nakahara wrote:

Creepin' my way in to say how much I love Freeman's hair poofy in this series. I ADORE the hairstyles men wore in to 20's (Google images for 1920's hair p0rn) and something about how it flops in his face is so nostalgic, classically handsome, I just adore it. 

The 'final court of appeal' lines in the original text is something I just loved growing up about Holmes. I love the idea that when everything else fails, the desperate go to 221B Baker St and Holmes looks at the case with an objective eye. I wish it hadn't been Mary who narrated that bit though in the series, would have preferredJohn himself or even Lestrade but am just happy it was included. 

Schmiezi, I don't usually take sides on the relationships. But TFP has me undeniably seeing two men as a couple, who are emotionally but probably not physically intimate. Sherlock himself says John is family, and they function on the same wavelength throughout the entire episode, more than in any previous episode of any series. I am of the theory that most relationships are sadly categorized into only a few very small labels, when in fact most relationships change rapidly from one type to another in its evolution. I think for me, the important thing is I can't see them not functioning as a team from this point forward, and I really like the evidence that they will stick together like glue from now on. 

rlogcabin83 wrote:

To continue attacking the deceased equine

Just popping by to say that is hilarious, thank you  

I really enjoyed the observations you mentioned, would relaly like to believe the writers went this deep.

I have this crack theory that not only was the secret sibling not planned, the writers thought it was a good idea to introduce one after fans misinterpreted "Don't be absurd, I am not given to outbursts of brotherly compassion. You know what happened to the other one" . My crack/joke theory has Mycroft's really meaning 'you know what happened to my previous outburst of brotherly compassion', aka swooping in the get Sherlock out of Serbian jail, but prolonging it so he could watch his arse get kicked   

My reading on this is all about Sherlock's reply of "well, now you do". That is a pretty sarcastic comment, and I took it as such in this context. It is super surprising that John doesn't know after all this time, funerals and weddings when Sherlock's actual day of birth is, and given that Sherlock never freely offers anything about himself without being prompted I don't think he deliberately hid it. A lot of people, especially as we get older, don't bother to learn my birthday including really close friends, and we don't really want to celebrate them either haha. The celebration of it is kind of reserved for a social occasion in our youth, so from experience something tells me this scene was written for Sherlock to be a bit unwanting of the attention, and then John changed his plans to include Molly and Sherlock in the outing for cake  :D  

OK, I promised I would not analyse this episode. My partner had other ideas- and I watched it again. I caught this:



That is Katherine Neville's The Eight, from 1988 on the floor at the very beginning of the 221B cleanup montage. It is in fact, the very first shot we see in this sequence- and placed very deliberately. Sherlock's hand appears and picks up the magnifying glass, which is right behind the book. 

What is significant about "The Eight"? Well, it about the quest for a legendary chess set, through different timestreams. The story is full of codes and encypted messages. 

"What makes The Eight an extraordinary novel, then, is its capacity to combine fiction with documented historical elements, and fit them into a narrative full of connections between such diverse subjects as music, art, history, mythology, physics, chemistry, mathematics, philosophy and, in more speculative fields, mysticism, metaphysics and alchemy, among other esoteric traditions. Despite telling the story of the imaginary search for an imaginary object by a group of imaginary characters and, despite the fact that its narrative is centered on an element of fantastic properties, the reading of The Eight oozes narrative realism, especially in its first two thirds. The reason for that, aside from these historical characters and this chess-related framework, which we’ll soon analyze, is the the careful spatial and temporal composition of the novel."

http://www.katherineneville.com/about-my-work/my-bookessays/1581-2/

Also, Chapter 13 features a Sherlock Holmes quote: “I play the game for the game’s own sake”. 

Clearly, its placement is intentional, meant to be noticed, but what do you make of it? 'Poetry, or truth'? 

 

meowraahsan wrote:

​6. Mycroft's general reaction towards the atrocities that Euros was committing before his very eyes. He seemed to be the most human of the 3 (him, Sherlock and John), but that's plainly because he isn't as experienced as Sherlock and John when it comes to handling such high pressure situations. Sherlock and John clearly have nerves of absolute steel; true heroes. Mycroft was visibly disturbed by what was happening to them and even gagged when the governor shot himself. This is a side of M. Holmes we haven't seen before - a very vulnerable and horrified Mycroft Holmes. Phenomenal acting from Mark's part.

Although I largely did not like the episode, I sincerely liked this. I always felt Mycroft was pretty detached to what Sherlock and John did, his feelings towards 'legwork' were pretty indicative. So given Sherlock and John have a load of experience with this grisly, high pressure stuff, Mycroft certainly has his own situations but its pretty clear he is never on the front lines. I think he has a whole new respect for what Sherlock and John really do. 
 

SolarSystem wrote:

... said that the success of the show has made Mofftiss kind of high and that the most important thing for them seems to be to throw all sorts of clever stuff at us - and most of the stuff doesn't really add up. And I agree. Everything has to be so clever - which is totally fine, but instead of just showing it to us they are making a huge fuss about it in advance, telling us how clever and crazy it's going to be.
 

Yeah, then they have the nerve to get angry at their fans for searching for clues, apparently! Come on Moffatt and Gatiss, you can't have it both ways. 

Whisky wrote:

I wonder, is there an objective way to judge this show?

 

It's art! It is super hard to be objective about art, I think if people were only feeling objectively about an art form, the creators would feel pretty dead inside    I remember once having to completely take apart a certain TV show in the cutting room, because the director themself had become so attached to the material. It was one of the hardest things I ever had to do, and some. I'd like to think in the end it was better, because I was more subjective than the director was, and able to see it from a different place more in line with the audience. Likewise in theatre, the performers themselves are not objective; they look to the audience to amplify or tone down parts of their performance.

I do think as fans and art fanatics, we will intially see something through the lens of our experience, and this will change over time leading to more objectivity. But the beauty of art is that it is that initial, subjective emotionally reaction that stays with you as a viewer.