BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012.


You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



February 25, 2016 9:43 pm  #2901


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

I meant the way they were talking about her in the Post Mortem. What they say in interviews doesn't always gel with what they show us in the show.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

February 25, 2016 9:47 pm  #2902


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

There is one thing on which we can rely: They will never ever tell us what is going to happen next or only in a very general way.

Remember how they told us Sherlock had emotionally regressed in series 3? And what did we get? A napking-folding, dancing, heartbroken man leaving a wedding early. I remember well how shocked people where, saying this was not "their" Sherlock anymore. And this may apply to every other character as well. 


------------------------------
"To fake the death of one sibling may be regarded as a misfortune; to fake the death of both looks like carelessness." Oscar Wilde about Mycroft Holmes

"It is what it is says love." (Erich Fried)

“Enjoy the journey of life and not just the endgame. I’m also a great believer in treating others as you would like to be treated.” (Benedict Cumberbatch)



 
 

February 25, 2016 10:39 pm  #2903


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

SolarSystem wrote:

Vhanja wrote:

What bothers me is that she is John's wife and she is also pregnant. That, more than how she is as a person, will mean that she will be a distraction and just as big (if not bigger) part of John's life than Sherlock. And I don't like that, no matter what type of character Mary would have been or is. 

But apart from that, you're right. She is a distraction, she distorts the dynamic of the show. I know that some people think the show needed a new dynamic, but I am not one of those people. Forthermore, I don't believe that introducing a new character to a show automatically improves the dynamics. Quite the contrary, sometimes. And I'm afraid this is one of those times for me.
 

Add to this the fact that Sherlock has so few episodes and yet even that little time we have with our favourite pair of heroes gets split half and half between them and Mary... more time for her means less time for Sherlock and John, unfortunately. 

And on top of that she is in such a god-mode that she makes all the other characters redundant. Why having Sherlock, John, Mycroft or Lestrade in the show, if she can out-detect, out-beat, out-spy them and as a law into herself, she removes criminals instead of police? Just as you cannot have two suns in the sky, you cannot have two characters with the same and equally brilliant skills in the story - one will be certainly weakened in favour of the other.... 

And on top of that, her "victories" are given to her without the story being built in that way, without any gradation leading to that... for example, in TAB she solved the case of the bride and yet we never saw her doing any detecting or analysing clues... it robs the story of any emotional or intellectual impact, if such deus-ex-machina emerges at the end and just steals the light from the characters we pursued through the storyline, turning them into dummies....


-----------------------------------

I cannot live without brainwork. What else is there to live for? Stand at the window there. Was there ever such a dreary, dismal, unprofitable world? See how the yellow fog swirls down the street and drifts across the dun-coloured houses. What could be more hopelessly prosaic and material? What is the use of having powers, Doctor, when one has no field upon which to exert them?

 

February 25, 2016 10:42 pm  #2904


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

For me, Mary finding the secret society before Sherlock does just strengthens the theory that she is Birdy Edwards...


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

February 25, 2016 10:45 pm  #2905


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

Your last point is true, Nakahara, and it's a bit irritating - what's the point in a detective series if we don't see the deductions!  I realise this was Sherlock's mind palace and that he didn't need to show Mary's deductions (he was doing them himself), but still. 

 

February 25, 2016 11:05 pm  #2906


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

Swanpride wrote:

Mary didn't make any deductions. Everything any character did in his mind was HIS MIND. It was not Mary finding the secret society, it was him deciding that it is time to go to Mary's rescue in his mind. He wasn't talking to any women at all, he was only talking to himself, his own subconscious.

When we had mind palace in HLV, Molly, Anderson and Mycroft advised Sherlock in their fields of expertise. They were established as characters knowledgeable in medicine, criminalistics and detecting before they appeared in this role in the mind palace.

But Mary? Wasn´t she established as an assassin? Why would she appear in the role of super-sleuth and super-spy all of a sudden, even if the whole episode was just Sherlock´s MP? She wasn´t known to him for those skills.

And that´s deus-ex-machina I am speaking about... so they should at least show her analysing clues to save this bit somehow....


-----------------------------------

I cannot live without brainwork. What else is there to live for? Stand at the window there. Was there ever such a dreary, dismal, unprofitable world? See how the yellow fog swirls down the street and drifts across the dun-coloured houses. What could be more hopelessly prosaic and material? What is the use of having powers, Doctor, when one has no field upon which to exert them?

 

February 25, 2016 11:09 pm  #2907


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

He did establish her as an intelligence agent in HLV, though (can't remember his exact words).  I don't know why he sticks with the agent part rather than the assassin part.  Possibly because he sees a little bit of similarity to himself?  But the point about the deductions still stands!

 

February 26, 2016 12:47 am  #2908


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

Liberty wrote:

He did establish her as an intelligence agent in HLV, though (can't remember his exact words).  I don't know why he sticks with the agent part rather than the assassin part.  Possibly because he sees a little bit of similarity to himself?  But the point about the deductions still stands!

 
I think Sherlock spun it as Intelligence Agent rather than Assassin because he was trying to calm John down, and make Mary believe that Sherlock wasn't a threat.

 

February 26, 2016 1:15 am  #2909


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

Did Mary actually solve the case in tab with deduction or detecting though ? IDK seemed to me she had insider information . Do we know she wasn't part of the killer club of women ?. She admits to being in the Suffragettes , and her maid and maid of honour / best friend Janine are in the cult . So maybe she just betrayed them by telling Sherlock and John .

This scenario kind of reflects what happened in hlv for me , Mary betrayed Sherlock and John and was part of a killing club of assasins . Even the alternative scenarios would be similar , she betrayed Mycroft and married John and shot Sherlock , or she betrayed Moriarty fell for John left Sherlock alive and would of killed Magnussen .

With Mary , we just don't know anything.
Sherlock is in the same boat and running themes through his mp

Last edited by Mothonthemantel (February 26, 2016 1:17 am)


"Man may not be degraded  to being a machine by being denied to be a ghost in the machine."
It's just transport. The virus in the hard drive . However impossible .Must be the truth.
 

February 26, 2016 6:42 am  #2910


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

Er, not sure about this: I think Mary was a suffragist.
I don't think she was part of the death cult.

Last edited by besleybean (February 26, 2016 6:43 am)


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://professorfangirl.tumblr.com/post/105838327464/heres-an-outtake-of-mark-gatiss-on-the
 

February 26, 2016 7:53 am  #2911


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

RavenMorganLeigh wrote:

Liberty wrote:

He did establish her as an intelligence agent in HLV, though (can't remember his exact words).  I don't know why he sticks with the agent part rather than the assassin part.  Possibly because he sees a little bit of similarity to himself?  But the point about the deductions still stands!

 
I think Sherlock spun it as Intelligence Agent rather than Assassin because he was trying to calm John down, and make Mary believe that Sherlock wasn't a threat.

There are hints like the skip code stuff, and then he does seem to see her as an agent in his mind palace.  I think he deduces that she's an agent. 

I don't think Mary solved the case, but I does look as if she went undercover to find the death cult, rather than being one of them.  (I just feel that that as that was a huge part of the information, maybe we should have been told more about how Mary found them - but of course, I wouldn't have wanted the show to get sidelined like that, so happy to accept that she could do it).
 

 

February 26, 2016 8:19 am  #2912


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

The thing with Mary is that - since she tells us hardly anything about herself - we have only two sources: Sherlock's deductions which are never really confirmed or refuted by her, and Magnussen's MP material against her. Since she tried to get this back from Magnussen or silence him by killing him, we must assume that what he had against her was real. That it would have meant a life sentence. So she was definitely doing things far beyond the duties of a regular government-employed agent. 
 


------------------------------
"To fake the death of one sibling may be regarded as a misfortune; to fake the death of both looks like carelessness." Oscar Wilde about Mycroft Holmes

"It is what it is says love." (Erich Fried)

“Enjoy the journey of life and not just the endgame. I’m also a great believer in treating others as you would like to be treated.” (Benedict Cumberbatch)



 
 

February 26, 2016 10:06 am  #2913


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

Yes exactly. And did she really just meet John by coincidence, it seems  ery unlikely.


"Man may not be degraded  to being a machine by being denied to be a ghost in the machine."
It's just transport. The virus in the hard drive . However impossible .Must be the truth.
 

February 26, 2016 10:08 am  #2914


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

Very unlikely. And even if she did, Mycroft would have known that something was off. There is something fishy about their whole meeting in the surgery. 


------------------------------
"To fake the death of one sibling may be regarded as a misfortune; to fake the death of both looks like carelessness." Oscar Wilde about Mycroft Holmes

"It is what it is says love." (Erich Fried)

“Enjoy the journey of life and not just the endgame. I’m also a great believer in treating others as you would like to be treated.” (Benedict Cumberbatch)



 
 

February 26, 2016 10:33 am  #2915


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

There is something fishy, I will agree to that. Mycroft has a file on John when Sherlock returns, with a new picture - and he knows exactly where John is that night. It makes no sense that Mycroft wouldn't want to do a check-up on a woman that John seems to be in a serious relationship with. 

And considering that it took a sick Sherlock a day (?) to figure out Mary's background (how did he do that, btw?), Mycroft would be able to find out the same about her. 


__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"We'll live on starlight and crime scenes" - wordstrings


Team Hudders!
 
 

February 26, 2016 11:26 am  #2916


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

Vhanja wrote:

There is something fishy, I will agree to that. Mycroft has a file on John when Sherlock returns, with a new picture - and he knows exactly where John is that night. It makes no sense that Mycroft wouldn't want to do a check-up on a woman that John seems to be in a serious relationship with. 

And considering that it took a sick Sherlock a day (?) to figure out Mary's background (how did he do that, btw?), Mycroft would be able to find out the same about her. 

I agree on all points.
Which, once again, brings us to the mysterious issue of Mycroft being selectively blind towards Mary... weird.


-----------------------------------

I cannot live without brainwork. What else is there to live for? Stand at the window there. Was there ever such a dreary, dismal, unprofitable world? See how the yellow fog swirls down the street and drifts across the dun-coloured houses. What could be more hopelessly prosaic and material? What is the use of having powers, Doctor, when one has no field upon which to exert them?

 

February 26, 2016 11:28 am  #2917


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

So maybe that's why Sherlock has come to the conclusion in his mind palace that Mary is working for Mycroft?


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

February 26, 2016 11:55 am  #2918


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

ukaunz wrote:

So maybe that's why Sherlock has come to the conclusion in his mind palace that Mary is working for Mycroft?

It would seem so but... do Mycroft´s employees normally shoot his family members without being fired immediately?


-----------------------------------

I cannot live without brainwork. What else is there to live for? Stand at the window there. Was there ever such a dreary, dismal, unprofitable world? See how the yellow fog swirls down the street and drifts across the dun-coloured houses. What could be more hopelessly prosaic and material? What is the use of having powers, Doctor, when one has no field upon which to exert them?

 

February 26, 2016 12:04 pm  #2919


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

Maybe that´s why Mary went freelance? She couldn´t hold a job because for all her cleverness, she always ended shooting the wrong targets?


-----------------------------------

I cannot live without brainwork. What else is there to live for? Stand at the window there. Was there ever such a dreary, dismal, unprofitable world? See how the yellow fog swirls down the street and drifts across the dun-coloured houses. What could be more hopelessly prosaic and material? What is the use of having powers, Doctor, when one has no field upon which to exert them?

 

February 26, 2016 12:56 pm  #2920


Re: Mary – the subject of discussion

I think Mycroft is just acting like the Iceman he is when it comes to "business."  He plans the long game and has infinite patience to deploy to that end.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Proud President and Founder of the OSAJ.  
Honorary German  
"Anyone who takes himself too seriously always runs the risk of looking ridiculous; anyone who can consistently laugh at himself does not".
 -Vaclav Havel 
"Life is full of wonder, Love is never wrong."   Melissa Ethridge

I ship it harder than Mrs. Hudson.
    
 
 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum