'There's something about Mary'- Sherlock, the end.

Well, here we are. After all this waiting and anticipating we have what appears to be the end of 'Sherlock'.
Not Sherlock Holmes, just Sherlock.

For better or worse, there it is.

And over the last week our so we have had a bunch of "Sherlockians" telling us if it was good or bad. Most just stating their own opinion, others telling us we are wrong if we don't agree with them. And if not telling us we are wrong, they at least try to but us in that 'old school' 'closed mind' category of Sherlockian.

We have been told that the key people involved are "Artists". And that 'Sherlock' was art.

Well, like with all art, and many artists (whether other people claim them as such, or it is a self given title) there is good art and bad art and using the often used quote, "Art is in the eye of the beholder."

While not being 'bad' art, it is not museum worthy.

For me 'Sherlock' is a show that did not meet up to its potential, nor do I think it achieved what it set out to do or could possibly have done. (It is not good when before you see they final episode they have to have a piece telling you why it was made the way it was.)

The first year suggested hope and potential, and while there were a few bright spots along the way it never dazzled as it should have. All the makings were there, but the light never came on all the way.
Wonderful actors playing the key roles. Wonderful sets and locations. The budget to go along with it.
Source material with infinite possibilities, and what at first appeared to be writers who loved the source.

As I said way back in 2010 when it all started, Martin Freeman and Benedict Cumberbatch are two of the best things to happen to Sherlock Holmes in a very long time. Their talents and skills can not be over looked as very good choices to play Holmes and Watson whether in a modern era of 1895.
They had the theatrical flare to pull off the larger than life characters they were asked to play.
And time after time they did that. But they were never allowed to complete that portrayal throughout the series run, at least not for me.
These remain two of my favorite actors in this day and age and I look forward to seeing their other works.

But when it really comes right down to it we have to decide if these portrayals of Holmes and Watson come close to matching the images we have created in our, using a much over used phrase of late, 'brain attic'.
If we take a still photo of these two actors as Holmes and Watson it is easy to imagine both as those to Canonical individuals.
But once Cumberbatch's Holmes goes into his 'highly functional sociopath' portrayal the bubble bursts for me.

The enjoyment of the Canon for me is the individual cases that Holmes is asked to solve, with just little pieces of back story thrown in to create a bigger image for us over time.

While many of the Canon based cases are mentioned in 'Sherlock' most it seems,  just like 'Elementary' is accused of doing, are thrown in as Canonical bait to keep us biting.

I don't want my Sherlock Holmes to be a murderer or a high functioning sociopath.
I don't want my Mrs. Hudson to be the ex-wife of a drug dealer.
I don't want my Mary Morstan dying in this show just so she can compete with Ethan Hunt in Mission Impossible Six or what ever.
I don't want my Mycroft to be as dumb as he turned out to be.
I don't want my Holmes to be related to James Bond.
I don't want my Sherlock Holmes to come from a family more dysfunctional than the Adam's family.

Unfortunately for all that was great, yes I said great, about 'Sherlock', there was just as much that wasn't.

We hardly ever witnessed Sherlock doing good. And, again for me, Canonically Holmes in the end was about doing good.

While we are all left to decide for ourselves what is good art we must also realize that we get to chose who we think good artists are.
And please artist's either use brushes or finger paints, not both.

Why did I title this essay 'There's something about Mary."? Well because I thought she delivered the best line of the whole series, all four years.

I will do my best to quote the whole thing here at the end.

She said;

"A junky who gets high on solving crime.
A doctor who never came home from the war.

Well you listen to me.
Who you are doesn't really matter.
It's all about the legend, the stories, the adventures.
The last refuge for the desperate, the unloved, the persecuted.
There is a final court of appeal for everyone.

When life gets to strange, to impossible, to frightening there is always one last hope.

When all else fails, there are two men sitting arguing in a scruffy flat, like they have always been there and they always will be the best and wisest men I have ever known.

My Baker St. Boys.

Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson."

This should have been the guide lines for 'Sherlock' all along.
This is the path they should have gone down modern era or not. Using cell phones, the patch and texting.

What does the future hold?

Benedict Cumberbatch talks future of 'Sherlock'

Series 4 of BBC show is expected in 2017

LUKE MORGAN BRITTON, 4TH AUGUST 2016

Benedict Cumberbatch has addressed uncertainty over the future of Sherlock.

Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman started shooting the new series in May, joined once again by Amanda Abbington as Mary Morstan, as well as by a new villain played by Toby Jones. 

Cumberbatch joined Abbington plus the show's co-creators Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss for a panel at Comic-Con in San Diego last month (July 24), when he was asked how long the show could keep going for.

"We’ll see. We’ll see how this series lands," Cumberbatch responded, as reported by Collider.

"It’s been great fun to come back and do it. How it will continue in the future, who knows? It’s not just about what any of us want. It’s about what’s actually right for the show, to be honest, and that has to be judged very carefully."

Cumberbatch continued: "Think about the very limited but classic British output of certain shows, and there aren’t that many of them. It’s a painful thing to say, but maybe Series Four is it. Who knows? I don’t know. I don’t want to say this is it because we have too much fun doing it. But generally, we have to see how this lands."

"And the actors aren’t the only ones who are busy," he added. "Mark and Steven are pretty tied up. Mark is an actor, as well as a producer and writer. It’s all of us being stretched in different directions. Also, this has run longer than most American series. You don’t want to compromise it by continually doing it, just because we could carry it on. There’s lots of stuff to weigh. It’s not just about what we want to do. It’s about what’s right. We’ll see. Really, we will have to see. No one has decided on it, so there’s no yes or no to an end or a beginning."

Steven Moffat went on to say: "We have to take it one season at a time. We don’t know what the future will be, and it’s not entirely down to us. Hopefully, we’ll do more. I find it hard to imagine that we won’t. But in terms of a specific plan, there are ideas that we haven’t gotten to yet."

During the panel, Abbington told fans of the new series: "It's really dark. It's the darkest Steven and Mark have written."

The BBC has previously revealed that series four will begin with Cumberbatch's title character "back once more on British soil as Doctor Watson and his wife, Mary, prepare for their biggest ever challenge - becoming parents for the first time".

Cumberbatch and Freeman returned in a one-off special, Sherlock: The Abominable Bride, on New Year's Day this year. The special attracted an audience of 11.6 million viewers, making it the most-watched programme of the 2015-16 festive season.

The show's last series, which also consisted of three episodes, aired in 2014. Cumberbatch and Freeman first played Doyle's iconic characters in 2010 and each actor has won an Emmy for his performance.

source

Well maybe it will finally be cleared up once and for all . . . . .

Just a snipit.  . . .

Important New Season

"Sherlock" Season 4 will become very pivotal for the entire franchise as a lot of previous characters will return along with a possible love interest for the main protagonist. Fans are curious as to who this love interest might be as Sherlock's last romantic partner, Irene Adler, appeared two seasons ago. They continue to question if Adler might also be part of the rumored characters to return this season.

While there has yet to be any official release date for the series, "Sherlock" Season 4 is expected to hit the small screens this January 2017.

Source

The case of the rugged rogue? Benedict Cumberbatch sports some heavy stubble as Sherlock Holmes in a stark contrast to the character's usual clean shaven look

By JJ NATTRASS FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 06:25 EST, 1 June 2016 | UPDATED: 06:27 EST, 1 June 2016

He's busy filming the much-anticipated fourth series of the BBC's hit-series, Sherlock.

But Benedict Cumberbatch's roguish detective appeared to have lost his razor during his latest escapade, as the cast and crew of the detective drama filmed scenes in South Wales.

Shooting scenes in Cardiff City Centre, the 39-year-old actor sported a heavy layer of stubble as he filmed scenes alongside two elder gents - presumably integral to the plot of the episode.

Whilst the actor's dark brown locks were styled into Sherlock's trademark tousled sweep, the famous detective's usually clean shaven features were coated in a heavy layer of stubble. 

Clad in full-costume, and sporting the character's well worn great coat, a navy shirt, dark trousers and black Oxford shoes, Holmes was instantly recognizable amide the hub-bub of cast and crew.

However, it seems that the latest shoot for the series sees Sherlock at his wit's end, as the appeared slightly weary and exhausted - something further emphasized by his loose stance and open-neck shirt.

Chatting away to the crew in-between takes, the actor looked to be searching for the right inspiration to take into the scene.

Clutching a bundle of pink papers in one hand, presumably his lines, it appeared that Benedict was intent on delivering a stellar performance on camera.

And it seems that the actor was facing off against one of Sherlock's numerous enemies, as he appeared to have a tense showdown with a man in a white suit.

Looking slightly insidious, the suited individual stood out from the crowd thanks to the lime green shirt and cravat that he teamed with the cream two piece.

The blonde actor was seen facing off against Benedict in Mount Stuart Square, with the two actors mirroring each other's stances perfectly.

And it seems that it was all hands on deck, as the actors were joined by numerous members of the cast and extras, as well as a heavy contingent of crew. 

Filming has continued at full-pace following Sherlock co-creators Steven Moffat and Gatiss confirmation that the show was returning in April - following the New Year's special earlier in the year.

In a statement, Steven and Mark said: 'Sherlock series four - here we go again!

'Whatever else we do, wherever we all go, all roads lead back to Baker Street - and it always feels like coming home.

'Ghosts of the past are rising in the lives of Sherlock Holmes and John Watson bringing adventure, romance and terror in their wake.

'This is the story we've been telling from the beginning. A story about to reach its climax.'

Benedict said he was 'thrilled' to be back as the detective.

He said: 'I can't wait for everyone to see season four. But you will have to wait... though not for long... And it will be worth it.'

Series four will return to BBC later this year with three feature length episodes. 

Source

You heard it here first. . . or second. . . . or third. . . but you did hear it here.

'Sherlock Season 4' Release Date, News & Update: Benedict Cumberbatch Bare In Morocco? 'Harry Potter' Actor Is Legendary Villain In S4

By Zee Mara, Parent Herald | May 26, 12:57 AM

"Sherlock Season 4" will reportedly take the adventure to Morocco as lead star Benedict Cumberbatch chases up clues and mysteries. Also joining Holmes' world is "Harry Potter" actor Toby Jones turning villainous in "Sherlock Season 4."

A New Location For 'Sherlock Season 4'

According to Metro, fans can hope to see Benedict Cumberbatch take time to frolic in the sands of Morocco as production for "Sherlock Season 4" progresses. What clues or character(s) will lead the "Sherlock Season 4" storyline to Morocco are kept secret - for now.

Scenes in colorful Morocco for "Sherlock Season 4" is a welcome change from the English-situated earlier episodes of the series. This makes for easier expectation build up on "Sherlock Season 4" topping "The Abominable Bride" special.

Some are even wondering if Benedict Cumberbatch will do a Tom Hiddleston-type baring in Morocco between takes for "Sherlock Season 4." Or if detective Holmes himself will have to do something similar well within the "Sherlock Season 4" plot.

Legendary Villain For 'Sherlock Season 4'

CinemaBlend points out that "Sherlock Season 4" definitely will have a meatier addition in Toby Jones. "Sherlock Season 4" is not the first time Toby Jones, Benedict Cumberbatch and John Watson actor Martin Freeman will be associated.

Like Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman, "Sherlock Season 4" villain Toby Jones also played a Marvel character. Citing CinemaBlend's highlight, "Captain America: The First Avenger," "Captain America: The Winter Soldier," and "Agent Carter" all had the "Sherlock Season 4" villain play evil Hydra scientist Arnim Zola.

Deadline reports that Steven Moffat promised that Toby Jones will definitely play one of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's classical villains in "Sherlock Season 4." Fortunately, there's a fine list of villains to guess from while "Sherlock Season 4" details remain under wraps.

'Sherlock Season 4' Release Schedule

Toby Jones, Martin Freeman and Benedict Cumberbatch will be rejoined by Amanda Abbington, who plays a very pregnant Mary Watson in "Sherlock Season 4." BBC is expected to release "Sherlock Season 4" in 2017.

You heard it here first. . . unless you have other sources for your new;)

Sherlock series 4 cast: Toby Jones joins Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman

The new series has finally started filming, with fans promised “ghosts of the past” and a baby on the horizon

Sherlock series 4 has landed its first new cast member, in beloved Brit actor Toby Jones. 

The actor, who often sports supporting roles in huge franchises such as Harry Potter, Captain America, and The Hunger Games; now joins the BBC 1 drama, Radio Times reports. "I'm excited and intrigued by the character I shall be playing," the actor stated. 

He'll join the returning Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman, alongside Amanda Abbington, Una Stubs, Rupert Graves, Jonathan Aris and Louise Brealey; with his character making an appearance in episode 2 of the new series, though his identity so far remains mysterious.

Series co-creator Stephen Moffat hinted, "Delighted to have Toby Jones on board, bringing to life one of Doyle's finest villains"; with fellow co-creator Mark Gatiss adding, "We're thrilled to welcome one of our finest actors to the Sherlock family. I know Toby will embrace the part with true relish."

READ MO

Knowing only that Jones is playing a famous Arthur Conan Doyle villain opens up a whole number of possibilities, considering the author's own Holmes had a knack for making enemies. Could he be the sinister Austrian murderer Adelbert Gruner? Or smuggler John Clay? 

Or could he somehow be connecting back to Moriarty, with the hint that "ghosts of the past rising in the lives of Sherlock Holmes and John Watson" possibly signaling some sort of return for the villain? We'll have to see when the series finally airs, with reports claiming with "near certainty" it will debut on New Year's Day 2017.

Credit where credit is due.

Was it, and I quote from Brad, a ". . .male-dominated Sherlockian culture" back in the day?

Well, sure it was! Remember, 'back in the day' society was still very use to private clubs that catered to a certain audience.

Probably most, defiantly many would have been like the Diogenes Club, you hung out with those of like mind. If you loved fishing with a worm and cane pole, you probably would not join a fly-fishing group as it were.

Mostly male represented activities would be run mostly by males. Likewise, mostly female represented activities would be run by mostly females.

It wasn’t a matter of whether that was fair or not, it was just the way society was. And thankfully that is changing.

And since Holmes and Watson were, well, male, it would seem most likely that, well, males would form a club about them.

While there have probably always been men who have wanted to join a Jane Austin club, it is true that there have always been women who enjoyed the stories of Sherlock Holmes.

Put since, up till recently, society has usually separated the genders in clubbable situations; Sherlockians groups have mostly been male dominated by males.

But for at least as long as I have been a Sherlockian (the late 70’s) there have been very knowledgeable and active women in Sherlockian society. But still a limited number compared to now.

And that brings up two good points.

One; How much of this surge in female Sherlockian popularity is because of how handsome Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman are and the fact that ‘Sherlock’ is set in modern times?  And how fashionable the coupling of these two is with this modern incarnation of that dynamic duo.

Second; how much of this new mass female participation will survive when the show comes to an end?

I am not against a group of men, or women, who chose to want to hang out in groups with only their own gender. And I also am okay with groups that want to remain exclusive. . . even if I don’t want to belong to any of them.

And I am equally glad of the contribution women make to the world of Sherlock Holmes.

But I think, in a while, when all the fascination over ‘Sherlock’ goes away we will see, once again, a decrease in female participation.

I do however hope that is not the case because they have so much to offer.

Now, actually running a Sherlock Holmes club. . . . . . ;)

'Sherlock' and whales . . . . . . I mean Wales.

Set to film in Wales?

I hate the phrase 'Mind Palace' - my thoughts on The Abominable Bride

During my second viewing of "The Abominable Bride' I tried to mark down each time I went from liking the episode to not liking it by placing a little tick in one category or the another on a note pad.
I soon found that the categories were keeping pace with each other as I went back and forth.

This exercise had started out as an attempt to find a different way of examining the episode that may not have been done before.

Most times when we watch a TV show or movie, or for that matter, when we see a play or read a book, we find that we either like it or we don't. Many times we can still like something while finding something in it that we don't like, but still on the whole giving it more thumbs up than thumbs down.
Example for me, the first Lord of the Rings movie.

And the opposite can also be true. We can on the whole not like something while still finding something within that we do like. Example for me, The Hobbit movies.

I did not finish my second viewing with my little list of check marks. I found that once, after the first viewing, we learn the whole episode was just a trip into Sherlocks 'Mind Palace' the experiment was a waste of time.
One can hardly find fault with the episode if it is just viewed as a trip into Sherlocks unconscious mind. Most of us have had dreams that make no sense or that can be taken many different ways by whom ever may wish to interpret them. They could just be the result of a little under cooked beef or a tiny bit of mustard.
And just like with Sherlock, must of the times when we visit our 'Mind Palace', the journey ends right before we get where we really would like to see it go;)

The check list attempt actually proved rather disappointing in that for every time I was starting to like the show I would end up equally let down by some turn of event.
While one mount enjoying the dialog, the next disappointed in a flip response or an out of character turn of phrase.

In my post on Jan. 13th I asked the question; "Without a Clue, Part Deux"?  And while 'Without a Clue' at times tried to have serious side to the story most of it was clearly played for the humor.
As has often been the case with 'Sherlock', we are never clear which way it wants to lean and for me is not pulling either one off as well as I would like. 
Most times when fun or funny things happen in our lives they blend in with our 'story line'. And in most dramas when humorous occasions happen they in no way attempt to confuse the fact that we are watching a drama.
'Sherlock' is always blurring those lines in an almost slapstick kind of way. (Many may find that appealing.)
Again, the episode took place in his 'Mind Palace', so we can hardly fault it for being confusing.
Any attempt to navigate my 'Mind Palace' would be equally confusing.

I must admit that I fall into the camp of "hoping for a Victorian Sherlock Holmes tale starring Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman" to hold us over till the regular series gets filmed again. But I fear, which my be fair, that this episode left a lot not caring if the show continues, but okay if it does.
The story arc was not advanced. Mostly it was just about putting a teaser out there again, like they have been doing for the last couple of years.

There were some wonderful nods to the Canon, the Granada series and Paget drawings.
The sets were wonderful. And I was not bothered by the flash back scenes from 221B to the crime scenes. It was inventive and worked okay with that part of the story.

Much of the dialog was witty and very inventive. It was mostly appealing if you accept the story line as, once again, taking place in a 'Mind Palace'

I found the scene where Watson first finds Holmes in the morgue rather disturbing and once again seems to prove that the producers want to prove Holmes is indeed a sociopath.

I have never liked the portrayal of Moriarty in this series and believe that portrayal only adds to the sociopath explanation.

While we have come to expect a deerstalker making an appearance in most Sherlock Holmes adaptations, it does not suit the Holmes in 'Sherlock'. Something about it always looking to new or to pressed. I think it can also be said about the Iverness.

I have never considered myself a 'scholaly' Sherlockian. I don't put myself in those ranks.
I would rather find a beer connection in the canon than spend time researching find out how old the pig would have to be for the harpoon to go in so far in BLAC.
I find myself more likely to read The Strand than the Baker Street Journal.
I read the stories more for the atmosphere than for trying to add stuff to my 'Mind Palace'.
And while I am at it, I must admit that it was only after reading several other reviews that I actually caught some of the things they talked about. Many of them I agree with, some I do not.

But it was not until I watched 'Elementary' this week that I really realized what it was that I really did not like about thiss episode and in some ways 'Sherlock'.
I have come to realize that the Holmes in 'Sherlock' is not someone I would really like to meet.
I find his character a little disturbing and very borderline. Where Canonically, as well as in 'Elementary', we see the relationship between Holmes and Watson as good for one another. In 'Sherlock' I can see the relationship dragging Watson down.
Brett as Sherlock Holmes did not suffer well fools. Cumberbatch's Holmes would rather make someone feel the fool.
There is a manic quality to 'Sherlock's' Holmes that seems un-fixable or un-changable or lacking in the ability for growth. He seems damaged beyond repair many times.

It may be a product of our time, the anti-hero being the hero. The more damaged you are the more appealing you become as the hero.

As has been the case since the early episodes, The Abominable Bride was written for the fans of 'Sherlock', not the fans of Sherlock Holmes.

And although 'Mind Palace' is a historical phrase, when used as it is in 'Sherlock' it appears more Fanfic than Sherlockain.

But with all my complaints about the show, I still think Cumberbatch and Freeman are two of the best things to happen to Sherlock Holmes in a very long time. And I still enjoy the show for it's 'Playing the Game' exercise.

I do not however consider this episode to be a respectful nod to the Canon of Sherlock Holmes.

But I can only fairly give it;

To bad it wasn't Elementary:)

My review of 'The Abominable Bride'. . . .

is yet to come. I was, or am, looking for a way to review it that hasn't been done yet. Or at least that I have seen. Not being as great a wordsmith as most reviewers, or as I would like to be, I needed to come up with something simple, like my way of enjoying Sherlock Holmes.

So, last night as I started to watch the episode for the second time, I had a pad of paper and pencil with me and made two columns.
One column was marked 'Like' and the other 'Not liked' and each time something would change in the episode or an event would happen that to cause a reaction I would make a mark in the appropriate column for my reaction.
Some scenes the reaction would go back and forth.
About half way through the second viewing I am a little surprise that the two columns are pretty close in ticks.

In my post on Jan. 8th I tongue-in-cheek asked the question of  The Abominable Bride (can we abbrivate it 'ABOM'?) "With out a Clue, Part Deux"?  I am still leaning that way.

A couple more evenings and I should be done with my second viewing and will post the results here.

I have finally started watching 'The Abominable Bride'

I am a little over half-way through this episode and am having mixed reactions.
Parts are incredibly fun, and parts are irritably annoying.
There are some well done nods to the Canon and some that seem placed within just to get in as many as possible.
While this episode is very much a study in patience's, I am having a lot of fun following it. And by the next review we will see if we have done a very good job of.

While I have read some other reviews, I have not yet read any that have given away any spoilers. So it is all if not fresh, at least new to me.
"With out a Clue, Part Deux"?

Let the game continue.

I have yet to see the episode myself, but I am finding some of the reviews very interesting. . .

Sherlock's 'mansplaining' wasn't the worst thing about The Abominable Bride

Under Steven Moffat, the great detective has become trapped in an endless hall of mirrors reflecting on his own cleverness

Critics of the latest episode of Sherlock Holmes have attacked the show for "mansplaining" feminism. For fear of actually mansplaining, that is a word used to describe the patronising way that men sometimes explain things, particularly to women (did you get that, dear?). It’s the neologism which birthed this tedious trend of adding "man" to the front of words – see "manspreading" – as a way of criticising those of us with a Y chromosome. If a man is bad at being in charge of a group of people or defending a fortification is he manmanaging or manmanning?

Still, as a show directed by a man, co-starring two men and written by two other men, Sherlock ought to have avoided making jokes about the sometimes token presence of women, or styling feminists as similar to the Klu Klux Klan. On the other hand, it’s good of the BBC to give a nod to the existence of women from time to time: of the eight latest dramas to be announced by the BBC, all of them are written by men. That’s a mystery worthy of a private detective.

Yet this was not even the most egregious thing about the episode entitled "The Abominable Bride" (hereafter TAB), Arthur Conan Doyle once wrote that “mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself," and if this installment had one problem, it’s that it thought that it was much smarter than it was. It was the Douglas Carswell of holiday television: a dim person’s idea of what a clever story would look like. I ought to warn that the rest of this will include spoilers, but that would imply that I believed that there was much enjoyment to spoil.

"This was an over-indulgent guitar solo, showing off talented strumming and fingering at the expense of the song"

Of course Cumberbatch, Freeman, Stubbs, Gatiss, Brealey, Scott and co are all brilliantly good in their respective roles. The sets, costumes and lighting are all shown off by adept direction. The emperor has good posture, but you can still see his noble bachelor shivering in the wind.

For one thing, the BBC has become a little obsessed with people who don’t die but do fake it. This was interesting the first time, but pretend deaths are no match for real ones, and the increasingly well-trodden territory of people who aren’t actually dead didn’t advance the plot of the overarching Sherlock storyline. “Sherlock gets off a plane” would have been a more accurate title. In an episode which drifted away from any pretence of focusing on the solution of crimes, or advancing the overall plot of the series, this drama was an over-indulgent guitar solo, showing off talented strumming and fingering at the expense of the song.

The three pipe problem here is that Sherlock’s writers clearly thought their work was exceptional. Perhaps Christopher Nolan is to blame for making the slick, highly successful but ultimately only half-clever Inception. TAB makes Inception look like it was written by a committee of Nobel Laureates. Sherlock eked out the "it was all a dream" twist –the end of every seven-year-old's creative writing homewrk – like a vehicle running on just the vapours of an idea. Where Inception revelled in the complexities of the dream state, Sherlock held it back as the great surprise. Gasp – the fake death was fake on two levels. Three if you count the fact that it was all a turgid TV drama. It was all so incessantly meta, so self-referential, that you couldn’t be distracted from the emptiness.

Like Mendes’ Bond in Spectre, Steven Moffat’s Sherlock has strayed too far from the source. It’s as if Moffat pointed at an ocean and bet someone that he could water-ski over a shark. Lazy references to Holmes stories like The Five Orange Pips are stretched over a canvas designed to satisfy the particular aims of the creator. When Holmes is ganged up on by versions of women he has mistreated in the past, it has nothing to do with Sherlock, nothing to do with the plot – just the preoccupation of an author trying to defend himself from his feminist critics.

It took great skill to reimagine Sherlock Holmes in the modern day and to successfully tell its stories for a new generation of viewers. I admire the episodes of Sherlock which preceded TAB, and I am still excited for the next series. With any luck, and a dose or two of humility, the show’s creators will go back to telling detective stories. Until then, we’ll just have to keep telling ourselves that this episode of Sherlock just happened in our mind palaces.

source

Well, that should be the end of that. . . . . .

Many are curious on what is the exact nature of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. John Watson’s relationship.

According to UnrealityTV, even Martin Freeman, who plays John Watson in BBC hit series “Sherlock,” is getting annoyed of speculations that the two characters are having special relationship.

Martin told The Sun newspaper that his character and Sherlock Holmes, played by Benedict Cumberbatch, are not gay and they are not in a relationship.

“It is possible for people of the same sex to have a deep friendship without being attracted to each other. People are attracted to each other in all sorts of ways. You don’t necessarily want to [sleep with] someone because you love them. They respect each other, they bring different things to their friendship,” he told The Sun.

Freeman further explained that Sherlock and Watson have a purely “friends” relationship.

The actor also expressed concern that he will be called homophobic for ruling out the possibility.

“The trouble is as soon as you start getting into a dialogue about that, it sounds like you‘re somehow being homophobic.”

Meanwhile, BBC recently released a video and photos for the “Sherlock” Christmas special titled “The Abominable Bride.”

Show creator Steven Moffat earlier hinted that the holiday special will be full of secret clues for Sherlock’s avid fans as well a secret message for its Chinese fans.

Moffat said: “It’s a new story, but if you know the original stories, you’ll see that it’s fashioned out of quite a few others. As ever with us, we’ve chosen several and there are loads of references. One of them you have to be able to speak Chinese to get (it).”

The upcoming Victorian-era Sherlock special will air on New Year’s Day on BBC One in the UK and PBS Masterpiece in the US, as well as in select cinemas worldwide.

orldwide.

SHIN - A little more if you haven't had enough yet. . . .

Here

Much to do about nothing. . . yet.

The "Devastating" Sherlock Season 4: What Will Happen to Mary?

by Katie Granger ⋅ Posted on August 28th, 2015 at 10:47am

Every time new information comes to light about the next season of the BBC's critically acclaimed Sherlock, everything just seems to get a little darker.

Speaking at Comic-Con last month, co-creator Stephen Moffat revealed that even though they're still in the early stages of writing they're really planning to up the ante this time around:

“We know very, very clearly what stories we’re doing. Where each episode goes, what the shattering, emotionally draining, you’ll never be the same again and you’ll never stop crying cliffhangers will be.” - Stephen Moffat

Wonderful.

Interestingly enough, according to the creators, the Moriarty mystery is something that's going to be wrapped up in the Victorian Christmas Special. So if that story-line is going to be all resolved before season 4 even starts, where does that leave us?

Well, a lot of people are speculating that the tragedy that Moffat speaks of will arrive in the form of the death of Mary Watson (Amanda Abbington).

It would make a lot of sense; given what we know of the character's murky backstory and the events of the season 3 finale, there's definitely something that she's running from. Add to that the fact that in the original story Mary and John only had a short marriage and it's not looking good for her.

The Original Mary Morstan

"She was blonde young lady, small, dainty, well gloved, and dressed in the most perfect taste. Her face had neither regularity of feature nor beauty of complexion, but her expression was sweet and amiable, and her large blue eyes were singularly spiritual and sympathetic."

"Sympathetic" aye

The Conan Doyle character Mary Morstan is a governess introduced in The Sign of the Four when she approaches Holmes seeking help. Her father, a Captain in the British Indian Army disappeared ten years earlier and following the death of his friend, Major Sholto (who you might remember from The Sign of Three) she had anonymously received six pearls in the mail, one per year for the last six years. The last pearl was accompanied by a letter telling Mary that she has been wronged in some way. She suspects that this is related to her father's disappearance a decade earlier, so takes the case to Sherlock Holmes.

They meet with the Major's son and discover that he's the one who has been sending the pearls; his way of providing compensation after her father died of a heart attack unbeknownst to her during an argument he had with Major Sholto. They were arguing over a treasure that Sholto had brought from India and, fearing he would be blamed for the Captain's death, Sholto got rid of his body and hid the treasure, which our heroes then embark on a mission to find. Along the way John Watson and Mary fall in love, and they become engaged at the end of the story. They marry a year later, in 1889.

And... That's kind of about it. She doesn't make any other appearances in the Conan Doyle stories. Her name crops up in conversation during a few of the stories but there's no significant mention of her until The Adventure of the Empty House (adapted in Sherlock as S03E01 - The Empty Herse). This short story is set after Sherlock supposedly died at the Reichenbach Falls in The Final Problem, three years earlier, and it marks his return. At his point we discover that Watson is now a widower. Sherlock comments briefly on the fact that Mary is dead, but her cause of death is never clarified. Since her date of death is unknown, I estimate they were married for between 2 - 5 years in the books.

Will our Sherlock Mary go out the same way?

"While we play fast and loose with the original stories, we generally follow the trajectory of what Conan Doyle did. So [John] gets married, and then Mary dies – so at some point presumably she’ll die." - Martin Freeman

In a Telegraph interview earlier this year Martin Freeman spoke about the possibility of killing off his on-screen wife, and he for one seemingly would not be surprised if that does end up happening.

Then again, Mary and John are about to have a child, and killing off pregnant women isn't a popular twist for this kind of show. Killing her off after the pregnancy would have narrative consequences too, as it would leave John a single father and therefore restricted by this role. Logistically the show may also benefit from having a more central female character in it, especially as Moffat has spoken about the difficult in adapting the "sexist" original stories.

Mary's character has been met with mixed reception, but I for one quite liked her. She's not without her faults, and I think we could do with a little more clarification on her past, but as John so aptly put it: "The problems of your past are your business. The problems of your future are my privilege"

Let's just hope that she has a future to look forward to.

Source