Of course there have always been things you just have to believe, after all it is fiction which is subject to different laws than reality. But IMO there is something that distinguishes S3, especially HLV, from the other series - the fact that is seems to be against the logic of the show itself, that it does not sit well with viewers, that people feel forced to accept things that seem to go against the essence of the show. I know no other SH adaptation in which Watson chooses a woman who has killed Holmes over the man himself. The contrast between Sherlock nearly dying in his own flat and the Christmassy reconciliation is so jarring to me that I find it hard to believe that this is real. And I definitely never had this feeling before. 

TSoT is different, at least to me. The crime is not very plausible, but the feelings are. And while I strongly dislike John's behaviour at times (the dance floor, in front of Sholto's door) it is something I can understand. HLV, however, I do not understand and that makes it difficult for me to accept the second half of that episode. And not just Mary, also the gun matter, the whole Christmas arrangement, etc. 

 

John is a grown man. I do not find it very plausible that his reconciliation with his wife should depend on Sherlock. This would basically mean that he makes himself subject to Sherlock's opinion. If Sherlock had said, she is a bad woman, he would have divorced her? I cannot imagine John Watson, army doctor, being pushed by Sherlock to stay with his wife or to leave her either. It must be his decision alone and we see him deciding to stay with her. 

But we will never come to a conclusion as long as we do not know what happened during the "missing months". And the writers deliberately chose not to show us. So far. 

@Liberty, I do see the neat differentiation you make here but I think what Susi means is (please correct me if I'm wrong, Susi): there's no adaptation where storytellingwise the rescue of the warstan marriage must be more important than the unique relationship of the two mains.

mrshouse wrote:

@Liberty, I do see the neat differentiation you make here but I think what Susi means is (please correct me if I'm wrong, Susi): there's no adaptation where storytellingwise the rescue of the warstan marriage must be more important than the unique relationship of the two mains.

Exactly. I know no other adaptation in which the marriage/rescue of the Watson marriage takes such precedence. And I also know of no other adaptation in which John Watson needs to be pushed to Mary by Sherlock Holmes, quite the contrary. If you look at the Ritchie films, for example, you have a Holmes trying his best to prevent the marriage. He comes round in the end but leaves the wedding early (!).
What has bothered me from the beginning is a marriage that seems to be built on nothing but lies and repression (John repressing his knowledge about Mary's past) is given such an important place in the narrative. And for me there is only one explanation for that which I have discussed in the appropriate threads. 

 

mrshouse wrote:

Schmiezi wrote:

I agree with Liberty: Sherlock does force the Watsons together again. I really still wonder why.

 
Because it is an epic love story, we just don't get it.

That must be it. :-p

No, I think that if they'd wanted to show the Watsons as an epic love story, they'd have done it quite differently.  Their story doesn't have that format.