Lots of points mixed up in this thread/ post.
(edit: And Sorry for the long post.)

Mrs.Wenceslas wrote:

exactly, Susi! I think Magnussen will be a satisfying replacement of a chief villain!

Agree

besleybean wrote:

Moriarty is dead and not coming back.

Refering to the canon: Moriarty died early in the canon and never arised.
Another refering to to canon: Sherlock characterized Moriarty as an equal opponent (I don't know the original english word or quote.) The canon charakter would be damaged, if Moriarty all the time was fooled by Sherlock and Big Brother.
Another refering to the canon: The note for Watson the ancient Holmes has left at the Reichenbachfälle was real. He assumed going to die, together with Moriarty.

It was a powerplay between them. Suppose it was an equal powerplay, Moriarty had the upper hand sometimes. And sometimes Sherlock had control. But who when and when it changes?

Thread theme: some of you want to buy the "Anderson Story" (or so called Lazarus explanation), and some of us are disappointed and left with questions and open things and prepared to wait another week for some final answers. It's a little a matter of faith in Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss and their interpretation of Sherlock Holmes. Refering above should be some motivation for a little hope for the disappointed ones.

@ ruthinks:

ruthinks wrote:

1: (After Moriarty shoots himself),"I knew I didn't have long...".
Why did he not have long? Moriarty didn't seem to give any time limit to those shooters or Sherlock. All the shooters could think that Moriarty and Sherlock still might be into conversation.

No there was a timetable. There was one of Moriartys man who watched the rooftop to see Sherlock jump (and further give a signal). This one watched Moriartys death, maybe Moriarty had calculated this possibility, and then a kind of countdown started. And Sherlock had known that he hadn't endless time.

ruthinks wrote:

2: Then why doesn't any police come. Does Sherlock's homeless network obstruct them from coming? But they never really could've done that, could they? (Sherlock says there were only 25 people who knew,at most). 

Oh, that's really a very goog point for me. I had wondered, what so much (25!) homeless meaningfully could do to help Sherlock in this coup. Thx a lot. (my theory at: http://sherlock.boardhost.com/viewtopic.php?id=4093&p=1) Annoying police completely forgotten.

ruthinks wrote:

Most of all,the part that gets to me is when Moriarty suddenly goes from "You're ordinary" to "You're not ordinary..I see"

It's part of the "final problem" of Sherlock and Moriarty and their powerplay. There are other (older) threads about this, if you are interested. Maybe it is about Sherlock being an angel or a killer?

ruthinks wrote:

bam! kills himself. 

Has Moriarty calculated his suicide for beating Sherlock? And had Sherlock planed to kill Moriarty?

But Moriarty is a bit besides the theme of the thread. Not to be heartless, I like the Moriarty charakter very much, too. It was a great one. There are threads about the rooftop scene and the play between Moriarty and Sherlock, I think somewhere in the Reichenbachfall episode theme.

For unsolved questions I will copy this post here: http://sherlock.boardhost.com/viewtopic.php?id=4093&p=1

Last edited by s.he (January 6, 2014 9:17 pm)

SusiGo wrote:

Well said, Mary. And the show is called Sherlock after all, not Moriarty. 

Although I wouldn't mind a Moriarty spin-off  
MORIARTY - How it all began...
 

spam alert?

Sob.

Commonwealth wrote:

Sherlock tells Anderson near the end of the scene "of course you've wasted police time, perverted the course of justice, risked distracting me from a massive terrorist assault that could have both destroyed Parliament and caused the deaths of hundreds of people."

I think people may have missed this really important clue that Commonwealth pointed out earlier in the thread.

"...RISKED DISTRACTING ME FROM A MASSIVE TERRORIST ASSAULT THAT COULD HAVE BOTH DESTROYED PARLIAMENT..." etc...

WHEN did Sherlock go and see Anderson for this scene to take place? It's impossible.

They didn't find out it was a plot to blow up Parliament until they were already fully embroiled in the case and they went straight to the Underground. There was literally no time for Sherlock to go and see Anderson...

Therefore...the scene with Anderson never actually took place.
 

Good catch, Sherlock Holmes! So, where do you stand, considering the article in the Sunday Times with the BBC quote? Information or misinformation???

sherlocked wrote:

But, if this was only Anderson's fantasy, how could HE have known about the terrorist plot?? So, maybe, it was Sherlock's fantasy, that he planned to go to Anderson, tell him, how he did it, and confront him with the fake skeleton?

Yeah, and that would explain why it's so oddly placed - in the train scene when there's only Sherlock and John there.

Sherlock manages to get John to forgive him, say all those nice things etc...and that probably set Sherlock thinking about the Fall and how he was going to explain it. So he had this mini-fantasy about going round to see Anderson.

That would also explain why he called him Philip when apparently in the Casebook he is referred to as S Anderson. (Sherlock is terrible with names...or perhaps he called him the wrong name on purpose to annoy him in his fantasy).

He imagines himself spinning Anderson a fake but plausable theory, Anderson almost buying it, how he would respond to Anderson's doubts etc...plays it all out in his mind.


 

Sherlock Holmes, sounds good to me. Sherlock has this mini fantasy of misling Anderson with a slightly plausible, but false explanation. Didn't someone comment, that Sherlock did a lot of snickering after that scene? If this is Sherlock's and not Anderson's fantasy, it all makes more sense. But that means, we really haven't got an explanation at all. They want us to discuss forever... but that makes me feel, that in future episodes I don't feel like discussing or analyzing  anything at all

Last edited by sherlocked (January 6, 2014 11:59 pm)

Good thoughts, Sherlock Holmes! Agree with most of what you say, especially of the 'analyzing faction' of the fandom to which I firmly belonged. I read a very interesting review of TEH, where the reviewer explained, how Mofftiss really had painted themselves into a corner by apparently creating the cleverest cliffhanger in tv history, leading the fans to assume, that they are the cleverest tv script writers in history. Then it turns out, they are clever, but not THAT clever. There was hardly a plausible way out (though i have to say, some of the fan solutions were better than what we got so far). So they resort to ambiguity and tearing down the 4th wall by letting the fandom in on it. And it probably dawned on them, that there was no elegant way to tie up all loose ends.As I said before, some like it, some hate it. But we all talk about it.
Now, that we have established, that the Sherlock/Anderson scene was most likely Sherlock's fantasy, who might very well have planned, how to misle Anderson, I feel better about that episode, too. It's placement makes far better sense, and there's no reason to believe into this ridiculous blue pillow anymore. We can all insert better solutions, if we want to. I still don't like it and think, it's a cop out, but it's a clever cop out. I have to give them that.