I have just seen the unaired pilot and wanted to get my thoughts out. 

The overall look, sound and feel of the pilot - My daughter who saw bits of it as she passed by me said that it didn't look as good and sounded weird. I explained to her that this was never aired and that it was the equivalent of a first draft. There was no post-production work done on it to fix errant lighting, or filter sounds, or pick the perfect background sound effects etc... I'm no expert in that field, but I do know that post-production takes almost as long as the actual shooting. The opening credits had a temporary feel to it. If the BBC had wanted to take the pilot as it was I am pretty sure that we may well have ended up with the more composed opening sequence we see in the series. 

The overall feel of the pilot was darker and grittier, but that again may have more to do with it being pre post-production.

The story and much of the dialogue is very much the same, taking minor turns here and there with the most notable divergence being when Sherlock gets in the cab after being drugged. There was an aspect of that scene that I liked rather a lot actually. Seeing Sherlock drugged and essentially abducted right in front of his friends who were watching had a gut wrenching feel to it, however, I believe that the final solution of having Sherlock go willingly with the cabbie was better. There is something to be said for "drugged Sherlock". I thought that Mr. Cumberbatch's drugged scene with the cabbie in the pilot was actually better than the drugged Sherlock scene in SiB. 

The addition of the scene running through the streets and rooftops of London to catch up to the cab in the final version gave the entire episode a more action/adventure feel to it. That can be good or bad depending on your perspective. It certainly pointed out the physcho-somatic nature of John’s limp more clearly.

Anderson looks different with the facial hair. He actually looks less like a dick with that hair bec

Sam wrote:

Yeah, OCD doesn't have to do with always wanting things neat/perfect. It's when someone has to perform "rituals" to deal with extreme anxiety. I don't think Sherlock has this

I don't think he cares much about things being tidy either. His room is clean but if he had an issue, he'd want the whole flat to be neat I believe

I agree with this. My daughter has OCD and her room is usually a flippin' mess. She wrote up a list of the things she obssesses about and what the rituals are that she needs to follow or she feels awkward and out of sorts. This list was necessary for the phychitrist so that we could get her on the right medication. (before I get told about the evils of medicating kids - she is also cutting and this is a necessary step)

One such behavior is: if she is walking along on a sunny day and the sun is coming through the trees in a dappled fashion, if she steps on a shadow with her left foot she has to step on another shadow of the same shade with her right foot or she can't move forward. It is the same with the tiles on the floor at school. To watch her walk down the hall is a strange sight. Once I saw her list I was shocked to realize how many obssessive traits she has because she hides them very well. She has an IQ of 140 and I think maybe the reason she has gotten as far as she has without this issue being addressed may be due to that intellectual advantage.

There is a TV show in America called Monk. He is a private dectetive with severe OCD but he still is able to solve crimes, even if he has to see his shrink several times over the course of a case. This is a TV version of someone with OCD and is overstated because that is where they get the comic relief, but some of the things that the character does, I see my own child doing.  The point is this is not Sherlock at all, at least not the BBC Sherlock version of the character IMO.
 

Sumac60 wrote:

Hey, the forum's still awake! Cool, because I watched "Scandal" a while ago and noticed a detail I can't figure out. When Sherlock is examining the phone under the microscope, we assume it's the real phone, because why else would he be viewing it? Also he has no reason to lie to Molly when he say's "it's a woman's". But then when she inadvertently gives him an idea about the address as the password, he turns and goes into the cupboard (or something) curiously marked with the sign for radioactivity, then enters the address in that phone as a possible code, which of course is wrong. Which phone is the real one now, then? If he's creating a perfect copy to fool Adler, why look at the copy under the microscope? And if the real one is under the microscope, why enter the code in the fake?

Or am I just blind and don't remember the scene?

I believe that he is viewing the phone via digital remote x-ray. The phone is in the x-ray machine. The image is being sent to the lense where he is viewing it. When Molly gives him an idea for the password he opens up the x-ray compartment and fishes the phone out to try out the password. The radiation symbol is there to signify that when the unit is active there is gamma radiation within the compartment, the same way you will see the radiation symbol outside x-ray room doors in a hospital. 

I have not personally used one of the remote digital machines. I work for a small rural hospital that does not have that sort of budget. This kind of unit is really for labratory purposes and would for obvious reason not work on live patients which are the bulk of the people I x-ray. It might be useful for other purposes such as still born fetal images, but I'm sure that it is mostly slotted for forensics work that requires x-ray penetration.
 

My favorite minor character so far I think would be Henry Knight played by Russell Tovey in HoB. That character stood out to me a very genuine. I loved his flip out down in the hollow when the "Hound" turned up scaring the beegeebiz out of Lestrade, John, and everyone else.

Of note: Isn't it interesting that the trained police officer Lestrade shot at the Hound twice and missed twice and John Watson shot at it twice hitting it both times. That always stuck out to me.

Still no disrespect to Lestrade intended. He is my 4th favorite charcater. I do love his snark and his wisdom.

Schmiezi wrote:

Alice, I've just read your story and dropped a few sentences there as review.
I always love stories in which John is clever enough to get that something was wrong.

=13pxThanks Schmiezi. Glad you liked it. From what the show has shown us, John is a very intelligent man. He had Sherlock figured out pretty quickly. Most people tell him to piss off because they cannot see past the fascade. John did.

Swanpride wrote:

It also explains to me Sherlock habit to sabotage John's relationships. It's not because he is in love with him, but because he doesn't really want to share "his" John. He doesn't want to be alone again.
=13px

I think you've hit the nail on the head here. 
 

ancientsgate wrote:

I get real prickly when people who don't understand the concept of fan fic and who aren't interested in it start with comments about fan fic readers. Fine with me if someone doesn't like it and/or doesn't get it, but I don't appreciate comments about our "fangirl flailing" and how all of us must be naive schoolgirls.

May I ask a question without offending? Is this why you felt that I was judging you or folks who like slash? And is this why you felt offended when I commented about younger people not having as much understanding about the different facets of love? I've been trying to wrap my head around why my post irritated you and that other poster. 

If this helps any I'll give you some background on myself so that it may help you to understand my post better. I am older than many authors of fan fic, but not the oldest by any means. I have been writing fan fiction for almost 10 years now as well as reading it. So I am not exactly new to it.

I am one of those authors/readers who is a a bit of a slave to cannon. Now in the case of Sherlock Holmes that term has subcategories. If I were reading/writing about the Sherlock Holmes that we see Benedict Cumberbatch portray that would be very different than the Sherlock that Robert Downey Jr. portrays. Cumberbatch's Sherlock is practically asexual where as Downey's Sherlock was found by the maid tied spread eagle to the bed, naked as a jay bird with a throw pillow over his hoop-d-do. These characters may both be Sherlock Holmes but their cannon is quite different.

The point is, that I will read and write stories that follow cannon for any given character. I still do not see the BBC Sherlock and Watson as a romantic couple, so given that I guess I don't read Johnlock. I would not say that a Johnlock story is bad, just not my cup of tea. 

As for my comments about younger readers, I stand by that observation. Many young people simply have not lived long enough or experienced enough of life and

Davina wrote:

To which we can add Mycroft becoming a New Age Traveller. (I do not intend any offence to New Age Travellers. Nor indeed to middle-aged members of The Establishment).

LOL 

Speaking from the point of view of a middle-aged member of anything I appreciate your caveat! (Don't let the avatar fool you. That IS a pic of me as I choose to be seen and how I view myself in my dreams )
 

Davina wrote:

I'm happy to proof read as well if you pm the phrases, or the whole thing.

)

Will the PM system handle 4,000 word messages. My chapters for this story are averaging that number of words.

I'm on my way home from work in a moment so I'll send them along later after a nap. (Night shift in the snow Urgh!)

 

Hello - I thought I'd throw my own 2 cents in. I see John Watson and Sherlock Holmes as two broken men who need each other.

Sherlock has little to no understanding of appropriate emotional-social behavior. He is so intent on his mind working overtime that "sentiment" just gets in the way. This is a trait that, to some degree, he shares with his brother Mycroft, making one wonder what their childhood must have been like. John provides Sherlock with a social and moral conscience. He acts as a GPS for the genius when he gets so lost inside his own mind that he forgets such simple things that the rest of the world takes for granted, such as sleeping and eating. John often acts as a guide to appropriate social behavior which seem to be quite beyond Sherlock. John acts as protector, and guardian in some ways, brother or confidant in other ways. He seems to be uniquely capable of taking in Sherlock's acerbic rhetoric and seeing past the barbs to hear the truth of what he is trying to convey. Basically John is Sherlock's filter, since he operates without one, hence the reason most people tell Sherlock to piss off.

John Watson is also broken, but in a very different manner. Somehow being sent home from the war in Afghanistan due to the injury he suffered destroyed his confidence in not only himself, but the world in which he lives. We see him dreaming of combat in the opening sequence and waking with a start. He is panting and upset and by observation he looks as though these images are haunting him. Mycroft Holmes on the other hand feels that John actually misses the war. I think that Mycroft only has it half right.
 
The war changed John as it would change anyone. He felt the most alive while in that combat situation because he needed to stay sharp and focused in order to survive. Now that he is back home in England with no war to keep his mind working on a survival basis, he doesn't know what to do with himself. He doesn't have the need for adrenaline surging through h