I have moved a discussion from another thread over here where it belongs:

Schmiezi wrote:

Ah thanks. But I think you'very got Susi's and my comments wrong. We meant (half jokingly) that BBC Mary is as inconsistent as canon Mary and therefore, somehow, BBC Mary fits canon even though she is that smart-alec sweet super heroine good wife mingle-mangle.

besleybean wrote:

I'm happy with both.

Both versions of Mary? What exactly do you like about canon Mary?

I kind of like canon Mary.  She seems quite sweet and intelligent, and independent without having much resources (she's an orphan).  But she's not the most exciting of characters, and I wouldn't particularly have wanted to see her in more of the stories.

besleybean wrote:

Appropriate to her time: she allows the boys go do their stuff.

And this is exactly what BBC Mary does not. She only allows the boys to do their stuff as long as she is included. As can be seen in TSoT, TAB, and TST. And this is something a lot of people did not like about her character. 
 

Last edited by SusiGo (May 17, 2017 8:52 pm)

So you think being a modern woman means to be included in a trio that has existed for 130 years as a couple? This is not my idea of feminist writing. 
 

Last edited by SusiGo (May 17, 2017 8:53 pm)

And I also judge the show as shown to us but I am free to voice criticism. And I can be critical of something I love and still love it. But I think that their choice to write Mary the way she is was not a good idea. An opinion not only shared by fans but also by some critics. I really love this show - else I had not spent five years with it - but I think the writers did the show a great disservice with turning Mary into a main character. And I know that I am not alone in this. 

 

I suppose the trouble is that Mary is quite a big thing not to like!  She's in for two "seasons" and a special, so it's more than half the show. 

I do think it works for what they seem to have been trying to do.   If Mary hadn't been a main character, would we have cared so much?  I know I talked about this further up the thread, but I think having a heroine/villain so close to home added drama.  It wouldn't have been the same if somebody else had shot Sherlock, if Sherlock hadn't had such a pressing reason to kill Magnussen, if the client in TST had been unknown person, if John and Sherlock had fallen out over his handling of a stranger's case, etc.   I think Mary as written was needed for what they were trying to do, which seemed to be to make it more emotional, more personal, more dramatic.   That's obvious right at then end when the overarching villain is Sherlock's sister.   That story could not have worked at all if they didn't have that childhood connection.  

SusiGo wrote:

The main problem for me is not Mary shooting Sherlock which made for a big dramatic climax. The problem is everything that came afterwards. I would have been on board with the story if they had made a cut here, take her to prison, let her be shot, escape, whatever. But the whole forgiveness, TST as an episode in which she took centre stage, another episode with her as an apparition, etc. was just too much for me. Mofftiss said it was the "Sherlock and John show". And with writing Mary in the centre they destroyed the dynamic that has been at the core of the SH universe for 130 years. I do not understand why they deemed it necessary after people had adored six episodes in which the Sherlock/John dynamic was enough.

And as for your first sentence: this is the trouble with Mary indeed. Sadly so. 

 
Hello guys, haven't been around for a while, mostly because of some real life issues, but also because it definetly took me some time to come to terms with S4.
I agree with everything Susi said in her last two posts. That nails my thoughts exactly. And also Liberty's remark of Mary being too big a thing to be easily disliked is perfect. That's exactly it. And I'm no fan of Amanda's acting tbh.
On the one hand I see bb's point that this is a fan forum and not a critic's board. On the other hand I simply see no reason for the educated and intelligent people around here to simply eat what is served. That is not how real life works. I always compare my relationship with BBC Sherlock with a marriage. I fell head over heels in love and with time passing by I got aware of things that I didn't like so much, things and decisions that annoyed me. Do I head for a divorce straight away? No, I don't. I try to make it work. Remains to be seen, if it will be successful.

I disagree here. The point is not to take it as proof. But a show must be successful to be continued. The point is that more negative critics and more disappointed fans show that the success might fade. Sherlock is the writers vision but it's not free from having to be received well and sweeping cash into BBC 's pockets. That the reactions were not as enthusiastic as usual could be a sign that they turned wrong at the crossroad.

I did not know that reviews and ratings were that bad, though I feared they might. :-(

What I noted was the dropping level of activety on the forum. Really, it's only a few months after S4 and it feels like there are only ten of us left. That must have to do something with S4.

Last edited by Schmiezi (May 18, 2017 9:57 am)

Good point. And not very tempting for New members to join