SusiGo wrote:

This is all very interesting and may the way they are telling the story. But then I must admit that they apply a logic that goes against the gut feelings of many viewers:

Just take Mycroft. We are shown again and again that Sherlock is his one weakness, his soft spot, the one person he truly loves and wants to save. And this person is nearly killed. And Mycroft accepts her remaining in his brother's life just like that, even seems to consult her on questions of national security. 

While on the other hand he locked away the other woman threatening his brother's life for decades. 

To me this does not make sense - not even, and especially not, within the universe of the show. 
 

 
I will never understand the obsession of the writers with Mary. I feel every logic has to bow to make her look the greatest fictional character ever written. Nothing seems as important as that.

SusiGo wrote:

Maybe Steven Moffat should not say things like "Mary shot Sherlock nicely". No idea if he was joking but this is just stupid. 

 ;-))
http://marcespot.tumblr.com/post/161172399119

SusiGo wrote:

The main problem for me is not Mary shooting Sherlock which made for a big dramatic climax. The problem is everything that came afterwards. I would have been on board with the story if they had made a cut here, take her to prison, let her be shot, escape, whatever. But the whole forgiveness, TST as an episode in which she took centre stage, another episode with her as an apparition, etc. was just too much for me. Mofftiss said it was the "Sherlock and John show". And with writing Mary in the centre they destroyed the dynamic that has been at the core of the SH universe for 130 years. I do not understand why they deemed it necessary after people had adored six episodes in which the Sherlock/John dynamic was enough.

And as for your first sentence: this is the trouble with Mary indeed. Sadly so. 

 
Hello guys, haven't been around for a while, mostly because of some real life issues, but also because it definetly took me some time to come to terms with S4.
I agree with everything Susi said in her last two posts. That nails my thoughts exactly. And also Liberty's remark of Mary being too big a thing to be easily disliked is perfect. That's exactly it. And I'm no fan of Amanda's acting tbh.
On the one hand I see bb's point that this is a fan forum and not a critic's board. On the other hand I simply see no reason for the educated and intelligent people around here to simply eat what is served. That is not how real life works. I always compare my relationship with BBC Sherlock with a marriage. I fell head over heels in love and with time passing by I got aware of things that I didn't like so much, things and decisions that annoyed me. Do I head for a divorce straight away? No, I don't. I try to make it work. Remains to be seen, if it will be successful.

tonnaree wrote:

Mothonthemantel wrote:

Great link Susie thankyou.Very telling comparisons.

An eloquent and well put together article on why Johnlock should be in screenspy yesterday too.

http://www.screenspy.com/articles/a-case-for-johnlock-why-sherlock-should-embrace-its-ship-of-dreams/

This article almost made me cry.
After having johnlockers be called crazy and obsessed it touched me so much to see our feelings treated with dignity and respect.  To have our reasoning present in such a calm and thoughtful way.

Regardless of what ends up happening on the show I will always treasure this author standing up for us.
 

 
Late to the party, but I loved that article, too. It's all we always said in here. Bless the author for speaking up at this time.

SusiGo wrote:

Heteronormativity, if you ask me. Texting a woman means of course much more than sacrificing your own life over and over for a man. 

 
That was one of the few things that didn't sit right with me in this episode. Forcing Sherlock to a female character that appeared in exactly one episode. And furthermore Mycroft with a woman, I ask you!

ewige wrote:

OMG

Sounds like a huge spoiler for the next eps so I'll just put in in tags. Just in case. Even tho I don't really believe PBS would reliease such a spoiler! Or maybe they just don't know what they are doing O.o
Martin Freeman on TST:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRn6x1TTxwE
Did he seriously say "pretend" to die and "pretend" to be grieving?
Didn't sound like he was talking about them acting. Sounds more like they were acting being pretending.

 
Okay, I don't think this is meant to be a spoiler it's

that he says "pretending" in the sense of "acting", doesn't he? Like "we pretend to be dying and grieving but we act."

SolarSystem wrote:

SusiGo wrote:

221b was never just a flat, it was a mirror of their friendship and of Sherlock's mind and personality. For me it is clever and heartbreaking to see how the flat reflects all that has happened since the fall.

Very true. And since there doesn't seem to be a way back, I suppose 221B has to collapse completely before there can be a new start and a rebuild of 221B and the relationship between Sherlock and John.
 

 
That makes me think of the promo pics with the crumbled wallpapers behind the actors.. 
I don't know if I'm reading too much into it but could an destroyed Baker Street and maybe a new flat, hopefully for the two boys together, be what both Martin and Ben talked about? It would not be exactly an end to the series but would most definetly feel like a major new start that needs his time?
Plus,just vaguely plotting in my head here, maybe even without Mrs. Hudson? I think of this tweet about her having maybe left and the sinister picture....
Maybe the time for this very flat will be over at the end of S4?

Well, how about that tweet "R.I.P."? (Not that I would have tweeted him "If I don't get Johnlock I will kill myself" in the first place but anyway...)
How about that tweet confirming the content of the interview and what came after with the "garbeled mistranslation", I might be wrong but it didn't sound too friendly...

It's good that we agree on the variety of possibilities, I think.
I was certainly a bit over the top but honestly: it was not me expressing the fear of the Moftiss getting attacked (which is completely out of bounds, I certainly agree on that), and it was not me citing interviews where the Moftiss more or less called the idea of seeing johnlock dumb.

ewige wrote:

I may get quite a different view of him as a writer if it turns out that all the clues were for nothing ;)
Unless Moftiss somehow come up with a better fitting resolution.

 
Thank you, ewige, this and this exactly!
Especially again after the I love you trailer. Sorry to repeat myself, but they absolutely know what they are doing by this.
(And no, I also do not think they are giving away JL here, just to be clear)