Tag: moffat

It was a rather boring one in retrospect. It was clever — Molly was actually trapped inside the coffin and they had to solve a puzzle to get her out. But while it was a clever puzzle and we liked it, we were the only ones who liked it. It was just another puzzle and it wasn’t something Eurus would be particularly interested in putting Sherlock through because she’s more interested in the emotional then why he’s clever. So we scrapped it and I’m glad we did because I rather like the replacement scene.

‘You’ve said you originally had a completely different scene originally for that Molly sequence that you scrapped, what was it?’

– Steven Moffat Interview – (x)

Sherlock’s quite a small world, actually, so we can’t do everything in that. But to take the other show… Doctor Who, I think, can do more, and should do more. And we’re working harder every year to try and get that better. But the perspective that I always look at is that I don’t think about it – and nobody should think about it – as ‘satisfying the activists’ or ‘satisfying the pressure groups’. That’s not what’s important. What you’ve got to be saying to children is that you are all welcome, and that there are loads of people like you, and you all belong out there in this space, in the future, and that’s what matters. The ticking boxes exercise is never going to work, because it ends in what you call tokenism.

Steven Moffat asked ‘How do you deal with treading the line between representation and tokenism within the show?’ (x)

Saying it again bc it’s more appropriate on this quote –

So if it ended with bad female characters, and bad gay characters and a big gay gun over the mantel that never went off, and the aces are pissed about “romantic entanglements,” and the neurodivergent folks are upset at how both Sherlock and Eurus were handled, and even the dogs in the audience are barking about dog erasure, then what are we looking at as an “improvement?” Hudders got more lines in t6t?

They literally could have done better even in this “small” show without sacrificing any “plot” or making anyone feel like they were “checking boxes.” For god’s sake, we DON’T want you to check boxes, we want you to UNcheck a couple you didn’t need. Leave out one line, for example, don’t make Eurus queer and rapey; done. And tell me, where has the show lost any integrity without that?

There, that one’s free, off you pop and do better now, boys.

(via violet-vernet)

blameitontheillustrator:

“When a fictional character starts keeping secrets from the writer, that’s when that character becomes real.” – Steven Moffat

Steven. You said once that when fictional characters start keeping secrets from their writer, that’s when they become real. But they told you, didn’t they, and you didn’t listen. You thought that John-”I don’t mind (anytime)”-Watson and Sherlock-”there’s something I’ve meant to say always”-Holmes live platonically together in Baker Street, raising a daughter, re-building their home? Look at them. This home is filled with love, laughters, and kisses. So take a deep look in the mirror and think carefully about why they did not share that secret with you.

moriarty:

moriarty:

Steven Moffat: “… in the whole sixty story canon, he [Arthur Conan Doyle] allows one moment of genuine affection between Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson. You always know it’s there. There’s one moment in ‘The Three Garridebs’…”
Mark Gatiss: “You’ve hurt my Watson.”
Steven Moffat: “…when Holmes for a moment… yeah, ‘You’ve hurt my Watson.’ And that’s it. And I think, arguably – and we would argue quite strongly – that under the surface – you know, the detective stories are merely the surface – is the story of the greatest friendship ever.”

The Garridebs moment in TFP:

the point of this post is that this like, can’t be real