Sherlock Meta

Collection of character metas, scene analysis, spoilers and/or theories for BBC's Sherlock. filter by... type Character Meta Scene Analysis Spoilers/Theories Parallels Asks/Replies Announcements/Exclusives Video Other character Sherlock Holmes John Watson Mary Morstan Mycroft Holmes Charles A. Magnussen Irene Adler James Moriarty Greg Lestrade Molly Hooper Mrs Hudson Phillip Anderson Sally Donovan Janine Minor characters episode Pilot --- A Study in Pink The Blind Banker The Great Game --- A Scandal in Belgravia The Hounds of Baskerville The Reichenbach Fall --- Many Happy Returns The Empty Hearse The Sign of Three His Last Vow other 221b Baker Street Fashion & Styling Props Websites Cinematography/Scenery Extras

[waitedforgarridebs]

Lestrade calling Carter and telling him that he is about to meet Sherlock struck me as a bit weird the other day - because the person Carter is then actually meeting turns out not to be Sherlock, but John.

Hold on, you might say, why is that weird? How could Lestrade possibly know that Sherlock would only send John and not go himself?

Well, I might say… because, during that phone call, Greg is sitting in his car, 

directly in front of 221b.

^compare the reflection in the car window and the background of the shot to the Google Maps screenshots I put up there, Lestrade really is in front of Speedy’s - which is a realisation that sent me down a rabbit hole that I never wanted to know even existed and now I have to ask the following question:

Greg… have you been a naughty, naughty boi?

Keep reading

[the-signs-of-two]

One thing I love about A Scandal in Belgravia is how the episode exposes heteronormativity. We are presented with a man showing absolutely no interest in a woman besides the interest he has in solving the case she’s involved in. He never responds to a single text she sends him until it’s hinted that perhaps his refusal to answer is a sign of interest, then he immediately replies. He keeps telling her not to be flattered by anything he says, not to give him compliments and not to think that he’s interested in ‘having dinner’. Meanwhile, a self-proclaimed lesbian tries to manipulate a man into helping her commit a crime by coming on to him and drops him the moment she gets what she wants (‘Not you, junior, you’re done now’). And yet people still think they’re in love because intelligent hero + sexy intelligent woman = straight romance.

Another thing I love (?) about A Scandal in Belgravia is how the episode exposes indifference to sexual harassment and abuse. This romance that people see is not just between an uninterested man and a manipulative woman. Irene sexually harasses and abuses Sherlock clearly and repeatedly all the way through the episode. She approaches him naked. She personalises her text alert noise to a moan that he can’t switch off. She repeatedly asks him to ‘have dinner’ when he’s quite clearly told her multiple times that he isn’t interested. She texts him repeatedly through a period of several months (that’s called stalking). She repeatedly touches him without his permission - straddling his lap in the nude, caressing his shoulder, touching his hand, kissing his cheek - and every time we see that his reaction is clear discomfort. She continues to come on to him very strongly even after he’s clearly told her not to (‘Please don’t feel obliged to tell me that was amazing or fantastic. John has expressed that sentiment in every variant available to the English language.’ - ‘I would have you right here on this desk until you begged for mercy twice.’) She drugs and hits him, which is assault by any definition and sexual assault when taking into account that she beats him with a riding crop. And yet still people think they’re in love because intelligent hero + sexy intelligent woman = straight romance.

[cuumbertomybatch]

Wait what

So. I’m at the library working on a paper on gay men in late-Victorian London. And there’s this one essay I’m quoting from called “Unspeakable Desires: we other Victorians” by Kate Flint, in which she is talking about the homosexual experience in said period. And there’s this one thing she addresses that just had me pause - so-called ‘Molly houses’, which Flint defines as “taverns where gay and cross-dressing men could meet and hook up”. 

Now the thing is.

Sherlock and John meet at the morgue of St Bart’s. 

And while the morgue isn’t a tavern 

it’s where Molly works. Almost as if it was…. 

Molly’s house.

[impossibleleaf]

John never was a dummy, he is smarter than he looks

In Leinster Garden, we got in a single scene the entire summary of John and Mary’s relationship.

Remember, a disguise is always a self-portrait but how others perceive it also says a lot about how they see you.

And I get a feeling that we were given a glimpse of the ending and what is exactly going on in the real world.

Tell me, do you remember when John was becoming Sherlock Holmes?

It was a long time ago, I know, but once upon a time, there was a man called John Watson. And this man one day met Sherlock Holmes.

He was deeply fascinated by him, he was without a doubt the most extraordinary man he’s has ever met. That wasn’t to say he was stupid, no.

He was only an army doctor, murders weren’t quite yet his division.

But he tried.

Boy did he try.

Sometimes his mistakes were just plainly embarrassing.

Sometimes he was just wrong and his deductions lead nowhere.

But he’s always managed to pull through.

Because he is learning.

There is a reason why John Waston is the best conductor of light that exists. He might not get everything on the first try, but his thinking always leads Sherlock to the right path. They are on the same wavelength.

And there is also a good reason why some foes mistook him for his friend.

JOHN: I’m not actually… (Still delirious) I’m not Sherlock Holmes.

THE OPERA SINGER (Smiles, she doesn’t believe him): Forgive me if I do not take your word for it.

(She made a strong case, didn’t she?)

Remember when John Watson was becoming Sherlock Holmes?

How he assumed it was Sherlock Holmes she needed and yet took the case instead? Remember when Mary had no other choice than to become his Watson?

HOLMES: You are not coming.

WATSON: Then you are not going.

JOHN: You can’t come (…)

MARY: You can’t go (…)

Remember that Mr Holmes thought Mary was the sane one and at the same time implied he thought John was the extraordinary one?

Don’t forget that John Watson is smarter than he looks. Don’t you dare forget he’s pretty damn smart. He’s more than just a puppy to trot behind Sherlock Holmes. No matter what Mary may think, this is only the image he sells to the public.

WATSON: Listen, I’m happy to play the fool, for you. I will run along like some halfwit, if that’s what you need.

The dummy isn’t who he is. It is what she saw (a fairly obvious trick) but it never was what he was. He wasn’t playing the idiot, he was being Sherlock Holmes.

Because, no matter what Mary may believe, if Sherlock can learn to become more like John, the reverse is also true. John Watson can be Sherlock Holmes when he needs to.

And he can wear the coat and fool her.

John Watson can perfectly be the Sherlock Holmes to her Moriarty. There never was any dummy, he was just taking Sherlock’s place while he was away.

And Mary never noticed that until it was too late.

[the-7-percent-solution]

All women in Sherlock speak for JOHN. He cannot say the exact words, but he mirrors the sentiment behind them.

“I was wondering if you’d like to have coffee.” (“You’re unattached, like me, okay, good.”)

“[Is the woman] your girlfriend?” (“You think you’ll be seeing her again?”)

“Have you ever had anyone?” (“A girlfriend, boyfriend, a relationship ever?”)

“A minute ago i thought you were chatting me up.” (John thought this too, Hence John’s THOB bed-sharing endeavour)

“You and John Watson platonic?” (“Confirmed bachelor… what the hell are they implying?”)

“Just one phone call.” (“One word, that’s all i would’ve needed!”)

“I like him.” (“He’s like a drug.”)

“I’ve moved on.” (“I’m moving on.”)

“I wish you weren’t… whatever it is that you are.” (*knee grab* “I don’t mind.”)

“How dare you betray the love of your friends?” (“You could’ve called, you could’ve talked to me.”)

“Room for a little one?” (“Are you trying to put me off?”)

“I’m the only one who knows what you’re like.” (Without any opposition i am your closest friend.“)

"You lied and lied.” (“How could you do that? How?!”)

“Just once would’ve been nice.” (“I’ll be next door if you need me.” / “Why would i need you?” / “No reason at all.” *orgasm noise*)

[deducingbbcsherlock-deactivated]

I have a question about something irene said. There was this part where She and john were talking and john says, "Im not actually gay" Then she responds with "Well I am, look at us both." But then they both realize Sherlock's been listening. THEn she says, "I dont think so... do you?" What does that mean? Thank you xxoo

Ohhh, I’m always up for a discussion about the Battersea scene. :) 

You broke the moment down perfectly. My interpretation is that Irene is finishing her thought, and their realization that Sherlock has been listening helps to confirm her point. So what IS her point? Let’s back up a little bit more. (Transcript credit: Ariane DeVere)

IRENE: Are you jealous?

JOHN: We’re not a couple.

IRENE: Yes you are. There …

(She holds up her phone to show John the screen, although he’s too far away to read it. She tells him what she has typed anyway.)

IRENE: “I’m not dead. Let’s have dinner.”

(She presses the Send button. John turns away momentarily and then turns back to her.)

JOHN (quietly): Who … who the hell knows about Sherlock Holmes, but – for the record – if anyone out there still cares, I’m not actually gay.

IRENE: Well, I am. Look at us both.

(John laughs ruefully. Just then an orgasmic female sigh can be heard a short distance away. In the corridor outside the room, unseen by either of them, Sherlock switches his phone off and rapidly walks away. John starts to walk in the direction of the sound but Irene holds out her hand to stop him. She looks at him pointedly.)

IRENE: I don’t think so, do you?

Before they both became aware of Sherlock’s presence, Irene was trying to make a point to John. Regardless of her own attraction to/feelings for Sherlock, she did not hesitate to throw their feelings for one another in their faces. One of her texts to Sherlock even says:

John’s blog is HILARIOUS. I think he likes you more than I do. Let’s have dinner.

Irene knows what people like. She tells us again and again. And there’s no subtext in this scene. It’s blatant. “We’re not a couple.” “Yes you are.”

She knows they aren’t in a sexual and/or romantic relationship. But she also knows that doesn’t mean they aren’t a couple. She knows it’s just a matter of time before they acknowledge it. Note that right before this scene, John tells the fem!lock Irene sics on him (the woman he thought worked for Mycroft), that Sherlock “doesn’t follow him everywhere.”

Now, to John’s comment:

“I’m not actually gay.”

(Not “I’m straight.” Not “I’m not interested in dating Sherlock.” But the standard John Watson #notgay.)

And Irene replies with: “Well I am. Look at us both.”

The second phrase is meant to contradict the first. In other words:

“Well I am. [But] look at us both.”

Irene has already confessed to flirting with Sherlock. She doesn’t try to hide her interest in him (unlike John). Here’s what she’s saying:

“You’re not gay. I am. But look at us both (in love with Sherlock).”

Sherlock literally enters the picture after the word “both,” with that orgasmic sound. Irene and John are both startled, and John looks very worried. Irene stops him from going after Sherlock, then finishes her thought.

“I don’t think so, do you?”

Irene is saying that their sexual orientations don’t matter, because they’re both in love with Sherlock. She has totally accepted this about herself, and is trying to make John understand it about himself, too. After all, John thought Sherlock wouldn’t follow him – but Sherlock did. They are a couple. Him showing up, the fact that he followed John, helps confirm her point.

Please note that I do not in ANY way believe this means Irene is not gay, or John is not straight (or…not not gay?). We’re told multiple times in this episode that Irene sleeps with both men and women. Irene *gets* sexuality. She’s well aware of the Kinsey scale and sexual fluidity. Being attracted to a man is not alarming to her, and does not change her sexual orientation (in her mind or in reality). It happens to plenty of people. Rules have exceptions.

For John, though, this is an utter mindfuck. Being attracted to/in love with Sherlock does not necessarily change his sexual orientation to “gay.” But, like many people, this is a foreign concept to John. It’s possible he’s never been attracted to a man before and this is intensely confusing for him.

Irene understands. She’s trying to explain it to John. Gay, not gay, it doesn’t matter, it doesn’t change how they both feel. 

“He doesn’t follow me everywhere. We’re not a couple. I’m not gay.”

“I don’t think so…do you?”

[deducingbbcsherlock-deactivated]

Hi. I'm new here and I've been engrossed in all the Sherlock analysis here on Tumblr. I was wondering though if you have any thoughts about Moriarty and how he survived?

Hello, and welcome! :)

I am in 100% agreement with LSiT’s theory on this. Essentially: Jim employs a ton of snipers/assassins, particularly in TRF. When Mycroft shows John the files of the assassins moving in on Baker Street, one is a blond Russian woman with a tattoo (recorded in her files) Her picture is visible and it’s not Mary, but it’s easy to see a parallel, as we know from Sherlock’s deductions that she has a secret tattoo, she is possibly not English, and of course, she’s blond. (And an assassin. ;)

(The fact that John doesn’t recognize the two male assassins from their photos, but admits to Mycroft he’s noticed the female one around, is a bit of foreshadowing – he’ll take notice of another blond assassin in Sherlock’s absence.)

Jim went to the roof knowing Sherlock had set up a plan to fake his suicide. Jim did the same thing. He had three snipers/assassins on Lestrade, Hudders, and John – and a fourth on himself. Mary.

Jim shaking Sherlock’s hand is the signal. That’s why Sherlock looks confused when Jim holds his hand out – it’s a weird thing to do. And Jim’s movement is very, very deliberate.

And that’s why we get the close-up, because this moment is important:

Jim is sealing his and Sherlock’s fake-fates.

Mary sees the signal and aims. Jim says “good luck with that,” pulls out a fake and/or unloaded gun, sticks it in his mouth, and…PAUSES.

See how he waits? It’s Sherlock who backs away, and the camera follows him. You can see Jim blink. Watching, enjoying Sherlock’s look of horror, staying perfectly still so Mary can take the shot. He’s got a pouch of fake blood under his turned-up collar, just behind his neck. He knows Mary can hit that pouch from a side angle without hurting him.

It’s surgery.

Mary makes the shot, crack, the pouch bursts and Jim falls back.

We see no brain, no fragments of skull, none of the gore that is present when someone has actually stuck a gun in their mouth and pulled the trigger. Instead:

The pouch leaks and Jim lays there and tries not to giggle. Is he really going to get away with this? Is Sherlock not going to check him for a pulse, for any signs of life? (Because Jim sure would like him to…)

Too easy, it’s too easy!

Sherlock glances back. There’s a reason we’re at this angle, with Sherlock blocking part of the shot. We, like Sherlock, aren’t seeing the full picture.

But we can see enough. That is not what someone who blows the back of his head out looks like.

And here’s the thing: this isn’t a gory show. Horrible murders are committed, but we don’t really see gore. Take Magnussen’s shot in the head, which was real:

So they kept it distant intentionally. To show us that yes, Sherlock shot him, but to avoid showing the up-close gore. But with Jim, they focus on his head and the trickling blood. Because it’s fake, and because they planned to bring Jim back all along, they knew when they filmed this part they would have to show us it was fake, and not intentionally block his body or show it from a distance. That’d be cheating. We have to see what Sherlock sees.

The last shot of Jim they give us is this:

His hand is still holding the gun. That’s one clingy corpse. (Seriously though – look at his fingers. It’s not just that the gun is in his hand: his fingers are still wrapped around it. #NotDead)

Of course, the sniper doesn’t have to be Mary. Except it really kind of does. Why?

Because you won’t love me when you’re finished.

Mary says this to John after he’s learned she’s an assassin, and after he discovers she’s shot and nearly killed Sherlock. Yet somehow, there is actually something else in her past that is worse than damn near murdering John’s best friend which, were he to discover it, would make him stop loving her (in her opinion). So what could that be? What is more terrible than almost murdering Sherlock?

Mary helped Jim fake his death. Which means she played a role in forcing Sherlock’s fake suicide. Which means she’s always known both Sherlock and Jim are alive. Which means John spent all that time grieving and crying about his dead best friend on the shoulder of a woman who not only knew he was alive, but was partially responsible for taking him away from John in the first place. 

She did all that, and then she shot Sherlock in the chest.

So yeah. Pretty sure John will be finished with her when he finally does learn the truth.

[just-sort-of-happened]

One of the ways that Sherlock deduces that David still has romantic feelings for Mary is that in all his Facebook pictures of John and Mary, John is, ‘always partly or entirely excluded’.  This shows that he wants John, ‘out of the picture’, so to speak.

Then we see director Colm McCarthy’s approach to framing his shots during the best man speech.  During Sherlock’s speech, Mary is, ‘always partly or entirely excluded’, in any shot that also includes Sherlock.  Janine, a character we’ve only just met, and of much less importance to the proceedings, seems to have plenty of room to fit in shots that exclude Mary.

If excluding half of a couple is a sign that someone wants them to not be a couple, then, here, the show is explicitly telling us that John and Mary are not the right couple.  The compositions escalate from merely cutting Mary out to having Sherlock actually physically block her from the audience’s view.  We are meant to not see John in relation to Mary but Sherlock.  It’s always Sherlock.

(Thank you to obliquely-related for their comment that reminded me to write about this.)

[mid0nz-deactivated20170516]

Colm McCarthy didn’t frame the shots. That would be the camera operator/DP. All together now… :-)

[just-sort-of-happened]

Well, yes, the camera operator (or possibly the DP) is the one who literally frames the shots.  But what I’m talking about, here, is the creative decision to reference an earlier part of the text with the framing.

It’s interesting that you are making this distinction because my first instinct was to refer to even higher up the chain of command, directly to Moftiss/Moftisson, but I chose to give a nod to the director, instead (possibly creating this confusion.)

If the decision to put Mary out of frame, or partially in it, does come from the writing then it comes directly from Moftiss/Moftisson, then to the director, then to the DP, then to camera operator.  

So while I know who literally executes a shot on a tv show, when I refer to someone, ‘framing’, things I mean at the highest level of creative decision-making.  Which I think lies higher up the chain of command than Colm McCarthy, not lower.   

[rainyeveryday]

Just fyi….there are always two scripts. The first is the original screenplay. The second, the most important one, the one, we as public rarely see, is the production script, the one with all the camera directions, set details, etc. The scene framing, candle angles, lighting choices, etc, are ALL predetermined, planned, and are deliberate choices made by the dop, director, and writer(s) of the story. This was written. They knew exactly what they were doing. Johnlock is real.

[stepfordgeek]

A little bird told me – or: it’s written all over the walls

One of the first lessons any of my employees gets is 

“Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is a pattern”. 

This rule of thumb holds true in many situations and it helps to spot oddities and find things that do not fit among big bundles of data. It is a rule I have internalised a long time ago and that runs in the back of my mind at all times, so it is not surprising that my “Three times is a pattern” alarm suddenly went off during TEH. 

It is the third time we see the flat of a woman that is somewhat close to Sherlock (I do not count Kitty Riley in this) and the third time this woman has a wallpaper with birds on it. Coincidence? The universe – or in our case Arwel Wyn Jones -  is rarely that lazy. We are talking about a man who puts glass skulls in the background of a scene and pins phoenixes on walls that remain invisible. Just because he can.

So where do we see birds on wallpaper? I do not count the walls at the wedding since they are technically a mural and not wallpaper.

The first person we see near bird wallpaper is Mrs Hudson. On the walls outside 221A we see finches.

This fits with her image. She’s a little old lady. Harmless. Like a finch. Just your garden variety landlady-not-housekeeper.  That’s what she broadcasts to the outside world (hence the finches are outside her flat). We learn that this is not quite true when we see her through Magnussen’s eyes.

The second bird wallpaper we see is in Irene Adler’s bathroom. Mind you, it is not her private bedroom. This bedroom is her workplace. This bathroom is directly attached to her workplace but it is slightly hidden away.

I do not know enough about birds to be sure what kind of bird it is but If I had to guess I’d say it is a Chinese bird of paradise. Which is a good fit for Irene.  Her sitting room is very respectable, like Irene in public in her impeccable outfits. The bedroom gets the Devil Damask treatment which is again a good fit for a dominatrix. Yet when all layers are away she is still an exotic bird. The naked woman Sherlock Holmes could not figure out. A very exotic specimen indeed.

We had coincidence, we had happenstance but for a pattern we need three instances, so what is number three?

It’s the wallpaper in Mary and John’s bedroom.

So what about that wallpaper? Especially in the colourway that Arwel has chosen for his set, the birds evoke parrots. A wall full of colourful parrots. What do parrots do? They repeat words and phrases.

What does Mary do when we first see her in front of this wallpaper? (gif borrowed from amygloriousponds)

She repeats a sentence she must have heard someone else say.  Other people have pointed out the striking similarities between Mary’s and Magnussen’s phrases.

Mary parrots a phrase she clearly must have heard someone else say, while sitting in front of a wall of parrots - a wallpaper pattern that is not that good a choice for a bedroom. It is entirely too busy, people usually want a calm and relaxing room, not such a busy wall full of birds. This is a very interesting turnout indeed.

Arwel Wyn Jones knows his wallpaper.

Arwel choosing the parrot wallpaper for this room is – on the surface - very odd. This is not a pattern that is appropriate for a bedroom. If the pattern had only been chosen  with its effect on camera in mind, there would have been countless other choices that would have worked better in the context of a bedroom.

(Trust me on that. In the last 16 months I have read more than two dozen monographies on the history of wallpaper design and usage. On top of that I have looked at roughly a million wallpaper pattern swatches. Yes you have read correctly. One million swatches. No, I am not kidding. It was all for science. And the masterpost)

So when I say that he could have chosen dozens of other spectacular patterns that are currently on the market, but went for one that is not only slightly off within the context it is being presented in, but that simultaneously fits into a meta-narrative pattern.

 “The flat of any woman that is of importance to Sherlock has wallpaper with birds on it and those birds make a statement about her personality”.  

Going with that pattern I would not be surprised to find something like this somewhere near Mummy Holmes next time:

(Baker Lifestyle - Rare Breeds)

[mid0nz-deactivated20170516]

ALSO

[stepfordgeek]

oh what a brilliant catch. I completely forgot about the porn magazine. So many birds everywhere. I’m trying to find a boom that deals with birds on wallpaper, but I fear I’m going to have to write that one myself.

[just-sort-of-happened]

Money + Courtship

As we see in BB, Sherlock is making sure that John has money so he won’t go to work and will stick around.

In HoB

John is clearly impressed by Henry’s house and Sherlock is visibly peeved. When I first saw this, with a...

[rominatrix]

Sherlock + flirting with men

[coldwarfem]

Mary is Mr.Hudson

I find it distressing that someone has yet to write a meta about how Mrs.Hudson’s marriage is a parallel to John’s marriage. Guess I’ll have to.

Throughout the episode we hear about Mrs. Hudson’s past. We hear about her wedding, her unusually upset best friend who leaves early, and we hear about her relationship with Mr.Hudson. I find it particularly telling that she’s talking to John in this exchange as he is her parallel in this scenario. 

JOHN: Did you think you’d found the right one when you married Mr Hudson?

MRS HUDSON (smiling): No! It was just a whirlwind thing for us. I knew it wouldn’t work, but I just got sort of swept along.

JOHN: Right.

MRS HUDSON: And then we moved to Florida. We had a fantastic time, but of course I didn’t know what he was up to. (Whispering) The drugs.

JOHN (laughing): Drugs?

MRS HUDSON: He was running … um, oh God, what d’you call it? Um, a … cartel. Got in with a really bad crowd.

JOHN: Right.

MRS HUDSON: And then I found out about all the other women. I didn’t have a clue! So, when he was actually arrested for blowing someone’s head off …it was quite a relief, to be honest.

John is Mrs.Hudson’s parallel, and, seeing as Sherlock leaves the wedding early, Sherlock is Mrs. Husdon’s heretofore mentioned friend, which leaves Mary as Mr.Hudson’s parallel.

Sherlock leaving the wedding does three things. Firstly, It justifies Mrs.Hudson even mentioning her friend at the beginning of the episode in the first place, and secondly, it solidifies Sherlock as the parallel to said friend, and thirdly, it sets the expectation for the parallel to continue hereafter.

One could argue that it was fulfilled when John found out that Mary was much more than she claimed to be, an episode later when she shot Sherlock, but I think this goes deeper than just that deception, though it is a large one. Specifically because of the way John begins the conversation. Just a few lines prior, they were talking about Sherlock. Specifically after the fall.

JOHN: Mm. Don’t sound so … final about it. I will be visiting, you know.

MRS HUDSON: Ooh, I’ve heard that one before!

JOHN: Mm, no, it’s different now, though, isn’t it? It’s different to when we thought we’d lost him.

And then Mrs.Hudson goes on about how Marriage “changes everything”. And then she says;

MRS HUDSON: You meet new people ’cause you’re a couple …and then you just … let your old friends slip away.

JOHN: It won’t be like that.

MRS HUDSON: Well, if you’ve found the right one – the person that you click with – it’s the best thing in the world.

We go from talking about Sherlock, straight into discussing the legitimacy of your chosen life partner.

JOHN: Did you think you’d found the right one when you married Mr Hudson?

Did you find the right one? THE one? Did you marry the correct person?

And Mrs. Hudson is quick to reply.

MRS HUDSON (smiling): No! It was just a whirlwind thing for us. I knew it wouldn’t work, but I just got sort of swept along.

She knew it wouldn’t work. She just got swept along. Because of the parallel that has been drawn, what does this say about the fate of John’s marriage and about the severity of the secrets Mary may be hiding from John?

[see-but-do-not-observe]

Look at how smug and confident he was when he entered the restaurant… But the moment he saw John for the first time after two years he turned into a nervous puppy. Sherlock Holmes was actually stunned for a moment,

[deducingbbcsherlock-deactivated]

that.

[skulls-and-tea]

Someone gif’d the moment! Thank zeus. 

It was only a split second; I missed it on the first few watches, but once I saw it I couldn’t unsee it. 

It makes a huge difference in watching the restaurant reunion: without it, the disguise scene feels like a gimmicky writing gag.

With it: the scene is a heartbreaking tapdance of nerves and deflection.

[gayeddies]

Steven Moffat kinda saying that Sherlock is not really into women :-)

[robertseanleonard]

BBC Sherlock + (some) significant dates. Based on this timeline.

[darlingbenny]

Love.

[robertseanleonard]

[bakerstreetbabes]

all of the above