BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 » Why did Moriarty kill himself?

s.he · July 29, 2012 9:07 pm

JaneCo wrote:
The guy in the stairwell is a bit of a puzzle

The assassins are employed by Moriarty's 'clients' who want the keycode, and they are trying to keep Sherlock alive. Mycroft draws John's attention to them and shows him photos.

The snipers are there to bump off John, Lestrade and Mrs Hudson if Sherlock doesn't jump.

When I was watching TRF I noticed that the sniper in the stairwell was also included in the photos of the five assassins shown to John by Mycroft.

Any thoughts?

Three:
1. Two actors accidentally look similar.
2. They are quarreling killer-twins, who never cooperate or do the same job.
3. Mycroft have insigned him to the wrong group of killers.
... ...

First thought would be a little disappointing, third one would be possible but a little bit complicated in the end, so I prefer the second idea.

Last edited by s.he (August 1, 2012 7:24 pm)

Sherlock Holmes · July 29, 2012 9:10 pm

Or maybe the assassin in the stairwell WAS the same assassin showed to John. Wouldn't be too unbelievable would it?

JaneCo · July 29, 2012 9:38 pm

... but they are supposed to be two distinct groups. How can he be part of the group trying to keep Sherlock alive (working for Moriarty's clients) and also a sniper (working for Moriarty). If there was nothing in this, why use the same actor?

s.he · July 29, 2012 10:45 pm

JaneCo wrote:
... but they are supposed to be two distinct groups. How can he be part of the group trying to keep Sherlock alive (working for Moriarty's clients) and also a sniper (working for Moriarty). If there was nothing in this, why use the same actor?

Yes, there are two groups of killers. And I think, he can't be part of both groups at the same time.

You will find an overview/ summery of them on http://finalproblem.tumblr.com/post/16959757250/assassins-vs-gunmen

Last edited by s.he (July 29, 2012 10:54 pm)

ancientsgate · July 29, 2012 11:07 pm

JaneCo wrote:
... but they are supposed to be two distinct groups. How can he be part of the group trying to keep Sherlock alive (working for Moriarty's clients) and also a sniper (working for Moriarty). If there was nothing in this, why use the same actor?

a) the show has a budget and it's cheaper to use the same actor for bit parts
b) we're not supposed to notice
c) when these shows were made, I don't think TWIC (the wankers in charge) exactly realized (or, perhaps, cared) how fervent we'd all be about picking this thing apart-- after all, who looks at a TV show frame by frame and then goes on an international forum to debate each individual nuance?

*looks around* oops I guess we do. *smile*

JaneCo · July 29, 2012 11:33 pm

Ancientsgate, that was an initial reaction but I thought it was too simplistic. You don't need to look at it frame by frame - or even slow it down to notice this.

ancientsgate · July 29, 2012 11:42 pm

JaneCo wrote:
Ancientsgate, that was an initial reaction but I thought it was too simplistic. You don't need to look at it frame by frame - or even slow it down to notice this.

Maybe not, but you have to look at it really, really, really closely to see that the gunman in the stairwell is one of the original guys in the folders Mycroft showed John. And you have to have seen the ep more than a few times to put two and two together and remember the face from one scene to the later one. And you have to care. A lot.

JaneCo · July 29, 2012 11:59 pm

No, I am interested and feel that it is worth looking at. I am perfectly happy if you don't feel the same, and would be even happier if your response was in the same pleasant tone.

ancientsgate · July 30, 2012 12:34 am

JaneCo wrote:
No, I am interested and feel that it is worth looking at. I am perfectly happy if you don't feel the same, and would be even happier if your response was in the same pleasant tone.

Unpleasant? I was being unpleasant? I thought this was a discussion group. I will make an effort to lighten up if you will. I'm here (mostly) for the fun of it. Don't want to argue, not about anything. Will try not to bother you in the future or respond to your posts, if I can remember.

Davina · July 30, 2012 10:07 am

The dangers of the written word when you are not able to talk to people face-to-face folks.

Irene Adler · July 30, 2012 10:18 am

Davina wrote:
The dangers of the written word when you are not able to talk to people face-to-face folks.

Agreed

kazza474 · July 30, 2012 12:22 pm

Well I have to say I have never been convinced that these 2 characters are the same person.
Jawline is different for a start, the noses have different tips.

SandraNM · July 31, 2012 7:12 pm

JaneCo says? (July 30)
The guy in the stairwell is a bit of a puzzle

The assassins are employed by Moriarty's 'clients' who want the keycode, and they are trying to keep Sherlock alive. Mycroft draws John's attention to them and shows him photos.

The snipers are there to bump off John, Lestrade and Mrs Hudson if Sherlock doesn't jump.

When I was watching TRF I noticed that the sniper in the stairwell was also included in the photos of the five assassins shown to John by Mycroft.

Any thoughts?

SandraNM: I think there were only 4 snipers that Mycroft showed John. I also wonder where the woman assassin went to. Two of the assassin were killed protecting Sherlock. Two were shown waiting to get word to take out Mrs. Hudson and Lestrad (was it?) I can see that one would be waiting to take John out. But he was emphasized for some reason. And he was the only assassin who was eye witness.

I don't know for sure what he (she?) was all about but I think it is significant and will be revealed in the next episode.

I'm going to watch TRF again and make sure about the assassins. (Another thought, if Sherlock had lived John, Lestrad, and Mrs. Hudson would be gone. He would stil have Molly's shoulder to cry on if he hadn't jumped. But a real hero saves his friends over himself.

With Andrew Scott wining the BAFTA he will be too busy making more movies and won;'t have time to guest star in Sherlock. Even as much as I want him to be. None of his other movies have shown him to be remotely this good of an actor. His Moriarty was a work of art.

Last edited by SandraNM (July 31, 2012 7:16 pm)

ancientsgate · July 31, 2012 10:58 pm

SandraNM wrote:
With Andrew Scott wining the BAFTA he will be too busy making more movies and won;'t have time to guest star in Sherlock. Even as much as I want him to be. None of his other movies have shown him to be remotely this good of an actor. His Moriarty was a work of art.

I have never seen anyone portrayed like AS did Moriarty. At times, I actually wanted to like the f***er, can you imagine? But he was so nasty. That one little snippet of a scene where he asked the female court clerk to stick that gum in his mouth was rather telling-- he was nasty, nasty, nasty. And a big flirt. And about the angriest individual I've ever seen on screen. Envious of Sherlock, wealthy enough to buy whatever he wanted, plus he truly was a spider, with an evil web that spread all across London. In many ways, he was Sherlock's evil twin.

AS says he's done with the role, but I don't know what the showrunners want. As for the actor, well, they can often be wooed back with enough money offered for a reprise. No idea what any real plans are, if any.

Moriarty was partly well-written, partly well-acted, and also part of an exquisitely talented, giving and dedicated ensemble cast. A great combo.

SandraNM · August 1, 2012 6:39 pm

Being a writer I always see the actor and his/her performance of a character more than I see the actual character .

It's funny you should say you were finding yourself wanting to like the #@!*^%* guy (Moriarty.)

I thought A.S. was excellent to the point of my falling in love with him, his Moriarty, and the whole movie (not to mention the series.) I'm also fond of Freeman and Cumberbatch (and want to see more of all three in performances equal to the ones in Sherlock.) Rah Rah. (A.S. is in a short British movie of The Duel. He was very good but not of the caliber he is as Moriarty. (It's interesting that for a man of slight build he can create larger-than-life, powerful characters.)

That's why comitting suicide in TRF was so out of character. But he did say he was 'ssssoo changeable'.

BTW, I feel the way about Scott/Moriarty that I did about The Phantom of the Opera, the character and Gerard Butler. I and a great deal of other women fell completely in love with "them". Most of us were old enough to be GB's mother. I found myself disappointed the Phantom wasn't more wicked. (But that was a musical. The day Lloyd Webber turns his attention to Sherlock Holmes...no that would just be so wrong.)

As long as I can still play my PBS DVD I'll always have Moriarty at my fingertips (Is that an expression in England?) even if they don't bring him back in Sherlock the series.

Last edited by SandraNM (August 1, 2012 6:42 pm)

ancientsgate · August 1, 2012 10:33 pm

SandraNM wrote:
Being a writer I always see the actor and his/her performance of a character more than I see the actual character . It's funny you should say you were finding yourself wanting to like the #@!*^%* guy (Moriarty.)

I think it's a testament to his acting skills. I loved the nuances of his portrayal of Moriarty. Alternating from that sing-song sarcastic thing to screaming in people's faces, sometimes menacing, sometimes silly ('course you have John... maybe I should get a live-in one.... that would be so fine). Both my husband and I burst out laughing during that otherwise serious roof-top scene, where he hung his arms and hunched along, boring Sherlock.... And Moriarty used the word doofus. Who says doofus? lololololol

That's why committing suicide in TRF was so out of character. But he did say he was 'ssssoo changeable'.

I'm of two minds about that. I don't believe for a moment that someone that vain, that self-absorbed, would kill himself in such a messy way. He cared about his looks. He cared about how people perceived him. In RL, of course, his brains, skull, teeth and eyeballs would have been blown all over that rooftop. I don't know that vain people would choose such a way to off themselves. ??? It didn't really gibe well with me, with what I thought I knew about his character. OTOH, he was f***ing crazy you just getting that now?, so.... I guess the "rules" (are there rules?) don't necessarily apply to irrational people.

But if AS wanted out of the role, and they wanted his character gone, I suppose the surprise suicide was as good as anything. And they couldn't have him and Sherlock just tumble off the roof together (like falling over the falls in original canon) because Sherlock had a plan and fully intended to live through his own suicide. Sherlock seemed genuinely surprised and horrified when Moriarty ate his gun. I wonder what S's original plan was-- how did he think he could jump into a net (or whatever he used) and M not notice, if M were still alive up there?

Last edited by ancientsgate (August 3, 2012 1:08 am)

SandraNM · August 2, 2012 10:48 pm

There is something no one seems to have mentioned--not that I read every post on here--but Why did Sherlock say "Give me some privacy, please" on the ledge before he laughed and turned back to say to Moriarty"I have you" referring to way for M to call off the assassinations?

I think one reason Moriarty offed himself was to prevent Sherlock from forcing him to call them off.

Another reason is that Moriarty wanted to frame Sherlock for his murder if his (M's) plan should go a different way.

Another reason is the writers wanted Moriarty out of the way so Sherlock would be able to call John and give the signal to "Molly and everyone else" (which was part of what he said to John). Of course he could have phoned his suicide note to John with Moriarty there but it wouldn't have had the same dramatic effect.

Also, I've not figured out how Sherlock knew Moriarty was going to make him commit suicide. Sherlock planned to fake his own suicide and planted the idea in Moriarty's mind? He didn't know M. would set up the assassinations of his friends. Nor suspected that M. was going to suicidehimself.

The whole scene on the roof had an aura of being contrived on both S. and M's parts as if they putting on a show for each other. (Some it was sincere but basically it seemed both M and S were setting something up beyond what they were actually saying. (I'm putting this badly but I hope you will get what I mean.)

With all these speculations and possible scenarios, I'd just like to say to the writer about the next season: "Lucy, you have some 'splainin' to do!"

It will be a treat seeing how the screenwriters will wiggle this episode of Sherlock out of all these predicaments. All the obsessed fans aren't going to settle of anything less than genius.

I'm an obsessed fan. Hurry up with Season/Series 3 and take us off the hook.

Arya · August 3, 2012 12:19 am

SandraNM- Agreed. It felt contrived because it was like a game of chess where they were both 10 moves ahead of what was happening (I think that metaphor/simile has been used before- sorry if I stole it). All we as viewers can do is go back and watch it numerous times to try and figure out exactly what it means.

ancientsgate · August 3, 2012 1:15 am

SandraNM wrote:
.....With all these speculations and possible scenarios, I'd just like to say to the writer about the next season: "Lucy, you have some 'splainin' to do!"

*smile*

It will be a treat seeing how the screenwriters will wiggle this episode of Sherlock out of all these predicaments. All the obsessed fans aren't going to settle of anything less than genius. I'm an obsessed fan. Hurry up with Season/Series 3 and take us off the hook.

Yup. I've been saying that all along-- they better make it good, because if they want me to hand-wave stuff that makes no sense, I am going to be plenty pissed off. And I don't want any kind of sci-fi explanation either.

S3 is at least 18 months away here in the States. At least. They won't start filming S3 until January, it takes them at least 2 months to get the whole thing in the can, then there's the editing, then they have to show it in the UK first, and and and and.... I hope I live long enough. Maybe I should go to the gym more often and start taking care of myself better, so I'll still be here when S3 ever shows up, all edited to death, on Masterpiece Theatre. *rolls eyes* Ah, well. Beggars cannot be choosers. But I am more than ready to beg and beg and beg some more.

KeepersPrice · August 3, 2012 2:12 am

Ancientsgate, I'm coming over to your house to watch it when it does come on so we can squeeeeeee together!