BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » Baby Watson (spoilers!)

besleybean · July 23, 2014 10:16 am

I have no problem with there being a child, just saying it doesn't have to be.

maryagrawatson · July 23, 2014 2:06 pm

BreathingIsBoring wrote:
John and Sherlock belong in 221B. That is just a rule dictated by the universe. They will always end up back in this little flat, because it is a part of who they are. It is just them, too.

Unfortunately, ACD canon is such that John moved out after getting married and Sherlock remained alone at 221B until he moved to his cottage in Sussex Downs. I don't think Moftiss will go against that and bring John back to 221B.

Mary

besleybean · July 23, 2014 2:07 pm

Oh I disagree.
One way or another, John will be back in 221B.

tonnaree · July 23, 2014 3:18 pm

besleybean wrote:
Oh I disagree.
One way or another, John will be back in 221B.

I'm with you BB.
The creators love and admire canon but they are far from slaves to it.

BreathingIsBoring · July 23, 2014 4:50 pm

maryagrawatson wrote:
BreathingIsBoring wrote:
John and Sherlock belong in 221B. That is just a rule dictated by the universe. They will always end up back in this little flat, because it is a part of who they are. It is just them, too.
Unfortunately, ACD canon is such that John moved out after getting married and Sherlock remained alone at 221B until he moved to his cottage in Sussex Downs. I don't think Moftiss will go against that and bring John back to 221B.

Mary

I thought Watson moved back into 221B in canon after Mary died. Am I wrong?

besleybean · July 23, 2014 4:59 pm

I thought he did.

SusiGo · July 23, 2014 5:32 pm

Me, too. I seem to remember that he married again later and Holmes moved to Sussex alone but after Mary's death and Holmes' return he came back to live with him in Baker Street.

maryagrawatson · July 23, 2014 6:11 pm

I hope I'm wrong and confusing ACD canon with fan fiction!

I did some research and came across a really good ACD canon timeline that has cheered me up immensely. It looks like John at 221B post-marriage versus living with Mary as at the convenience of whatever story Doyle was writing at the time and that he was just as sloppy about this as he was about everything else. I wish I could find the quote that convinced me that John is gone from 221B for good, but I'm glad I can't!

Mary

BreathingIsBoring · July 23, 2014 6:31 pm

Moftiss, I swear to god: if you don't put them back together and they have to live apart for the rest of the show, I will throw a tantrum that blows up the block.

besleybean · July 23, 2014 6:34 pm

Even if they have a little cuddle?!
Ha.

A lovely light · July 23, 2014 10:44 pm

The baby will be a major pressure point for John. I hope that the baby won't get kidnapped to make John do something abominable. This would either break John into pieces or it would him make discover some unknown strenght inside.

Whisky · July 23, 2014 11:55 pm

All I ever think when hearing the word "baby", is "no". In my head there is a voice saying "no" to this baby all the time. Sorry.

But I suppose the question is not what I want to happen, but what could happen with the baby. And I really can imagine they will keep the baby in the show, which will make me struggle with liking series 4. And after already struggling with series 3, I'm really not looking forward to it.

If it was my script, I'd write a miscarriage into it. It's cruel, but it does happen in real life, it keeps Mary in the show but not the baby, and John... he'll cope. I'm no fan of this baby idea, but I'm pretty sure writers had it all plotted out before they made Mary pregnant. So I'll wait for the surprise, and if I've learned anything about the show in series 3, it's that I don't have to like all of it, because others still will.

Uh, bad topic. I think I won't write about it any more, it makes me... uneasy and dissatisfied.

besleybean · July 24, 2014 7:25 am

Keep hopeful, dear.

SolarSystem · July 24, 2014 8:16 am

Whisky wrote:
All I ever think when hearing the word "baby", is "no". In my head there is a voice saying "no" to this baby all the time. Sorry.

That's exactly how I feel about it. For me the show worked best when it was Sherlock and John in 221B, solving crimes and having their domestic bliss from time to time. That's what the voice in my head is saying when I think of "Sherlock": Sherlock and John in 221B.
I know that a lot of people think the show needed a new direction and new dynamics - quite frankly, I still don't know what that's supposed to mean. At the same time I'm always open for something new - but a baby? No. Just no.

tonnaree · July 24, 2014 1:03 pm

I'm starting to lean towards wanting the baby to not be John's. I don't want him to suffer any more trauma than necessary after going through so much already. Finding out the baby isn't his would hurt, but not nearly as much as having his own child die some way.

BreathingIsBoring · July 24, 2014 8:32 pm

The only problem with that is there's really no time where Mary could have cheated on John without Sherlock deducing a problem. They spend too much time around each other as a raggedy trio after Sherlock comes back between TEH and HLV for her to have conceived from another father without Sherlock noticing. If he just noticed she was pregnant around the wedding, she's probably around six weeks along, maybe earlier, because that's when the morning sickness kicks in. There's a slim chance that he missed the signs of her infidelity if this is the case, like he missed her identity before it was too late, but the Sherlock we know would never keep something like that from John. So it could be infidelity, but it's very unlikely that that is what happened.

Whisky · July 24, 2014 10:02 pm

SolarSystem wrote:
For me the show worked best when it was Sherlock and John in 221B, solving crimes and having their domestic bliss from time to time. That's what the voice in my head is saying when I think of "Sherlock": Sherlock and John in 221B.

We quite agree then So back to 221b with everybody who belongs there - and for me that's 2 people, not 3 or 4

Well, about the changes and new directions of the show... I liked that series 3 was different. I really liked it (or to be honest, rather learned to like it). But I don't need it again, not in such a fundamental way. There was a substance in series 1 and 2, something like the core of the show, an unchangeable beat that kept everything smooth. In series 3 they somehow upset that, it was like music that suddenly changes the key it's written in. I have the feeling, if series 4 pushes further, the show will loose its... whatever it is. Identity? Integrity? I cannot describe this any better, but it's like they upset the water of a pond, which is a good thing, but after a storm, there's need for quiet... and not for another wild ride. My opinion. But I think we discussed that in another thread already, so I'm shutting up here
back to baby-topic :D

Last edited by Whisky (July 24, 2014 10:03 pm)

BreathingIsBoring · July 24, 2014 10:18 pm

Well, the thing about S3 was that there was no primary antagonist. They've left open a huge set of potential with those last five minutes of HLV. If Moriarty is truly back, then there's suddenly purpose in Sherlock and John's story again. If it's someone like the much anticipated Sebby Moran, same story. S3 had Magnussen, but he was only really a problem in HLV, sans the threat at the wedding that no one understood until analysis and watching HLV. This is what I believe derailed the show from the norm, and the reintroduction of our favourite psychopathic criminal mastermind/minions could very well dump it back onto the tracks.

Whisky · July 28, 2014 1:01 am

I don't think it was only because of the missing antagonist. When I think of Hounds, that was for me a great episode with the right "feeling", and it hadn't got any Moriarty in it It has a wonderful Sherlock-John dynamic, regardless of villains. Just saying....
But I agree that it might be indeed a valid reason among others - the episodes feel more "complete" when there is a good old-fashioned villain.... and it's true for the overall story arch, if I judge by series and not by episodes.

BreathingIsBoring · July 28, 2014 1:43 am

Whisky wrote:
I don't think it was only because of the missing antagonist. When I think of Hounds, that was for me a great episode with the right "feeling", and it hadn't got any Moriarty in it It has a wonderful Sherlock-John dynamic, regardless of villains. Just saying....
But I agree that it might be indeed a valid reason among others - the episodes feel more "complete" when there is a good old-fashioned villain.... and it's true for the overall story arch, if I judge by series and not by episodes.

You make a very valid point. I do think S2 was the best purely because Moftiss decided to take the three most read, loved, and recognised of ACD's stories and throw their all into it, knowing that there could very well be no S3. Baskerville is, I daresay, the most well-known of the SH stories, so it makes sense that the team would make it one of their best episodes.

I actually did like Season 3 a lot. Murder me if you will, fandom. I prefer to be the type of fan who doesn't overanalyse the first few times I watch the episode: I want to soak it up, first, and if there's nothing glaringly awful about it, then I'm very happy. Then, if I really want to go hunting for things I didn't like, I could, but I generally don't do that. My absolute favourite scene is the mind palace scene in HLV: Partially because Ben took something that could have been insignificant and made it extraordinary, and partially because it was heartbreaking (I'm a sadist with TV programmes; Reichenbach is the episode I've seen the most, and I still cry every single time). Yes, it wasn't quite as good as S2, but it was still eagerly watched and cherished while it lasted.

Last edited by BreathingIsBoring (July 28, 2014 1:44 am)