Wasn't there bonus material for the cinema viewers? I remember reading something like that. I haven't heard anything yet what the "bonus" was?



 

You did? Sorry. I admit I haven't read every word of the 450 post here. Thank you.

Last edited by Ivy (January 4, 2016 3:16 pm)

Liberty wrote:

She's in very early pregnancy in TSOT, though, so the baby could just be seen as premature - in fact as long as they were married when the baby was born, it would be legitimate.   I'm not sure how common it was for women to keep working after marriage, never mind through pregnancy (I know some of my grandmother's generation had to give up work when they married - as in they seemed to be automatically no longer employed!). 

Of course, there's an odd timeline in the mind palace, obviously - I would tend to think that the characters are where they are in the present day, but that's not necessarily the case.   Mary could have had the baby already and left it with a nanny.   Or maybe she didn't get pregnant in Sherlock's version.  Or maybe Sherlock just didn't want to include the baby? 

We really need a commentary!

Huh, so if Sherlock´s mind-palace shows us Victorian Mary working for Mycroft, according to some of you it also means she must be working for him in RL, in her modern form, also.

But if Sherlock´s mind palace shows her without the baby, you fail to apply the same logic - that he shows her without a baby because she is not really pregnant and Sherlock is unconsciously aware of the fact (the same way he was being aware of her being a liar, but he ignored it). Or it could symbolise the fact that the baby of RL Mary is not really John´s.

Add to this a fact that she lacks a baby-bump in a scene you believe is real and you have it almost confirmed.
 

Ahem, I just found this. Not sure if they would be so lazy to commit such a continuity error:

http://skulls-and-tea.tumblr.com/post/136587649656/skulls-and-tea-mycroft-wearing-two-different

If we suppose it is not an error, it would mean that all the modern scenes are in Sherlock's mind, right?

What do you mean by this? He did not lose it, it is completely different. 

Cannot believe that would happen. 

nakahara wrote:

Liberty wrote:

She's in very early pregnancy in TSOT, though, so the baby could just be seen as premature - in fact as long as they were married when the baby was born, it would be legitimate.   I'm not sure how common it was for women to keep working after marriage, never mind through pregnancy (I know some of my grandmother's generation had to give up work when they married - as in they seemed to be automatically no longer employed!). 

Of course, there's an odd timeline in the mind palace, obviously - I would tend to think that the characters are where they are in the present day, but that's not necessarily the case.   Mary could have had the baby already and left it with a nanny.   Or maybe she didn't get pregnant in Sherlock's version.  Or maybe Sherlock just didn't want to include the baby? 

We really need a commentary!

Huh, so if Sherlock´s mind-palace shows us Victorian Mary working for Mycroft, according to some of you it also means she must be working for him in RL, in her modern form, also.

But if Sherlock´s mind palace shows her without the baby, you fail to apply the same logic - that he shows her without a baby because she is not really pregnant and Sherlock is unconsciously aware of the fact (the same way he was being aware of her being a liar, but he ignored it). Or it could symbolise the fact that the baby of RL Mary is not really John´s.

Add to this a fact that she lacks a baby-bump in a scene you believe is real and you have it almost confirmed.
 

No, not at all: I said that Mary working for Mycroft could be a hint or a clue that she's working for him in real life.   That idea is then kind of backed up by Mycroft not being surprised at Mary bypassing MI5 security and even asking her about it.   It doesn't at all mean that she must be working for Mycroft, but there are two big clues there that go together.  (There's also some other little details that could fit with that too - although not really from this episode - why Mycroft doesn't seem to check Mary out, why he warns Sherlock off, etc.)

(Yes, the pregnancy could be a hint but it's a bit more vague.  I find it very difficult to see her as definitely not pregnant on the plane, because she's wearing loose clothing and leaning forward - it would hide a bump.  She doesn't look pregnant in the mind palace, though - Victorian corsets might hide it, but there isn't a noticeable bump even in her more active clothing). 

 

Last edited by Liberty (January 4, 2016 5:04 pm)

It is a nice thought...
And thanks for the info on the gloves!

besleybean wrote:

Exactly!
Who sees but doesn't observe?!

*raises hand*  Me.

I've only seen TAB once so far, and I'm sure more of it will become a bit clearer to me on subsequent viewings. But I have all of you clever forum members to 'splain things to me, so I don't have to wear out many brain cells figuring things out for myself anyway.
 

Well hang on, we go in and out of the hallucination, don't we?