BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012.


You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?

Latest News » Sherlock to end because of Ben and Martin's 'frosty relationship' » March 3, 2017 9:08 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 48

Go to post

Not in Stephen Colbert's Late Show in December where he didn't just say that season 4 was the best season yet to "get a pavlovian response" (applause on cue) from Stephen's "acolytes" and said that being a subject of the queen of England was nothing compared to what Stephen's going to be in January. He was in biting top form there - and i love it http://cdn.boardhost.com/emoticons/grin.png

Latest News » Sherlock to end because of Ben and Martin's 'frosty relationship' » March 3, 2017 8:46 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 48

Go to post

I never had the impression that Matin was seriously annoyed at Benedict on the Hobbit set, he was just being his ironic/sarcastic self. To quote Mark Gatiss: "Martin Freeman is a very angry man, which is kind of part of his charm. He's so angry he always makes me laugh because of it. But he's got a really brilliant sort of dry sense of humour." At least from what I've seen in interviews with Martin, I couldn't agree more with Mark.

Character Analysis » How could the Holmes parents raise three children like them? » February 20, 2017 8:41 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 7

Go to post

I find this question particularly intriguing. Taking into consideration the (little) material there is to base a theory on, here are my thoughts on that subject: 

Mummy Holmes  - as we learn in HLV - is a genious herself. And while her husband doesn't seem to be a genious, I guess we can savely assme that he's not stupid either. So them having three genious children is not that unlikely to begin with. Mummy seems to have strong genes, after all. 

In the short family video we saw at the beginning of TFP Sherlock and Mycroft didn't seem sociopath-like at all. Sherlock seemed to be a happy, affectionate child playing around on the beach, at some point playfully hugging his elder brother. Mycroft on the other hand seemed a bit of a loner, but not sociopath-like either. He seemed to enjoy the attention he got from his brother, as we can see in the video and by the little smile on grown-up Mycroft's face when he watched the video. I can imagine that Mycroft being seven years older than Sherlock, being the nerdy and slightly overweight "know it all" kid in school, had a very hard time making friends (kids can be very cruel to kids that are different) and thus mostly kept to himself, learning early on what it means to be lonely. But being a bit of a loner didn't make him a sociopath back then.

I think Eurus, on the other hand, actually was a psychopath. But she's the only one of the three. I think that Sherlock and Mycroft were deeply scarred by what happend with Victor and everything that followed his disappearing and Eurus burning down their house. Sherlock must have been desparate, after all he was just a six year old boy who had just lost his best friend. And I can imagine that Mycroft, seening his little brother suffer so much over the loss of his best friend, actually convinced himself that he was much better off having no friend at all.

We don't know how quickly Sherlock started to rewrite his memories after Eurus was taken away, and we also don't know why his

The Final Problem » Hints of the Final Problem in previous episodes? » February 19, 2017 7:33 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 54

Go to post

Elemental wrote:

Yeah, I agree. I'm happy I brought this out (even though the thread has gone a bit OT, I'm sorry for that :S) because it has given me a lot to think about and it's been fun http://cdn.boardhost.com/emoticons/happy.png

 

Yes, we went a bit off OT there, but I hope nobody minded (and if anybody did, I'm sorry, too). I really enjoyed this discussion as well http://cdn.boardhost.com/emoticons/smile.png

 

The Final Problem » Hints of the Final Problem in previous episodes? » February 18, 2017 5:48 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 54

Go to post

besleybean wrote:

There are great unknowns: for example, because of Mycroft's official work, just how many deaths has he 'been responsible for' and I certainly think the issues are worth discussing: is a government sanctioned death more moral than an unofficial death etc?
But I do think we also have to take note of what we actually see on the screen: we have seen Sherlock 'execute' somebody, we have not seen Mycroft do the same and on the contrary he has stated that he 'will not kill'.
I think he's possibly stretching the truth there, but these are things we are actually shown on screen.
I am of course typing with the assumption that killing somebody is the worst thing you can do.

Indeed, we don't really know any details about Mycroft's work. Probably he has been responsible for people's deaths, but we learn on several occations that he's mainly trying to uncover/prevent terrorist attacks.

No, I don't think government sanctioned death is more moral than unofficial death. But no court will convict someone who was killing in self defence or killing somehone who's threatening someone elses's life. I can imagine Mycrof signing off on a mission to free hostages or something like that and on such a mission the criminals could have gotten killed. But if there's no other way to save the hostages' life, then that's not even illegal, but assisted selfe defence (in German it's called "Notwehrhilfe"; I can't really find the official legal term in English, but it means assisted self defence). 
 

The Final Problem » Hints of the Final Problem in previous episodes? » February 18, 2017 5:25 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 54

Go to post

Elemental wrote:

My comments on your examples (sorry that I don't quote each separately)

1) whipping a corpse (ASiP) -> I don't see a problem in that. The man is death and it will help solve problems with alive people involved.
2) keeping a severed head in his fridge (TBB) -> Don't see it unethical. Disgusting, yes, but unethical? I don't know. I guess I'm practical about death. In Spain we have a saying: "el muerto al hoyo y el vivo al bollo": the death to the grave, the alive eats the bread.
3) purposely solving a case slowly, not caring at all that there's a victim with a bomb strapped around his body who has to wait in agony hours longer because of the delay (TGG) -> He had the bigger picture in mind. I'm not sure this was unethical either. 
4) trying to give his best friend a hallucingogenic drug and scare him half to death to prove he was right (yes, the drug was not in the sugar, but he tried; HOB) -> Yeah, that one is not pretty xD Although I can understand why he did it (he again had the bigger picture in mind). I told you, I'm a sociopath http://cdn.boardhost.com/emoticons/lol.png
.
5) Forcing a confession out of his best friend by making him believe that he's about to die (TEH) -> Agree. Although I think maybe the last two have more to do with the dinamics between John and Sherlock than with Sherlock's ethics in general.
6) Showing a little boy pictures of a corpse and promising him to show him pictures of beheadings (TSoT) -> I don't find that unethical either. Again, corpses don't suffer anymore, and if the child gets scared, he will learn for the next time. 
8) Threatening Mary's ex and almost scaring him to death (TSoT; don't misunderstand me: I love that scene, but Sherlock's behaviour surely can't be considered ethical) -> I'm not sure whether this is a lack of ethics or a lack of social skills. That's what I meant in my previous post with naivety.
7) Shooting CAM in the head (HLV; yes, CAM had it coming, but what Sherlock did can't be

The Final Problem » Hints of the Final Problem in previous episodes? » February 17, 2017 9:13 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 54

Go to post

Elemental wrote:

I actually paused a bit after I wrote that and thought "really, does he?". But I decided to leave it because that's how I perceive the characters, although it's true that I don't have any concrete proof to back it  up. Maybe I see Sherlock more like a black-and-white, good-vs-evil kind of person, whereas Mycroft looks much more shady to me. Of maybe Sherlock is just more naive and Mycroft has more intelligence and power and ends up making more difficult choices that affect more people (like "do I leave Eurus alone with Moriarty, or do I stop preventing a terrorist attack when I know I could?").

Maybe my comment was also biased because I just rewatched HLV and Sherlock behaves really well in it, fighting CAM, trying to save Johns marriage, etc. 

My position in this is not fixed at all, so thanks for your input.

I do agree that both have "flexible" morals. One having stronger ethics than the other doesn't  mean either of them are moral compasses to anyone.

It's very interesting how differently characters can be perceived. But that's what keeps the discussion interesting http://cdn.boardhost.com/emoticons/happy.png
 I always had the impression that general ethics were a concept that Sherlock probably wasn't even fully aware of. It's not that he's purposely unethical, but he does a lot of stuff that is considered to be unethical by the majority of people. I think quite often this happens just because he doesn't seem to know better and doesn't have any moral compass at all. For example: 

1) whipping a corpse (ASiP)
2) keeping a severed head in his fridge (TBB)
3) purposely solving a case slowly, not caring at all that there's a victim with a bomb strapped around his body who has to wait in agony hours longer because of the delay (TGG)
4) trying to give his best friend a hallucingogenic drug and scare him half to death to prove he was right (yes, the drug was not in the sugar, but he tried; HOB)
5) Forcing a confession out of h

The Final Problem » Hints of the Final Problem in previous episodes? » February 17, 2017 5:45 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 54

Go to post

SolarSystem wrote:

Whisky wrote:

I wonder about Moriarty. So his intention was to get Sherlock killed, and himself as well, or that's what I thought in TRF.

I used to think the final problem was very close connected to "staying alive". To the way Moriarty was so bored, brilliant minded but bored.

If he intended to kill both of them, why put up a riddle. If he didn't intend to kill both of them, why bother about that dramatic set-up on the roof. Except from Sherlock jumping, there was no gain, was there. It was about Sherlock dying, and if it wasn't, why would he shoot himself? He seems to be the kind of man who would want to see the pay-off. What if Eurus never got out of that cell. What if she changed her mind - she isn't a reliable person to carry out some plan from years ago. Moriarty would have been dead and nothing would have happened to Sherlock. What kind of plan is that?

Those thoughts might actually be obsolete, because if I understood correctly Eurus has the power to reprogram people, right? (And even writing this is totally weird, it's so over the top...) So maybe what we saw in TRF didn't have anything to do with Moriarty really, but only with Eurus. Moriarty merely executed what Eurus had programmed him for. Which would negate quite a few things we saw in TRF...
 

I don't think Eurus reprogrammed Moriarty:

a) Sherlock already mentioned in TEH that Moriarty obviously had a death wish, which had already been aparent in TGG/ASiB in the swimmingpool scene: He did seem to enjoy the thought that Sherlock would kill them all by shooting the bomb. 

b) And then, in TFP, Eurus at some point mentions that Moriarty was quite keen on the idea of dying if his death would actually cause more problems than him being alive. So I don't think there was any reprogramming going on or necessary. What we saw in TRF was just a plan that had been partly Eurus' idea (especially the part about Sherlock having to chose between his won death and the death of h

The Final Problem » Hints of the Final Problem in previous episodes? » February 17, 2017 5:30 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 54

Go to post

besleybean wrote:

I don't know if Sherlock does have higher morals than Mycroft...

I fully agree with you there, I was quite puzzled by the remark of Sherlock having stronger ethics than Mycroft as well. Sherlock's morals/ethics are quite - what could be the right word - flexible? 
 

The Final Problem » There's something I don't understand. » February 17, 2017 5:19 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 30

Go to post

If it's not because Mycroft tries distancing himself from everything that could be too personal, then it could also be a sign of respect: At the end of TAB he kind of officially passes the "durty" (or priviledge?) of looking after Sherlock on to John ("look after him, please"), he entrusts John with Sherlock's safety and wellbeing. So the "Dr. Watson" could also be a sign of respect, showing that he thinks John worthy to take over that task. 

The Final Problem » There's something I don't understand. » February 17, 2017 12:59 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 30

Go to post

Wow, I never even noticed these changes. Maybe - after the painful events at the end of HLV - Mycroft was (purposely or subconsciously) trying (not very successfully as far as Sherlock is concerned) to distance himself even more from anything that could be even remotely close to friendship or caring (feelings which - according to him - could only lead to pain in the end). Thus the more formal, distant addressing of John.

The Final Problem » Why the fear of intelligence? » February 13, 2017 10:09 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 52

Go to post

Me, too. Anyway I love all the glimpses of "soft" Mycroft we got throughout the series ("your loss would break my heart" / "oh Sherlock, what have you done" / "look after him, please!", just to mention the most obvious ones. Or even the one in aSiP where he admits to John that he constantly worries about Sherlock. Or the one  in TBB where he forbids John to go out with the boring teacher - what was her name? Janette?  - and orderes him to stay with Sherlock because it's a danger night. But I'm drifting off topic, sorry). 

The Final Problem » TRF and TFP... was this Moriarty's plan all along? Really? » February 13, 2017 9:57 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 15

Go to post

Elemental wrote:

One question though: if Sherlock had chosen to avoid the fall and condemn his friends to death, John wouldn't have been in Sherrinford later on. And I think I remember Eurus saying something about Jim anticipating that Sherlock would choose John over Mycroft, didn't she?

Or maybe he didn't think it through that much?
 

Thanks for giving me an excuse to watch this scene again (not that I really needed one) http://cdn.boardhost.com/emoticons/smile.png
http://cdn.boardhost.com/emoticons/wink.png


What Eurus says is: "Jim Moriarty thought you'd make that choice, he was so excited." Then comes one of Moriarty's videos in which he says: "And here you are. The end of the line. Holmes killing Holmes." 

My explanation for this is that Moriarty, when he recorded this video, thought that - if Sherlock should chose not to jump off the roof - Eurus would kill Sherlock in the end. So when he said "Holmes killing Holmes", he actually meant Eurus killing Sherlock, not Sherlock killing Mycroft. Of course, for effect, Eurus created a situation in which she could use this video and make it look as if Moriarty had forseen everything that would happen, make Sherlock believe that his arch enemy had in fact been cleverer than him. But we only have her word that Moriarty had seen this coming, and she's not exactly trustworthy. 

So my explanation in short would be: Moriarty didn't forsee anything of what really happened in that room, he thought that Eurus would kill Sherlock, thus Holmes killing Holmes. 
 

The Final Problem » Why the fear of intelligence? » February 13, 2017 9:36 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 52

Go to post

Oh, then it seems we all agree http://cdn.boardhost.com/emoticons/smile.png

The Final Problem » Why the fear of intelligence? » February 13, 2017 9:42 am

Kae Em
Replies: 52

Go to post

besleybean wrote:

I don't know if Eurus would have even seen it as a distraction...I think her information may just have been part of a her incessant babble, although that is of course how she won her treats.  So she was possibly still quite manipulative at that stage.
I am sure Mycroft felt duty and possibly some love towards his sister, but it was certainly out of duty he would try and extract information from here.

I wasn't saying he mainly did it out of brotherly love and not because he felt duty. I'm just opposed to calling his actions "cold". It would have been cold if he had exploited her talents against her will, if he'd made her or tricked her into helping him. But he didn't. They just made a deal and this deal neither harmed her nor did she have to sacrifice anything for it, that's why I'm opposed to calling Mycroft's actions "cold". They were not exactly heartwarming, but reasonable and fair, not cold.
 

The Final Problem » Why the fear of intelligence? » February 13, 2017 9:11 am

Kae Em
Replies: 52

Go to post

nakahara wrote:

[
And we have no "genius" character, even the minor one, who actually has a pleasant personality and who actually works for the greater good of people. 
 

There are not many people out there - neither highly intelligent ones nor "normal" ones - who actually work for the greater good of people. Most of us mainly focus on making life as pleasant as possible for ourselfs and our closest family and friends. So the fact that none of the genius charachters on the show mainly works for the greater good of people doesn't bother me. And after all, I think Mycroft in his position as "the government" has the chance to do a lot for the greater good of people. Whenever we see him doing his job, he's actually working out plans on how to save lifes and how to protect people from terrorists.

As far as the pleasant personality is concerned, in my opinion neither Mycroft nor Sherlock have an unpleasant personality. Different, yes. A handful, yes. Not easy to read and understand, yes. But not unpleasant. I don't think people would like the show as much as they do if the main character had an unpleasant personality. But maybe that's just me . . .

The Final Problem » Why the fear of intelligence? » February 13, 2017 8:49 am

Kae Em
Replies: 52

Go to post

Liberty wrote:

What does seem cold is that Mycroft was using Eurus for the government - but presumably he was saving multiple lives by doing so.   We don't know his motivations for sure, but he's such a softie in TFP that I could believe that he is motivated to save humanity, just as Sherlock is.

Why does this seem "cold"? I assume helping out Mycroft must have been a welcomed distraction for Eurus, I can't imagine life being very interesting or diversified in that cell of hers. I assume Eurus must have quite enjoyed helping Mycroft bust those terrorists, proving that she was far cleverer than anyone else and making Mycroft give her Christmas treats. After all, Mycroft didn't force her to help him against her will, they had a bargain and she helped him willingly. And Mycroft actually gave her a chance to use her abilities to to something good that helpled save many lives, so I don't really see anything cold about Mycroft's actions there.
 

The Final Problem » Still unexplained secrets? » February 10, 2017 8:07 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 317

Go to post

Schmiezi wrote:

Well, he flatlined anyway. What really prevented him from dying was his inner Moriarty telling him "John Watson is in danger."

Agreed, but if he hadn't first figured out which way to fall to minimize the blood loss, he would have lost too much blood and not even made it to the hospital alive. Anway, my point was that in Sherlock's mind, Mycroft challenging him not to be stupid is actually a positive thing, because it makes him focus and helps him be as smart as he can. 

I like to imagine that Sherlock probably was a bit lazy or reluctant when it came to studying (remeber how he doesn't know the basics of the solar system?). So his parents probably were sometimes cross with him because he didn't work/study as hard as he could. So Mycroft came up with his "am I so much smarter than you" routine to make him work harder and do better, because of course little Sherlock would want to prove to his older brother (and his parents) that he wasn't stupid at all. 

 

The Final Problem » Still unexplained secrets? » February 10, 2017 4:39 pm

Kae Em
Replies: 317

Go to post

I also don't agree that Sherlock was pictured as "the family idiot". The fact that Eurus and Mycorft probably have a higher IQ than Sherlock doesn't make Sherlock an "idiot". And I also don't think that Mycroft seriously thinks that Sherlock is stupid. I think he used to "tease" his brother to challange him, to push him to be as good and as smart as he could be. And it worked: For example in the mind palace scene in HLV, Sherlock first doesn't realize that the bullet is still inside him. But then he wants to prove to Mycroft that he's not actually stupid and it's only then that he realizes that he hadn't heard the glass of the mirror behind him break and therefore the bullet was still inside him. So the motivation of proving to Mycroft that he's not stupid actually saved his life.

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum