I said it already somewhere else here that we possibly see some scenes from Scandal again. Maybe only pictures with on screen text/deductions about Irene in flashbacks when Sherlock tells John what really happend. It will probably explane Sherlock's behaviour with Irene. We are  simply not supposed to know what Sherlock was able to deduce when he saw Irene. More that just "???"
The lose threads from Scandal must get an expanation.

Sherlock Holmes wrote:

I doubt they'll be explaining loose threads that far back...the only pick ups they'll be doing will be a very short explanation of how Sherlock survived, otherwise we'd just end up with an episode full of exposition and flashbacks, which isn't good writing or drama.

Anyway, does anyone actually know whether that New York Pizza place actually exists or did they just put up the sign for the filming? I tried googling it because I'm in London over the next couple of days and thought I'd pay a visit, but all I got were Setlock pictures!

I agree- I don't even know what threads are still loose from Scandal.  I wonder if they made the shop to look like it was in New York in his mind?

I can't find the pizza place on Google Maps, not even in Cardiff. There are pizza places called New York Pizza but they look nothing like those photos... 

the_dancing_woman wrote:

I agree with those who state that too many flashbacks are more harm- than helpful. I hope and believe that they will mainly focus on getting on with the story. There is so much in the canon that hasn't been told yet. I might be wrong but (Cabin Pressure, yay ) going back to past episodes, meaning any episode before Reichenbach, seems more like a bloody waste of good screen time to me. If Irene Adler (and I loved her character btw) appears at all, it could well be as a short flashback in Sherlock's mind, or it is really just trolling...
And I also wouldn't really know which loose ends there would be left to tie up concerning "The Woman" ?

^ I completely agree with this.  We only get 3 episodes per season...what's the point in rehashing something we've already seen?  But I would like to know what loose ends there are concering Irene Adler.  To me, everything was adequately explained the first time around.

Be wrote:

IMO, there are still some background information lacking.
Questions about motivation and connection between people...

But this makes it interesting, or? I would be disappointed if explanations came like "What did Sherlock and Irene do after her rescue?" or "Was Sherlock really in love, just attracted or neither of that?" - whatever. That this is still open, makes us discuss and interpret differently. It´s up to us and this is something, what makes a good film to me. I always appreciated that so much was left to our imagination.

Of course we appreciate that we don't know everything. Some things are best left to the imagination.

But IMO inspite of that there is a possibility that we need and get answers to the question "Why did it happen?" and "Why did he know what he knew?" 
I can be mistaken, but IMO Doyle always explaned how Holmes was able to deduce his line of reasoning. And there was always a backstory to be revealed.
Maybe Moriarty was just insane and obsessed with Sherlock and Sherlock just assumed everything in advance out of thin air.
Or not. Real people have a history and motifs to do what they do. Other than being obsessed.
In my imagination (possibly wrong) the characters in "Sherlock", especially Irene and Moriarty, act because of cause and effect.
As long as we are not told otherwise I prefer to look for and invent a sensible explanation myself and wait for some answers in series 3. More that just "He's Sherlock" or "He just knows everything in advance".
If it won't happen, so be it.

As far as the possibility of Irene coming back, I could only imagine that Sherlock comes to her while he's "dead" to get information out of her.  If he is trying to take down Moriarty's networks, she would might have some information he needs.

Be wrote:

For example:
Why is Moriarty so upset when Irene (or somebody else) called at the pool? Moments ago he was ready to die. What did the person say to change his mind?
Irene wanted protection for some reason. Why? She was in possession of the phone. It's her protection. Why risk it and get into contact with royalties? To get even more protection? Is there something else on the phone?
 

Irene called him, we are made aware of this by her hanging up the phone afterwards.  Moriarty was ready to die, but suddenly, he had to change his plans.  Irene told him that she had the MOD man's information, but she didn't know what to do with it.  Moriarty instantly knew what to do with it (screw with Mycroft and Sherlock, double the fun), so he called off his murder-suicide attempt.  "Wrong day to die".  Messing around with the royals was simply a way of attracting Sherlock to the case.  She knew the value of that MOD message, but she had to convince Sherlock to decipher for her without provoking his suspicions.  Sherlock CAN decipher that sort of thing quickly, especially if he wanted to show off (which he did).  Irene's phone is  her protection, but once the CIA learned about what was on there, they attempted to take it before the information leaked out.  However, Sherlock unwittingly helped Irene keep the phone safe. Mycroft also miscalculated Sherlock's penchant for love...he never thought his brother could get duped into something so stupid...which was why he was so upset when he found out.

I'd definitely agree with sj4iy about the phone call Jim gets at the pool. It has to be from Irene, otherwise the cut to Irene hanging up the phone would make absolutely no sense whatsoever. It would be totally misleading. And the things he says on the phone make perfect sense in connection with Irene, IMO.

Apart from that, I almost always tend to find flashbacks pretty inelegant, especially when they are used to come back to something which could have been explained or shown earlier on in a more elegant fashion. In series 3 I think I could only live with two different flashbacks: a) a flashback to show what happened to Sherlock and/or John while Sherlock was away; b) a flashback that explains something in connection with the fall.

Be wrote:

Maybe you are right.
I am not quite convinced. The phone call at the pool, what Moriarty said and what Irene possibly said... It's not right. Something is missing, IMO.
 

M: Hello?
I: Is this a bad time?
M: Yes, of course it is. What do you want? (Sorry)
I: I have some information from an MOD man about (name of Terrorist Project).
M: SAY THAT AGAIN!  Say that again, and know if you are lying to me, I will find you, and I wil skiiiin you.
I: I have the information you need for (name of Terrorist Project).
M: Oi. (To Sherlock) Sorry. Wrong day to die.
S: Oh? Did you get a better offer?
M: You'll be hearing from me, Sherlock. (To Irene) So, if you have what you say you have, I'll make you rich.  If not, I'll make you into shoes. (exits, calls off the snipers)
J: What happened there?
S: Someone changed his mind.  Question is: Who?
(cut to Irene Adler hanging up the phone)

It's unmistakably, inarguably, Irene Adler that Moriarty is talking to.  Moriarty only calls off their deaths because he knows he can use Sherlock later.