series: lost

6

mist and shadow
cloud and shade
all shall fade

all shall fade

Want to instill doubt in someone? “Change minor details in their surroundings.”

Yes, this post is about Sherlock. Specifically, about the reason for all of those pesky set design flaws that grew larger and larger as series 4 progressed.

For example, the skull picture we normally see…

…turns into this.

Or when Ella’s office looked like this…

…but turned into this.

There are hundreds of examples but how about simply one more.

John’s flat looked like this…

…but turned into this.

If you watch Many Happy Returns, which takes place before Series 3, you’ll see John’s front door doesn’t actually exist under the staircase – that was an unnecessary change in Series 4.

So what do all of these changes have to do with making an impression on the audience?  Well.  Everything.

When you want to get a group of people to doubt their own memory – or to plant new ones – you have to change things about what they already know, but don’t let on that you’ve changed anything.

And who does this for a living?

Derren Brown, the illusionist who had a cameo in The Empty Hearse. He’s also a very good friend of Mark Gatiss’. He has a fascinating video you can watch about this exact technique I’m explaining. By changing details visually, one can change how people doubt their own abilities to perceive reality, and also question their own memories.

Do you know all the outrageous things series 4 fed us?

– Mary is just an ordinary housewife with a good heart
– John would never save Sherlock from a serial killer
– John would beat Sherlock senseless
– Sherlock simply needs love from family to complete him
– John has a bunch of friends that love to look after his baby
– John would blame Sherlock for any harm befalling Mary
– John would easily forgive Mary for shooting his best friend in cold blood
– Mary knows Sherlock and John better than anyone ever could

These things blatantly contradict everything we’ve ever known about these characters. Still don’t believe Mary is a manipulative psychopath? Go read the HLV script; it just made its rounds on the internet today.

You’ve been wondering why series 4 is so screwed up, narratively and visually? It has a purpose. It is to make the audience doubt – to make the audience doubt their own ability to comprehend reality.

Is it working?

The Lost Chapter

Do excuse me if this has been looked at before, but on the security cam screen behind Moriarty here, each camera is marked in the corner with an identifier *whispers* and he’s looking at us

CH011
CH012
CH 013
CH014

CH011 (Chapter 11) of Sherlock is The Six Thatchers

CH012 is The Lying Detective

CH 013 is The Final Problem

So what’s Chapter 014? 

@the-7-percent-solution ??

i was watching the cringy interview with andrew scott in china

and one of the questions was “can you give any clue for the 4th season of sherlock” and he said “Well theres going to be three episodes” and you might think well yeah thats just a joke but in another interview with amanda someone asks “What are you most excited for about season 4″ and amanda abbington replies “the three episodes”.

After I watch the rest of the cringy interview I will look for more times they say that but it cant be a coincidence because the universe is rarely ever so lazy

“Creative” choices for the Series 4 Soundtrack Packaging

@gosherlocked has already posted here about the oddness of having this page be the last one in the accompanying soundtrack booklet- “the game is on” appearing at the supposed end? When the tagline for the series was ‘this is not a game anymore’? ;)

[Sherlock voice] “Ah, but there’s more!” This is the cover page:

Really? The cover of the top secret meeting where we’re shown a false narrative? Wonder why that was chosen…. (And, I checked, the cover matches exactly with what were shown onscreen in The Six Thatchers opening).

And finally: in the booklet, each episode is titled like THE SCENE OF AN ACT IN A PLAY:

  • The Six Thatchers= Act IV.I (Act 4, Scene 1)
  • The Lying Detective= Act IV.II (Act 4, Scene 2)

  • The Final Problem= Act IV.III (Act 4, Scene 3)

Way to draw more attention to the idea of some of series 4 being an utter fabrication! Could there be other plays to compare this to? How many scenes usually come in Act 4, maybe? Shakespeare comparisons…? 

With thanks to @victorianlovers for actually making me check the booklet lol <3

Apple Tree Yard...

…is not a novel by Amanda Coe. Further ‘proof’. [puts on tin hat]

Ok, let’s go down that rabbit hole.

Many of us suspect there is still something coming from Mofftiss and the BBC and recent theories include the series Apple Tree Yard and it’s airing time which collides with a suspected fourth episode which can/could be  be found scheduled for Sunday, Jan 22nd on yahoo.

I went over to the BBC schedules and checked. Apple Tree Yard is there, complete with trailers and descriptions.

It says it’s based on a novel by Amanda Coe who also works as a screenwriter and created “Life in Squares” for the BBC.

Based on a novel. Since the tin hat is in place I thought: Better check that, I’m a detective!

So this is the official Apple Tree Yard description – it’s about a woman named Dr. Yvonne Carmichael. Okay, so far that seems all right.

So I searched for the novel “Apple Tree Yard” by Amanda Coe. Doesn’t exist.

Okay, maybe they changed the title but surely it’s based on something else? These are all novels of Amanda Coe’s I could find:

THERE IS NO DR. YVONNE CHARMICHAEL.

THERE IS NO DESCRIPTION THAT EVEN REMOTELY RESEMBLES APPLE TREE YARD.

I mean, I don’t know about adapting novels for television but… Aren’t you supposed to keep the title? Aren’t you supposed to keep the same characters? And their names? What’s the point of creating an adaptation which doesn’t … adapt … anything at all?

Take that and the names of the cast someone (I’m sorry, I forgot who!) already pointed out as well as the similarities in the plot description, ‘enigmatic stranger’ and all that. I’m not saying the BBC asked one of their writers to lend their name and reputation to a story that doesn’t exist but… they could do that. It’s possible.

Apple Tree Yard itself is definitely real, there are promo pictures, trailers and everything. But the part of it being an adaptation of Amanda Coe’s novel seems to me like a gigantic lie. Amanda Coe does create screenplays for the BBC, maybe this is one of her new creations that will definitely air but they decided to fuck with the description in order to [touches tin hat] make sure there is a time slot available and also a slight hint for us to pick up on?

Edit: okay, some of you told me it’s a novel by Louise Doughty but  there is no mention of the autor’s name in the BBC’s description! It clearly says “adapted from the novel by Amanda Coe”. 

Tagging secret episode believers and people I saw discussing this earlier: ​ ​ @shag-me-senseless-watson @all-shades-of-everything @johnholmescouldwork @tryingforblue @pearlrebs @ila-221b

The BBC fucked up. They fucked up so bad and they know it. Their plan is falling apart at the seams. Yes, this is a plan. 

They have more footage. It comes out Sunday the 29th (or not at all). “It’s not a trick, it’s a plan.” – a poorly executed plan.  They wanted to recreate the social unrest from The Final Problem of 1893, except they’re failing at the one goal they wished to accomplish. 

They wanted every audience member on board with the romance coming to Sherlock series 4. This is why they marketed the “I Love You” scene in the trailer and went to social media to proclaim “Sherlock is in love, but who with??”. It was a direct bait in their marketing scheme to get people to anticipate the romance. They needed to get everyone on the same page with who Sherlock loves – that is where this all fell apart, and I can tell you exactly how and where in the series this happened. 

 In The Lying Detective, Moffat and Gatiss made the unwise decision to include Mary Watson as a figment of John’s imagination. This is where everything went wrong. The audience sees her and forgets she’s not real – they think she’s speaking as herself or that John loves her so much he can’t bear to be away from her. This is not true in the slightest. John calls it “self-loathing” because he is torturing himself with her memory.  He conjures her in order to punish himself. This is explicitly stated. He does not miss her – he forgets her as soon as “the game is on” with Sherlock in the TD-12 room.  This is explicitly stated, as well. We saw John (as Mary) call Sherlock “My Monster” and “Posh Boy”, we saw John argue with himself about Sherlock over and over and over again because he can’t stop thinking about him. We saw John get outrageously jealous of Irene Adler, which has been happening for five years straight. We saw John practically beg to know about Sherlock’s sex life. We saw John break down about not being honest with himself about what he’s always wanted in a romantic partner, therefore causing devastation to everyone he holds dear. Many people in the audience saw this and thought “John loves Mary!” which is the exact opposite conclusion the audience needed to reach at that very moment. John loves someone, he’s always loved someone, and by not having the guts to be honest, he “lost his chance”.  He is talking about Sherlock. The things he wanted to say in episode 6 – that’s what has been eating at him for years. He never took the chance. He wasn’t honest with himself. And the audience missed this important piece of information because they couldn’t separate Mary as John from Mary as herself. 

Moffat and Gatiss thought the audience would ban together at this point and see the characters’ love arcs as almost complete. “Sherlock is in love, but who with??” – this should be obvious after The Lying Detective, but it wasn’t. “Romantic entanglement would complete you as a human being.” This should have made the entire audience go, “Ooooo Sherlock is going to confess his love in The Final Problem”, but because the audience didn’t fully understand Ghost!Mary’s role in The Lying Detective, they couldn’t see anyone loving Sherlock back. This is not at all what the writers thought would happen. 

The Final Problem was meant to be one gigantic queerbait. They explicitly made the villains queer. They had a John-sized coffin with “I love you” smashed to bits. They used Freddie Mercury’s “I Want to Break Free” as a villain’s anthem. They ended the song at the phrase “I’ve fallen in love” precisely at the word “love”. They made Mycroft “here to see the queen” Holmes a heterosexual romantic (TLD and TFP). They didn’t give John and Sherlock even five minutes alone in TFP. They made a mockery of “The Three Garridebs”, a Doyle story about Watson seeing “the depth of loyalty and love that lay behind the cold mask”. They told us “Who you really are doesn’t matter”. 

The problem with this is because viewers didn’t fully understand what was told to them at the end of The Lying Detective, not a huge amount of people were upset with the lack of romantic closure. The queerbait was wasted on the general audience but felt horribly by queer people. Now many don’t believe queer people when they claim there to be deliberate homosexual intent/subtext written in the show. The audience still doesn’t see it. This is why Gatiss came out to confirm that they had indeed purposefully put in homosexual subtext repeatedly as a joke. He wants people to see the queerbait for what it is. He wants this to be discussed. 

Now the BBC has a huge problem on their hands. The queer/ally audience is upset over representation and everyone is upset over quality of the episode itself. The main complaint the BBC thought it would get would be the queerbaiting allegations. However, those allegations aren’t large enough. The outrage isn’t loud enough. It would have been if they projected John Watson’s inner thoughts in a better way. 

Now the BBC is sweating. The plan isn’t working. The audience is still divided. 

How do you rile up a crowd? How do you get everyone who’s upset about The Final Problem and all of its flaws to focus on the one thing everyone should be thinking about?

You tell everyone who will listen that Sherlock was never, ever a queer show because there is absolutely zero proof of homosexuality ever hinted at on screen. You tell the biggest lie to anyone who will listen, regardless of what they asked about. You tell lies that have been previously contradicted by the writers themselves. You plant the idea for the audience, because they didn’t reach the conclusion themselves. You wait silently, fingers crossed, that an angry crowd will take to social media and promote your story. You hope to stay relevant because you fucked up so, so badly. 

Somehow, in the attempt to make television history, BBC Sherlock managed to alienate its most dedicated queer fans. 

There’s only one thing I can say about this:

Norbury

I was at the Walmart in my po-dunk Tennessee town, and I just happened to stumble across this:

And I was like, hey, cool, cause ya know, Sherlock.  Then I flip it over and

this beautiful bastard.  So, yeah I spent US $13.99 and bought it (I would have spent $20 tbh)  But I didn’t crack it open until I got home and

March 8.  Hmmm, I thought.  Let me get my tin foil hat out.  

20/20= 40?  maybe I’m reaching…But then

Um 27?  These numbers seem unnecessary to these sentences or am I

seeing things things that aren’t there…  [pictured above: ACD posing for “spirit photography” in 1922]  

Then an article about ACD and his unlikely friendship with Houdini.  They met when Doyle read his book, then went and saw him perform in New York where he made an ELEPHANT disappear, and ESCAPED FROM CHAINS UNDERWATER.

*cough cough* Mark and Darren Brown *cough cough*

So anyway, I may just have a blue car and then am seeing blue cars everywhere, or this magazine (which the earliest date I can see where it hit the stands was feb 8, 2017).  New key? BONUS:

meta meta meta meta meta canon that ACD was King of All Meta.  This magazine has condensed so much SH fun facts (a whole  big piece about about ACD killing off SH) and it makes me happy to have more info I can obsess about.

I’ll tag some tjlc blogs that I fangirl over:

@tjlcisthenewsexy@the-7-percent-solution@teaandqueerbaiting@jenna221b

You know how in TEH Sherlock talked about his death being the final piece to that confrontation, because ruining his reputation wasn’t enough to complete Moriarty’s game? HE needed to die. Yeah. Well. I’m absolutely convinced The BBC is going to make a statement very soon about not commissioning series 5 of Sherlock, which will send fans everywhere spiraling into despair. Right now BBC Sherlock’s reputation is tarnished - but it’s not enough to complete their game. It NEEDS to die. If they’re recreating the social phenomenon surrounding The Final Problem of 1893 (so far it’s happening whether intended or not), then that’s their last move. I’d keep this in mind, just in case.

youtube

Happy Valentine’s Day, Everyone!

Sorry no, hold on!
I was going through my Sherlock album on my phone and it’s mostly screencaps from info on series 4 and I found this?!
Steven was saying the long 29 page dialogue was this mind palace scene, but we never saw that did we? It’s not when he’s figured out the ‘anyone’ clue is it? Because that wasn’t really mind palace it was him high as a kite!

Never have I ever related to a television character more than I do to Anderson from BBC Sherlock, because I know something’s up, I **KNOW** it, but I don’t know what that is, when it’s gonna resolve, how it’s gonna resolve, why, who or to what scale, and EVERY guess I’ve made up until this point has blown up in my face, but I’m PERSISTENT because I know SOMETHING is UP but when everything reveals itself I’ll be the last to find out