XistentialAngst's Blog, page 62
October 12, 2016
isitandwonder:
may-shepard:
tjlcisthenewsexy:
sussexbound:
de...
Thanks @ace-sherlock-holmes ! Okay now I’m freaking out because of the similarity between that particular elephant and the design on Mary’s dress.
I’ve seen that elephant before, it’s a BANKSY artwork. The elephant in that particular room was an exhibition, and not just some “thing” that was a “truth going unaddressed”, but it was specifically a commentary on social issues going unaddressed:
On opening night, cards were handed out which read: “There’s an elephant in the room. There’s a problem we never talk about.” The statement went on to say there were billions of people living below the poverty line. (x)
And there’s the probable (?) Banksy reference in TBB with the street artist who’s artwork is very Banksy-esque. The Elephant exhibition was in 2006. Take another look at this:
This is a real elephant, and it was painted to match the wallpaper. And doesn’t that wallpaper REMIND YOU OF SOMETHING???
OKAY and also the PATTERN ON MARY’S CHRISTMAS DRESS, specifically right over her belly (I can’t get a better shot than this -maybe there’s a production still or promo pic somewhere?).
The baby is an elephant in the room, as an EXTENSION of John and Sherlock’s love for each other being THE elephant in the room. It’s all part of the same “obvious truth going unaddressed”. If John and Sherlock love each other and are destined to be together, then why is Mary pregnant with John’s baby?? Well, maybe she’s not.
What do you think @monikakrasnorada @isitandwonder @ebaeschnbliah @deducingbbcsherlock (this was about this post which was another reference to the Watson baby as an elephant via Mary being mirrored with Amy in Doctor Who)
*incoherent sputtering*
Also, perhaps relevant to your interests. Remember wee bab in London was dressed all in pink. There was some conjecture that at least some of those London/baby/dog scenes were dream sequence or hallucination. Well…
With crappy link because I’m on mobile: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seeing_pink_elephants
(sorry tagging you all again because reasons @monikakrasnorada @isitandwonder @stillgosherlocked @may-shepard)
I want to crumple this post up and eat it and assimilate it into my cells because I’m positive it will make me immortal.
@may-shepard please, let’s share! This is getting better and better!
October 10, 2016
ebaeschnbliah:
gosherlocked:
ebaeschnbliah:
gosherlocked:
isi...
(x)
BBC Three agrees with our take on things, bless them
How is this even real?
Oh …..
I’m sure this means something innocent like ‘I’m glad you like my chicory’ or something…
The peas maybe @isitandwonder ?
SHERLOCK: … and John can cook. Does … a … thing
… thing with peas …
Ok, this means either ‘thing with peas’ or ‘tyre leaver’
Deaded.
B O O M E R A N G
________________________________________________________________JOHN: “Yeah. And if you’re
thinking gunshot, there wasn’t one. He wasn’t shot; he was killed by a single
blow to the back of the head from a blunt instrument which then magically
disappeared along with the killer.”
October 9, 2016
ebaeschnbliah:
gosherlocked:
isitandwonder:
Friendly reminder that Moffat and Gatiss dedicated...
Friendly reminder that Moffat and Gatiss dedicated shitloads of time, money and resources to one scene in TAB that to most viewers didn’t make any sense at all. They even filmed a whole extra clip about the production of that scene.
Yes, I’m talking about their go at Reichenbach. Because that’s where most casual viewers I talked to lost it completely; because, to them, this scene doesn’t serve any purpose. It is not even a true to canon re-enactment of the Reichenbach scene from Final Problem.
It looks like it is - being built like the famous Paget drawing. But it’s not - as the whole show is not ACD Holmes with iPhones.
Mofftiss took this scene and made it their own. That’s why they were so excited. In terms of plot development of the surface narrative - is Moriarty alive or dead / how can he be back? - this scene does nothing, especially when taking into account what Sherlock says in the last scene at the tarmac before getting into the car. And yet Gatiss said about the Reichenbach scene in TAB:
‘Got everything we wanted in terms of telling the story.’
They wrote a literally wet dream in which Sherlock overcomes his fears (Moriarty) with the help of John. This is not an update of the ACD story; this is so far removed from Reichenbach in Final Problem as one can imagine!
This is finally the turning point of the whole series as it leaves ACD behind and becomes its own story. John is suddenly there, he kicks Moriarty off the precipice and Sherlock first throws his deerstalker away before taking a leap of faith…
This is what Mofftiss do with canon - they take the famous names, the props, some pieces from proverbial cases - but they don’t just update them; they fill them with new, contemporary content. To tell the story they’ve mapped out from the beginning. I’m not even sure that this is a Sherlock Holmes show anymore (which is not meant in a derogatory way).
Because in this scene it becomes batantly obvious that Moffat and Gatiss are telling a love story, not just a romance or a story about a detective (and his blogger). This is a story about what love can do to people, that it is possible for anyone - how damaged or strange or afraid they might seem - to find someone to love and be loved in return; to become whole and free through love. Using Sherlock Holmes and John Watson as a famous vehicle to get this message across just adds prominence.
And I’m not even sure if it is about Sherlock and John being straight or gay or asexual or bi or celibate - and perhaps that’s why Mofftiss always argue against the assumption of making a ‘gay’ show - because perhaps it doesn’t matter (and in the universe where the show is set it certainly doesn’t) who you love or what gender the person you love identifies?
To me this is what Sherlock understood at the waterfall:
WATSON: Actually … would you mind?
HOLMES: Not at all.
And I’m sure by the end or the series - be it after S4 or S5 - most viewers will have arrived at the same conclusion. They won’t mind - there won’t BE anything to mind at all, because these two men are in love (and I’m not talking a platonic kind of love here, don’t get me wrong. I mean full on physical and mental LOVE in capital letters). Mofftiss will dish out a story so irresistible that even ‘antis’ will be happy for Sherlock and John. Because this is not about two middle-aged blokes snogging or political representation of minorities (as important as these issues are) - this is about how two people save and complete one another. And this is eternal and way grander than time or gender concepts.
Before the Reichenbach scene Sherlock tells himself that it’s not the fall that will kill him - the act of fallig in love - but the landing - the actual consequence of acting upon his feelings. But these are Sherlock’s treacherous fears speaking (his inner Moriarty). At the waterfall, when John shows up to save him, he understands that neither the fall nor the landing will kill him. And therefore he jumps.
We’ll see him land in S4 (or S5). And it will be a good one.
Transcripts by Ariane Devere.
This. Is. So. Very. Beautiful.
Absolutely T.H.I.S.
There is something odd about Molly in series 4
Molly Hooper works at Bart’s. She’s usually filmed in the morgue. In series 2 she emerges to attend the Xmas Party at Baker St but quickly returns to the morgue later that evening. In series three she only left the morgue to interview for John’s position with Sherlock, which was a study in the futility of Sherlo//y from the writers, and for Sherlock’s return home celebration at 221b when she introduced her new beau Tom. Oh and for the Watson wedding. So basically in BBC Sherlock, Molly Hooper’s world is the forensics lab at Bart’s, and she basically only leaves for celebrations.
In series 4 we apparently see a change of pattern, always a nod to a change of direction for a character.
She babysits at the Watson’s flat or is called there for a crisis of some sort.
Now remember that Molly is not close to Mary, really not close to John. Mary has ‘friends’ at work and in a social circle; they were at the wedding [and christening by the looks of it] plus there is Cath, whoever that is. Why have Molly babysit? Did Sherlock call her after finding the baby alone at the flat? It’s a Sherlock thing to do. Yet then we get this scene:
The reconstruction of that day at the Watson’s flat in Sherlock’s delirious musings during The Lying Detective. Why? Is this a sudden revelation? A lightening bolt moment of a reveal? Sherlock sees the Watson’s front door, Molly as she was from the scene in T6T and the Watson baby. If he had called Molly there that day then it’s less likely to be an ‘OH’ moment for Sherlock. If Molly called him there, then it’s more likely.
Molly in TLD also appears to come and get Sherlock in an ambulance from the Miskin house. It’s not a welcomed intervention by Sherlock but he goes into the vehicle with her.
Next we see Molly out and about, at a house near Ogmore Beach, maybe even on the beach, as setlockers got to the site late that day and some scenes had been filmed.
Loo may have just been watching Andrew film his scene after she had completed hers, as she was in costume as Molly and tweeted that she was filming that day. Molly away from her lab and in the vicinity of a Jim Moriarty scene being shot. Coincidence? I don’t think so.
Now we get a weird photo from set at the end of ep 3:
What was this all about? Loo doing a Sherlock impression in a John shirt? Just strange. It goes along with the weird photo of Mrs Hudson we received from Arwel.
It could be Mark, it could be Andrew, could it be Loo? Uncle Rudy?
Molly is available for a rug pull that goes above and beyond a canon fix because she is an original character. She had two main functions; possible romantic interest for Sherlock and instigator of the first meeting of the villain to the show’s two protagonists. She is clearly ruled out now as a romantic possibility for Sherlock [the imagined kiss/the rejected substitute for John] by the writers, who put the character into the show to highlight Sherlock’s lack of interest in women. The most important point of Molly in the series arc is the fact that she was the character that introduced Moriarty to Sherlock and John. It is very telling and a milestone in the story.
I’ve been thinking about it lately, too. I know you, @welovethebeekeeper, are completely gearing up for Molly as Moriarty and it has some things to it. You’ve mentioned Molly was the one who introduced Sherlock to Moriarty, but everyone seems to overlook the fact that she also produced Irene’s body in ASIB. “Records are only as good as the one who keeps them”, wasn’t it? I think it was Molly and I think Sherlock knows it, too. Molly was after all the one who gave Emelia her airtight alibi in TAB. Two women on a slab in a morgue, and who identified them both? Molly.
Reblog for the above comment!!
Maybe,on the surface level Molly works for Mycroft as a supervisor for Sherlock (re his alleged drug problem). She follows him everywhere as long as John isn’t around. So Sherlock tricks her by offering to babysit. They are both there in the beginning, but then he says he has to leave urgently for a case. Obviously they can’t take the baby with them on a crime scene, so Molly has to stay with the baby at the Watson’s flat, while Sherlock takes off.
More interesting Molly ideas. I recently wrote about Molly possibly being Mary’s “confidante” here.
There’s definitely something going on with her in S4.
October 8, 2016
Dream Theory (EMP): A closer look at Last Christmas - Part II
Part Two under the cut
Thanks for the photo and gif reference for Dr. Who. There really is some quite interesting parallels, particularly the hospital paraphenalia and the hospital scene in TAB.
XistentialAngst's Blog
- XistentialAngst's profile
- 15 followers
