BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » Go on then...what are your theories?

Montag · December 2, 2013 3:55 pm

But the whole episode is about fame. The nicknames, the papers, the reporters and television reports even Moriarty's crimes. In earlier episodes Lestrade kept Sherlock secret (ish). Sherlock wouldn't even go in a police car, he followed behind in a cab. If Moriarty simply wanted Sherlock gone there is nothing he could do about it with a sniper. But he wanted to be better than Sherlock and if Sherlock was a public hero then his ego required that everybody knew he was better publicly.

besleybean · December 2, 2013 3:58 pm

I completely agree.
But I still say this role was thrust upon Sherlock, rather than him seeking it!

LunANDROID · December 3, 2013 3:14 pm

I've got this strange theory:
What if Sherlock did the same thing like Irene Adler did, cause she faked her death to, only Sherlock could find that one out. Perhaps Molly Hooper helped him out, cause Molly asked Sherlock if she could help him out.
Maybe, perhaps Irene helped him out, cause Sherlock helped Irene out from dieing.

'I owe you' is inportant, but the thing is, for who does it count! Cause John also said by the grave that same phrase.

Sherlock ofcourse set up the phonecall to Watson, about Ms. Hudgons dieing. Sherlock had plenty of time, Watson did sleep, till he got the call. He had enough time to set everything up.

Whatever Moriarty did. doesn't matter if he killed himself or not. Sherlock had to fall. That's what Moriarty only wanted for him. For Sherlock it's the only thing to do so only then he can clear his own name. If he told John about it, then it wouldn't be convinsing.

It's all just a magictrick! Sherlock said it himself

sirlockofthesher · December 3, 2013 4:00 pm

I think Sherlock purposely seeks out these big crimes to solve to draw Moriarty out. Look at the scene where John says "your this close to famous" The look on Sherlock's face is perplexity and frustration. He knows what he is becoming..and he knows that he is purposely becoming famous to draw Moriarty out so he CAN"T find a small discreet case to solve.

Look at the Great Game. Why does Moriarty set up the Great Game? Because Sherlock has been interferring with the crime activity Moriarty has been involved with. What kind of crime activity does Moriarty get involved in? Well there was the fake Vermee-r now what happens in RF? A Turner peice goes missing...you can see Moriarty all over that one and so can Sherlock.

In Hounds of Baskerville, Sherlock negotiates with Mycroft to get back into the army facility. What did Sherlock exchange with Mycroft? Obvious answer: Sherlock's services. Services for what? Well what happened at the end of that episode. Moriarty is released by Mycroft. What does Mycroft know Moriarty is interested in? (it's written on the walls) SHERLOCK scraped into non breakable glass-that took effort it probably would have hurt.

The Holmes brothers were starting this game and that is definitely a fact when you look at the above scenes. Sherlock drew Moriarty out to play Reichenbach Falls and he did this by getting involved in high profile crimes-crimes Moriarty was behind. Want more food for thought? Sherlock turns down money to locate a very large diamond that has gone missing, Why would he care about an old Turner masterpeice being retreived?

Yeah-the high profile cases were on purpose. And this time the Sherlock was starting and facilitating the Great Game part 2.

December 4, 2013 12:09 pm

sirlock, I think you are right.
Moriarty said at the pool: If you don't stop prying I will burn you.
Solution: Sherlock starts prying and tries to provoke Moriarty to come and play.
Sherlock told John that the last thing he needs is a public image. But he stills allows the press to take photos. Sherlock is clearly uncomfortable when he has to stand in the middle of the room and say thank you and be nice. He would never do that for the sake of publicity. OOC.

anjaH_alias · December 4, 2013 1:39 pm

Montag wrote:
I do. You see three press conferences in 1 episode. In all others he avoids them. That is where the hat comes from, trying to hide his face from cameras.

Goal . This is quite an out-of-character-behaviour, or? I am sure that this is what everybody has overseen one time (as Steven Moffat said) and I am nearly sure that this was provoked by Sherlock to get Moriarty out of his spider web. In ACDs canon Sherlock Holmes does something very similar.

Last edited by anjaH_alias (December 4, 2013 1:39 pm)

anjaH_alias · December 4, 2013 1:43 pm

Montag wrote:
But he wanted to be better than Sherlock and if Sherlock was a public hero then his ego required that everybody knew he was better publicly.

Perfectly sound analysis - and supports again what I said before - Sherlock wanted his reaction. To get him in the end.

Montag · December 4, 2013 3:02 pm

Something else has occured to me (well a couple) Just finished rewatching Baskereville and something Sherlock said supported the idea that it is all a set up by Mycroft and Sherlock. When he sees Moriarty at Dewers Hollow he says that "You CAN'T be here". This is when he throws off the gases effect and sees the doctor. He must have been sure that it wasn't Moriarty because he knew that he was with Mycroft.

In RF when talking to Kitty she says you need someone to set the record straight there is a brief smile. If publicity was the key he knew she could help (unwittingly) with the plan. The whole conversation appears overly personal and confrontational. Normally he offends people by accident but in this he seemed to know what he was doing deliberately and being overly personal.

Montag · December 4, 2013 3:11 pm

anjaH_alias wrote:
Montag wrote:
But he wanted to be better than Sherlock and if Sherlock was a public hero then his ego required that everybody knew he was better publicly.
Perfectly sound analysis - and supports again what I said before - Sherlock wanted his reaction. To get him in the end.

Throughout both Sherlock and Moriarty wanted to do their work in the shadows and have the satisfaction of knowing that they were the best. As soon as the paradigm shifted and Sherlock "came out" he became the best because everyone knew it.

Moriarty could have just used proxys to rob the Tower of London and Bank of England. The effect would have been the same. He didn't need to advertise that he had the mythical key. Robbing the highest profile targets in the UK? Effect and publicity. The release of the prisoners would also have the same effect but he needed to visible. He even needed to beat Sherlock in the courtroom, to show that he controls everything even if Sherlock testified he was better. He couldn't do that without going public.

sirlockofthesher · December 4, 2013 5:44 pm

Montag wrote:
Something else has occured to me (well a couple) Just finished rewatching Baskereville and something Sherlock said supported the idea that it is all a set up by Mycroft and Sherlock. When he sees Moriarty at Dewers Hollow he says that "You CAN'T be here". This is when he throws off the gases effect and sees the doctor. He must have been sure that it wasn't Moriarty because he knew that he was with Mycroft.

In RF when talking to Kitty she says you need someone to set the record straight there is a brief smile. If publicity was the key he knew she could help (unwittingly) with the plan. The whole conversation appears overly personal and confrontational. Normally he offends people by accident but in this he seemed to know what he was doing deliberately and being overly personal.

I love this vein of thought. I have always viewed this scene to be a deeper analysis into Sherlock's fears...but going on this backs up a thoery I have been working on...

How did Mycroft capture Moriarty to begin with?. The man is a Ghost. facial recognition software is definitely something high government agents use and Richard Brook is an actor with a public image. Now I propose that Mycroft knew about Richard Brook's existence and so therefore I deduce so did Sherlock after HofB. If Sherlock knew Richard Brook existed BEFORE Reichenbach Fall series 2 ep 3-Then he knew when he recovered Turner's Painting -Reichenbach Fall that the new game was on...

Mycroft counters Sherlocks great endeavors by the 3 heists moving ahead of Sherlock's achievements again...

Sherlock pushes Kitty Moriarty's way (If we go on the Theory that during the HofB that Sherlock knew of Mycroft doings and that Richard Brook existed then we must also deduce that Sherlock knew false information was being fed to Moriarty by Mycroft)

So the deduction of this is that Sherlock and Mycroft knew of Richard Brooks existence BEFORE RF and Mycroft always knew that Moriarty was after Sherlock. So Mycroft gave false information to RICHARD BROOK/Moriarty about Sherlocks life. What now can we deduce how easy it will be for Sherlock to reinsert himself back into society as a non criminal? Hint: Kitty should use 3 RESOURCES instead of one...bad Kitty!

Last edited by sirlockofthesher (December 5, 2013 12:24 am)

Montag · December 4, 2013 9:42 pm

I think we will find that Moriarty will be behind at least the stealing if the painting, if not the other 2 crimes. Sounds like something a master criminal might do, steal the painting that is his name sake to get Sherlock involved.

It all depends on whether he really is Richard Brook, actor by day, jobbing criminal mastermind by night. Does seem unlikely that he could invent such a detailed and easily discounted persona as an actor in a few months. So he either built the persona over time and took some acting jobs to add validity which would suggest that he chose the name RB before the painting and that was why he chose it or he made it all up after the painting was stolen which would weaken the alibi. From this I think the RB persona was a deliberate long term fabrication or even his real identity.

If the whole thing was a conspiracy to get Sherlock then it would seem getting close to Mycroft would be part of the plan, so he was caught on purpose. The Holmes boys then turned it all back on him. As soon as the painting was stolen Sherlock new the game was afoot which was why he chose the publicity, to push the plan along.

Almost like the publicity was him saying that he new Moriarty was behind it.

sirlockofthesher · December 5, 2013 12:28 am

I think the idea that Sherlock knew Moriarty was being held by his brother, Mycroft, in Hounds of Baskerville is something very NEW to the theories out there....Kudos to Montag for this excellent deduction.

Because with this clue, so many things fall into place and make sense in the Timeline of how the Holmes brothers took out Moriarty. And exactly what Sherlock would know PRIOR to the start of RF.

The best of which is that when Moriarty steals that Turner painting Reichenbach Falls-Sherlock knows Moriarty is behind it because he already knows Richard Brook (Reichenbach) is Moriarty too.

I can't wait to see how much we get right in the Empty Hearse. Yeah-new pics out today too....

besleybean · December 5, 2013 6:36 am

Only trouble is, I thought when John reads out the name ' Richard Brook', it's at that point Sherlock works it out.

sirlockofthesher · December 5, 2013 7:14 pm

uhg...only a few more weeks to wait...
John points out the paper...maybe the real peice of information for Sherlock is the author of the story not the source of the information. You see them go to Kitty's house leading Sherlock to finally deduce that Moriarty just doesn't want to destroy Sherlock public image but to shame/maneuver him into "suicide" as well. And Sherlock would not know that Richard Brook is giving a tell-all interview about him until John Points it out...

It's fun theorizes though! I'm looking forward to more material to work with. I watched Elementary the other night and wrote the script within the first 5 minutes of watching....boring

Montag · December 6, 2013 1:45 am

I've been thinking of what Molly said about her dad. She says that Sherlock looks sad when john isn't looking. Does this mean that he is only showing john what he wants him to see? So all scenes with john are actually an act by Sherlock, setting the scene for johns benefit.

May be going a little too inelegant but.....

besleybean · December 6, 2013 6:13 am

Again, only problem I have, Sherlock looks genuinely shocked at Kitty's.

Montag · December 6, 2013 2:12 pm

If the argument is very elegant then it is all tied up.

The Holmes brothers have planned to bring Moriarty down. Their plan is draw him out into the open. Sherlock seeks publicity, forcing Moriarty out and to make his move.

The one person who knows Sherlock best is John. John isn't very good at hiding his emotions. For the plan to work John has to believe that Sherlock doesn't know. Imagine the scene at Kittys house. If John knew S was working to a plan to bring down M, how would he have acted? If M felt that John was acting then he would simply back off... he would know that S was up to something. This is actually ACD canon (adventures of the dying detective), where S believe John couldn't act well enough to keep up a pretence.

For M to believe that he is beating S, then seeing John honestly confused and angry at the house means M believes the fairy tale is playnig out as he planned, not how S planned it.

We know observation is constant, otherwise how could the assassins always be in the right place at the right time. I think S just played a role constantly to John and the observers. Molly saw what he was like when he wasn't being watched, he was sad because he knew what was coming. Could it actually be guilt she saw?

John was the key. If John believed Sherlock was dead then both lestarade and Mrs Hudson would believe. Remember John couldn't sya out loud he believed in Sherlock. John was the big lie that made everything else seem true. The assassins had to believe and they were probably the closest observers. They had to see that John believed S was dead.

Last edited by Montag (December 6, 2013 2:25 pm)

besleybean · December 6, 2013 5:47 pm

Thank you for that.

KeepersPrice · December 6, 2013 8:43 pm

These have pretty much been my thoughts from the beginning. John needed to be deceived as much as Moriarty and the snipers for the deception to truly work. Poor John. . Mycroft was involved in planning from the start to.

lvmarak · December 11, 2013 8:45 pm

Why be gone for 2 years (besides the movie contract in New Zealand and the 3 year period in the cannon)? Doyle never convincingly answered that question in "The Empty House" (llamas are in the Andes, not Tibet, and Mountpelier is in Vermont, not France...did Doyle make these typos to play with the readers???). The answer had better be good.