Episode 4.3 "The Final Problem"

[J.P.]

I would agree that your POV is quite unusual - as I would agree that your POV was not the makers POV or their intent.  The latter was my only point - not that someone couldn't somehow come to a different conclusion. 

 

I start to realize that it looks like a kind of anti-JL conspiracy of my own! And it's actually pretty funny. I'm really glad they left me Mycroft as a spirit animal, even if a bit ruffled one.

[Arcadia]

@Bedelia ... since you saw it in the cinema, can you confirm what the "bonus footage" consists of?

[BLS_Pro]

 

I think the huge waits between seasons are starting to take their toll.  Expectations are raised too high for the rare event that is an episode.

 

I think you've got something there. We had too much time to imagine what the "perfect" season would be like, and of course we didn't get it.

I have to disagree.  For instance, the wait time between 4.2 and 4.3 was a week, not two years.  And I surmised much of Final's story points.  And I didn't even try to imagine what the "perfect" episode would be like.  I just knew that examples LIKE 4.2 - and Bride - meant it COULD be good, even (especially) KNOWING the story points.  The disappointment in 4.3 came, not as a result of any time between episodes, but as a result of its BAD writing.

 

If I had been able to binge watch 4.2 and 4.3 or had to wait months or years between them, I would still be disappointed in the exact same way and for the exact same reasons.

[J.P.]

 

It isn't WHAT they tried to say which was the problem.  It was the REALLY horrible way they went about saying it.

Even if I was kind of expecting they will go the "normal" way (after all they are normal people, unlike me :P), but I really hoped they will give it to me in a shiny, clever, brillant wrap so I have something to love after all. There are still elements that are moving and well done and brillantly acted, but they don't fit together, don't make a story.

 

I always thought a good allegory for a good story is a bridge - a construction bringing the characters and the audience from A to B savely. I've been thinking I couldn't see the bridge in Sherlock, because there were elements we weren't shown yet, and I expected them to be revealed and put everything together. But it's not a bridge. It's like a half of a bridge, and the other half is… I don't know - a mikado?

[Surelock]

 

Yeah, Mycroft comes out of that whole situation looking like the village idiot. It is what it is

I think they destroyed the characterization of Mycroft in this episode.  He was just contradictory all over the place.  Doesn't want innocent blood on his hands in one scene and casually wants to kill innocent girl on the plane in the next.  John making all the clever deductions rather than Mycroft in the Gov's office.  They made someone we KNOW is demonstrably smart into "the village idiot".

 

 

 

I think it's more that Mycroft just doesn't have first hand experience with these things. He just sits back in his office and gives orders. He doesn't actually participate in the action. That's why he's uncomfortable about participating. I think it makes sense for him to do things like vomit after that director commits suicide. Even in the books, Mycroft basically just sat back in Diogenes Club and had Sherlock do all the practical work.

 

I like how this episode showed Mycroft's vulnerable side but I hate how it wrote him out of the final act. IMO Mycroft should have been in the final act as well as he was largely responsible for what Euros was doing.

[J.P.]

Re Mycroft: it wasn't necessarily glorious how they have shown him, but I think it's still in character - he's a bit like all of us, meat eaters. We don't have a problem with a dead pig on our plate, but how many of us would ba able to make that pig into meat?

[bedelia1984]

@Bedelia ... since you saw it in the cinema, can you confirm what the "bonus footage" consists of?

 

What I saw was just Amanda's segment. There is one part of it I'd like to discuss, but after you've all seen it.

[BLS_Pro]

 

I think it's more that Mycroft just doesn't have first hand experience with these things. He just sits back in his office and gives orders. He doesn't actually participate in the action. That's why he's uncomfortable about participating. I think it makes sense for him to do things like vomit after that director commits suicide. Even in the books, Mycroft basically just sat back in DIogenes Club and had Sherlock do all the practical work.

I agree that he has likely NEVER been the 'bag' man, as it were - he's never been the one to literally pull the trigger.  But it isn't that he's shown as being a coward - that he doesn't have the courage of his convictions.  He explicitly states he doesn't want to be MORALLY responsible for this person's death:  "I can't.  This is murder"  and more specifically "I will not kill.  I will not have blood on my hands".

This isn't about having the "stomach" to kill, but not having the morality to kill.  Yet we KNOW he does have the morality to kill - and to kill innocents.  He DOES have blood on his hands - and he KNOWS it.

 

If this is all about him just being a COWARD about his morals, then that is an even WORSE destruction of his characterization than I was positing.

[Inge l-w]

Oh, I don't know about you personally, and I have certainly never worked in a slaughterhouse, much less an assembly-line one, like in Chicago, but I have killed game over the years, hunting with my family. The rifle in the show was a really good piece of work, although its function escapes me, since it's for bison, and there are no bison to hunt in Europe. They are all farmed and fiercely protected. Wild boar, now...

One of my particularly nagging complaints is how the creators threw away the whole Three Garridebs problem as a sick joke on Euros's part, especially since they b#%%#y well know that there was NO third Garrideb, and one of the two was a fake, a bit like the stunts they pulled on the fandom!

And if they lose the younger generation worldwide, then what?

[BLS_Pro]

Re Mycroft: it wasn't necessarily glorious how they have shown him, but I think it's still in character - he's a bit like all of us, meat eaters. We don't have a problem with a dead pig on our plate, but how many of us would ba able to make that pig into meat?

The analogy isn't a good one.  Most of us don't watch the slaughtering of animals either.  Unlike Mycroft, we are completely separated from the entire process - which is why it would be difficult for us to shoot a pig (though I suspect most of us could do it, and - more importantly - without moral qualm).  But, given his job, there is NO way Mycroft has escaped seeing all sorts of grotesque killings (via surveillance, both up close) as well as the bloody results afterwards in reports.  He has never been squeamish in his job - he wouldn't have gotten as far as he did if he had.  He is knee deep and up to his arms in the process.  So Mycroft is not like "all of us".

 

[BLS_Pro]

BTW - have they posted the Behind the Scenes video yet?  By now someone here has usually provided a link to it.

Also, will they be posting the Mary 'extras' being mentioned?  Or will that have to be acquired on DVD?

[T.o.b.y]

This actually belong more to the "How you relate to Sherlock" thread.

 

It's hardly about TFP. It's about me, and won't make much sense without knowing me for a while now. So you can actually skip it without missing anything in this discussion. I will move it to the other thread, once it stops to be spoilery.

 

 

Ending of TFP left me in the same state as the end of S3: uncontrollably sobbing. For reasons I could not even name. I tried to stay on Twitter or write the first impressions, but I didn't really felt like doing this. Went to bed relatively early, so around 2EM. Could not fall asleep for a while. Dreamt about an evil child thretening people.

 

Woke up with a huge emotional hangover. Felt like I don't want to leave the bed EVER. It's really good that I don't have to go to work. People could ask me why I look so upset, and as an answer I would probably burst into tears.

I was trying to read some reactions, and even wrote mine as a comment on a German blog, then another on the Polish one, but the whole day I was trying to find excuses not to come here. Apparently, when it comes to Sherlock, German and Polish are tools suitable for the more objective discussions, but Enlish is the language to bare my soul.

 

To be disappointed, even very disappointed, is one thing. But I feel as if I've lost a friend. I was prepared for a celebration, but I'm beeping grieving the whole day, and everything that happened in the last 3 years suddenly feels empty and sensless, as if TFP erased all meaning of it all.

 

I couldn't put a finger on what actually upset me so much, until while writing one of the more dry comments, the tears came again. It's the same reason that stirred so much in me before, and why I love the show. I will again quote Toby in her unforgettable post from last year.

 

We also get to see all the drama and hurt and vulnerability that comes with forming ties with other human beings, which for some of us might be the reason why we tried to avoid all that in the first place. "Caring is not an advantage" - what sensitive introvert hasn't sighed that to her- / himself at some point or other? Sherlock doesn't sell us the common storybook idea that love is the solution to every problem. The show's portrayal of love is more problematic, and more realistic and relatable. One might even say the verdict is still open on whether it's worth it for Sherlock. I'd say yes, but I've read plenty of dissenting opinions on that.

 

Well, that's it. The common storybook idea that love is the solution to everything found it's way to the Sherlockverse.

 

Did it though?

 

What did love actually solve? Euros isn't magically cured just because her brother hugged her once in thirty-odd years. She's back at Sherrinford. For the time being, she just isn't talking any more. Big improvement?

 

And wasn't it maybe love, albeit a very twisted version thereof, that drove her to torture Sherlock in the first place? He seems to have been the only person she cared for. Then he was closer to someone else and she hated that and became jealous and killed the someone else. It was a crime of love, disappointed love, and I like that it wasn't of the romantic order.

 

I guess you can say that love made Sherlock's life better in the end. Having friends made him happier and more sane. But is that really so terrible? At least he didn't ride off into the sunset with a domesticated Irene Adler or something like that.

 

 

Oh, J.P. I am terribly sorry. I came on here just now, all elated and bubbly and giggly after a rewatch, a tear in each eye from the ending I didn't dare dream I'd ever get and then I found your post and thought - oh no. I can argue all I want, if the message is ruined for you, that's what it is and it is what it is. I won't offer a hug, not even a virtual one, because I have a feeling you wouldn't like it, but how about a

?

 

They have thorns, you know.

 

 

[bedelia1984]

 

 

I think the huge waits between seasons are starting to take their toll.  Expectations are raised too high for the rare event that is an episode.

 

I think you've got something there. We had too much time to imagine what the "perfect" season would be like, and of course we didn't get it.

I have to disagree.  For instance, the wait time between 4.2 and 4.3 was a week, not two years.  And I surmised much of Final's story points.  And I didn't even try to imagine what the "perfect" episode would be like.  I just knew that examples LIKE 4.2 - and Bride - meant it COULD be good, even (especially) KNOWING the story points.  The disappointment in 4.3 came, not as a result of any time between episodes, but as a result of its BAD writing.

 

If I had been able to binge watch 4.2 and 4.3 or had to wait months or years between them, I would still be disappointed in the exact same way and for the exact same reasons.

 

 

It wasn't the wait between episodes in the season I meant, but more the wait for the season itself- and the not knowing when or if there will be more- I think fans expect that when the three episodes do happen, (and they are so closely released in comparison to the gap between seasons, it almost feels like a binge watching session) they will be very thoroughly thought-out and that every moment will count.

 

I think there are going to be cracks deepening if they were to keep to an every-three-years approach- Rosamund's age will be visible, Una Stubbs might well retire, and they lose momentum in some of the stories they are trying to tell too.

 

I don't think they carried over much suspense from the finale of HLV and though the resolution at the start of TST was a bit weak, I'd say most of us were just glad to be rid of Magnussen and on to the next story. But there was something distant-feeling about the season- I've seen it written elsewhere, and it is true. I think it is partly the writers being so clever at keeping their options open, and the fans happy, that they are afraid to take a definite line in any direction. About what others are saying about ratings- I think they lost casual viewers at TAB- a marvellous episode for the fandom and a very odd journey for the casual viewer.

 

Then, at times they introduce so many little elements- fragments of ACD stories etc, that it feels as if they are worried they will run out of space and time- and the space taken up with that, takes away from having one strong case that sustains an episode, and some strong character development with it, with a good deal less tricks.

 

To me the over-reliance on Mary and Moriarty this season is almost like a band replaying their greatest hits because the new album isn't going so well. I do think they struggled to fall back in to the universe this time. I don't mean to be negative because I would dearly love another season.

[BLS_Pro]

 

What did love actually solve? Euros isn't magically cured just because her brother hugged her once in thirty-odd years. She's back at Sherrinford. For the time being, she just isn't talking any more. Big improvement?

Yes, it is an ENORMOUS improvement for her.  She isn't jealous any more.  She isn't angry any more.  She isn't confused any more.  She isn't alone any more.  She now has what she always wanted: Eurus is LITERALLY playing with her brother Sherlock.

 

[Arcadia]

I loved the show too much, even the worst episodes, but this episode is not worth for another watch.

 

I understand why you feel that way, but look what happened to me ... I didn't like it the first time I saw it, but I liked it quite a bit the second time I saw it. Any expectations I had were gone the second time, and I think I paid more attention to the show as it was, rather than as I hoped it would be. Your call, but maybe you want to give it another try before you give up on it? Just a thought.

 

 

Does she really need to be explained? I'm not sure; I think we've all got enough vague impressions of personality disorders to accept that she's simply batsh*t crazy and will literally do anything, anything at all. She's Sherlock without a conscience, or even an understanding of what a conscience is. She's bored and she wants someone to play with.

I don't think boredom is her motivation.  And, as someone else pointed out, she does have a conscience - at least the little girl form of her does, just as she has a wide range of emotions as the little girl.  That is the problem.  HOW those two disparate 'personalities' are related.  She wants to play - she wants companionship.  She wants love from someone.  That is how John 'saved' Sherlock.  And that is how Eurus needs to be 'saved'.  She needs Sherlock to 'come to her room'.  She has the longing, the desire - not to mention the anger when those desires are not fulfilled. 

 

This is the thread tying both 'personalities' together. 

 

But HOW the disparate personalities manifest from this desire and how they are supposed to work together to the one, PLANNED, goal by Eurus to have the little girl 'saved', is what needs to be explained.  HOW the Games were supposed to lead from one to the other to the room needs to be explained - or at least how she expected them to reach that end - needs to be explained. 

 

In short, EURUS needs to be explained  - explained FAR more and FAR better than she was.

 

 

I agree that a fuller exploration of her character would have 1) been interesting and 2) raised the suspense quotient ... as it is, we have to rely on our stereotypes of what psychopaths are capable of, instead of witnessing what this particular psychopath was capable of (dropping the three Garridebs into the ocean didn't exactly horrify me, because, frankly, I don't know them either.)

 

But to do that, they would have needed to give her more screen time. They needed another episode, imo. Or another half hour tacked on to this one, maybe. But given their time constraints, I can't find it in me to complain too much about spending most of it with Sherlock rather than his nutso sister.

 

I also think we could have used an emotional lull between this episode and the last ... most of us were still recovering from the breach in Sherlock and John's friendship, and how that (potentially) was going to affect them. But they had to rush right into the next thing as if TLD had never happened ... notice that none of the events there even get a nod in this one. Again, it would have been nice if they had constructed these episodes in such a way that the continuity felt more natural. But they didn't, and to be honest, I think I understand why. I think they didn't want to drag it out anymore. For some reason, that feels like the right decision to me.

 

 

visiting her like that; that's a huge sacrifice on Sherlock's part. That takes a big heart. It's not easy dealing with the mentally ill.

"Huge sacrifice"?  What is Sherlock giving up?  And why is what Sherlock giving up supposedly a greater value to him than the 'lesser' value of loving his sister and trying to help her? (If it were the other way around, where he is gaining a greater value for that which he trades - ie he would be profiting).

 

 

Having a profoundly mentally ill person in your family is ... well, in some ways, death would be easier to take. (And now I begin to understand why Sherlock seems to have a rather cavalier attitude towards death...) The emotional toll is tremendous. Here we have a man who has avoided sentiment all his life, and now he is marching straight into it, week after week after week. For someone he doesn't remember, and possibly feels guilty about. (Deserved or not, guilt is a common reaction in this situation.) There is no hope of cure, only of treatment. It hurts, and the hurting doesn't stop. A lot of people can't take it, and escape the situation through drugs or abandonment or what have you. But not Sherlock effing Holmes; he marches straight into it, and in doing so, exposes his heart over and over. And I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he doesn't also feel that he is, in some way, doing penance for not being there for her earlier. Not logical, no, but very heartfelt.

 

Okay, that theory is pretty logical- but you've got to admit Jim must have realised at some point that she was crazy about Sherlock. I'd say it would have been pretty easy to identify her as the one in the canteen who wouldn't shut up about Sherlock Holmes. Annnd... if Moriarty though Sherlock made a point of deliberately ignoring Molly (not not noticing, but choosing not to pay attention), then near her is the perfect place to hide. I can't help but believe that his reasons for picking her were a little more pointed than just her vicinity to Sherlock- he could have met Sherlock in a million ways all on his own- posing as a client for example.

 

Yeah, but ... okay, how about this ... it didn't matter whether Molly cared about Sherlock, what mattered was that she had access to him. And I further deduce that Jim was learning about Sherlock's pressure points. He found John, Mrs. H and Lestrade ... but he didn't find Molly because Sherlock never showed her any consideration in front of him. So he still couldn't have revealed their relationshipto Eurus, because he didn't think they had one.

 

What do I win? :P

 

(Oh dear ... now it occurs to me that Jim didn't need to reveal Sherlock's attachment to Molly, he only needed to reveal her crush on Sherlock; and Sherlock's apparent indifference. That allowed Eurus to test how Sherlock dealt with Molly's affection; it didn't matter whether he returned it or not, it only mattered that he was humiliating her, and whether he could bring himself to do it. Drat. Well, heck, I still think I should win something. )

 

So - what IS "The Final Problem" in the episode?

 

Beats me. "How to cram a 3 hour plot into a 1.5 hour episode?" :D Seriously, I was wondering the same thing. Will get back to that, perhaps.

 

 

I think you've got something there. We had too much time to imagine what the "perfect" season would be like, and of course we didn't get it.

I have to disagree.  For instance, the wait time between 4.2 and 4.3 was a week, not two years.  And I surmised much of Final's story points.  And I didn't even try to imagine what the "perfect" episode would be like.  I just knew that examples LIKE 4.2 - and Bride - meant it COULD be good, even (especially) KNOWING the story points.  The disappointment in 4.3 came, not as a result of any time between episodes, but as a result of its BAD writing.

 

If I had been able to binge watch 4.2 and 4.3 or had to wait months or years between them, I would still be disappointed in the exact same way and for the exact same reasons.

 

I believe you. But that's definitely not how it worked for me.

[BLS_Pro]

 

It wasn't the wait between episodes in the season I meant, but more the wait for the season itself- and the not knowing when or if there will be more- I think fans expect that when the three episodes do happen, (and they are so closely released in comparison to the gap between seasons, it almost feels like a binge watching session) they will be very thoroughly thought-out and that every moment will count

 

I understood what you meant.  I was just using a different interval of time (between episodes rather than between seasons) to demonstrate the ultimate issue wasn't time.  This is true of the complaint above as well.  Because they had at least two years time between seasons, I expected 4.3 to be good and every moment will count.  And I expected it, not just because they had time, but because they had succeeded in doing that in 4.2, the episode they had scripted at the same time.  And I expected it because they had succeeded in doing it in Bride, a stand alone episode.  And they had succeeded in doing it in other episodes in other seasons.

The issue isn't the time.  The successful episodes demonstrate that fact.  The issue is whether they bother to write well or not, regardless of the time.

 

 

 

 

I think there are going to be cracks deepening if they were to keep to an every-three-years approach- Rosamund's age will be visible, Una Stubbs might well retire, and they lose momentum in some of the stories they are trying to tell too.

 

They can always make changes and incorporate them as story points.  The sort of changes you reference aren't an issue.

 

 

 

I don't think they carried over much suspense from the finale of HLV and though the resolution at the start of TST was a bit weak, I'd say most of us were just glad to be rid of Magnussen and on to the next story. But there was something distant-feeling about the season- I've seen it written elsewhere, and it is true.

I agree.  And I can pinpoint it to the writing (and the directing of T6T).  That COULD have been a strong episode, but they didn't actually create much DRAMA through most of it.  That's the same problem with Final.  There are a couple moments in both - but the episodes don't earn them through the action, plotting, and character development through them.  Both episodes rely on BAD storytelling techniques which have been SHUNNED by the previous episodes.  There is SO much, one could actually write a book on the bad writing used in the two episodes.  Having a good one in-between doesn't change this fact.  :(

 

 

To me the over-reliance on Mary and Moriarty this season is almost like a band replaying their greatest hits because the new album isn't going so well. I do think they struggled to fall back in to the universe this time. I don't mean to be negative because I would dearly love another season.

Yes.

[J.P.]

Erm… I start to have problem with this thread. It's too fast, it contains too many issues, all mixed up and confusing.

May I suggest getting some more specific threads, like e.g. problems with the story arch, unsolved mysteries, emotional response, what we actually liked about it?

[T.o.b.y]

Erm… I start to have problem with this thread. It's too fast, it contains too many issues, all mixed up and confusing.

May I suggest getting some more specific threads, like e.g. problems with the story arch, unsolved mysteries, emotional response, what we actually liked about it?

 

That's a good idea! You know what, I'll see whether I can start a subthread. Which one(s) would you like to have most?

 

[Bankomas]

Finally, releasing Euros on an unsuspecting world would be like releasing Dr Lecter. Not an option.

 

I didn't mean releasing her upon the world uncontrollably. I thought of getting her outta Sherrinford and help her adapt and settle in the world. Some place secret under constant supervsion to begin with. She is smart. I suppose it can be possible for Sherlock to teach her not to kill people right and left. 

I also think that the conversation of Mycroft and Sherlock about the girl on the plane is a metaphor for Eurus's life. Mycroft opts for making the girl steer the plane away from the city to save people on ground by sacrificing the girl (locking Eurus up in Sherriford to avoid potential casualties). Whilst Sherlock insists that he can help the girl land the plane (He can help Eurus cope with her life). 

And it's not a coincidence - "I want to break free" playing as soundrack over Sherrinford. #SetEurusFree!

[Caya]

Erm… I start to have problem with this thread. It's too fast, it contains too many issues, all mixed up and confusing.

May I suggest getting some more specific threads, like e.g. problems with the story arch, unsolved mysteries, emotional response, what we actually liked about it?

 

Sound suggestion - keep spoilers out of and a spoiler warning in the title, and start them in this (series 4) subforum, and I'd say anything goes! Well, except for potential NSFW aspects, those go to Irene's, naturally.

 

[Pamela]

 

Erm… I start to have problem with this thread. It's too fast, it contains too many issues, all mixed up and confusing.

May I suggest getting some more specific threads, like e.g. problems with the story arch, unsolved mysteries, emotional response, what we actually liked about it?

 

Sound suggestion - keep spoilers out of and a spoiler warning in the title, and start them in this (series 4) subforum, and I'd say anything goes! Well, except for potential NSFW aspects, those go to Irene's, naturally.

 

 

Please don't forget to link us there!

[Inge l-w]

Very good suggestion, but 'it is what it is', the spoiler-free thread for discussion! We both got warned off two other threads as being spoilery. Need some more vivisection?

I actually liked seeing Mycroft being taken down a peg or two, I liked Molly's giving nature, and I liked the Two men and a Baby at Baker Str. right at the end. The rest was borrowed from other shows, and their feeble attempt to pay tribute to Basil Rathbone fell flat!

[Arcadia]

BTW - have they posted the Behind the Scenes video yet?  By now someone here has usually provided a link to it.

 

Also, will they be posting the Mary 'extras' being mentioned?  Or will that have to be acquired on DVD?

 

If you can access the PBS website (or, I assume, the BBC site) there are behind the scenes videos there. Also they showed one about TLD before the broadcast last night, I don't know if it's available online yet. Ditto the bit that accompanies the theatrical release. Even if they don't release it on the DVD, I'm willing to bet it will show up online somewhere ... eventually.

 

I'll post some links in a bit ... if I can find them again. Although now that I think about it, I think all the ones I've seen only mention the first two episodes.

 

 

What did love actually solve? Euros isn't magically cured just because her brother hugged her once in thirty-odd years. She's back at Sherrinford. For the time being, she just isn't talking any more. Big improvement?

Yes, it is an ENORMOUS improvement for her.  She isn't jealous any more.  She isn't angry any more.  She isn't confused any more.  She isn't alone any more.  She now has what she always wanted: Eurus is LITERALLY playing with her brother Sherlock.

 

I think she is probably still all of those things. Sherlock is giving her what he can, but the fact is she is institutionalized and always will be -- if they're realistic about it. Which they don't have to be, of course. (Why start now? :d )

[Ozgood]

Did i miss something? I recorded the episode to watch later and when i started it, it showed Mycroft being chased by a clown. No opening credits or anything like a start of the show was apparent. What happened before that?

[Fantasy Lover]

There was a girl on a plane.