But that is not exactly the guilt of the writers here, is it?

The scene in the drug den they have taken right out of Arthur Conan Doyle´s "The man with a Twisted Lip" - and yes, Sherlock was hiding right next to Isa Whitney, one of John´s neighbours, there. The London at that time had 4 millions of people, so more opium dens were available in the city, that´s certain, yet John and Sherlock coincidentaly met in that one.

A woman who wants to shoot CAM dead entering his villa, Appledore, exactly the evening during which John and Sherlock are burgling CAM´s safe, is the motive taken from "The Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton" too. Here, in HLV, there was even a slight possibility that Mary and Sherlock could both be set up by Janine who gave them incorrect information about CAM´s wherebouts.

Both "plot-holes" were just the attempt of the authors to adapt the scenes from the original and play with them a bit.

But maybe they didn't play enough with it yet and should have played some more. Because don't get me wrong, I really appreciate their nods to canon, but canon or not, stuff like this doesn't really work for me in a modern tv show. Mofftiss are so damn good, they should be able to do something about such plot holes... unless of course they don't care.

You are right about the coincidences and all that. But still, my main problem with this episode are the (apparently) incredible character developments, i.e. the whole forgiveness business. 

SusiGo wrote:

You are right about the coincidences and all that. But still, my main problem with this episode are the (apparently) incredible character developments, i.e. the whole forgiveness business. 

That's true, question (still) is: Do we buy it or not?
 

SusiGo wrote:

In case you are referring to the Sholto scene: I was not critisicing a dry sense of humour but hurting someone else deliberately. And to me Sherlock looks hurt, not amused. 

 
Are we discussing humour here? Sorry, I didn't get that, I thought the Sholto-wedding scene was about comforting or not? Or is it the beginning of HLV ? I just see tension there , no humour. Or what is this about?

I thought the "See? That does happen" was the kind of banter the two of them have always had between each other. It continues throughout the scene, as with John's "Pretend I said that without shouting". It seems to me that kind of banter is what they do.

SusiGo wrote:

As I said before - I cannot buy it. If I have to, it would be bad writing (my personal opinion as for others it does obviously work). Because I get the impression that they do not even try to convince me. Some selfish tears in front of the fireplace? Sorry, this is not enough. 

To me Mary and John both seem very tense at the beginning of HLV. Possibly because John is bored out of his skin and without Sherlock to take him to the battlefield his PTSD is playing up again. We know (thanks to Mycroft in ASIP) that John's nightmares are not so much about the things that traumatise him, but about the things he misses. And now he misses the war and Sherlock. Maybe Mary is just annoyed by the tension coming for him, maybe she feels she is not enough. Or maybe, thanks to the close proximity to Sherlock, she too has gotten caught up in the danger vortex that surrounds him. Based on her former career choices, she seems to be like that almost as much as John does. Maybe that is why she (after presumably 5 years of abstinence) is looking to join the danger too. They both are caught up in the idea of having a normal live, but neither of them seems to be cut out for it.

edit:
About John finding Sherlock in the drug den. It might be the other way around. Maybe Sherlock was looking for John. For some reason they did not have any contact for a month before that. Maybe Sherlock was forcing his way back into John’s life this way. “Officially”, Sherlock’s relapse into drugs is supposed to be for CAM’s benefit, yet Sherlock does not at all seem surprised that CAM does not buy it. So maybe the whole rouse was for John’s benefit. For Sherlock it would have been quite easy to figure out that one of John’s neighbours had a drug habit as well as where the boy would go to get the drugs. Sherlock could from there quite easily deduce that John’s danger addicted nature would have him in that drug den quite quickly. Seeing Sherlock back on drugs would inevitably cause John to give in to sentiment, he would never leave Sherlock behind in such a state. Isn’t it lucky that after a month of silence, John ends up in 221b again on the very same day that CAM comes over? The very same day Sherlock needs to recruit John again?
 

Last edited by Lola Red (March 11, 2015 10:43 am)

And why else should Sherlock turn around and talk to John in the drug den?
He could've just stayed quiet and John wouldn't have noticed him at all.
He wanted John to find him.

IDK..... He misses John so much that he even risks that angry reaction in the drug den? 

It just was my thought when I saw it the first time. Why on earth should he turn around and take off his hood / take down his disguise and talk to John if he wants to stay unnoticed? I'm sure he has an idea how John might react to find him there / like that.