Your alternative ending?

[T.o.b.y]

Hey,

 

I was just thinking - if you were hired to write an alternative ending to Sherlock, what would it be? I am defining "ending" very loosely; you can go as far back as you like...

 

I know I would keep the final montage but without Mary's narration. Or maybe with but it would be Mary alive in hiding somewhere spying on the boys, since I would write her out of the picture but keep her alive. Her flight in The Six Thatchers would have been successful.

 

I also wouldn't keep Eurus, I would try to redo the Holmes Family history to involve Moriarty in some major way. He would still be dead though. And there wouldn't be any third Holmes sibling. Or it would turn out to be Moriarty. Maybe as a half-sibling.

 

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

... if you were hired to write an alternative ending to Sherlock, what would it be? I am defining "ending" very loosely; you can go as far back as you like...

Umm, I'm tempted to go back and fix Empty Hearse, but I suspect I'd merely run up against all the inherent contradictions and inconsistencies that Moftiss bumped their noses on.  Failing that, I'd be tempted to go back and fix Last Vow -- though I have absolutely no idea how, because pretty much the whole episode bothers me.  Therefore, I'm with you, let's see if we can fix Series 4.

 

I know I would keep the final montage but without Mary's narration. Or maybe with but it would be Mary alive in hiding somewhere spying on the boys, since I would write her out of the picture but keep her alive. Her flight in The Six Thatchers would have been successful.

I like the idea of Mary in hiding.  How's this:

 

Everything's the same through John reading her letter.  But then we see John and Sherlock plotting how to track her, putting the thingie inside her AGRA drive (if such a feat is even possible -- I can't imagine there's much empty space in there).  Then we see the same montage of Mary's flight, but intercut with the boys tailing her.  When they get to that Middle Eastern city, they decide it's time to confront her.  The signal leads them to a crowded marketplace, specifically to a vendor with just a few pots spread out on a mat.  They discover that the tracking thingie is no longer in the AGRA drive, it's lying loose inside one of the pots.  They stalk off in disgust.  About the time they get around the corner, they suddenly stop, look at each other, and dash back -- but the nondescript veiled woman is gone and her mat and pots have been stuffed in a trash can.  John says she can't have gotten far and looks at Sherlock in full expectation of Plan B.  But Sherlock says they have no contacts here and don't even speak the language, so she's beaten them for now.  They'll just have to wait till she's ready to come back as promised.  We see Mary watching, eavesdropping, smiling fondly, from a nearby shuttered window.

 

So they go back to London and finish dealing with the Embassy-rescue betrayal, hopefully a good bit more intelligently than the previously-aired version (same wish for the earlier part of the episode -- e.g., Sherlock will not have spilled the beans to what's-his-name about Mary).  I'm having a bit of trouble offhand recalling what happens when, so that's all I can say about this at the moment.

 

I also wouldn't keep Eurus, I would try to redo the Holmes Family history to involve Moriarty in some major way. He would still be dead though. And there wouldn't be any third Holmes sibling. Or it would turn out to be Moriarty. Maybe as a half-sibling.

Oh, goodness yes!  I still have no idea what moved them to write that episode.  They had  already set up some nice little hooks to hang future plots on -- e.g., Mummy's scientific background that echoed Professor Moriarty's, the commentary hint that one of the elder Holmeses might have had an affair.  Maybe they thought it would be just too easy to make Moriarty a half-brother resulting from (presumably Mummy's) affair.  Less bizarre, sure, but doing something really well is rarely easy.  I would have liked to see them try -- and work in the "I know exactly what he's going to do next" in a more meaningful way while they're at it.

[Boton]

I would not have let Mary become pregnant, so I would have no Rosie.  In my fondest imagination, Mary would have been a non-character; John gets married, and his wife gets 30 seconds of screen time a season. Barring that, if they absolutely, positively had to make her an Amazon, I'm fine with her going out in a blaze of glory. 

 

I would keep the Eurus plot about testing Sherlock's emotions, but I would move it to Moriarty since that's a super-villain kind of thing to do. So, no third Holmes sib, and no terrible psychological damage resulting from Sherlock having his childhood best friend killed.  I don't really need a Sherlock Holmes with an actual psychological problem; quirky is good, but I'm not a fan of damaged.

 

I would keep the Mary voice-over at the end (ideally, because she, from behind the scenes, is the one that sees that they are just average guys who the public perceives as the Baker Street Boys). But instead of the scene being all happy families, I'd emphasize the ordinary parts of their lives:  John seeing patients at his practice and maybe doing some sort of home repair or domestic thing with Mary; Sherlock still doing chemistry in the kitchen and maybe (having reached some sort of rapprochement with Mycroft) playing chess with Mycroft in the Diogenes.  (I'd like a scene of him messing with Janine's beehives, but I won't push it.) Then, you see them running off and solving a crime as if this is more of an occasional thing that they do, not their everyday lives.

[Slithytove]

No Eurus.  No Mary - or no more than we get in ACD's work, i.e. the occasional reference along the lines of "Holmes summoned me and Mary was fine with that."  Then she could quietly die offstage, as she does in the original, and John could move back to Baker Street.

 

I'm in the minority that didn't want Jim to be dead.  I would have liked them to develop that hint of a link between Mummy Holmes and Moriarty.  Much more intriguing than the insane genius sister locked up in a fortress.  Basically, I would have liked a finale that was a good, twisty mystery with lots of clues, not a version of a horror film.

 

Still wish they would come back though, with or without Rosie.  (I'm not saying I would kill her off, just not give her any screen time - maybe let it be implied that Mrs Hudson was on permanent babysitting duty.)

[Arcadia]

I like the ending the way it is, except for one thing; no resolution for Molly. That seems to belittle her character, somehow.

 

But would I change anything that led up to the ending? You betcha, but I think you ladies have pretty much covered it already. I could go along with any of those scenarios.

 

T6T I would simply reshoot with Nick Hurran at the helm. I don't mind the plot so much, it's the way the story's presented that irks me. It makes me feel like they suddenly stopped caring whether they made a quality show or not, because the dumb fans would lap up any old thing they put on the screen and never notice the difference. Urgh, just thinking about it makes me want to punch something. Gatiss' nose, perhaps. Except I like the face behind it too much. Besides, if I did punch him, JP might come after me.

 

The one thing I really, really, really wanted to see but didn't get ... I wanted to see Sherlock feel remorse for letting himself stoop so low as to murder Magnussen. Or at least acknowledge that it was his greatest failure as a human being. Instead we get him acting like a spoiled brat in front of Lady Smallwood and Co. *sigh*

 

But I did like that the story was ultimately about Sherlock becoming a good man. Whether they pulled it off or not, I'm happy that's the direction they wanted to take it in. For a while there I really was afraid he was going to end up as James Bond. Ugh.

[Inge l-w]

*SIGH* Could we skip S3 episodes 2 & 3 and S4 episode 3? I like my Holmes and Watson as ACD-canonical as possible, with the odd modernism thrown in, like texts in the place of telegrams. No hullabaloo about the wedding, since we know from the original Scandal in Bohemia that practically anyone could serve as witness and 'best man'. No Sherlock Holmes solving a case by use of a killing shot to the head, instead of using his little grey cells. No pregnancy, Rosie and intrusive Mary, and most definitely NO Euros The Mad female genius!

[T.o.b.y]

While I don't really approve of the path they took with Mary, I can't really imagine the show without her any more. And all things considered, I don't think I would have wanted to miss out on Amanda Abbington's acting. Still unsure as to whether I like the character or not but I certainly think she did a fantastic job with her.

[Arcadia]

Yeah, I liked the character of Mary. It didn't bother me that she was the smartest one in the room, either; I appreciated the humor behind that. Given my preference, I would do what Boton said; keep Mary, but in the background, happily nurturing Rosie.

 

I don't mind Eurus either; I thought she was an interesting character. Making her a Holmes sibling doesn't even bother me; it's Sherlock's memory loss that's the problem, because we never received any clues that he had something like that. That something was "wrong" with him. It's not even necessary to the story; they could have him remember her, and still have the same plot because he thought she died in the fire. 

 

Ah well. It is what it is.

[Carol the Dabbler]

... they could have him remember her, and still have the same plot because he thought she died in the fire.

 

Excellent point.  But I suspect they were too enamored of the Redbeard reveal.  *mumble* always wanting things to be clever *mumble*

[Arcadia]

[Shadow Dweller]

Hey,

I also wouldn't keep Eurus, I would try to redo the Holmes Family history to involve Moriarty in some major way. He would still be dead though. And there wouldn't be any third Holmes sibling. Or it would turn out to be Moriarty. Maybe as a half-sibling.

 

Yes, definitely yes to this. To me Eurus looks like a cheap cop-out and it would be much more attractive to make it as Jim's doing on the first place. Mofftiss had overused the crazy opponent plotbunny. In the current era a genius and thrill-loving crime-lord would make more sense to the audience than [is looking with disgust toward the general direction of Eurus].

[Redbeard]

Yeah, I liked the character of Mary. It didn't bother me that she was the smartest one in the room, either; I appreciated the humor behind that. Given my preference, I would do what Boton said; keep Mary, but in the background, happily nurturing Rosie.

 

I don't mind Eurus either; I thought she was an interesting character. Making her a Holmes sibling doesn't even bother me; it's Sherlock's memory loss that's the problem, because we never received any clues that he had something like that. That something was "wrong" with him. It's not even necessary to the story; they could have him remember her, and still have the same plot because he thought she died in the fire. 

 

Ah well. It is what it is.

 

I bolded the part about her being the smartest in the room because that, along with Eurus being the other smartest person in the room, really bothered me.  Because Sherlock and Moriarty should have been the smartest (with Mycroft above them but also above the fray).  Sometimes, I feel like they only killed off Mary because had she been around the finale would have been a Mary vs. Eurus showdown with Sherlock off sucking his thumb somewhere 

 

As to what I would change other than the super-geniuses Mary & Eurus - the whole post by Slithylove nailed it! I agree whole heartedly. 

[T.o.b.y]

I agree, I think towards the end the show suffered from "genius inflation". And that took away from Sherlock... But on the other hand, it also highlighted his other qualities so the direction they took did serve a purpose.

[Arcadia]

Redbeard and Shadow! You're back! I was beginning to think we'd lost you.
 

I agree, I think towards the end the show suffered from "genius inflation". And that took away from Sherlock... But on the other hand, it also highlighted his other qualities so the direction they took did serve a purpose.

 
Plus I think it's interesting to explore what happens when the hero is bested in the field he's always excelled in before. How does someone who takes such inordinate pride in his own genius handle being outsmarted? Moftiss's answer seems to be ... by following his heart, which I think is a nice twist in a show about the ultimate rationalist, Sherlock Holmes. It's a very humanistic point of view, which I appreciate. Don't have enough of that these days.
 
Having said all that, I agree it's time they show Sherlock being on the top of his game again, or I'm going to start disbelieving he was ever a genius in the first place. :P Although he was pretty brilliant in TLD, imo. Well, except for the drug use, of course.

[Arcadia]

Oh, and does anyone besides me think that TFP intended to show that Mycroft is not, in fact, the smart one? Or that he's smart, but only intellectually ... emotionally and ethically, he lacks depth and/or insight? They sort of dropped his storyline after the coffin scene, but I thought that's where they were going with it. Plus I thought that's what Mummy meant when she called him "limited." Poor Mycroft, clearly never Mummy's favorite.

[Shadow Dweller]

Redbeard and Shadow! You're back! I was beginning to think we'd lost you.

 

 

Well..... It was Travian all over again. That, and baking, role-playing and Pinterest. :D

 

Oh, and does anyone besides me think that TFP intended to show that Mycroft is not, in fact, the smart one? Or that he's smart, but only intellectually ... emotionally and ethically, he lacks depth and/or insight? They sort of dropped his storyline after the coffin scene, but I thought that's where they were going with it. Plus I thought that's what Mummy meant when she called him "limited." Poor Mycroft, clearly never Mummy's favorite.

 

No one with a lot of ethical holdback can survive for long in the kind of role he is in. I suspect that he have only a few of 'line not to cross' to keep him on the side of the angels. If he is emotionally poor in depth and insight he won't get that high in government, one of his main tools is practically emotional manipulation to get everyone else to follow his design.

[Arcadia]

Yes, but what I mean is ... hmm, what do I mean? He's limited in the sense that his insight is employed only for manipulation, there's no real "heart" in it. Maybe that's necessary for  a person in his position, but that's the point ... his position is more important to him than being a "decent human being." Not that Mycroft isn't on the side of the angels in his own way, it's just that his way is to stay inside a certain defined space. Nothing inherently wrong with that; but it IS limited.

 

Actually, maybe there is something wrong with that; but I'd have to take my thoughts over to the political thread.

[Shadow Dweller]

My guess is, he doesn't empathize easily with 'ordinary' people's difficulties. Not from the lack of trying but that's the price of having your mind wired for hyper-rationality, many of 'ordinary' people's concerns could be seen as solvable problems if only they are willing and dare to step out of their comfort zone along with its expectations.

 

Sherlock needs a minder with ability to shield him from the results of his own tomfooleries and who is better than a high-ranking intelligence officer with (likely) vast personal and professional networks of resources to draw help from?

[Carol the Dabbler]

Sherlock needs a minder with ability to shield him from the results of his own tomfooleries and who is better than a high-ranking intelligence officer with (likely) vast personal and professional networks of resources to draw help from?

 

As I recall, the canon Mycroft Holmes (oddly enough) did not serve in that capacity at all.  He was apparently in "The Greek Interpreter" mostly to introduce the interpreter to his brother.  Similarly, in "The Bruce-Partington Plans" his main purpose seems to be bringing a top-secret security breach to his brother's attention.

 

Of course, the canon SH was (in most stories) older and more experienced than the fellow in BBC Sherlock.  So who knows, maybe MH had previously needed to nursemaid him now and then.  OR maybe he still needed to do that (or felt that he needed to) -- but Watson was too circumspect to mention it!

[Arcadia]

My guess is, he doesn't empathize easily with 'ordinary' people's difficulties. Not from the lack of trying but that's the price of having your mind wired for hyper-rationality, many of 'ordinary' people's concerns could be seen as solvable problems if only they are willing and dare to step out of their comfort zone along with its expectations.

And I think they showed us that Mycroft himself is unwilling to step outside his comfort zone. So at least he has that in common with 'ordinary' people. :d

[Shadow Dweller]

 

My guess is, he doesn't empathize easily with 'ordinary' people's difficulties. Not from the lack of trying but that's the price of having your mind wired for hyper-rationality, many of 'ordinary' people's concerns could be seen as solvable problems if only they are willing and dare to step out of their comfort zone along with its expectations.

And I think they showed us that Mycroft himself is unwilling to step outside his comfort zone. So at least he has that in common with 'ordinary' people. :D

 

 

Which one, the no kill scene? I am firmly on the side of, 'Mofftiss needs to make other characters do OOC acts in order to make Sherlock looks good, which in turn speaks about the quality of Sherlock's own mindset & actions itself.' If Mycroft is a career, desk jockey bureaucrat all his life that scene would fit with his character but we knows that he could do field work if necessary (example, rescuing baby brother trapped in a Serbian dungeon). Heck, even Craig's James Bond's actions makes more sense than what had happened in Sherrinford.

[Arcadia]

And here I was thinking he had been shown all along as a career, desk jockey bureaucrat! Seriously, the "no kill" scene, but also most of the other scenes in TFP, I thought were intended to show that Mycroft is not "smarter" than Sherlock, just more rational ... and that the reliance on rationality is, in its own way, a weakness. That's what I got out of it, anyway.

 

Was Mycroft OOC? I didn't get that impression, but then I find Mycroft's character to be very elusive. Deliberately so.

[Shadow Dweller]

That's because Mycroft's mindset was just as alien to you as Molly's to me and thus once he was made to do something that was out of character and it happened to fit your hope to see him 'being brought down' you latched on that piece of 'evidence' and by force moulded his whole character around that one. A case of confirmation bias. (This is me in :sherlock2: speak)

[Arcadia]

Mmmmmaybe. Or maybe it's just that Sherlock was the one who first said maybe Mycroft wasn't so smart after all, and I, as usual, just slavishly followed his lead. :p

[Shadow Dweller]

Then Sherlock is luckier than Mycroft for having easier time to relate to what some people described as, 'being human' with its pluses and minuses, that made him more relate-able to most than Mycroft.