Shorty Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 I look forward to the explanation considering they show him do it and it was clearly him on the ground. As others have said he makes a point of where Watson has to stand, and had a request of Molly. To illustrate that he is just like Moriarty, perhaps he has bribed or paid off the people who crowd around him, the cyclist who knocks Watson to the ground and the paramedics who wheel him off so quickly. For a split second, you could actually see that it was Moriaty on the ground, then when it went to Watson seeing the face, disorientated because he conveniently got hit by a cyclist, it was Sherlock Wha? I didn't see this at all. And Dante's screenshot illustrates nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEVILMURRAY Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 woop https://twitter.com/#!/steven_moffat/statuses/158680970130751488 I'm not entirely sure what his "Gotcha!" is meant to achieve, as the "twist" is revealed at the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamishmash Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 I'm not entirely sure what his "Gotcha!" is meant to achieve, as the "twist" is revealed at the end. The cast and crew and Moffat have all been saying for a while now "Well we might do a 3rd series, we'll just have to see if Sherlock survives the finale" when it's been confirmed (for them) since August 2010. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEVILMURRAY Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 The cast and crew and Moffat have all been saying for a while now "Well we might do a 3rd series, we'll just have to see if Sherlock survives the finale" when it's been confirmed (for them) since August 2010. Ah, it must be for those who've been following Moffat that closely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McPhee Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 The key is the lorry full of cushions (was it cushions? Can't remember. Something soft anyway). I suspect there was a couple of blokes, Moriarty's body and something to break Sherlock's fall, all hidden on the other side of that lorry. Sherlock lands safely, they slam Moriarty's body on the ground, Watson gets hit by a cyclist, they pick up Moriarty's body and Sherlock takes his place. The lorry drives away. The only other thing he needed was something which could stop his heart for a few seconds (an antidote could be administered by those "paramedics" once he was out of sight). It's either that or he genuinely did jump, was incredibly lucky to be revived, and he knows an amazing plastic surgeon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 And Dante's screenshot illustrates nothing. A truck that has something inside in that looks deflated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEVILMURRAY Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Looks like rubbish bags, but can serve a similar purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shorty Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 At first I wrote that I think he just jumped into the van, and then got to the ground/swapped with cadaver when Watson was knocked to the ground. But when I typed it out it sounded so daft I edited it out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob Posted January 19, 2012 Share Posted January 19, 2012 My friend had the idea that the corpse on the ground was some sort of look-a-like, i.e the reason why the girl screamed when Sherlock walked into the room earlier. At some point in the episode he must have died (which Sherlock knew about) and then he got Molly to get the corpse and throw it out of the window while Sherlock jumps in the bin truck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 BBC trying stop CBS own version The producers of the BBC's acclaimed Sherlock series, starring Benedict Cumberbatch, are prepared to take legal action against the US network over a rival Holmes series which appears to tread on familiar ground. The BBC version is already a cult hit in America, where it is screened on the PBS network. The show's contemporary reinvention of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's stories, allied to slick production values, impressed network executives at CBS – so when an offer to remake the BBC's Sherlock for US viewers came to nothing, they decided to go ahead and make their own. Sue Vertue, Sherlock Executive Producer at Hartswood Films, said: "We understand that CBS are doing their own version of an updated Sherlock Holmes. It's interesting, as they approached us a while back about remaking our show. At the time, they made great assurances about their integrity, so we have to assume that their modernised Sherlock Holmes doesn't resemble ours in any way, as that would be extremely worrying." She added: "We are very proud of our show and like any proud parent, will protect the interest and wellbeing of our offspring." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmac Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 well with public domain characters and stories I'm not sure what they can actually do unless CBS actually copy the BBC scripts exactly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cube Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 (edited) I finally got round to watching this. I spent a large majority of the episode thinking "There's no way a 'few lines of code' can do anything like that. It's simply stupid". Which, thankfully, was revealed to be the case. Brilliant episode. It's annoying that the series is over, but I do think that not having too much helps out a lot. Edit: Some interesting theories. - Notice how, at the start of the episode, Sherlock suddenly no longer seems to care about avoiding the press. This (along with Mycroft "accidentally" spilling Sherlock's life story) if to give Moriarty the tools, and desire, to want to carry out the plan. The whole thing was an attempt to get Moriarty to spill all the details. Moriarty did spill the details, but I don't think Sherlock expected him to kill himself. - Moriarty probably killed himself he realised that Sherlock had beaten him, and could untangle all his lies. Killing himself meant that they both "lost". Moriarty just didn't expect Sherlock to have gotten it so early to be able to arrange a fake death. - The rubber ball Sherlock was playing with. He still had it with him when he confronted Moriarty. It was big enough to fit a bug of some kind - probably the one he found in his flat. This would have recorded the events on the roof (essentially, Moriarty's confession). Edited January 22, 2012 by Cube Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintendohnut Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 I finally got round to watching this. I spent a large majority of the episode thinking "There's no way a 'few lines of code' can do anything like that. It's simply stupid". Which, thankfully, was revealed to be the case. Brilliant episode. It's annoying that the series is over, but I do think that not having too much helps out a lot. Edit: Some interesting theories. - Notice how, at the start of the episode, Sherlock suddenly no longer seems to care about avoiding the press. This (along with Mycroft "accidentally" spilling Sherlock's life story) if to give Moriarty the tools, and desire, to want to carry out the plan. The whole thing was an attempt to get Moriarty to spill all the details. Moriarty did spill the details, but I don't think Sherlock expected him to kill himself. - Moriarty probably killed himself he realised that Sherlock had beaten him, and could untangle all his lies. Killing himself meant that they both "lost". Moriarty just didn't expect Sherlock to have gotten it so early to be able to arrange a fake death. - The rubber ball Sherlock was playing with. He still had it with him when he confronted Moriarty. It was big enough to fit a bug of some kind - probably the one he found in his flat. This would have recorded the events on the roof (essentially, Moriarty's confession). These are good points, I like your thinking! I would say about the last one that I considered something similar ('why didn't he just record Moriarty all the times they met?!') but seeing as he had convinced the world that Moriarty was a character played by this actor, doing so wouldn't have done anything - people would have just said 'well clearly you paid him to enact this 'scene' to make yourself look innocent' etc. Still, it may be different if he recorded this final part and can then prove his innocence after Moriarty's death. I guess we'll have to wait and see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sméagol Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Just a reminder people, season 3 starts in 2 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.C.G Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Here's a link to the 7 minute mini-episode on iPlayer in case anyone else hasn't seen it before series 3 starts properly in less than an hour. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p01np1b8/Sherlock_Series_3_Sherlock_Mini_Episode_Many_Happy_Returns/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cube Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 (edited) I like how they didn't tell us, but gave us some theories. I especially loved the second one, making fun of "shippers". And the way they did the first one. I was sat thinking "this is stupid" and then it turned out to be someone guessing. As for the plot of the actual episode, I didn't really find it that interesting. Edited January 1, 2014 by Cube Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamba Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 I like how they didn't tell us, but gave us some theories. I especially loved the second one, making fun of "shippers". And the way they did the first one. I was sat thinking "this is stupid" and then it turned out to be someone guessing. As for the plot of the actual episode, I didn't really find it that interesting. Agree with most of what you have said. I'm interested in what we didn't find out about in that episode. I still think that Moriati (sp?) isn't dead and really think that the chap we saw was a puppet. I've thought right from the beginning of the series that Mycroft is going to end up being the eventual antagonist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayseven Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 I forgot how much I loved this show. I have to admit, I was a bit disheartened by the light tone of the first half hour, which seemed to be fan-service for the cumberbitches et al, but once it got into the crux of things there was tension, direction, and great ideas put to use for Sherlock's 'mind palace'. Thoughts; Sherlock did a quick once-over of Watson's fiance-to-be (I forget her name) and he just offered a look that sort of said "hmmm... ok she's fine" but no further commentary on the matter. With the attempt on Watson's life, as well as the glasses-man at the end (we assume to be the new antagonist) who was inspecting the bonfire footage, I would guess that she will be playing the role of the victim at some point. I like the idea of Mycroft being the villain, but I think that's an easy ruse that's being played. As with the explanation for how Sherlock did it and the eschewing of the Holmes parents, I'm more just hoping this will be a background tool for tension rather than Gatiss writing himself more screen-time! I don't know the Holmes stories at all, so I have no idea where it goes. With only 3 eps a series, I doubt we'll be kept in the shadows for too long! The wait for each episode is tough, but so far it has always been worth it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serebii Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Like Sherlock said, and they repeated ad nauseum, it's like a magic trick. If they wish to unravel exactly how it was done, it'd ruin it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 I think Mary could be the new baddy. I think she knew that Sherlock was still alive, and wouldn't to get close to him. She got with Watson knowing that Sherlock would come back to him. It explains why she was immediately enamoured with him. It may also explained why Sherlock did an analysis of her and seem confused (he couldn't get a read off of her because she's too well in disguise). I think she planned to have Watson put in the bonfire, maybe to test Sherlock's ability for herself. Think about it, the texts kept talking to Sherlock, yet they were sent to Mary's phone. If they wanted Sherlock, why didn't they just text him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamba Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 @MoogleViper and @jayseven Mary has almost always become John's wife in all iterations of Sherlock Holmes. I wouldn't expect them to break out of the mold quite that much. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Morstan#Mary_Morstan_.28later_Watson.29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Ah right, didn't know that; never read the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rummy Posted January 2, 2014 Author Share Posted January 2, 2014 Ahhh, didn't know that myself. Was feeling along the same lines as Moogle(either that or the fact Sherlock found her...suitable?) - do share Jamba's sentiments on Mr M though. I dunno if it's the wait that deadened it, or it being first episode, but I did feel a bit...left wanting? Maybe a full and proper explanation. Also, why exactly was it that John couldn't/didn't know? Was always going to be a difficult episode to do, accounting for the 'death' or Sherlock and having a fresh mystery - all in all was ok but I'm moreso looking forward to the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Also, why exactly was it that John couldn't/didn't know? Well people were always going to question whether he was really dead, and they'd undoubtedly look at John. If they saw him not grieving then it would have given it away. His genuine reaction would convince people that it was real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 But his parents not turning up at his funeral wasn't a slight hint? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts