Episode 2.1, "A Scandal In Belgravia"

[Boswell]

 

 

(actually Mycroft already seems to be believing just that, what with his offering Sherlock a cigarette and being all consolatory, a scene which i absolutely disliked)

But it also shows, that Mycroft has a heart. Which - in case of that alternative interpretation - wasn't an advantage for him.

Yes that's exactly why that scene isn't exactly my favourite - Mycroft and Sherlock suddenly all sentiment. It didn't feel natural. It makes their usual proclamations re the superiority of reason ring hollow.

But that's really my only peeve with this otherwise brilliant episode. Im going to watch it again as soon as I can make the time.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Van Buren, I fixed the links in my previous post. Now they should work

 

Can't speak for Van Buren, but they still don't work for me.  Seems to me this sort of thing happened a while back -- will see if I can find that thread.  Martina, you're good at this sort of thing -- do the pictures work for you?

[J.P.]

Have you reloaded the the page?

[Carol the Dabbler]

They didn't work for me yesterday, and they still don't today, so yes.

 

[Arcadia]

Van Buren, I fixed the links in my previous post. Now they should work

They didn't work for me yesterday, and they still don't today, so yes.

This is weird, because they weren't working for me either. But today, only the first of the 3 posts isn't showing me anything, but the other two are (great pic of Sherlock in the sheet!) Also I couldn't get the Verity Burns link to work until today.

[Boswell]

J.P., great pictures there. Cumberbatch has beautiful hands and he uses them so gracefully. Seeing the little closeups of him typing (in TGG) I go "lucky keyboard!"

not to mention the   scenes

 

(i love these emoticons!)

[Arcadia]

Finally got time to watch! (What a week. )

I know I've said it before, but this episode is just so beautiful to look at, I find I don't much care what it's about. BC is at his most attractive here, the cinematography is gorgeous (that scene where they drive past the airline hangar ... stunning), the clever use of framing devices in so many shots .... to my visually-oriented little brain, this episode is the ultimate eye-candy. All that, and it has a decent plot! :P

 

And at some point after that episode, Moriarty was brought in questioned... in a not so nice way, as we find out in TEH, but we see him in his cell at the end of THOB. Then of course, he's on trial in TRF... what exactly was he on trial for? Conspiracy of some sort?

For breaking in to steal the crown jewels, wasn't it? And/or possibly for the murders in TGG? Also John and the other "bomb vest" victims could have brought endangerment charges or something. And I would guess that's why Sherlock was the key witness; he could make the connections between Jim and the assorted crimes. (??)

 

What cracks me up more is just before John punched him the second time, Sherlock was trying to think of a compliment about John's first punch.

Same here. Sherlock's so clueless!

 

...Cumbersplat.

Love it! I'll have to remember that!

 

To be continued ....

[Arcadia]

Part 2.

 

One question keep niggling on my mind, why Mycroft let Sherlock keep Irene's phone for months. Why didn't he try to break the password himself? It is not like he cannot conceal from 'cousin across the pond' that he have it on hand.

Yeah, that is a little odd. All that I can think was that, since Irene was apparently dead, she was no longer a threat so Mycroft just dismissed her from his calculations. He seems to trust Sherlock ( ) enough to assume little brother would say something if he learned anything important.

 

And now to the 007 allocation. Sherlock's deduction is brilliant, but does it make sense? It is a row of seat numbers. What for? I assume that you need a second half of the table to make it work, like names of the passengers... I can imagine that even if they actually didn't need boarding plan for dead people, they wanted to make the plan look real. But if yes, then how can you replace a jumbo without nobody noticing. If they were to fake the flight, there must have been the usual procedure of selling tickets, boarding... and then what? Hire David Copperfield to make one plane disappear and other pop out of...

 

Oooh. (said in the best Sherlock manner)

 

One plane starts with living people, the other starts elsewhere; they change places in the clouds. Well, I never took time to think about the procedure before. But still, the allocation order alone makes no sense, beside to let Sherlock find out the particular aircraft and flight.

Plus they needed the whole plane of living people who would know about the trick, at least after their aircraft landed in the middle of nowhere.... And now it's even more ridiculous. If they had a plane full of living people, they must have put them all in a witness protection program. Because they are officially dead, even if someone replaced their bodies.... Another Plothole/Fan pitfall? Or is it my brain that doesn't work yet?

The deduction makes sense to me, because I thought the purpose is indeed to distinguish that particular flight.

The flight that is targeted by terrorists. This assumption is based on terrorists, in their history, don't really care about who the victims are.

They set target, and go at it.

However, I also have a hard time understanding how does Mycroft chose the victims.

First guess is that he 'collected' dead bodies, and create a scenario that they board the flight. However, to pull this off he needs to collect people without close family I suppose, otherwise the family would question the purpose of them flying without informing, and like shown with the potential clients, they get suspicious and question things.

Re: collecting dead people.

They were stealing bodies for a longer time and 2 of the cases Sherlock declined as boring. (the girls and the I-know-human-ash-guy) They were cooled somewhere and waited for their time. So the smell shouldn't be that bad. The planes always smell of something. I see a bigger problem with staging the flight for the terrorists. You need living people to board a plane. Were they all agents?

The code - it is good for deciphering a flight, but I wonder what it is supposed to be? It is a sequence, but it is not a natural order of seats. I would say, it is the order how seats in a common flight were booked in a time period, but does anybody needs such a thing? It's enough to know who's sitting where. And if it was about the Flight of the Dead, it was even more superfluous, as nobody would see such details after an explosion, even if the bodies were just dumped on the floor. So what the sequence was about? Still don't understand.

Okay, you've all made me think -- about the Bond Air plot, that is, so here's my best shot at it:

 

I think the only significance of the numbers was that Sherlock realized 1) they were airline seats and 2) the types of letters and numbers pointed to a specific flight. The actual sequence doesn't matter, nor the identity of the passengers. From Ariane Devere (italics mine):

 

SHERLOCK (quick fire): There’s no letter ‘I’ because it can be mistaken for a ‘1’; no letters past ‘K’ – the width of the plane is the limit. The numbers always appear randomly and not in sequence but the letters have little runs of sequence all over the place – families and couples sitting together. Only a Jumbo is wide enough to need the letter ‘K’ or rows past fifty-five, which is why there’s always an upstairs. There’s a row thirteen, which eliminates the more superstitious airlines. Then there’s the style of the flight number – zero zero seven – that eliminates a few more; and assuming a British point of origin, which would be logical considering the original source of the information and assuming from the increased pressure on you lately that the crisis is imminent, the only flight that matches all the criteria and departs within the week is the six thirty to Baltimore tomorrow evening from Heathrow Airport.

If you're asking about why the sequence of numbers existed in the first place; maybe it was like an inventory, to keep track of how many seats they had filled with dead bodies? Or perhaps just faked evidence to convince the terrorists the flight was proceeding as normal?

 

(And if I may take a moment to point out: Irene had to get Sherlock to decipher the numbers, because apparently Jim wasn't smart enough to figure it out himself! Booyah! Take that, Jim Moriarty!!! :P )

 

I would guess Mycroft didn't need either a second plane or a crowd of living passengers in witness protection. He already knew which flight was targeted; all he had to do was make sure dead people booked all of the seats, then send it on its way as usual. I would think that would be easy enough to pull off with some computer trick or other. And yeah, I would assume his agents would have been the only ones "boarding" the passengers (that must have been an ... interesting ... job....)

 

As to choosing the bodies, I'd think that anyone who was dead would do! :D Give them a fake i.d. and put them on board. Maybe get homeless people and such as much as possible, or bodies donated to science? The rest, steal from the hearses on the way to the cemetary, or dig them up after they're buried .....

 

 

 

(actually Mycroft already seems to be believing just that, what with his offering Sherlock a cigarette and being all consolatory, a scene which i absolutely disliked)

But it also shows, that Mycroft has a heart. Which - in case of that alternative interpretation - wasn't an advantage for him.

 

Yes that's exactly why that scene isn't exactly my favourite - Mycroft and Sherlock suddenly all sentiment. It didn't feel natural. It makes their usual proclamations re the superiority of reason ring hollow.

 

Or, was Mycroft just testing Sherlock to see if he actually felt anything for Irene? He didn't sound consolatory to me, more like he was chiding Sherlock for having feelings.

 

 

I always assumed that Sherlock's involvement with Irene Adler came about from nothing more than Mycroft having him try to get the photos. But I caught a line of Irene Adler's this time that made me think: "Hello. I think it's time, don't you?" Are we to assume that she's speaking to Moriarty there? Was Irene contacting the palace about the photos all just to get Sherlock to her? All part of Moriarty's plan?

Exactly my thought, and I wasn't paying attention to that part either. But what exactly was Jim's plan? Was it that "code" he wanted to have cracked - and the female anonymous person was only a bite? Then Irene's game with letting Sherlock get the phone, take it back, and then send it to him - was it all staged? If it was, does the interpretation, in which Irene sends the text on Christmas to let Sherlock know she's alive - does it still make sense?

 

And you know what? What was the evidence she had anything important stored on that phone, beside the photos she sent to the palace and the seat allocation? What if the phone were a small version of Appledore? I mean, it obviously ended well, but how the Holmes brothers knew she's not bluffing?

 

It took me a lonnnng time to catch on too, but yeah, it was all staged. Jim wanted to know what the "code" meant, (Remember, the "MOD man" Irene goti it from said it would "save the world") so he told Irene how to "play the Holmes boys."

[Inge l-w]

Dear Arcadia, in all the points we have discussed so far there's something missing: in the whole Bond Air deduction scene, he has let her "hijack" his chair and he himself is sitting in what Dr Watson will designate 'the client' chair in HLV. I admit that I adore Irene in both ACD ( Sir Arthur showed her as born in New Jersey, perhaps thinking of Lily Langtry, The Jersey Lilly) and in the modern version, but the fact remains that when blocking out that scene, Irene is in his chair, so he has already let her get away with that before falling into her ingenious trap that ruins Mycroft's well-laid plans. Molly may have his complete trust, but when he dabbles in emotions, it's definitely the mysterious, unfathomable Ms. Adler!

P.S. Concerning Mycroft's jibes in the palace scene, as usual, Sherlock opened hostilities when asked by Dr Watson if they were there to see the Queen, and on Mycroft's appearance he replied "Apparently yes"! From that moment on, it was Mycroft vs Sherlock until it ended in a truce with Sherlock demanding the details of The Woman. Everything else in between can be taken as sibling rivalry.

[Van Buren Supernova]

Same with Arcadia, I can't see your first post for the pictures, but the rest now shows up fine, and they are awesome!

 

A study in faces

 

 

Dealing with an oversize 5-yrs-old in a sheet.

 

 

A face of rage

 

Wasn't aware about Gatiss before Sherlock, saw him in GoT when an internet user refered to his character as Sherlock's brother, but didn't think too much of it.

Now, have come to love every moment he appears on the scene.

 

Face of rage: I love this scene so much it's actually the first avatar I used here, before falling in love with current one.

 

Sherlock in a heroic pose, looking like young Caesar (might decide to get him a nice crest made of olive twigs later)

 

Yes please! What would be his saying? I came, I observed, I insulted..?

 

Just because:

 

This one. And the one who took the pulse.

[Van Buren Supernova]

(And if I may take a moment to point out: Irene had to get Sherlock to decipher the numbers, because apparently Jim wasn't smart enough to figure it out himself! Booyah! Take that, Jim Moriarty!!! :P )

Oh yeah, always thought Sherlock is at least one level smarter than Moriarty. It's easier to create question than providing answer. So, being a consulting criminal is easier that consulting detective. There are also questions to be answered by CC, of course, but the questions are from lower level criminals and crooks. While CD has to read the mind of CC, how they operate etc.

 

 

As to choosing the bodies, I'd think that anyone who was dead would do! :D Give them a fake i.d. and put them on board. Maybe get homeless people and such as much as possible, or bodies donated to science? The rest, steal from the hearses on the way to the cemetary, or dig them up after they're buried .....

Fake id can be a solution. But Mycroft needs to know a lot, and arrange a lot more.

Imagine a special mission unit to make sure all bodies are beyond recognition and identifications. Setting up the whole fake family saga for mourning period. And crisis control for the impacts of 'successful' terrorists attack, and 'fake effort' for imcreasing security and stability for frighten  citizens.

[Carol the Dabbler]

... in the whole Bond Air deduction scene, he has let her "hijack" his chair and he himself is sitting in what Dr Watson will designate 'the client' chair in HLV.  <snip>  Irene is in his chair, so he has already let her get away with that before falling into her ingenious trap that ruins Mycroft's well-laid plans....

 

I never noticed that, but you're right!  I checked Ariane DeVere's transcript to see how each of them arrived in those chairs, but they were already seated when the scene opened.  So I guess the question remains, who sat where first?  (If Sherlock had a reason for sitting at the table, that would have left his usual chair open, and the poor woman had to sit somewhere....)

[sfmpco]

Fun little bit:

 

http://www.buzzfeed.com/keelyflaherty/stephen-moffat-wrote-a-final-scene-for-sherlock-and-irene-ad#.mbYzryEG7

[sfmpco]

I should add regarding the previous post that somewhere in an interview, Moffat or Gatiss said that Magnussen was the first person Sherlock killed, but he clearly hacked up some people in rescuing Irene, so NOT the first person he killed.  I have also always maintained that there were some killings when he was undercover for 2 years dismantling Moriarty's network.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Maybe Moftiss meant that Magnussen is the first person Sherlock has killed on camera.  Or the first person that he was actually acquainted with and killed while looking him in the eye.

 

I agree, it seems highly unlikely that Sherlock got out of the Karachi incident without at least causing serious injury to several men.  It has been pointed out that "Many Happy Returns" doesn't depict anything even bordering on bloodshed -- but those events didn't seem closely tied to dismantling Moriarty's organization, just a few little diversions before heading home.  I don't think we've yet seen any of the dismantling process, with the possible exception of Sherlock's run-in with Baron Maupertuis in Serbia.

 

[Arcadia]

It was Mr. Gatiss who said he thought Sherlock hadn't killed anyone before Magnussen.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUIBMf5HcrI (at around 23 minutes).
 
Mr. Moffat's indicated 2 or 3 times that he thinks Sherlock has killed lots of people. So apparently you just pick the one you want to believe! (You wonder sometimes if they even talk to each other.... ;) )

[Arcadia]

.... It has been pointed out that "Many Happy Returns" doesn't depict anything even bordering on bloodshed -- but those events didn't seem closely tied to dismantling Moriarty's organization, just a few little diversions before heading home.  I don't think we've yet seen any of the dismantling process, with the possible exception of Sherlock's run-in with Baron Maupertuis in Serbia.

But but but (  :P ) ... I don't see anything that indicates they're NOT closely tied to dismantling Moriarty's organization, either. Rather than Sherlock going around personally killing a bunch of operatives, it seems far more likely -- to me at any rate -- that he would go around doing what he normally does ... figure out who done what and put it in the hands of local law enforcement. He's like Moriarty in that respect, imo ... he doesn't like to get his hands dirty (that's what the police are for! )

[J.P.]

But but but we don't know if what we see in MHR are facts or crazy interpretations of Anderson. Those snippets aren't any more valid than the jump interpretations we see (bungee and dummy). Anderson could be right by accident.

[Arcadia]

Alas, you are correct, MHR could all have been Anderson's fevered imagination. Drat.
 
Okay, then! My new motto: I believe in Phillip Anderson.

[Inge l-w]

Oi! That's not on, in fact it's a bit more than NOT good! If we accepted Philip Anderson's point of view, we would also have to accept whatever Mr Moffat says as Gospel truth! Absolutely, positively NOT! Otherwise, we should need to do a on one of the creators ourselves, and that would be this century's paradox!

[sfmpco]

I can see that Sherlock would not have been able to "turn it off" regarding aiding in little bits of local police work wherever he was as long as he remained incognito.  So I think some of what Anderson was picking up on in MHR is probably true.  He just couldn't put the pieces together properly because to almost everyone else, including Lestrade, Sherlock is dead, and even Anderson seems to grimly agree to that assessment  when they get coffee.  Sherlock is just Sherlock and he would be itching for little cases, especially when the answer to him was so obvious.  He wouldn't be able to keep it to himself.

[J.P.]

But - he is shown in his Carpet. He might have many, but obviously they all stayed in London. So - it must be Anderson's fantasy. :D

[Van Buren Supernova]

Maybe Magnussen is the one that matters because that is the one he killed for personal reason?

The others are...war casualties and necessities, even Karachi.

[Carol the Dabbler]

But - he is shown in his Carpet. He might have many, but obviously they all stayed in London. So - it must be Anderson's fantasy. :D

 

Sorry, but I can't figure out what scene you're talking about with a carpet.

 

 

 

By the way, I wouldn't be quite so certain that Anderson's first name really is Philip.  Considering that we've heard it only once, and that was from from Sherlock, who has referred to Lestrade as "Graham," "Gavin," and "Geoff," I wouldn't bet on anything beyond it starting with either a P or an F.  (Admittedly, his difficulty with "Greg" is presumably a play on all the different names that the movies have assigned to ACD's "G. Lestrade" -- but nevertheless, the writers have shown Sherlock as having that characteristic, so I'm afraid he's stuck with it.)

[J.P.]

Carol, Carpet is the name Ben gave to Sherlock's Belstaff. Apparently he hates it, especially when shooting in summer. :D