SusiGo wrote:

I think this is a point that is very much up to personal taste. And I did not criticise anyone's acting. For me it is mainly due to how the scenes were written and filmed that makes the difference. 

I just wanted to write the same. :-)

Yeah, I think it's good that the scenes are different - because the circumstances and emotions behind are so different.

And I still don't think we know what Mary has done that would make John not love her anymore.

But she's wrong about John not loving her any more.  We're shown that.   She think she would lose him if he finds out, and he doesn't.   So what we see is what we get, I think.   By the end, she has come clean - she wasn't just a government agent/assassin, but had worked for a mercenary organisation.  AGRA was the initials of the four people involved.   This was the freelance work that Magnussen mentioned.   John does go off Mary when he finds out about it, but they resolve it. 

If there was supposed to be another dark secret, we weren't told about it, so I think it's safe to assume it doesn't exist.   Or we could speculate that there's something else, and that could still fit with the facts, but I think what we've been told is that it's not part of the story.   It's not something we can judge Mary by, because it just doesn't exist in the show.   John doesn't ask about it.  It's never revealed.   Mary's last act is saving Sherlock's life, and then there are the DVDs which save both of them from beyond the grave.  She ends up as a benevolent character. 

Liberty wrote:

But she's wrong about John not loving her any more.  We're shown that.   She think she would lose him if he finds out, and he doesn't.   So what we see is what we get, I think.  

At this point, we have to agree to disagree, I guess.

I don't think that we habe seen all there is, jud ging by how it was built up in HLV and TAB.

I suppose what I'm saying is that "you won't love me any more" is said at around the same time, and with the same information as "it will break him and I will lose him" - the difference is that it's directly to John, rather than to Sherlock.   At that point, Mary thinks John can't deal with the truth and will leave her.  It doesn't actually need anything worse than what we find out about Mary for him to stop loving her (she thinks).  She's wrong, but doesn't know it at the time.   What she's offering is the detail, about AGRA.    It's the stick from the AGRA group, so we now know there's nothing worse on it than whatever she did with AGRA.   If she's trying to give John the chance to know all the truth, then I think it's unlikely that she did anything really awful outside of AGRA.   The biggest difference between what Sherlock is saying and what we find out is that she wasn't just working for the CIA or whatever, but was working with a mercenary group.    I can understand why people thought this scene was hinting at a greater crime - it was definitely a possibility.  But as we're not shown it, and as we're shown what AGRA is then we know now, don't we?  Of course they will have had other jobs - possibly not all for the British government.

I think what TAB did was hint that Mary was working for Mycroft, which kind of turned out to be the case.   (Although she wasn't a British agent, but was with a freelance group).  And also that Sherlock felt warmly towards her.

Anyway, I loved this quote from the convention:

as Steven put it, you shine a light where you want it, you don’t paint the whole backdrop. Meaning, what they left out of the story doesn’t matter.

http://friskykatt.tumblr.com/post/161178995817/from-the-makers-of-sherlock

If it's not there, it doesn't affect the story.  If Mary did do something terrible, it doesn't affect things - it doesn't make her a worse person than we see.   I'd agree that she can be "grey" (like the other characters at times!), but I think the twist was just what we saw in HLV.  Once Sherlock does his deduction, she's no longer a villain.  I think we all agree that shooting Sherlock was a terrible thing to do, but in the context of the show, I think it's forgivable, in the same way that, for instance John beating helpless Sherlock, or Sherlock torturing a prisoner, or trying to poison John are forgiveable, when they would be quite a big deal in real life!

Last edited by Liberty (June 1, 2017 6:00 am)

SusiGo wrote:

This is all very interesting and may the way they are telling the story. But then I must admit that they apply a logic that goes against the gut feelings of many viewers:

Just take Mycroft. We are shown again and again that Sherlock is his one weakness, his soft spot, the one person he truly loves and wants to save. And this person is nearly killed. And Mycroft accepts her remaining in his brother's life just like that, even seems to consult her on questions of national security. 

While on the other hand he locked away the other woman threatening his brother's life for decades. 

To me this does not make sense - not even, and especially not, within the universe of the show. 
 

 
I will never understand the obsession of the writers with Mary. I feel every logic has to bow to make her look the greatest fictional character ever written. Nothing seems as important as that.

Liberty wrote:

Anyway, I loved this quote from the convention:

as Steven put it, you shine a light where you want it, you don’t paint the whole backdrop. Meaning, what they left out of the story doesn’t matter.

http://friskykatt.tumblr.com/post/161178995817/from-the-makers-of-sherlock

If it's not there, it doesn't affect the story. 

I agree that it is the writers' choice where to shine the light and where not. I only disagree with his choice of what is important. :-)

SusiGo wrote:

This is all very interesting and may the way they are telling the story. But then I must admit that they apply a logic that goes against the gut feelings of many viewers:

Just take Mycroft. We are shown again and again that Sherlock is his one weakness, his soft spot, the one person he truly loves and wants to save. And this person is nearly killed. And Mycroft accepts the almost-killer remaining in his brother's life just like that, even seems to consult her on questions of national security. 

While on the other hand he locked away the other woman threatening his brother's life for decades. 

To me this does not make sense - not even, and especially not, within the universe of the show. 
 

What other woman?  (Genuine question - I just can't think).  Irene was threatening international security, and Eurus was a threat to the world in general, but neither wanted Sherlock dead.   And I can't think of another woman who fits the bill at the moment!

Mycroft is protective of Sherlock but also happy to put him in dangerous situations.   However, with Magnussen, he specifically did not put him in that situation - he tried to get him to stay away (initially, at least).   Sherlock defied him.  Whereas it turns out that Magnussen was working against Mycroft, and Mary would have done him a favour if Sherlock hadn't been on the scene.   Mary has been employed by Mycroft before and perhaps he thinks she's trustworthy.    We don't know if has the same information as Sherlock or not, but if he does (and I tend to suspect he does, simply because I think he would have to know!), he perhaps comes to the same conclusions as Sherlock - that she's not a risk to him.  And may even be a protective factor, as she turns out to be. 

Now I'm frustrated that I didn't think of that question for the convention - did anyone ask how much Mycroft knew?
 

besleybean wrote:

I suppose I'm just lucky that my likes more often than not chime with those of the team.

Me too, but I think that's just because I tend to end up liking whatever they give me!   I'm sure if they'd made Mary an archvillain, I'd have loved that too!

But I do think this is fine - I don't think it was necessary to give more detail about Mary's activities with AGRA.  We did get most of an episode on that! 
 

besleybean wrote:

Surely Mycroft knows everything?
About Irene, too, do we think?

I've wondered about Irene.  Sometimes I think it's just as it is - that Sherlock tricked Mycroft.  And I still think that Sherlock thinks he tricked Mycroft - probably.   But that whole pirate conversation with John - I can see Mycroft letting Sherlock save Irene, just because he cares about him, and doesn't want him to be heartbroken.   And hopefully Irene isn't a threat any more.