BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » What Sherlock did...

sj4iy · January 16, 2014 12:46 am

onlydreamieverhave wrote:
Isn't that what the show is about though? "As always john You look but you dont see". Its a show where in all probability what your eyes tell u is not the truth, the idea is to look for the clues as to what is really happening...why they weren't searched at appledore, why we see though CAMs eyes as an electronic read out,...perhaps I am wrong but personally I think "sherlock the murderer" is about as likely as mary berry emptying out a packet of hobknobs onto a plate on this years great british bake off.

...I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say here?

Wholocked · January 16, 2014 12:52 am

Wait, are we now debating whether or not Sherlock really did murder CAM? Seriously?

He did. CAM is dead, and Sherlock shot him.

CAM didn't search them because he was over-confident in his own environment and believed he had already beaten them. Plus, as someone else has pointed out somewhere, when they were searched at Baker Street neither of them had anything (really) on them. CAM had no reason to suspect they would come with murderous intent (which they didn't, but Sherlock likes to have backup plans).

The fact that CAM could only threaten people with the information he had in his mind and had no physical proof of was enough to justify, to Sherlock, eliminating him. In canon, Sherlock destroys the vault of information after someone else murders CAM. In this episode, the vault and CAM were the same and Sherlock destroyed the vault (as per canon). That just so happened to mean that he had to destroy CAM in the process.

Mycroft is unable to get him completely out of a murder conviction because there was no physical proof that CAM was anything other than what he appeared to be (media magnate businessman). Everyone knew it, but there was no proof. Therefore, as far as a court of law would be concerned, Sherlock murdered him in cold blood for no reason. Mycroft did what he could to ensure Sherlock's potential for survival was maximised.

Moriarty is dead. CAM is dead. They're not coming back. It's all in the canon...as is Sherlock's faked death.

As for why it was shot the way it was...probably because it was more dramatic? And we were looking at it from Mycroft's perspective. The show runners weren't using distance to trick us, it was just more dramatic that way.

C'mon people...you're looking for mysteries that just aren't there.

Last edited by Wholocked (January 16, 2014 12:53 am)

sj4iy · January 16, 2014 1:07 am

Wholocked wrote:
Wait, are we now debating whether or not Sherlock really did murder CAM? Seriously?

He did. CAM is dead, and Sherlock shot him.

CAM didn't search them because he was over-confident in his own environment and believed he had already beaten them. Plus, as someone else has pointed out somewhere, when they were searched at Baker Street neither of them had anything (really) on them. CAM had no reason to suspect they would come with murderous intent (which they didn't, but Sherlock likes to have backup plans).

The fact that CAM could only threaten people with the information he had in his mind and had no physical proof of was enough to justify, to Sherlock, eliminating him. In canon, Sherlock destroys the vault of information after someone else murders CAM. In this episode, the vault and CAM were the same and Sherlock destroyed the vault (as per canon). That just so happened to mean that he had to destroy CAM in the process.

Mycroft is unable to get him completely out of a murder conviction because there was no physical proof that CAM was anything other than what he appeared to be (media magnate businessman). Everyone knew it, but there was no proof. Therefore, as far as a court of law would be concerned, Sherlock murdered him in cold blood for no reason. Mycroft did what he could to ensure Sherlock's potential for survival was maximised.

Moriarty is dead. CAM is dead. They're not coming back. It's all in the canon...as is Sherlock's faked death.

As for why it was shot the way it was...probably because it was more dramatic? And we were looking at it from Mycroft's perspective. The show runners weren't using distance to trick us, it was just more dramatic that way.

C'mon people...you're looking for mysteries that just aren't there.

...as if there weren't plenty of mysteries in the stories to work out already XD

RavenMorganLeigh · January 16, 2014 3:18 am

sj4iy wrote:
shezza wrote:
I'm not really sold on this new Sherlock, to be honest.

And CAM is #dead guys.
I honestly don't think he's 'new'. He's always had emotions from episode 1. He wasn't a robot. He laughed, got excited, was angry...how was he ever 'emotionless'? The only difference between then and now is that now he actually cares about other people. Suddenly he's not as selfish. The only way for him to be the same as he was before would be for him to never care for anyone...even John.

Yep-- I keep thinking to when John has snapped at Sherlock, and it was really obvious that Sherlock was hurt by it, though he just as obviously covered it up with brittle veneer of condescension. (The scene that comes to mind is from The Great game-(I think,) John goes off on Sherlock for not caring about the victims, only being concerned with the victims.

We see him freak the heck out duing Hounds-- and actually, I think that's why he drugged/tricked John-- when Sherlock was freaking out, John made light of it, didn't really take him seriously-- it seemed like a tit-for-tat move, like, "See? See? THIS is what I went through last night-- how do YOU like it."

the_dancing_woman · January 16, 2014 6:51 am

Wholocked wrote:
Wait, are we now debating whether or not Sherlock really did murder CAM? Seriously?

He did. CAM is dead, and Sherlock shot him.

CAM didn't search them because he was over-confident in his own environment and believed he had already beaten them. Plus, as someone else has pointed out somewhere, when they were searched at Baker Street neither of them had anything (really) on them. CAM had no reason to suspect they would come with murderous intent (which they didn't, but Sherlock likes to have backup plans).

The fact that CAM could only threaten people with the information he had in his mind and had no physical proof of was enough to justify, to Sherlock, eliminating him. In canon, Sherlock destroys the vault of information after someone else murders CAM. In this episode, the vault and CAM were the same and Sherlock destroyed the vault (as per canon). That just so happened to mean that he had to destroy CAM in the process.

Mycroft is unable to get him completely out of a murder conviction because there was no physical proof that CAM was anything other than what he appeared to be (media magnate businessman). Everyone knew it, but there was no proof. Therefore, as far as a court of law would be concerned, Sherlock murdered him in cold blood for no reason. Mycroft did what he could to ensure Sherlock's potential for survival was maximised.

Moriarty is dead. CAM is dead. They're not coming back. It's all in the canon...as is Sherlock's faked death.

As for why it was shot the way it was...probably because it was more dramatic? And we were looking at it from Mycroft's perspective. The show runners weren't using distance to trick us, it was just more dramatic that way.

C'mon people...you're looking for mysteries that just aren't there.

Well said, completely agree!

I particularly liked the canon reference, yes, here the vault of information is inside Milverton/Magnussen and Sherlock's aim when he went to Magnussen's lair was to destroy the vault.
This is was he did and this is how his mind works.
I think he was quite aware of what he would have to do when John asked him if he had a plan B, and I guess the final decisive moment was when he had to watch Magnussen 'play' with John.

No question about Magnussen being dead, I really don't need to see it from another perspective, as I said before I am just glad he met his end.

Wholocked · January 16, 2014 7:08 am

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:
sj4iy wrote:
shezza wrote:
I'm not really sold on this new Sherlock, to be honest.

And CAM is #dead guys.
I honestly don't think he's 'new'. He's always had emotions from episode 1. He wasn't a robot. He laughed, got excited, was angry...how was he ever 'emotionless'? The only difference between then and now is that now he actually cares about other people. Suddenly he's not as selfish. The only way for him to be the same as he was before would be for him to never care for anyone...even John.
Yep-- I keep thinking to when John has snapped at Sherlock, and it was really obvious that Sherlock was hurt by it, though he just as obviously covered it up with brittle veneer of condescension. (The scene that comes to mind is from The Great game-(I think,) John goes off on Sherlock for not caring about the victims, only being concerned with the victims.

We see him freak the heck out duing Hounds-- and actually, I think that's why he drugged/tricked John-- when Sherlock was freaking out, John made light of it, didn't really take him seriously-- it seemed like a tit-for-tat move, like, "See? See? THIS is what I went through last night-- how do YOU like it."

It's not a 'new' Sherlock actually. In fact, the Season 3 Sherlock is far more like his canon personality than Season 1 & 2. They always said that they originally made him younger so that he could develop into the Sherlock Holmes we know from the stories, and Season 3 Sherlock is far more like that. He has a definite morality, protects people from the legal consequences of their actions where he deems it morally appropriate to do so, intercedes on behalf of those less fortunate/intelligent than him and is far more empathetic and aware of what drives people. He's also more socially aware. Now, in canon he's still brusque, sometimes rude, is impatient with those less intelligent than himself, goes off half-cocked to prove a theory etc etc etc but he is more human and more emotionally aware.

I didn't see him as being 'new' at all this season, I saw him as being more the 'old' Holmes that we know.

Criosdan · January 16, 2014 8:14 am

Was there ever another option? Was there ever a real possibility of justice for CAM?
I can absolutely live with Sherlock killing CAM. Actually, I was relieved to see CAM die there.
For that I want to quote something from my favourite writer which cane into my mind.

~~Something Vimes had learned as a young guard drifted up from memory. If you have to look along the shaft of an arrow from the wrong end, if a man has you entirely at his mercy, then hope like hell that man is an evil man. Because the evil like power, power over people, and they want to see you in fear. They want you to know you're going to die. So they'll talk. They'll gloat.

They'll watch you squirm. They'll put off the moment of murder like another man will put off a good cigar.

So hope like hell your captor is an evil man. A good man will kill you with hardly a word.”

Well, Sherlock didn't talk much after learning there was no vault...

Schmiezi · January 16, 2014 8:20 am

Leave it to Terry Pratchett to tell us about things like that spot on! Thanks for the quote, Criosdan. I was thinking about it all the time since watching HLV but couldn't remember the book it came from.

Criosdan · January 16, 2014 8:25 am

Schmiezi: It's "Men at Arms" (I love the Guard books so much as well as the Witches.)

sj4iy · January 16, 2014 1:12 pm

Criosdan wrote:
Was there ever another option? Was there ever a real possibility of justice for CAM?
I can absolutely live with Sherlock killing CAM. Actually, I was relieved to see CAM die there.
For that I want to quote something from my favourite writer which cane into my mind.

~~Something Vimes had learned as a young guard drifted up from memory. If you have to look along the shaft of an arrow from the wrong end, if a man has you entirely at his mercy, then hope like hell that man is an evil man. Because the evil like power, power over people, and they want to see you in fear. They want you to know you're going to die. So they'll talk. They'll gloat.

They'll watch you squirm. They'll put off the moment of murder like another man will put off a good cigar.

So hope like hell your captor is an evil man. A good man will kill you with hardly a word.”

Well, Sherlock didn't talk much after learning there was no vault...

My husband and I looked at each other after the episode and mentioned that very quote.

/Discworld is awesome

Willow · January 16, 2014 1:57 pm

Criosdan wrote:
Was there ever another option? Was there ever a real possibility of justice for CAM?
I can absolutely live with Sherlock killing CAM. Actually, I was relieved to see CAM die there.
For that I want to quote something from my favourite writer which cane into my mind.

~~Something Vimes had learned as a young guard drifted up from memory. If you have to look along the shaft of an arrow from the wrong end, if a man has you entirely at his mercy, then hope like hell that man is an evil man. Because the evil like power, power over people, and they want to see you in fear. They want you to know you're going to die. So they'll talk. They'll gloat.

They'll watch you squirm. They'll put off the moment of murder like another man will put off a good cigar.

So hope like hell your captor is an evil man. A good man will kill you with hardly a word.”

Well, Sherlock didn't talk much after learning there was no vault...

Absolutely superb piece of linking there; positively inspired!

In this situation, CAM was gloating over the destruction of everything, as well as everybody, that Sherlock held dear; he simply did't realise that he was facing Carrot.

Admittedly, few people would, and CAM didn't strike me as being into recreational reading

Schmiezi · January 16, 2014 4:01 pm

Criosdan wrote:
Schmiezi: It's "Men at Arms" (I love the Guard books so much as well as the Witches.)

Thanks! ( The Guards books are great. IMO, "Night watch is one of the best time travel stuff I've ever read.)

Mrs.Wenceslas · January 16, 2014 4:20 pm

Night watch is great!

Davina · January 16, 2014 8:04 pm

CAM deserves to die in the canon. He deserved to die in this version too.

besleybean · January 16, 2014 8:10 pm

Well, as I don't believe in either murder or capital punishment, I have difficulty with that.
I understand why Sherlock did it and I'm glad he's escaped prison.
But this would be totally unacceptable in real life.

besleybean · January 16, 2014 8:19 pm

In theory yes.
But I think we have to let the Justice system run it's course.
CAM could have been closley monitored...
But actually, what did he do?
Did he actually kill anyone?
Oh, John's abduction...
Couldn't they have got evidence against him for that?
I don't like vigilantism and for me, this has never been part of Sherlock before.
He did it for John...

besleybean · January 16, 2014 8:28 pm

Destroy peoples repuatations yes and I'm sorry, somebody being made to feel bad enough and committing suicide is not the same as putting a bullet in somebodys' temple.
I am a tad disturbed if people do not respect the rule of Law.
I want to live in a civilised nation, not some banana republic with lynchings and mob rule.

Last edited by besleybean (January 16, 2014 8:29 pm)

RavenMorganLeigh · January 16, 2014 8:29 pm

I don't think there was any way to actually prosecute CAM-- no actual files, it was all in his head. To make matters worse ( and this seemed like an editorial plot point) Magnussen (sp?) asserted that he could print whatever he wanted without having to prove anything--it' NEWS, not TRUTH. You can print insinuations and rumors, and it becomes truth in the public eye, and someone's life is ruined. We went through all this with Kitty Riley in TRF. Magnussen is a thousand times worse, and the threat he help over Mary, and therfore John and Sherlock-- was not only possible prison time, but being hunted down and killed by the enemies she's made in her life as an assassin/merc/agent/etc, .

And I doubt that Lady Smallwood's husband's suicide was the only death caused by what, to me was a very good portait of a *real, bonafide clinical sociopath*.

It would never stop. Magnussen WAS the vault. Sherlock destroyed the vault.

Last edited by RavenMorganLeigh (January 16, 2014 8:32 pm)

besleybean · January 16, 2014 8:34 pm

I get all that.
Still not convinced it was right.

besleybean · January 16, 2014 8:42 pm

He just wanted to stop the suffering and I get that.
I just don't think it's a very good precedent for a legal system...which I know soumds werid! I mean it's a bit of a slippery slope argument.
Fine on TV...
Of course it's the ' should somebody have assassinated Hitler?' argument.
And possibly on reflection it may have been better if somebody did, altho I dunno, it could have actually got worse...
'Be careful what you wish for', kind of thing.
I mean it was kind of different in Sherlock's case, cos he knew all about CAM...
But, I still have concerns.

Last edited by besleybean (January 16, 2014 8:42 pm)