Can someone explain to me how Janine learned that Sherlock's proposal was false? She gets knocked out before he enters the office and when she comes to he has already been shot. It is obviously her first visit in hospital but she has extensively talked to the papers, i.e. she did this very shortly after the shooting. She says "give my love to John and Mary" which means to me she has not been in contact with them. Sherlock and Magnussen have not talked at all. So how did she know? 

It may be an error. She mentions CAM being furious because she went to a rival with her story. So I do not think they talked about it beforehand. She must have known for sure that Sherlock betrayed her because the newspaper thing was quite a strong reaction. 

Well, imagine the scene when the ambulance arrives and Sherlock is taking to the hospital : Watson's here, there was a breaking in the office, Magnussen and janine are knocked out and Holmes 's been shot. There's likely been a police investigation after, and Watson and Janine have seen each other.
Watson maybe didn't tell the truth to the police (or maybe he did, both are sustainable) but we can guess he told it to Janine.
I'm not sure it's a genuine continuity error, Janine isn't important enough so that they dwell on her, it's just an ellipsis.

This discussion made me realise something just now. When John found Sherlock (or to be more correct: the other way around) in the drug den, Sherlock had been gone a month. However, he was already "dating" Janine. When they returned to the flat, Janine was in his bedroom. It is implied that she spent the night there, and that she has stuff in the flat to get ready for next morning (fresh set of clothes, hygiene products etc).

However, Sherlock seem to have slept in the den. And since he's been gone for a month, that meant he must have spent a lot of time in the drug den. So if he wasn't much at home in 221B, and if he acted a druggie - including the clothes, the unwashed hair etc - how would have time to date Janine? And how would she want to date an unwashed drunkie?

Those two stories doesn't mix in my head.

Yeah, perhaps he was mostly there when she was at work, and they only met through made appointments that he could work around.

Personally, I see the whole fake relationship with Janine as a nod to canon, slightly updated of course.

Kittyhawk wrote:

It's never said that Sherlock was gone for a month - John says: "A month – that’s all it took. One." (http://arianedevere.livejournal.com/67234.html) I understood that to mean that John has been married (and out of 221B) for a month.

I still find it strange that Sherlock lets Janine stay in his apartment on her own, and the question of how did Janine learn that the proposal was false is so good it has a thread of its own.

As for do we like Sherlock for being a horrible person? I don't think he's generally a horrible person, he just sometimes does horrible things. And I'm prepared to forgive quite a lot if people are brilliant (or at least good) at what they are doing - being nice is not necessary (and who said - I believe on one of the LOTR bonus disks - that saying of somebody "he's a nice man" is actually a terrible thing to say?)

I'm not happy about Sherlock faking the relationship with Janine (and I don't think she'll be a one-off character), but Janine doesn't seem to mind too much, so who am I to complain. For some reason I find the underground scene much worse - I think in John's place I would  reconsider whether I really want to be friends with such a person.

He's been married for amonth but would've been out of 221b for much longer.  He was out of 221b in the MHR.

Kittyhawk wrote:

Of course, you are right, John moved out of the flat when Sherlock was "dead" and probably never moved back in (certainly not before learning about Mary's past later in HLV). But the important point here is that Sherlock did not spend a month in the drug den. My guess would be on several separate nights (followed by mornings in his bathtub), most probably interspersed with nights in his own bed (with or without Janine), which looks a lot more comfortable.

This is backed up by the fact that Janine was obviously completley oblivious as to where he'd just been and what he'd been up to. I'm sure she would have realised if her new boyfriend was a complete druggie.
 

Good point - with the amount of adaptations that are already around it's probably not easy to create something new and original.

Unfortunately I still haven't made any progress with ACD's stories (I've just come to a point in Study in Scarlet where it struck me how scrupulously polite Sherlock is to a policeman who's probably on completely the wrong track), but maybe you could tell me: What did Sherlock do and say to make Mofftiss (don't remember which one) say (either in an episode commentary or in a DVD extra) they were struck by how "not nice" ACD's Sherlock was? That they (or one of them) were actually rather shocked by the character? Because I don't remember anything like that from when I read the stories several decades ago.

Of course I suppose that behaviour standards have changed quite a lot from then to now, so it's not impossible that the protagonist's behaviour needed to be "updated" (read: made much worse) to make a similar impression on today's audience as ACD's characters made on theirs. On the other hand - reactions to ACD's characters seem to have been positive, haven't they?

 

Kittyhawk wrote:

: What did Sherlock do and say to make Mofftiss (don't remember which one) say (either in an episode commentary or in a DVD extra) they were struck by how "not nice" ACD's Sherlock was? 
 

Actually, The original Sherlock Holmes is usually polite with the clients, and can even be cheerfull now and then. I don't remember him being rude. He's quite lonely but certainly not a sociopath.
But he's certainly blunt, uncaring  and sometimes manupulative ( do you need exemples or do you prefer finding out by reading the canon?). Moreover, he's absolutly regardless of social status, and treat equally rich, noble or poor lads.
So, to me, this Holmes is not the same as the canon one, but not utterly foreign to him.I guess, when you " create" a new Holmes, you focus on some traits and forget some. I suppose the writers overdid the rudeness because they wanted to add humour to the show ( and it works, this show is funnier than the canon or any other adaptations) .
I have more reservations on the emotionnal/personnal interactions part of the show. Ever since I can appreciate a touch of it,  I prefer when "Sherlock Holmes" stays first and foremost a detective story, not "days of our lives".