I doubt they would make Mary a new Watson - the show would never recover from the shark-jump of such proportions. 

Well, killing off John and replacing him with the new "Watson"-- Mary-- would do a couple of things; it would end the criticism that "Sherlock" has no relevant female charcters; it would be using the same trope as "Elementary"; it would be "Jumping the Shark", but that seems to be what passes for plotting a series these days-- the more outlandish and unbeleivable, the better (Think Game of Thrones mentality); and it would give Amanda Abbington's career a HUGE boost. 

Add to that the idea of a single mother, widowed--- who goes on a vendetta with Sherlock to solve the mystery of who killed her husband--- and Sherlock's best friend--- well, if you really wanted to create serious drama--- if I were an extremely cold-blooded author (you hear me, George R.R. Martin???) this would be a path I'd consider. 

Next season is supposed to be so dark, that when an announcement was made about the direction the show was taking to the crew, they were reduced to tears. 

Keep in mind that they can always use Martin Freeman in Mind Palace sequences-- so he's never really gone. 

Again, I WOULD HATE THIS DIRECTION. Hate. It. 

But I don't put anything past modern screenwriters/producers these days. 

BONUS: Mary's behind the "death" of John Watson, and gets her comeuppance-- at the end of the 5th season. 

Last edited by RavenMorganLeigh (June 24, 2015 8:34 pm)

Now that we have made clear how we don't want Mary to replace John (and I completely agree), and thought about baby-sitting arrangements let's please keep in mind that this thread is dedicated to neither Watson but the one and only Mycroft Holmes, who would not only make a poor baby-sitter but would also be appalled by the lack of self-restrain causing some of us to deviate from the topic of the discussion at hand 

Lola Red wrote:

Now that we have made clear how we don't want Mary to replace John (and I completely agree), and thought about baby-sitting arrangements let's please keep in mind that this thread is dedicated to neither Watson but the one and only Mycroft Holmes, who would not only make a poor baby-sitter but would also be appalled by the lack of self-restrain causing some of us to deviate from the topic of the discussion at hand 

My apologies, Lola-- didn't mean to go off on a tangent. 

Something unrelated to Mary and Co: What I keep thinking about is "the other one". Just in the case this actually was a sibling of Mycroft, like Sherlock... wouldn't it explain Mycroft's and Sherlock's relationship a bit better? What if Sherlock's resentment towards Mycroft isn't about old family dynamics while they were children, but more recent? And it would also explain why Mycroft keeps going on about "caring is not an advantage". It would also explain why Sherlock is so afraid to care for people but still does it. We always think about what "the other one" incident could have mean to Mycroft, but it also must have had an impact on Sherlock, and that again would hugely influence the Mycroft-Sherlock dynamics.
 

Last edited by Whisky (June 25, 2015 10:55 am)

I found an interesting meta. No spoilers, just speculation so everyone is safe. What really strikes me is the idea that in the long run there may be no place for a deus ex machina:

http://57circlesofhell.tumblr.com/post/122417862179/will-mary-murder-mycroft

@ Susi and the meta:
interesting! But: because Mary shot the Queen? Good observation, but no, their hints aren't that clever, imo :D

Yet, I agree on the story arc thing. The Harry Potter parallel is actually a good one.
I could see sth happening to Mycroft story-wise, I just don't think his actor will be willing to give up the fun. That, for me, is the strongest hint that Mycroft will be fine :-)

I think Mycroft isn't deus ex machina anymore. If he's under s.o. thumb, or his hand's are tied, which we have both heard about him, then he can't be, no matter how powerful he is otherwise.
 

I seem to recall that it was said that one of the main characters will die in the next season. Assuming that Sherlock and John are safe (I recall Mark and Steven once saying something about “playing fair” and how those two should never die=be killed by an adaptation), I would still put Mycroft only in fourth place on the list of the most likely people to die (after Mary, Hrs. Hudson and Molly). His death just would not make sense to me (yet). Because of his position, he is able to –convincingly- get Sherlock into much more interesting situations that he would be likely to end up in if left to his own devices (see Irene). Also I like Mycroft’s role as a reminder that Sherlock is neither as detached and cold as he would like people to believe, nor as infallible as he and John like to pretend. So I think as of now, he still has a role to play in the storytelling that makes it unlikely he will be written out yet. But I am sure, should it happen, Mark (how often can you write your own death scene?)will make sure he leaves with a bang (and I will watch broken-hearted)

I wonder if they have to show Sherlock's "growing up" in such a harsh way and kill s.o. Sherlock cares about. There are many things that can help a person to grow characterwise. And now when we have seen Sherlock's parents, it would also affect them. I'm no big fan of showing character growths by killing family and friends. That's sure the quickest way to grow up, but not the only one. I can see it, but I hope they choose different means of finishing their story arc for Sherlock.
I would have hoped that Sherlock's time in Serbia would have given him that growth characterwise, but apparently the writers and Benedict didn't see/write it that way.
I am also not so sure if Mycroft is really a fully developed character yet.

I think to show Sherlock as a child was mainly to show the relationship between Mycroft and him (a younger brother will always be younger brother, no matter how grown-up he might become), and also I thought it was to show that Sherlock really hasn't got the mind-set to kill in cold blood. He isn't that man - he reacted like the confused child, and this, more than anything else, shows that he isn't a second Mary, imo. If he was anything similar to Mary, he would have simply accepted his actions and the writers wouldn't have shown a crying child. I don't think this picture was only for Mycroft's characterization (how he sees his little brother), but also for Sherlock's - he is actually overwhelmed.
 

Last edited by Whisky (June 25, 2015 3:52 pm)

I just had a thought inspired in another thread: Mycroft “is the British government, when he is not too busy being the British Secret Service or the CIA on a freelance basis”, Mary did “all those wet jobs for the CIA”. Might this be (part of) the answer to Mycroft’s curious apparent lack of involvement in the whole Mary-issue?