Liberty wrote:

But if she doesn't love him, then what?  What drew her to him and tied her to him, to the extent that she'd kill to keep him?  I'm not saying that it has to be love. In fact, I'm saying that there's maybe some other reason, but I haven't worked out what.

Well ... maybe to protect the "new" life that she created ... her facade?
 

Where can I sign this?

Me too *waving hands*

What sign??

SolarSystem wrote:

gently69 wrote:

Liberty wrote:

But if she doesn't love him, then what?  What drew her to him and tied her to him, to the extent that she'd kill to keep him?  I'm not saying that it has to be love. In fact, I'm saying that there's maybe some other reason, but I haven't worked out what.

Well ... maybe to protect the "new" life that she created ... her facade?

Whatever it was, I can't believe it just sort of happened. What do we say about coincidence? It's hard to believe that a former CIA agent meets of all things John Watson, the friend of the famous Sherlock Holmes, just by accident. There has to be something else and yes, it is of course possible that step by step she really fell in love with him (although I agree that I don't really see this on screen, let alone feel it). But if there is something else and Mary didn't just meet John by chance, an explanation needs to be given in the next episode.  

It definitely needs an explanation, and I'm surprised there wasn't one by the end of the series.  But maybe it's part of the cliffhanger.  It does seem too much of a coincidence, even if Sherlock was "dead" at the time. 

I don't think John was part of her facade, for that reason.  Why choose somebody with such famous connections to that other world?  And again, why the flashy wedding, with the star guest in a prominent role?  If it was all about keeping the facade, it would have been better to lie low. 

It's a pity, as I liked Mary, but you lot are making me see more and more of that sinister side.  Perhaps it was a clever move casting Amanda, as it's difficult to think of Martin's lovely girlfriend as a villain.  And Mary in the books seemed lovely too.   But then we see Mary and John falling in love in the books - it's striking that we don't see that at all in the TV series.   Mary must have been lying all along to John, not just about the big lie, but about all the little details, the things a couple might talk about in their past (where she's lived and worked and so on). 

Mary didn't have time to train and become a practice nurse (they're usually experienced nurses) with the new identity, so must have trained as a nurse earlier and then become an assassin.  Something about that makes me uncomfortable - her choosing a caring career, seeing death and seeing it affect people, then choosing to kill people for a living.  I suppose we don't know the full story about her reasons.

Last edited by Liberty (August 20, 2014 12:35 pm)

Liberty wrote:

Mary didn't have time to train and become a practice nurse (they're usually experienced nurses) with the new identity, so must have trained as a nurse earlier and then become an assassin. 

Do we know that for sure? Do we know for how long she hasn't 'worked as an assassin' anymore and when she 'changed jobs'? I'm not sure it's mentioned in the show, but maybe someone has a better memory than myself?

One piece of the puzzle at least is still missing. The whole Magnussen thing presents itself as a huge coincidence as well. Mary is dealing with him the same time Sherlock has to deal with him? I don't buy this. Or maybe I just don't see the obvious?
 

SolarSystem wrote:

Liberty wrote:

Mary didn't have time to train and become a practice nurse (they're usually experienced nurses) with the new identity, so must have trained as a nurse earlier and then become an assassin. 

Do we know that for sure? Do we know for how long she hasn't 'worked as an assassin' anymore and when she 'changed jobs'? I'm not sure it's mentioned in the show, but maybe someone has a better memory than myself?

One piece of the puzzle at least is still missing. The whole Magnussen thing presents itself as a huge coincidence as well. Mary is dealing with him the same time Sherlock has to deal with him? I don't buy this. Or maybe I just don't see the obvious?
 

I looked up the transcripts at Arianne De Vere's journal(thank you to people here for linking there, and to her for doing them - they're fantastic!), as I had 5 years in my head and wasn't sure where it came from.  Anyway, it's this:
"Mary Morstan was stillborn in October 1972.  Her gravestone is in Chiswick Cemetery where - five years ago - you acquired her name and date of birth and thereafter her identity.  That's why you don't have friends from before that date." 
Looking at John's blog, he was seeing Mary in the April of the year before the wedding, so that's at least a year and half of the 5 years gone.  That leaves three and a half years.   That's pushing it to even fit in basic nursing training, given that she would need to apply and wait for a start date.  Practice nurses usually have experience and further training after qualifying and she wouldn't have time to fit that in.   (Unless she was somehow planted in the surgery, by someone).  Oddly, Mary doesn't seem to be doing any actual nursing at the surgery, which might suggest that she isn't really a nurse and was placed there, undercover.   That would need the collusion of the whole practice, though.  And Sherlock believes she's a nurse. 

And of course, being a nurse, isn't incompatible with being an assassin.  There have been a few serial killers who were nurses, and come to think of it, the profession might draw somebody who was interested in death.  It's maybe not such a wild leap as I thought, sadly.  Angel of mercy to angel of death. 

No, I'm not buying the Magnusson coincidence either. 

tykobrian wrote:

Well Mary could very well be the adaptation of Col. Sebastian Moran, Moriarty’s trusted sniper from ACD canon. I think more or less similar to canon she was stationed by Moriarty to look for any signs of Sherlock’s return. The moment I learned that she is a contract killer/ crack shot my suspicions shot through the roof. The canon Mary was nothing like that.
 
The signs indicating Mary being Moran are rather compelling. Sherlock’s way of exposing Mary’s true nature (to John) almost totally matches with the canon. If you can recall, Moran was a respected person to his peers and seemed nothing like Moriatry’s trusted assassin that he was. In the Empty House Moran was hunting down Sherlock and at one time he planned to snipe Sherlock at his flat positioned from an empty house nearby. But Sherlock and Watson were already aware and so they covertly waited for him in that house. To fool him Sherlock placed a dummy shaped like his silhouette which can be seen from the flat for Moran to shoot. So when he did shoot thinking it was Sherlock he was caught red handed and arrested. The similarities are in-your-face and irrefutable if you ask me. On the other hand I’ve found no such canonical similarity with Col. Moran’s character with Lord Moran in TEH.

Also in canon, Moran was present and assisting Moriarty in the Reichenbach Falls to kill Holmes. I found that interesting. 

Oh yes, the dummy has got to be a reference to TEH! 

I wondered about Moriarty too.  Isn't it odd that he (or his image) pops up just as Sherlock is sent off? 

Maybe I'm mixing the series' together too much, but if Mary was working for Moriarty (or is or becomes Moriarty in some way) it would make sense for her to be keeping an eye on John to check that Sherlock is still dead.  No wonder Sherlock couldn't contact John!  Except ... she isn't shocked enough at the restaurant, is she?   And Sherlock doesn't read much that's telling about her, apart from "liar".  So maybe not.

Last edited by Liberty (August 20, 2014 2:50 pm)

SolarSystem wrote:

One piece of the puzzle at least is still missing. The whole Magnussen thing presents itself as a huge coincidence as well. Mary is dealing with him the same time Sherlock has to deal with him? I don't buy this. Or maybe I just don't see the obvious? 

Actually, this is not a missing element at all--Magnussen himself told Sherlock and John that Mary was John's pressure point, John was Sherlock's pressure point, and Sherlock was Mycroft's pressure point, and that the whole point of threatening Mary was to give himself control of Mycroft and, through Mycroft, whatever parts of the UK government he didn't already control.

It seems to me that if she was planted by Mycroft, she wouldn't be a good pressure point for Magnussen--she'd just go to Mycroft when Magnussen tried blackmailing her, and the trail would be cut off quite easily. And if she was planted by Moriarty or had anything to do with him, she wouldn't be a good pressure point either--I'd imagine a criminal network like that could either take care of Magnussen, or they'd just pull her out and try something else.

Well if anybody is interested to spend some time reading here is a favourite meta of mine with plays with the idea that Jim is alive and both Janine and Mary are his minions. Also Magnussen was one of his associates who supplied him with media power back in TRF. He's manuvered Sherlock to kill him and has now taken over his infrastructure. Also it is proposed there that Mycroft is under Moriarty's thumb. What really impressed me is that the analysis starts from ASiP to HLV and considers every event showed on screen even the supplementary online blogs and maintained the integraty of it's basic assumptions. And I thought the author drew the conclusions using very sound logics and facts seen on the screen. But fair warning, it's around 85k words! 

And where do you see Janine in all of this? Planted by CAM in Mary's life? Her being Mary's friend and CAM's PA at the same time is a bit fishy if you ask me.