussion. I just learned all kinds of cool stuff. You gotta love Sherlock for that if nothing else; it stimulates thinking!
 
However.....
 

Moderator Comment:

This is just to remind some folks that using ALL CAPS is akin to shouting. Some limited amount of all caps is allowed on this forum; when it's used sparingly for emphasis, for instance. However, I saw instances recently of it being used rather liberally, to the point where it approached shouting. And that is not permitted, as per the forum guidelines.
 
In addition, while many instances of sarcasm are acceptable for the purposes of humor, using it to put down other forum members goes too far. Disagreements are fine. Opposing opinions are fine. Joshing between forum members who like each other and know it's just for fun ... that's fine. But put downs are not.
 
Most of the time, the conversation here has been conducted in a lively but friendly and courteous manner, with everyone sharing instead of beating down someone else's observations. So I know you can do it! So please think of this as just a friendly little reminder to respect each other, okay? Okay.

 
Now, back to the conversation, and we'll get this episode figured out yet, gang!

[BLS_Pro]

Another BTW - John viciously attacking Sherlock (in the morgue)  is a mirror to Eurus' viciously attacking Sherlock (since childhood).  Both are instances of a person who loves Sherlock 'hating' him for the same reason: supposedly taking away that which they love (in John's case: Mary; in Eurus' case: Sherlock).  And both of them thus need their souls to be 'saved' from this loss by Sherlock.

[sherlockandjohn]

 

This has the video with the actors about the ILY you scene. I think someone asked for the reference.

 

http://jeni2727.tumblr.com/post/155957319627/alphielj-this-played-after-the-tfp-i-saw-a-few

 

Fantastic, thanks!

I think the love feelings of Sherlock have yet to be cultivated. Molly is happy anyway.

 

 

That was a nice video! I agree; I like how BC talks about Sherlock still having to discover his feelings (whatever those feelings may be). Makes me think that there is still potential for character development, even though Sherlock has already grown so much. But I will also be happy leaving it up to my own imagination

[bedelia1984]

 

Point is, I get why people obsess over the little things - it's because we care so much about the show - but I also think the writers deserve more credit than they are currently getting over series 4.

 

 

Yes, especially some of the poor reviews online seem quite unfair, when you consider the quality of this episode compared to a lot of other shows on TV. The fact they have so many relationships, interactions and concepts that we all can see in so many different ways, must mean they are doing something right.

 

And, this one in particular, had so many small but huge moments for the characters, that a little outlandishness from the plot can be forgiven

 

 

 

TBH Euros said  that every time she closed her eyes she was on the plane again so she could switch to her little girl persona quite easily. She just has to close her eyes. It's a contrived explanation but this episode is full of them. 

 

I also find it weird that Adult Euros knows everything about Child Euros but Child Euros doesn't seem to know anything about Adult Euros. This is evident when Sherlock mentions Redbeard to Child Euros and Child Euros says 'Who's Redbeard?'

 

I also don't find Euros to be as sympathetic as the writers seem to want her to be.

 

Euros hid Victor, a little boy, away and refused to say where he was unless people could solve her puzzle. Victor was never found and that traumatised Sherlock. We don't get all the information of how Euros responded after committing this atrocity. However when Sherlock first meets her in this episode, Euros says that the last thing she told him was to go get her favourite hairband from mummy. Judging by the fact that her mum had her hairband, I'd say it's probable that her mum was punishing her (by taking her favourite hairband away) for not telling them about Victor. 

 

Euros said she made this request to Sherlock on the day that she was taken away. So it was the same day she burnt the house down. In the flashback of when she lights the matches, we hear background conversations of presumably her parents  arguing. Her mum mentions how they can't make Euros tell them or do anything. Her mum presumably took away her favourite hairband to try and coerce Euros to cooperate but it Euros still refused.

 

 I'm guessing what happened on Euros' last day with the Holmes is:

 

1. Euros was being punished by her mum by having her favourite hairband taken away. Her mum said 'I'll only return it if you tell us where Victor is.' However Euros refused to say.

 

2. Sherlock couldn't wait. He begged Euros for information of where Victor was because he couldn't solve her puzzle. Then Euros responded by saying something like 'I'll give you another clue if you can get my favourite hairband back from mummy.'

 

3. Euros wasn't cooperating so her parents got into an argument on what to do with her. Mr. Holmes seemed insistent on punishing her (as he said 'She knows where he is') while Mrs. Holmes seemed to realise that coercion wasn't going to work on Euros (she said 'We can't make her do anything').

 

4. Euros was upset because she overheard her parents' argument. It didn't sound like she was going to get her hairband back anytime soon because her parents were divided on how to deal with her. Also it's clear that Sherlock didn't get her hairband back.

 

5. Thus Euros decided to burn the house down in rage. After that Uncle Ruddi decides to take her away to an asylum. However Euros then decides to burn down that asylum as well so then she's moved to Sherrinford.

 

^This is why I don't like Euros. When she doesn't get what she wants, she just lashes out at anyone even if they have nothing to do with it. It also looks like she didn't care about Sherlock being traumatised for losing Victor. All she cared about was herself. If that isn't selfish then I don't know what is.

 

 

Also I think it should be noted that Euros probably was more closer to her mother than father. Remember in that flashback of her lighting the matches, her father seems to be the one who's more insistent on punishing her. Additionally when Mycroft tells them about Euros being alive in the end, it's only Mrs. Holmes who gets out of her chair. I'd say that Euros had a more negative opinion of her father because he was more strict with her.

 

This dislike for her father and closeness to her mother may have materialised in her Child Euros persona. Child Euros only talks about her mum and never her dad. 

 

 

Thanks for this really well organised estimation of the Eurus timeline. I can picture the sequence now, and it starts to become more clear for me. Like you, I don't have a great fondness for Eurus as a character- which is not to say that I don't want to see her onscreen again, but I don't believe she has real affection for any of her family and suspect she's a continued threat to them.

 

I was watching The Sign of Three tonight, and Sherlock says about his mother that she 'understands very little' and also that he keeps a list of grievances against her, whereas Mycroft has a whole file. Their father doesn't seem to ever get much of a mention. I wonder is there any remote possibility that Eurus was the product of an affair, at a time when the father was away? The fact that we don't know at lot about their relationship at that time, that the father was less close to her, maybe it is an outside possibility? I am, as an outside chance picturing her somehow being Moriarty's sister, and having weird sort brother/sister slightly incestuous relationship. She is so different in personality from Mycroft and Sherlock too.

 

Small fact I find interesting- was researching Moriarty's brother and ACD described him as a station master, so it is cool that in TFP he owns a TV station. Between that and the fact ACD gave the two brothers the same name (and forgetting that it is probably an oversight)- they could surely use that as proof that two Moriarty's is a 'canon' idea, and bring back Andrew Scott as the twin? (he's just so good in the role, sorry, I know it is clutching at straws).

[BLS_Pro]

 

 

Point is, I get why people obsess over the little things - it's because we care so much about the show - but I also think the writers deserve more credit than they are currently getting over series 4.

 

 

Yes, especially some of the poor reviews online seem quite unfair, when you consider the quality of this episode compared to a lot of other shows on TV. The fact they have so many relationships, interactions and concepts that we all can see in so many different ways, must mean they are doing something right.

 

And, this one in particular, had so many small but huge moments for the characters, that a little outlandishness from the plot can be forgiven

 

I'll say that I can understand the poor reviews.  Before I grasped what they were trying to do, this episode seemed like a real departure from and contradiction to, everything which had come before - including the point of Sherlock not even solving anything about the case really.  It seemed a mess and a betrayal of "the quality" of this show, making it seem worse than many of the 'ordinary' shows on TV.

 

Indeed, even after understanding WHY they did everything they did, much of my plot and character complaints remain.  What they were able to achieve was great.  But they did it at the cost of many of the things which made people love the show in the first place.  I don't think it's "unfair" for people to complain about that fact. 

 

If they had been able to integrate the plot, character, AND theme as they did in TLD, people would be (deservedly) raving. 

[sherlockandjohn]

 

Small fact I find interesting- was researching Moriarty's brother and ACD described him as a station master, so it is cool that in TFP he owns a TV station. Between that and the fact ACD gave the two brothers the same name (and forgetting that it is probably an oversight)- they could surely use that as proof that two Moriarty's is a 'canon' idea, and bring back Andrew Scott as the twin? (he's just so good in the role, sorry, I know it is clutching at straws).

 

 

It is hard to imagine Sherlock without Moriarty in it in some way, isn't it? Although, it did work in several episodes, actually, but most of us have always seemed reluctant to let him go. At the same time, it doesn't seem reasonable to keep him in just for further flashbacks, and if there was a twin, surely Mycroft and Sherlock would know about it by now...

 

Oh well, doesn't matter - bring him back, just for the fun of it! I'd even accept the 'fake death' explanation just to see him again :D (Kidding... maybe)

[bedelia1984]

 

 

 

Point is, I get why people obsess over the little things - it's because we care so much about the show - but I also think the writers deserve more credit than they are currently getting over series 4.

 

 

Yes, especially some of the poor reviews online seem quite unfair, when you consider the quality of this episode compared to a lot of other shows on TV. The fact they have so many relationships, interactions and concepts that we all can see in so many different ways, must mean they are doing something right.

 

And, this one in particular, had so many small but huge moments for the characters, that a little outlandishness from the plot can be forgiven

 

I'll say that I can understand the poor reviews.  Before I grasped what they were trying to do, this episode seemed like a real departure from and contradiction to, everything which had come before - including the point of Sherlock not even solving anything about the case really.  It seemed a mess and a betrayal of "the quality" of this show, making it seem worse than many of the 'ordinary' shows on TV.

 

Indeed, even after understanding WHY they did everything they did, much of my plot and character complaints remain.  What they were able to achieve was great.  But they did it at the cost of many of the things which made people love the show in the first place.  I don't think it's "unfair" for people to complain about that fact. 

 

If they had been able to integrate the plot, character, AND theme as they did in TLD, people would be (deservedly) raving. 

 

 

I don't think it is unfair to complain either, but just that there could be more credit given for the things that they got right, to balance it out. I see a lot of reviews saying the writers have lost the plot, gone James Bond, and talking about the poor ratings etc. A lot of criticisms are ones I have thought of myself already. But they don't focus so much on the casting of Sian, which was inspired, the phone call scene, which was wonderful, and all of the Mycroft stuff that was so well done, the family backstory that we did get, which was interesting and left me wanting more. They have used elements here, like Redbeard, for which they put years of work and character development into the set up, and whether you like the result or not, there is a craftmanship to that sort of writing not often seen on television.

 

I suppose it is hard for me to imagine being a critic who is not that invested in the show and just judges the episode 'as it is'.

 

About the ratings, do people think that's a genuine danger, to the show not returning? I'm still thinking availability of the stars is the main issue, and as everyone still loves the project, it may well continue. Am I living in a dream world?

 

 

 

 

It is hard to imagine Sherlock without Moriarty in it in some way, isn't it?   Although, it did work in several episodes, actually, but most of us have always seemed reluctant to let him go. At the same time, it doesn't seem reasonable to keep him in just for further flashbacks, and if there was a twin, surely Mycroft and Sherlock would know about it by now...

 

Oh well, doesn't matter - bring him back, just for the fun of it! I'd even accept the 'fake death' explanation just to see him again  :D (Kidding... maybe)

 

What I find really weird is that he has a brother and neither Sherlock nor Mycroft have mentioned him, and we haven't seen a picture either? Especially now we know he helped Eurus. Heck, I'd even take Andrew Scott with a prosthetic nose, if they can't be twins!  :lol:

[Surelock]

 

 

Point is, I get why people obsess over the little things - it's because we care so much about the show - but I also think the writers deserve more credit than they are currently getting over series 4.

 

 

Yes, especially some of the poor reviews online seem quite unfair, when you consider the quality of this episode compared to a lot of other shows on TV. The fact they have so many relationships, interactions and concepts that we all can see in so many different ways, must mean they are doing something right.

 

And, this one in particular, had so many small but huge moments for the characters, that a little outlandishness from the plot can be forgiven

 

 

You know it's not just fans that are giving this season poor reviews. It's professional critics as well.

 

Season 4 of Sherlock got 59% on Rotten Tomatoes.

 

For comparison's sake, Season 1 got 100%, Season 2 got 100% and Season 3 got 97%. Dropping from 97% to 59% is quite bad.

 

Metacritic hasn't released its released its score yet however it has made 3 reviews it used public. 2/3 of the reviews are mixed (which is the 40 - 60 range).

 

For comparison, none of the previous seasons ever got any mixed reviews. All the reviews were positive. Season 1 got 85, Season 2 got 91 and Season 3 got 88. It's expected for Season 4's score to be lower here as well. 

 

Season 4 isn't getting critical acclaim which feels very off to many Sherlock fans because Sherlock is a show that has been critically acclaimed since its first season. I can see why so many people are angry at Moffatiss for the new direction they took the series with in Season 4.

 

This makes me wonder if the poor reviews would convince Moffatiss to not take the next season of Sherlock (assuming they make it) in a new direction like they did with Season 4.

 

[BLS_Pro]

About the ratings, do people think that's a genuine danger, to the show not returning? I'm still thinking availability of the stars is the main issue, and as everyone still loves the project, it may well continue. Am I living in a dream world?

 

I don't think the ratings would ultimately be a hindrance.  I think the comparative dip in ratings wouldn't be enough to prevent a return (but it might be enough, given the criticisms the BBC execs would have seen as widespread, to have those execs exercise a bit more control over the content).  I believe the real question is whether the creators and the stars have a desire to come back.  From the way I understand the story, it seems like the writers did reach the climax of what they were ultimately trying to achieve.  They even explicitly say it is at least the end of a "chapter" in the life and writing of Sherlock Holmes.  Whether they want to pursue another chapter and have to come up with as compelling a theme for it, remains to be seen.  And I think that whatever they come up with as the new theme would be what ultimately draws the actors back - or has them shrug their shoulders and walk away to other projects.

[bedelia1984]

Yes, after reading what Surelock and BLS Pro have added, I have to say, the reviews plus the ratings do make me worry about the show's future.

 

It was a difficult season, and parts were actually difficult to like too, so there is a lot to criticise, but it is still such a good show. 59% seems harsh doesn't it? I might give TST about that (in fact I think I roughly did, in our poll), but I would rate the other two higher.

 

I think they made a few mistakes this year honestly, but not so many that I wouldn't love to see another season.

 

As well as that, I think if they come back, they really need to rethink the tone. They've just gone too dark. It's not fun for a casual viewer anymore and there are too few laughs. The funnier episodes are probably actually harder to write, but I think they really need them, to sustain the show. Even TAB felt lighter than this season.

[sherlockandjohn]

Well, maybe we should go to review sites and try to help even out the score? Critics usually shout louder, but it doesn't have to be that way.

 

One of the things I love most about this episode, and all of series 4, is how it connects with the overall story and character arc. Sherlock continues to change, to understand the consequences of his actions, to get to know himself better, and to let his guard down. John, too, has a moment of really letting his guard down, and the result for both men is that they are able to be much more honest - with themselves and with each other.

 

The Final Problem - while focused quite a lot on a new character - brings Sherlock and John to a point in their friendship where they stand side by side, with no reservations. And that's how it ends. It mirrors the beginning of the show... I keep thinking of that moment in ASiP when Sherlock and John walk away together at the end. It's magic on screen for me, and from the first moment I watched it, I knew that this was going to be a great friendship.

 

When it comes to Sherlock's character arc, Lestrade sums it up - Sherlock has gone from being a great man to being a good one. Again, this mirrors ASiP.

 

Then there's all the other relationships... Everything is tied up neatly. I know I'm just sentimental, though, and as such, I really love this series and this episode.

[sherlockandjohn]

 

 

 

It is hard to imagine Sherlock without Moriarty in it in some way, isn't it?   Although, it did work in several episodes, actually, but most of us have always seemed reluctant to let him go. At the same time, it doesn't seem reasonable to keep him in just for further flashbacks, and if there was a twin, surely Mycroft and Sherlock would know about it by now...

 

Oh well, doesn't matter - bring him back, just for the fun of it! I'd even accept the 'fake death' explanation just to see him again  :D (Kidding... maybe)

 

What I find really weird is that he has a brother and neither Sherlock nor Mycroft have mentioned him, and we haven't seen a picture either? Especially now we know he helped Eurus. Heck, I'd even take Andrew Scott with a prosthetic nose, if they can't be twins!  :lol:

 

Moriarty has a brother? In this BBC version of Sherlock? I have to quote the man himself and say: "What did I miss?"

[Pamela]

From what I've heard and read, if they do continue, it will be in a totally different vein, lighter, doing cases, things like that. This 'arc' is complete.

[bedelia1984]

 

 

 

 

It is hard to imagine Sherlock without Moriarty in it in some way, isn't it?   Although, it did work in several episodes, actually, but most of us have always seemed reluctant to let him go. At the same time, it doesn't seem reasonable to keep him in just for further flashbacks, and if there was a twin, surely Mycroft and Sherlock would know about it by now...

 

Oh well, doesn't matter - bring him back, just for the fun of it! I'd even accept the 'fake death' explanation just to see him again  :D (Kidding... maybe)

 

What I find really weird is that he has a brother and neither Sherlock nor Mycroft have mentioned him, and we haven't seen a picture either? Especially now we know he helped Eurus. Heck, I'd even take Andrew Scott with a prosthetic nose, if they can't be twins!  :lol:

 

Moriarty has a brother? In this BBC version of Sherlock? I have to quote the man himself and say: "What did I miss?"

 

 

Yes yes Eurus mentions him, says he owns a TV station and helped her broadcast the message!

 

Also, just went to Rotten Tomatoes and the audience ratings are only 32%!! A whole lot of people only gave the season one half star. I call that outrageous. I left one good rating, not sure it'll help much as nearly 2000 people have reviewed it.

[sherlockandjohn]

From what I've heard and read, if they do continue, it will be in a totally different vein, lighter, doing cases, things like that. This 'arc' is complete.

 

I would love to see one final episode like that, but without character or story arc, there seems to be little point in continuing the show. Could be wrong, though

[bedelia1984]

I'd love to see it lighter, but still with character development. To me, an episode like TEH has a near-perfect balance of humour, character and plot.

[sherlockandjohn]

 

 

Moriarty has a brother? In this BBC version of Sherlock? I have to quote the man himself and say: "What did I miss?"

 

 

Yes yes Eurus mentions him, says he owns a TV station and helped her broadcast the message!

 

Also, just went to Rotten Tomatoes and the audience ratings are only 32%!! A whole lot of people only gave the season one half star. I call that outrageous. I left one good rating, not sure it'll help much as nearly 2000 people have reviewed it.

 

 

Goody! Now I've got something to look for when I watch the episode again

 

That sounds outrageous to me as well. I can't help but think that a lot of people are simply frustrated that it didn't turn out how they wanted, and they forget to acknowledge how good the series is compared to so much other television. But of course people can do whatever they want, and my interpretation is obviously affected by my own feelings about series 4. I just hope Moffat and Gatiss get the positive feedback as well. I think they deserve it.

 

[sherlockandjohn]

I'd love to see it lighter, but still with character development. To me, an episode like TEH has a near-perfect balance of humour, character and plot.

 

Agreed, but the backdrop was Sherlock being a jerk after returning from exile, having pretended to be dead for two years At this point, a similar plot would be considered character regression, not development. I love TEH, don't get me wrong, but I don't want to see Sherlock being that ignorant of someone's feelings again - at least not in such a serious context. He's grown too much for that.

[MycroftsUmbrella]

Wow, I've only been away for less than a day and only just made my way through the five pages of threat I missed in the meantime. There's been some seriously deep almost philosophical discussion going on and although my tired brain is struggeling keeping up at the moment, I do want to say that I loved reading the different views and theories.

 

Sorry to jump back a bit, but there is just something I wanted to add about whether the past Holmes family has been as strange (as ever so slightly suggested by the gravestones). It wouldn't surprise me at all if their ancestors had been pretty strange in the eyes of others. I know we know very little about the previous generation but for a start there is to consider that mother Holmes was pretty smart herself and only stopped doing whatever she was doing to care for her family. I'm pretty sure she would have had a very interesting life before their children.

 

Then there is her brother? Or is it the father's brother? I'd like to believe it's the mother's brother, Uncle Rudy. He is a cross dresser who by the looks of it had a reasonably influential position in either the government or intelligence or how else would he have been in a position to move young Eurus to Sherringford. Also Mycroft keeps talking about how he has 'taken over' a lot of things from him including Eurus care, which suggests that he might have been as powerful as Mycroft, maybe more or less so, we just don't know. It would make sense to me that he was and that the Holmes family has had an influence in the shadow government for quite some time. Then the mum's kids turn out to be a murdering 'age defining genius' psychopath, a smart self-proclaimed sociopaths/ crime solving detective with superior deduction skills and a completely closed-off though super smart and powerful leader of some shadow-government/ intelligence organisation(s). So it sounds to me a bit like some of it might be genetic.

 

I'd personally love to know more about their family history. Shame we'll probably never know. I can't see either of the Holmes siblings ever having children though (in future storylines), which is a bit of a shame. Surely this amount of intellect shouldn't go wasted. ;) But then maybe that's for the better, who knows what a next generation of Holmes children would turn out to be like, with either Mycroft, Sherlock or Eurus as a parent :o

[Pamela]

It's too bad people have rated/are rating TFP based on their initial knee-jerk reactions. Mine wasn't good either after the first viewing. Another factor is, who are these people? Casual viewers? If they are, then of course they wouldn't "get it." At least faithful Sherlock watchers would understand what was going on.

 

Okay, yes, I'm a defender.

[BLS_Pro]

I think one of the excuses Moffat et al would use to "explain" S4 and all its problems - especially the fact that Final doesn't see him doing much 'detecting' - is something he's said in the past:  Sherlock is"not a detective show; it's a show about a detective."