BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » Johnlock: The Official Debate

Mattlocked · April 10, 2014 8:09 pm

Oh, and I just noticed something new (for me) at the beginning of the "sofa-scene": Sherlock folds his hands and John is copying him.

SusiGo · April 10, 2014 8:10 pm

Wow. And does he not have his arm on the backrest behind John?

SolarSystem · April 10, 2014 8:11 pm

He does, Susi, he does...

SusiGo · April 10, 2014 8:12 pm

Mattlocked · April 10, 2014 8:13 pm

And he takes it away when she says "I'd love to have gone further"

SolarSystem · April 10, 2014 8:17 pm

As if he came to his senses there for a second and remembers that John is not for him to have...

SusiGo · April 10, 2014 8:19 pm

KeepersPrice · April 11, 2014 2:02 am

Love how you all have been analyzing this scene - one of my favorites. I'm thrilled if he said, "Anytime" because I knew he murmured something but only knew it appeared to be something positive as opposed to being annoyed. I'll have to re-watch for the couch business. What sticks out in my mind is Sherlock's face crumbling listening to Tessa's sad story about being dumped before he pulls himself back together or starts to drift off. Oh, and I become mesmerized when John puts his stocking feet on Sherlock's chair. I just can't take my eyes off that!

tonnaree · April 11, 2014 2:20 am

The whole game scene was swimming in feels. I read on one tumblr about an experiment where the fan took only pictures of John's face from that and ask people not familiar with the show what they thought he was looking at.
Every single person answered with some variation of "someone he loves obviously."

Mattlocked · April 11, 2014 6:50 am

Oh really? Now that's interesting........................

I just noted that I posted this in the wrong thread last night: I am wondering since the airing why Sherlock starts "crying" when the client does. If it has any deeper meaning or if it just shows us how drunk he really is. I really like KPs explanation. Anyone else?

SolarSystem · April 11, 2014 7:28 am

tonnaree wrote:
The whole game scene was swimming in feels. I read on one tumblr about an experiment where the fan took only pictures of John's face from that and ask people not familiar with the show what they thought he was looking at.
Every single person answered with some variation of "someone he loves obviously."

Oh god, tonnaree, that's just...
But really, looking at John's face, the way he's smiling at Sherlock, even if it's a drunk smile... oh my...

Mattlocked · April 11, 2014 7:34 am

I have to check that scene again. NOW. (For science. ) But I'm at work. Aaaarghh!

gently69 · April 11, 2014 7:41 am

Same cross, Mattlocked, I have to bear.

Mattlocked · April 11, 2014 10:19 am

Oh, now it's only half the weight.

tonnaree · April 11, 2014 11:56 am

The things we ladies suffer through for science.

Chiennoir · April 11, 2014 3:08 pm

besleybean wrote:
1. ACD. He's dead, so we can't ask him. I'm also unaware of anything he particularly wrote about his characters or their story.

He spoke - very briefly - about the character of Holmes in a 1927 interview. He didn't really say much. https://archive.org/details/SirArthurConanDoyleSpeaks_272

besleybean wrote:
I gather Holmes and Watson are based on real people that Doyle admired.

Holmes (His name in the rough draft was "Sherrinford") was modeled after Dr. Joseph Bell, who was able to diagnose a person's illness simply by looking at them. http://www.siracd.com/work_bell.shtml Watson, originally to be named "Ormond Sacker," was a military man, a type of character Doyle had often used before. Watson's physical description (a middle-sized, middle-aged man with a mustache) could have been one of Doyle himself.

besleybean wrote:
So where does this leave us? Holmes is never shown to have been in any kind of romantic relationship.

Holmes refers to love and sentimentality as "grit in a sensitive instrument" and therefore destructive to the logical faculties. People have always wanted him to fall in love, though. He's paired most often with Irene Adler, who, according to Willaim Baring-Gould's sentimental pseudo-biography Sherlock Holmes of Baker Street, bore him a child in 1892. That child would grow up to be Nero Wolfe. Yikes. (John D. Clark, 1956)

besleybean wrote:
Watson marries.

At least twice. He also brags about an experience of women that extends over three continents.
http://www.sherlockpeoria.net/Who_is_Sherlock/WatsonsWives.html

besleybean wrote:
bromance( a loving male freindship)is the most perfect thing. To try and force it into something sexual, is somehow saying it is not good enough and is frankly demeaning.
I love homo-erotica, but that is not what BBC Sherlock is.

YES. ^^^ That.

SusiGo · April 11, 2014 3:34 pm

Well, I still agree with Jude:

http://cloudiness.tumblr.com/post/44593744404/tell-us-about-your-relationship-with-robert

Mattlocked · April 11, 2014 3:39 pm

Hm.... but I have the feeling that "Romance" and "Bromance" are different..... ?

tonnaree · April 11, 2014 3:39 pm

I get slightly irritated at how much is made of the "bromance" thing. Like it's so rare to see male friendships dipected in popular media. Male friendships are EVERYWHERE in tv and film.

If the writers eventually let Sherlock and John be something more than friends it will not mean that "friendship" wasn't good enough but that the freindship was so good it grew into something more. This happens a lot in real life. My relatioship with my husband is the best I've ever had in my life and I believe it's because we were friends first and for a long time before romantic feelings developed.

I think that letting these two characters have an openly sexual romantic relationship would be a bold fascinating move. Allowing the subtext that has exsisted since the original stories become text would be truly brave story telling.

Last edited by tonnaree (April 11, 2014 3:41 pm)

SusiGo · April 11, 2014 3:42 pm

To me the term "bromance" sounds artificial.