BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012.


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



January 19, 2014 5:56 pm  #21


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

sj4iy wrote:

Willow wrote:

Swanpride wrote:

Not every high building has windows which can't be opened...(hell, first season featured one with a door and a balcony), and if there is one room in the whole building with a working window, it's CAM's personal office. It's like in TBB - nobody secures it because nobody expects anyone to be able to climb that high.

I am also inclined to like Mary, mostly because I see the situation in the empty house as some sort of test for her. When she says that she would do everything to protect John from the truth, that's the moment she had me, because it tells me that at least her love is honest (even if she is wrong in this instance - think about it, if she had talked to Sherlock from the get go, Magnusson wouldn't have had a chance against them both).

I didn't say they did; I was referring specifically to the design of office blocks in the City which we were shown in the programme. They are designed with closed system heating/air conditioning; there are no opening windows because that destroys the whole system, and modern building codes preclude that.

In the homes in the Barbican, by contrast, there are almost full height sliding glass doors onto the balconies which can be opened, but only from the inside; if you were going to have a billionaire up on the 41st floor of one of the tower blocks then you could have rather a cool scene of someone scaling the building. Unfortunately, given the number of security cameras in the City s/he would be spotted in minutes but it would be a tad more plausible.

I think that the writers' evasiveness on the question of how she got in is likely to be related to the plot lines in the next season, which promises to be fun

As for Mary herself, I find it hard to warm to someone willing to kill anyone who stops her getting something she wants; she really is a psychopath. All facade and nothing inside, beyond 'I want'; I don't think emblazoning her face across the fake houses in Leinster Gardens was solely Sherlock's Dead Man's Lever to the police. It's a very clever representation of what she really is, and I expect to learn more about what she is in S4. The one thing I do not expect to see is Mary becoming a better person; why should she? She has nearly killed someone and got away with it; it will merely have fed her vanity, and encouraged her to believe that she can carry on doing what she wants and there will never be a payback time...
 

She's not 'facade' with nothing behind her...she's very clearly a human being who has a terrible past and wants to live a normal life.  I think you are making her to be a caricature when she is not.  She's not evil, nor is she vain.  If she were, Sherlock would never have agreed to help her.  He saw that she loved his best friend and was willing to do anything to protect their lives together.  Most people would do the same in her position.  I know I would.  Not all of us have the good fortune to have never made a mistake in our lives, and if she really did grow up an orphan, it would explain why she became an assassin in the first place.

I don't think Mary is nearly as terrible a character as some people are making her out to be.

We don't have any evidence that she wants to lead a normal life. She specifically states that she was drawn to John because he's not normal, he's dangerous and she can't live without that. She likes it even more when Sherlock returns because then there's the chance of more action and more excitement. She isn't normal and she doesn't want to be normal; she does, however, want to be alive, hence creating a new identity because too many people hated her and wanted to kill her.

I do believe that someone who murders people for money is evil; there really is no point for me in discussing that aspect because it won't change.  And no, most people wouldn't do the same thing in her position; most people don't kill to get what they want. You might, indeed you say you would, but I am sure that is just rhetoric on your part. She does. Incidentally, strangely enough many children grow up as orphans but very, very few of them become hired killers.

She demonstrates her vanity very obviously when it is flicked by Sherlock out thinking her, setting her up in Leinster Gardens when she thought she was being clever. She really does not like it one little bit, and she makes it very clear. And when Sherlock's plane takes off she thinks she is home free and very happy about it.

Sherlock chose not to turn her in because she is pregnant, presumably by John; he was, I think, motivated partly by guilt in having hurt John, and partly because he has a romanticised view of motherhood. But for whatever reason it still does not change her; she remains what she always was. Someone prepared to kill anyone who may get in her way...
 

 

January 19, 2014 5:57 pm  #22


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

Willow wrote:

sj4iy wrote:

Willow wrote:

I didn't say they did; I was referring specifically to the design of office blocks in the City which we were shown in the programme. They are designed with closed system heating/air conditioning; there are no opening windows because that destroys the whole system, and modern building codes preclude that.

In the homes in the Barbican, by contrast, there are almost full height sliding glass doors onto the balconies which can be opened, but only from the inside; if you were going to have a billionaire up on the 41st floor of one of the tower blocks then you could have rather a cool scene of someone scaling the building. Unfortunately, given the number of security cameras in the City s/he would be spotted in minutes but it would be a tad more plausible.

I think that the writers' evasiveness on the question of how she got in is likely to be related to the plot lines in the next season, which promises to be fun

As for Mary herself, I find it hard to warm to someone willing to kill anyone who stops her getting something she wants; she really is a psychopath. All facade and nothing inside, beyond 'I want'; I don't think emblazoning her face across the fake houses in Leinster Gardens was solely Sherlock's Dead Man's Lever to the police. It's a very clever representation of what she really is, and I expect to learn more about what she is in S4. The one thing I do not expect to see is Mary becoming a better person; why should she? She has nearly killed someone and got away with it; it will merely have fed her vanity, and encouraged her to believe that she can carry on doing what she wants and there will never be a payback time...
 

She's not 'facade' with nothing behind her...she's very clearly a human being who has a terrible past and wants to live a normal life.  I think you are making her to be a caricature when she is not.  She's not evil, nor is she vain.  If she were, Sherlock would never have agreed to help her.  He saw that she loved his best friend and was willing to do anything to protect their lives together.  Most people would do the same in her position.  I know I would.  Not all of us have the good fortune to have never made a mistake in our lives, and if she really did grow up an orphan, it would explain why she became an assassin in the first place.

I don't think Mary is nearly as terrible a character as some people are making her out to be.

We don't have any evidence that she wants to lead a normal life. She specifically states that she was drawn to John because he's not normal, he's dangerous and she can't live without that. She likes it even more when Sherlock returns because then there's the chance of more action and more excitement. She isn't normal and she doesn't want to be normal; she does, however, want to be alive, hence creating a new identity because too many people hated her and wanted to kill her.

I do believe that someone who murders people for money is evil; there really is no point for me in discussing that aspect because it won't change. And no, most people wouldn't do the same thing in her position; most people don't kill to get what they want. You might, indeed you say you would, but I am sure that is just rhetoric on your part. She does. Incidentally, strangely enough many children grow up as orphans but very, very few of them become hired killers.

She demonstrates her vanity very obviously when it is flicked by Sherlock out thinking her, setting her up in Leinster Gardens when she thought she was being clever. She really does not like it one little bit, and she makes it very clear. And when Sherlock's plane takes off she thinks she is home free and very happy about it.

Sherlock chose not to turn her in because she is pregnant, presumably by John; he was, I think, motivated partly by guilt in having hurt John, and partly because he has a romanticised view of motherhood. But for whatever reason it still does not change her; she remains what she always was. Someone prepared to kill anyone who may get in her way...
 

The fact that she gave it all up 5 years prior, hid her past, became a nurse and settled down with the man she loved completely contradicts that.  And she doesn't say that she was drawn to him, she says that he was drawn to her.

And if you think that anyone who is paid to kill people is evil, then I suppose that includes every soldier who was paid by their government to kill someone, police officer who was paid to shoot a bad guy, every agent who was paid to kill those who were a threat to the government, and even every doctor who was paid to mercifully end the suffering of those with chronic illness.  Our society is what has determined when it is 'acceptable' to kill...many people will think what I wrote above is not at all problematic, and many will think that each one of those situations are 'evil'.

However, I don't believe 'evil' is that easily defined.  No one is either wholey good or wholey bad.  People may do terrible things, but very few think they are doing wrong when they are doing it.  Who was more evil?  A dictator who convinces people to kill others while never getting his hands dirty, or the people who actually carried out the killings?  The man who kills a child or the man paid to execute that man for his crimes?  And as far as Mary goes, who is more evil...those who paid her to kill or her for killing those she was paid to kill?

"Evil" is not black and white, and never has been.

Last edited by sj4iy (January 19, 2014 6:21 pm)


__________________________________________________________________Bigby: Will you shut up?
Colin: Well, maybe if my throat wasn’t so parched, I wouldn’t have to keep talking.
Bigby: Wait, that doesn’t make se-
Coline: Just give me a drink, please.
 

January 19, 2014 6:14 pm  #23


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

In regard to Mary's made up tragic past..if this turns out to be true.
If  Mofftis go the abuse excuse route I will be very angry and do as all angry english people do..write the bbc for my money back!

A tragic past or w/e well so what. Yes it is sad..yes you poor person.
But no...that does not excuse choosing to do bad things to other people years later.

Only things happening right now do..it must be real and it must be relevant and it must be immediate..that is not only opinion but I believe the law.

Last edited by lil (January 19, 2014 6:15 pm)

 

January 19, 2014 6:22 pm  #24


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

sj4iy wrote:

Willow wrote:

sj4iy wrote:

She's not 'facade' with nothing behind her...she's very clearly a human being who has a terrible past and wants to live a normal life.  I think you are making her to be a caricature when she is not.  She's not evil, nor is she vain.  If she were, Sherlock would never have agreed to help her.  He saw that she loved his best friend and was willing to do anything to protect their lives together.  Most people would do the same in her position.  I know I would.  Not all of us have the good fortune to have never made a mistake in our lives, and if she really did grow up an orphan, it would explain why she became an assassin in the first place.

I don't think Mary is nearly as terrible a character as some people are making her out to be.

We don't have any evidence that she wants to lead a normal life. She specifically states that she was drawn to John because he's not normal, he's dangerous and she can't live without that. She likes it even more when Sherlock returns because then there's the chance of more action and more excitement. She isn't normal and she doesn't want to be normal; she does, however, want to be alive, hence creating a new identity because too many people hated her and wanted to kill her.

I do believe that someone who murders people for money is evil; there really is no point for me in discussing that aspect because it won't change. And no, most people wouldn't do the same thing in her position; most people don't kill to get what they want. You might, indeed you say you would, but I am sure that is just rhetoric on your part. She does. Incidentally, strangely enough many children grow up as orphans but very, very few of them become hired killers.

She demonstrates her vanity very obviously when it is flicked by Sherlock out thinking her, setting her up in Leinster Gardens when she thought she was being clever. She really does not like it one little bit, and she makes it very clear. And when Sherlock's plane takes off she thinks she is home free and very happy about it.

Sherlock chose not to turn her in because she is pregnant, presumably by John; he was, I think, motivated partly by guilt in having hurt John, and partly because he has a romanticised view of motherhood. But for whatever reason it still does not change her; she remains what she always was. Someone prepared to kill anyone who may get in her way...
 

The fact that she gave it all up 5 years prior, hid her past, became a nurse and settled down with the man she loved completely contradicts that.
 

 
You have adduced no evidence to support your claim that she gave it all up 5 years prior, and indeed it is contradicted by her possession of a gun with silencer, ammunition, ninja outfits etc., not to mention the money she was obtaining from somewhere. People cannot live on part time nurses pay.

Becoming a nurse, part time or otherwise, is not proof of moral integrity; oddly enough, nurses have been known to kill people.

Settling down with the man you love sounds good, until you consider people like Rosemary West; it's still no proof of moral integrity.

She killed people, for money, and she was perfectly prepared to kill anyone who got between her and what she wanted. She said so.

She came very close to killing the person her husband cared for the most, next to her, in the whole world because she would rather cause John pain than give him up.

That isn't love, it's the sort of obsessive fixation that drives stalkers and bunny boilers; in fact an entire Phd thesis could be written on the different conceptions of love in Sherlock's behaviour and hers in this episode.

 

January 19, 2014 6:34 pm  #25


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

Willow wrote:

sj4iy wrote:

Willow wrote:

We don't have any evidence that she wants to lead a normal life. She specifically states that she was drawn to John because he's not normal, he's dangerous and she can't live without that. She likes it even more when Sherlock returns because then there's the chance of more action and more excitement. She isn't normal and she doesn't want to be normal; she does, however, want to be alive, hence creating a new identity because too many people hated her and wanted to kill her.

I do believe that someone who murders people for money is evil; there really is no point for me in discussing that aspect because it won't change. And no, most people wouldn't do the same thing in her position; most people don't kill to get what they want. You might, indeed you say you would, but I am sure that is just rhetoric on your part. She does. Incidentally, strangely enough many children grow up as orphans but very, very few of them become hired killers.

She demonstrates her vanity very obviously when it is flicked by Sherlock out thinking her, setting her up in Leinster Gardens when she thought she was being clever. She really does not like it one little bit, and she makes it very clear. And when Sherlock's plane takes off she thinks she is home free and very happy about it.

Sherlock chose not to turn her in because she is pregnant, presumably by John; he was, I think, motivated partly by guilt in having hurt John, and partly because he has a romanticised view of motherhood. But for whatever reason it still does not change her; she remains what she always was. Someone prepared to kill anyone who may get in her way...
 

The fact that she gave it all up 5 years prior, hid her past, became a nurse and settled down with the man she loved completely contradicts that.
 

 
You have adduced no evidence to support your claim that she gave it all up 5 years prior, and indeed it is contradicted by her possession of a gun with silencer, ammunition, ninja outfits etc., not to mention the money she was obtaining from somewhere. People cannot live on part time nurses pay.

Becoming a nurse, part time or otherwise, is not proof of moral integrity; oddly enough, nurses have been known to kill people.

Settling down with the man you love sounds good, until you consider people like Rosemary West; it's still no proof of moral integrity.

She killed people, for money, and she was perfectly prepared to kill anyone who got between her and what she wanted. She said so.

She came very close to killing the person her husband cared for the most, next to her, in the whole world because she would rather cause John pain than give him up.

That isn't love, it's the sort of obsessive fixation that drives stalkers and bunny boilers; in fact an entire Phd thesis could be written on the different conceptions of love in Sherlock's behaviour and hers in this episode.

The evidence is right there in the story.  "Everything about who I was before".  You don't change your identity, settle down and get pregnant if you are going to continue killing people.  CAM was someone who was going to destroy her new life...that's very different from being an assassin.

However, show me the evidence that she was a terrible human being.  Who did she kill?  How many people did she kill?  Why did she kill them and who paid her to do it?  It's easy to let your imagination run wild when you don't have any information to fill in the blanks.

If anything, the 'evil' one here is CAM, not Mary.  But I've yet to see many people calling him as such.

Last edited by sj4iy (January 19, 2014 6:37 pm)


__________________________________________________________________Bigby: Will you shut up?
Colin: Well, maybe if my throat wasn’t so parched, I wouldn’t have to keep talking.
Bigby: Wait, that doesn’t make se-
Coline: Just give me a drink, please.
 

January 19, 2014 6:59 pm  #26


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

I don't think she's that evil. She was not for hire, she worked for the CIA. CAM was rather mysterious about what happened but he's not the most reliable storyteller ever. 

We don't really know about what she did. It would really surprise me if she was evil. 

 

January 19, 2014 7:03 pm  #27


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

Sj4ly

It helps in getting a decent reply together if you don't edit your post to expand it from 2 lines to 13; another post would have been easier to respond to without more and more space being taken up.

I accept your point that it is Sherlock who suggests that John was drawn to Mary because of her violent core, not the other way round. I do not think it is particularly significant because Mary at no time claims to be shocked or repelled by John's propensity to be a bamf; as I recall she finds it sexy and says so as John is about to wander into the crack house.

You are also trying to conflate the moral and legal position of a soldier who kills within the framework of the Geneva Conventions and a private individual who is paid to murder someone. I am fairly sure that you know that there is a moral and legal difference between the two; if you don't know that then there are numerous books which will enlighten you. In the meantime please refrain from suggesting that I don't know the difference; I do.

Mary's willingness to kill anyone to obtain what she wants, even when she isn't being paid for it, suggests that she will never change. There will always be someone who could find her because CAM got his information from somewhere, which means those sources are still out there.

I'm fairly sure that neither the writers nor the BBC want S4 to be all about Mary's attempts to to kill them off, and I am even surer that the BBC would not be happy if the programme appeared to condone her past, or suggest that it is a result of her tragic childhood. Mary has survived in the programme so far because killing off a pregnant woman is not acceptable to our morality, but it is clear from Moffat's comments that her character cannot continue behaving as she has done so far.

And since I'm not a fan of Post-Modernism I do believe that the writers do shape their material; there will not be a lethal killer nurse following Sherlock and John around shooting anyone she thinks might be dangerous to them...

 

January 19, 2014 8:16 pm  #28


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

Willow wrote:

Sj4ly

It helps in getting a decent reply together if you don't edit your post to expand it from 2 lines to 13; another post would have been easier to respond to without more and more space being taken up.

I accept your point that it is Sherlock who suggests that John was drawn to Mary because of her violent core, not the other way round. I do not think it is particularly significant because Mary at no time claims to be shocked or repelled by John's propensity to be a bamf; as I recall she finds it sexy and says so as John is about to wander into the crack house.

You are also trying to conflate the moral and legal position of a soldier who kills within the framework of the Geneva Conventions and a private individual who is paid to murder someone. I am fairly sure that you know that there is a moral and legal difference between the two; if you don't know that then there are numerous books which will enlighten you. In the meantime please refrain from suggesting that I don't know the difference; I do.

Mary's willingness to kill anyone to obtain what she wants, even when she isn't being paid for it, suggests that she will never change. There will always be someone who could find her because CAM got his information from somewhere, which means those sources are still out there.

I'm fairly sure that neither the writers nor the BBC want S4 to be all about Mary's attempts to to kill them off, and I am even surer that the BBC would not be happy if the programme appeared to condone her past, or suggest that it is a result of her tragic childhood. Mary has survived in the programme so far because killing off a pregnant woman is not acceptable to our morality, but it is clear from Moffat's comments that her character cannot continue behaving as she has done so far.

And since I'm not a fan of Post-Modernism I do believe that the writers do shape their material; there will not be a lethal killer nurse following Sherlock and John around shooting anyone she thinks might be dangerous to them...

You're taking this way too personally.  And I am free to use the edit function how I wish.

I'm simply suggesting that before we call anyone 'evil' because they are paid to kill someone, we look at all the ways this happens throughout the world.

You may think it's perfectly acceptable for a soldier to kill...but that doesn't mean you're necessarily right.  It doesn't mean you're wrong, either.  But how is killing an enemy soldier in wartime any different than an agent killing a spy in peacetime?  The difference is that our society has deemed one acceptable and the other unacceptable.  In the end, two people have killed and two people have died.  Why is one person who killed more 'evil' than the other?  Do you think that one killer feels less guilty than the other?  If all life is sacred, then there shouldn't be ANY acceptable reason for murder.  If life isn't sacred, then why are some forms of murder more reprehensible than others?  I'm not 'conflating' anything.  The legality of something doesn't mean it's right: it wasn't against the law for many brokers to give out loans to customers who couldn't afford them just to line their pockets a few years back, for instance.  And the illegality of something else doesn't mean it's wrong: for instance, an unemployed man with two starving children steals a loaf of bread to feed them and is imprisoned for it.

Morality isn't clear cut and never has been.  Neither is the law.  That's why so many great pieces of literature have challenged the notion that we should simply do as we're told and believe what we are told to believe.  And that's why I enjoyed this episode.  There is nothing absolute about it and it challenges the notions of morality and legality.

I would appreciate if we kept this civil, btw.  Thank you.

Last edited by sj4iy (January 19, 2014 8:18 pm)


__________________________________________________________________Bigby: Will you shut up?
Colin: Well, maybe if my throat wasn’t so parched, I wouldn’t have to keep talking.
Bigby: Wait, that doesn’t make se-
Coline: Just give me a drink, please.
 

January 19, 2014 8:38 pm  #29


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

Swanpride wrote:

To me the question is if Mary is a danger to society. And I don't think that she is.

The question is if she loves John. And I think she does.

The question is if it was right to forgive her. And I don't know. But I am not Sherlock or John. They forgave her, and that is all what matters.

The question is if I belive that Mary is less worth of protecting than Magnusson. And no, she certainly isn't. Never mind that this was not just about her, it was also about John and the unborn baby.

The question is if repeating again and again what a terrible human being Mary supposedly is will convince anyone who likes the character (not necessary the character in itself, but the way she is written) to change this opinion. It won't. But I guess if the three or four treats about Mary prove anything, than that the writers have done a good job. I doubt that we would have talked about her that much if she were just John Watson nice wife.

I completely agree with this.  It wasn't by accident that they created a controversial character.  They wanted her to be controversial.  It's too easy to make her nice and sweet.


__________________________________________________________________Bigby: Will you shut up?
Colin: Well, maybe if my throat wasn’t so parched, I wouldn’t have to keep talking.
Bigby: Wait, that doesn’t make se-
Coline: Just give me a drink, please.
 

January 19, 2014 8:52 pm  #30


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

One would assume people like agents and soldiers do what they do as part of a larger ideal or cause...the greater good as it were.
When Mary deviates from this path..and goes freelance..she is doing it for herself..wealth..w/e , but selfish reasons.

The contrast between her actions and her love to Sherlocks is I think striking.

Sherlocks love puts John first..he is selfless...Sherlock kills for a greater good, other people..the patriotic theme, not for himself.

They are opposites while appearing similar only on the surface.

Maybe we need a good things only about Mary thread.or list...because looking at it below the surface the only admiral thing to find is her aim.

 

January 19, 2014 9:00 pm  #31


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

lil wrote:

One would assume people like agents and soldiers do what they do as part of a larger ideal or cause...the greater good as it were.
When Mary deviates from this path..and goes freelance..she is doing it for herself..wealth..w/e , but selfish reasons.

The contrast between her actions and her love to Sherlocks is I think striking.

Sherlocks love puts John first..he is selfless...Sherlock kills for a greater good, other people..the patriotic theme, not for himself.

They are opposites while appearing similar only on the surface.

Maybe we need a good things only about Mary thread.or list...because looking at it below the surface the only admiral thing to find is her aim.

1. She convinced John to reunite with Sherlock
2. She liked Sherlock
3. She helped Sherlock pull John out of the bonfire
4. She helped save Major Sholto's life

...seems like she's a pretty good person, as well


__________________________________________________________________Bigby: Will you shut up?
Colin: Well, maybe if my throat wasn’t so parched, I wouldn’t have to keep talking.
Bigby: Wait, that doesn’t make se-
Coline: Just give me a drink, please.
 

January 19, 2014 9:06 pm  #32


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

As for going freelance - this is something CAM said. We get no more information about this. My first thought was that he was hinting at her breaking into his office and threatening to shoot him. 


------------------------------
"To fake the death of one sibling may be regarded as a misfortune; to fake the death of both looks like carelessness." Oscar Wilde about Mycroft Holmes

"It is what it is says love." (Erich Fried)

“Enjoy the journey of life and not just the endgame. I’m also a great believer in treating others as you would like to be treated.” (Benedict Cumberbatch)



 
 

January 19, 2014 9:08 pm  #33


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

4 maybe she pushed into tht part..John asked her to stay, jealousy maybe?
1-3 selfish reasons or to her own advantage again.

Anything she did for someone not Mary?

Last edited by lil (January 19, 2014 9:14 pm)

 

January 19, 2014 9:13 pm  #34


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

Swanpride wrote:

Sherlock doesn't always put John first. If he were really such a perfect human being, he wouldn't have let him belive that he is dead for two years. Or locked him in a lab for an experiment. Or crashed his date. Or let him believe that he would die in the next few minutes.

Yes agree but this is sposed to show..since he came back he has changed...and the fake dead thing we think was to protect other people?

Contrast the Sherlock/sociopath of last series to sherlock/mary this series..see the diff. Thing.
 

 

January 19, 2014 9:18 pm  #35


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

lil wrote:

4 maybe she pushed into tht part..John asked her to stay, jealousy maybe?
1-3 selfish reasons or to her own advantage again.

Anything she did for someone not Mary?

Oh please, like everything we do is for altruistic reasons.  You could find selfish reasons for everything everyone does.  It's human nature.  Does that take away from the fact that they are still good things?  No.


__________________________________________________________________Bigby: Will you shut up?
Colin: Well, maybe if my throat wasn’t so parched, I wouldn’t have to keep talking.
Bigby: Wait, that doesn’t make se-
Coline: Just give me a drink, please.
 

January 19, 2014 9:33 pm  #36


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

Sorry I don't actually agree that she actually did any of those 4 things.
They just happened around her. She is irrelevant  to them all.

 

January 19, 2014 9:55 pm  #37


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

lil wrote:

Sorry I don't actually agree that she actually did any of those 4 things.
They just happened around her. She is irrelevant to them all.

She liked Sherlock.  Don't know how she 'didn't' do that.  She said, straight up, "I like him."  And she did talk to John about it, trying to get him to go talk to Sherlock.
She received the texts about John and went straight to Sherlock for help.  She got on the bike with him and helped Sherlock pull John out of the bonfire.  Don't see how that 'happened around her'...she did those things.
She, in fact, remembered the number of the room when every second counted.  She also pushed Sherlock into solving the puzzle when he was frustrated.  Don't see how that can be taken away from her, either.

If you want to dislike her based on the bad things she did, you can.  But you can't say that she didn't do those good things simply because you don't like her.  She DID do those good things.  We saw them.  The only 'motive' she had was that she wanted to help others.  You can't make her out to be 'completely evil' by ignoring the good things she did simply because they don't fit the view you have of her.


__________________________________________________________________Bigby: Will you shut up?
Colin: Well, maybe if my throat wasn’t so parched, I wouldn’t have to keep talking.
Bigby: Wait, that doesn’t make se-
Coline: Just give me a drink, please.
 

January 19, 2014 10:10 pm  #38


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

Swanpride wrote:

I want to add that she was most likely well aware that revealing that she recognized the skip code or knowing the room number might put her on Sherlock's radar. As trained operative she knows how and when to play stupid. But she apparently considered saving lifes more imporatant than hiding her secret.

Exactly.  She cared more about Sherlock understanding the code than what he might figure out about her.


__________________________________________________________________Bigby: Will you shut up?
Colin: Well, maybe if my throat wasn’t so parched, I wouldn’t have to keep talking.
Bigby: Wait, that doesn’t make se-
Coline: Just give me a drink, please.
 

January 19, 2014 10:41 pm  #39


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

I do not necessarily dislike her or think she is evil.
In her shoes I wld of drugged John to miss a day on honeymoon , alibi, snuck back shot mycroft or similar,(the goldfish plan)

It is motive not actions that are relevant .
The things you say are not good things of her choosing or making...but opinions of her involvement in the things that happened , which is minimal in all 4.
Exception may be taking the skip to Sherlock...but again selfish all about her/John..she didnt actually help at the bonfire btw she stood behind Sherlock shouting,,, and we do not know for sure cam didnt ask her to that...eitherway..

It it telling we are struggling with finding  good things..that we were not shown good selfless Mary...it is supposed to be a contrast ....it is the whole of the wood and a not a single tree that is important....isn't it?
In all three episodes..not one single moment of her doing or maybe even saying anything good/nice about anything/anyone that is not Mary/John.
And on the bad/not nice the list is endless.

Is is fine to differ in opinion, brilliant in fact it provokes thought..but to progress beyond agree/disagree we need evidence.
And on good mary.....well its a struggle isn't it.
I am actually trying mysel,, and the best I have is...she didn't go for the goldfish plan.

Last edited by lil (January 19, 2014 10:44 pm)

 

January 19, 2014 10:56 pm  #40


Re: How Mary could have shot Sherlock and everyone forgave her for it

lil wrote:

I do not necessarily dislike her or think she is evil.
In her shoes I wld of drugged John to miss a day on honeymoon , alibi, snuck back shot mycroft or similar,(the goldfish plan)

It is motive not actions that are relevant .
The things you say are not good things of her choosing or making...but opinions of her involvement in the things that happened , which is minimal in all 4.
Exception may be taking the skip to Sherlock...but again selfish all about her/John..she didnt actually help at the bonfire btw she stood behind Sherlock shouting,,, and we do not know for sure cam didnt ask her to that...eitherway..

It it telling we are struggling with finding good things..that we were not shown good selfless Mary...it is supposed to be a contrast ....it is the whole of the wood and a not a single tree that is important....isn't it?
In all three episodes..not one single moment of her doing or maybe even saying anything good/nice about anything/anyone that is not Mary/John.
And on the bad/not nice the list is endless.

Is is fine to differ in opinion, brilliant in fact it provokes thought..but to progress beyond agree/disagree we need evidence.
And on good mary.....well its a struggle isn't it.
I am actually trying mysel,, and the best I have is...she didn't go for the goldfish plan.

I think we are actually providing evidence for our arguments.


__________________________________________________________________Bigby: Will you shut up?
Colin: Well, maybe if my throat wasn’t so parched, I wouldn’t have to keep talking.
Bigby: Wait, that doesn’t make se-
Coline: Just give me a drink, please.
 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum