• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Sherlock Series 3 |OT| - THE Source for Fiction’s Cheekbone Fetish

CAM's asshole mannerisms are really funny and endearing for some reason. Minus the obvious stuff like the face licking and the pissing, him pushing the table away in the apartment or making sure to touch every fry on Sherlock's plate before eating one and rinsing his hand in Sherlock's cup were really nice touches.
 

raindoc

Member
Speaking of (younger) brothers - what/who was Mycroft talking about when he said "Remember what happened to the other one?". AFAIK there are no other Holmes-siblings, so who was he referring to (beeing accused with an "outburst of brotherly compassion" [sic!]).

Anderson-mode engaged: Sherlock died at the end of S2. S3 featured a clone and obviously that's also how Moriarty is back.
 
Speaking of (younger) brothers - what/who was Mycroft talking about when he said "Remember what happened to the other one?". AFAIK there are no other Holmes-siblings, so who was he referring to (beeing accused with an "outburst of brotherly compassion" [sic!]).

Anderson-mode engaged: Sherlock died at the end of S2. S3 featured a clone and obviously that's also how Moriarty is back.

There is a third, even smarter brother in the original stories.
 

Quick

Banned
CAM was taken out too soon. And with the reveal at the end, CAM and Moriarty potentially antagonizing Baker Street at the same time could make for an amazing series 4.

That being said, having Moriarty back is great. Please don't take too long, Moffat and Gatiss.
 

Mariolee

Member
I'm proofreading it now before I do a second draft.

There's this one scene where Mrs Hudson's pot accidentally gets dropped into Mary's lovely little dinner prepped for John. And then he goes to a crime scene, and Greg has to arrest him while attempting to charm Molly who is oblivious to his attempts to charm. It's all quite charming.

But what quirky thing will Sherlock say that will display his ineptitude to basic human emotion in order to appeal to our sense of humor?
 
So...pot-ladened pot roast? Sounds delicious.

Greg: "Oh this? Nah, he just needs some time to sleep off the high but I have to make it look like it's an actual bust... Think you'd be available for coffee afterwards? Would love to pick your brain after you pick Helen Louise's..."

Ha!

But what quirky thing will Sherlock say that will display his ineptitude to basic human emotion in order to appeal to our sense of humor?

He's basically a prettier Sheldon from TBBT.

"Oh you pesky humans and bodily fluid exchanges."
 

Mariolee

Member
So...pot-ladened pot roast? Sounds delicious.

Greg: "Oh this? Nah, he just needs some time to sleep off the high but I have to make it look like it's an actual bust... Think you'd be available for coffee afterwards? Would love to pick your brain after you pick Helen Louise's..."


Ha!

He's basically a prettier Sheldon from TBBT.

"Oh you pesky humans and bodily fluid exchanges."

We need to make this script an actual thing. Have each scene written by a different Gaffer of Sherlock-GAF.
 

Quick

Banned
We need to make this script an actual thing. Have each scene written by a different Gaffer of Sherlock-GAF.

At the risk of falling ill, here's another QuickShop™.

ikjb6q8SrJkap.jpg


*pukes*
 
But can you imagine a serious professor doing something as silly as an animated face of his dead son going "did ya miss me?" with an impact font and an high pitched voice?

nope. it's either the leftovers of his organization or moriarty himself. i know ppl will be mad but i wouldn't mind if he came back.

the idris elba thing was a joke but hmmm.....how about sherlock vs. luther. luther teams up with alice and they're going on a natural born killers spree.
 

mclem

Member
Bert Coules' radio adaptation of the original Milverton story is on Radio 4Xtra at the moment. It's repeated late this evening, and should also be on iPlayer.
 

Zeppu

Member
Not exactly. An older brothers' existence is implied in the original stories, but never expounded upon. It's not impossible to work with that.

The name, I grant you, is non-canon.

I just read through all of the Sherlock Holmes literature and there is neither mention nor implication to another brother. All sources on the internet simply say that Sherringford was mentioned in Conan Doyle's original notes and that everything that was written related to him was basically fanfiction.

That being said, I see no reason why that should stop Moffat and Gatiss from introducing him since this just a re-imagining of the original stories and having the series be constrained by the canon would be tedious, which is why nothing of plot importance is directly taken from the books.
 

mclem

Member
I just read through all of the Sherlock Holmes literature and there is neither mention nor implication to another brother. All sources on the internet simply say that Sherringford was mentioned in Conan Doyle's original notes and that everything that was written related to him was basically fanfiction.

The implication is that neither Sherlock or Mycroft seem to have inherited their parents' estate, so there must be an older son who must have. If you like, a third brother fills in a minor ACD plot hole. There are other ways to fill in that hole, but I think the idea is that the canon has a gap into which an older son could fit.

I'll happily concede that it's very loose, but the scope is potentially there.
 

xandaca

Member
According to Wikipedia:

"Sherrinford Holmes is a hypothetical elder brother of Sherlock Holmes and Mycroft Holmes. It is believed that his deduction skills exceed those of both his younger brothers. His name is taken from early notes as one of those considered by Arthur Conan Doyle for his detective hero before settling on "Sherlock Holmes".

He was first proposed by William S. Baring-Gould who wrote in his biography "Sherlock Holmes of Baker Street" that Sherrinford was the eldest brother of Sherlock Holmes. Holmes once stated that his family were country squires, which means that the eldest brother would have to stay to manage the house. If Mycroft were the eldest then he couldn't play the role he does in four stories of the Sherlock Holmes canon, so Sherrinford frees them both. This position is strengthened by the fact that Mycroft's general position as a senior civil servant was a common choice among the younger sons of the gentry."

Personally, I hope that if Moffat and Gatiss do something with this, it'll be more inventive than 'yet another even cleverer brother'. Doesn't do much for your protagonist if he's the stupidest son.
 

Tugatrix

Member
According to Wikipedia:

"Sherrinford Holmes is a hypothetical elder brother of Sherlock Holmes and Mycroft Holmes. It is believed that his deduction skills exceed those of both his younger brothers. His name is taken from early notes as one of those considered by Arthur Conan Doyle for his detective hero before settling on "Sherlock Holmes".

He was first proposed by William S. Baring-Gould who wrote in his biography "Sherlock Holmes of Baker Street" that Sherrinford was the eldest brother of Sherlock Holmes. Holmes once stated that his family were country squires, which means that the eldest brother would have to stay to manage the house. If Mycroft were the eldest then he couldn't play the role he does in four stories of the Sherlock Holmes canon, so Sherrinford frees them both. This position is strengthened by the fact that Mycroft's general position as a senior civil servant was a common choice among the younger sons of the gentry."

Personally, I hope that if Moffat and Gatiss do something with this, it'll be more inventive than 'yet another even cleverer brother'. Doesn't do much for your protagonist if he's the stupidest son.

I would love to see an Antagonist Holmes, in which both Mycroft and Sherlock had to team up to fight
 

Krev

Unconfirmed Member
Weird episode.

Hate Moriarty. Loved the apocalyptic vibe (as Altazor put it) in Reichenbach Falls, but hate everything else about his depiction on this show. His actor reappearing in the otherwise cool 'staying alive' sequence was the worst thing about the episode. Didn't miss him. Not looking forward to the probably dumb explanation for his survival if it turns out Moriarty (as we saw him in the show) really is back.
 

SimSimIV

Member
-"The game is over."
_"The game is never over, John. But there may be some new players now."

Every fairytale needs a good old fashioned villain

To me season 3 has been a little dissapointing in comparison to season 2, but by no means bad at all. I feel season 3 has been a "filler" season in that they have chosen to develope the characters in the story further, just to have the good old fashion villain back in season 4. I love Andrew Scott as Moriarty and gladly welcome him back if the explanation is good enough!
 

War Peaceman

You're a big guy.
Not exactly. An older brothers' existence is implied in the original stories, but never expounded upon. It's not impossible to work with that.

The name, I grant you, is non-canon.

Well that is what I meant! Although Sherrinford was inspired by a note by Doyle, I think?

EDIT: The 2002 Hounds of the Baskervilles by the BBC is a great piece of work. For me, that is the definitive classic Sherlock Holmes adaptation. It blows this series' Baskervilles effort.
 
- Deadline: ‘Sherlock’ Season Finale Draws 8.77M UK Viewers
A roundly lauded finale for Season Three of Sherlock was the weekend’s most-watched TV program in the UK. The modern detective series’ third installment drew 8.77M viewers for a 32.1% share, according to the overnights. While it was possibly the best-reviewed episode of the current season, it also was the lowest-rated. Last week’s 90-minute turn, “The Sign Of Three,” had brought in 8.84M viewers and the January 1st opener, “The Empty Hearse,” was the show’s most-watched episode ever at 9.2M on BBC One. In March last year, star Benedict Cumberbatch said there would be a fourth series of a three more episodes. At a BAFTA screening and panel discussion last week, Sherlock co-creator Steven Moffat said the next season will be made “as quickly” as possible. Season 3 kicks off in the U.S. on PBS on January 19.
 

Sinatar

Official GAF Bottom Feeder
Season 1 and 2 both followed the pattern of Good Episode 1 -> Weak Episode 2 -> Good Episode 3.

Season 3 was all Episode 2's.
 

SimSimIV

Member
Season 1 and 2 both followed the pattern of Good Episode 1 -> Weak Episode 2 -> Good Episode 3.

Season 3 was all Episode 2's.

While I agree with you, I would stills say that all of the season 3 episodes were better than the episode 2's from season 1 and 2. As I consider season 3 a "filler/character developement" season I feel they have done a great job.

Now, you could argue that even if I am right about season 3 being all about character development and this was the intention, the creators should be able to make a great season without having to sacrifice plot quality. I still think of Moriarty as THE villain and hope his abscence combined with the character development in season 3 is setting up one hell of a season 4.

This might just be wishfulthinking though
 
I actually thought last weeks episodes was one of the best of Sherlocks entire run. I thought the season finale was very weak. There was a lot that just didn't make much sense, and some strange time jumps that didn't help matters either.
 

Altazor

Member
Season 1 and 2 both followed the pattern of Good Episode 1 -> Weak Episode 2 -> Good Episode 3.

Season 3 was all Episode 2's.

for me it was Weak-ish Episode 1 -> Great Episode 2 -> Good Episode 3 this time.

It *has* been a weird season, anyway. It has been far more self-aware and "meta" than the previous two and, as has been already said, it chose to develop the characters far more than presenting interesting crimes to solve. Let's hope this is only a necessary but transitional step in the evolution of the whole series instead of a completely new direction.
 
the moriarty fake out should be his father, professor moriarty. played by idris elba.


I have three theories.


1. It was Mycroft's doing and it was a way to save his little brother.

2. It was Sherlock fooling everyone into thinking that Moriarty was still alive.

3. The Moriarty we saw in the first two season was not the "True" Moriarty. He was just a brilliant but psychopathic stand in for the real Moriarty.
 

SimSimIV

Member
I really don't get why so many fell in love With Magnussen? He had a photographic memory, a God complex and was stupid enough to confirm that all his data was in his head in front of Mycroft, thus letting Sherlock take him out without any severe consequences.

Moriarty is just way more interesting to me. I respect all of your opinions, I just don't understand it.
 

Quick

Banned
I was hoping Mycroft was telling Sherlock and Watson to stay back so his team could assassinate CAM, and Sherlock one-upped him by making him confirm that he has no physical evidence stored anywhere, making him expendable to the government.

Sherlock being the one to pull the trigger caught me off guard, but I suppose he'd have to do it at some point to someone.
 

Mariolee

Member
I just wish we could see more of the consequences to Sherlock's action. Instead we get, "Oh Sherlock murdered somebody? Screw all the potentially interesting ethical dilemmas and crazy set ups that could arise from this. Let's just bring Moriarty back!"

Which was the first thought that came to my mind.

Putting Sherlock into prison would be one hell of an entertaining thing to watch, but for some reason it's thrown aside as "Sherlock being in prison wouldn't be good for anybody."
 

hamchan

Member
Best villain only lasted one episode. What a shame. They're gonna bring back that fool?

Agreed. Have to repeat myself when I say I really hope it's an impostor or a relative.

If it's actually the real Moriarty then they have a hell of a job trying to explain how he survived. They can't exactly pull the wishy-washy, multiple explanations thing they did for how Sherlock came back. Well, I guess they could if they wanted to but I doubt people would be very happy with them pulling the same trick twice.
 

LiK

Member
Agreed. Have to repeat myself when I say I really hope it's an impostor or a relative.

If it's actually the real Moriarty then they have a hell of a job trying to explain how he survived. They can't exactly pull the wishy-washy, multiple explanations thing they did for how Sherlock came back. Well, I guess they could if they wanted to but I doubt people would be very happy with them pulling the same trick twice.

I hope the Moriarty thing is a Mycroft scam to save his bro. Ido not need that turd to come back.
 

Quick

Banned
I just wish we could see more of the consequences to Sherlock's action. Instead we get, "Oh Sherlock murdered somebody? Screw all the potentially interesting ethical dilemmas and crazy set ups that could arise from this. Let's just bring Moriarty back!"

Which was the first thought that came to my mind.

Putting Sherlock into prison would be one hell of an entertaining thing to watch, but for some reason it's thrown aside as "Sherlock being in prison wouldn't be good for anybody."

This, too.

The way I see it, a lot of people in that meeting with Mycroft probably wanted CAM dead, notably Lady Smallwood (heh heh). So, they weren't too bothered by Mycroft's suggestion of keeping Sherlock out of prison and in Eastern Europe for six months doing a mission for MI6 instead (mentioned by Mycroft as dangerous earlier).
 

Qvoth

Member
Magnussen caused his previous client's husband to commit suicide. Sherlock was in deep, even before the big Mary revelation.

oh... so that's what that was, i only caught a glimpse on this part, i thought it was the PM

props to everyone who found out about that mary with horns scene from episode 2... god i couldn't believe they really did it lol
 

War Peaceman

You're a big guy.
I do wonder if one of the issues that limited Magnusson's potential was the availability of the actor. Compared to Andrew Scott, he would be far harder to schedule and thus long term plotting might be difficult or at least complicate an already difficult timetabling process.

Just speculating though.
 

Blader

Member
I just wish we could see more of the consequences to Sherlock's action. Instead we get, "Oh Sherlock murdered somebody? Screw all the potentially interesting ethical dilemmas and crazy set ups that could arise from this. Let's just bring Moriarty back!"

Which was the first thought that came to my mind.

Putting Sherlock into prison would be one hell of an entertaining thing to watch, but for some reason it's thrown aside as "Sherlock being in prison wouldn't be good for anybody."

eh, that seems like another "change up the status quo for 90 minutes, then reboot back to normal" type scenario. In a longer show, I wouldn't mind an episode or a whole arc of Sherlock in prison, but that seems like a needless digression for such a short series. While I liked S3, too much of the focus in the first two episodes was dragged away from the cases, and I can't help but feel like a "Sherlock in prison" story would be another gimmicky distraction.
 

sirap

Member
There are actually two Moriarty's, and both of them are twins.

One of them played the psychopath, while the other faked being an actor.

:p
 

zychi

Banned
Anyone else think the addict sherlock took under his wing, is actually the youngest holmes, just an actual drug addict. Mycroft and the family never really care that hes at xmas.
 
Anyone else think the addict sherlock took under his wing, is actually the youngest holmes, just an actual drug addict. Mycroft and the family never really care that hes at xmas.

Hmm? Wiggins is one of the actual Baker Street Irregulars in canon, where he's the leader of the group. Though a junkie here, the BSI are just homeless kids that Sherlock uses to gather information and he pays them.
 
Top Bottom