This is John being interrogated by Greg in a tiled room. It reminds me vaguely of a well or a swimming-pool. Is there a guard behind him (who looks a bit like Mycroft)? The whole scene is completely surreal. We have no idea where this is meant to take place. Surely not NSY.
If Greg was just interviewing John for information, there would not be a guard at the door. If John was accused of assault, the lighthearted convo does not make sense. If this was Mycroft in the back, he could not have been at 221b at the same time, conducting a search of the flat.
Which leads me to the conclusion that this is not real. Not the interview, not the preceding scene in the morgue.
@gosherlocked I think this scene was meant to be a hint about Magnussen being still around somehow. But like you said, it feels surreal… and what’s with the voice recorder? Seemed like there should be better technology in the interrogation room these days, like… a camera? Culverton Smith gave me an 80s vibe for some reason… other than his cereal killer commercial, everything else felt… dated?
Interesting that this video is seemingly all to do with Sherlock’s deductions about Mary. VERY INTERESTING:
What’s RED doing here in stuff about Mary? Red flag? REDBEARD? Red herring? And don’t you love how the ‘kind-hearted’ gets aligned to:
That’s right folks, you too can be a KIND-HEARTED ASSASSIN, what a niche job description. But wait!
What’s that you’re deducing, Sherlock? Kind-hearted and a sociopath?
And I especially love how the deduction GOOD MEMORY gets split so just MEMORY remains, especially considering all the unreliable narrator stuff around s4- and that doesn’t even get into the possible TD12 shenanigans. (x)
^And all with that ‘loving’ Christening scene… are our “”good memories””” of Mary unreliable? (Spoiler: yes 😉 )
I mean, red means rouge in french… Just like the march 8th thing in TLD
*eye emoji* NICE, also her RED COAT of villainy. (x)
Nice, all those wet jobs for the CIA *eye emoji* (x)
Is that redhead Amanda or Sian because I would totally buy that this is supposed to be “E” from the bus and that is absolutely terrifying that Mary could be so similar looking.
It’s definitely Amanda! She posted the red head wig on her twitter, and a photo of her in a long dark haired wig on instagram. (x)
Did we ever see her with that wig during her montage of being Bourne? I just don’t remember if we did or not but if not, then I’m calling the bullshit police.
Dark haired wig: yes… red haired wig: NO! *infinite eye emojis*
swimmingfeelsinajohnlockianpool pointed out that the line “Softer, Sherlock” sounds like it was delivered by Mrs. Hudson instead of Eurus and I wanted to make an edit.
If there are any other fucky audio bits you want me to edit as I have here, send them my way.
like i hate this but it sounds like the effect on the voice of the lady in the vivala.me vid
I may be crazy but it sounds almost like Mary to me?!
I can hear it being Mary! It’s just not fucking churros…
Well, I just googled how a tranquilizers gun looks like and I got this photo.
And yeah, I know there’d be many more types but looking again it’s even the same. The long thing. And looking back to Eurus’s gun, for me it doesn’t look like to a “tranquilizer gun”.
So make your deductions.
So it always has that long shape for shooting the tranquilizer.
Okay, so Mycroft is very obviously holding a pen in TST, and John is very obviously holding a pen in TFP, is there anyone holding a pen in TLD? ‘Cause then maybe we could assume TST is Mycroft’s “fixing” of Mary’s murder as evidenced by his “fixing” of Sherlock killing Magnussen at the beginning; TFP is John’s mind after he gets shot; so presumably Sherlock would be writing TLD, but was he ever holding a pen in that one? Does this make sense?
isn’t ‘Faith’ holding a pen, both as Faith herself and maybe even as Eurus? I’m sure she has a pen quite a few times – definitely as John’s therapist, if nothing else. I can’t recall whether she has one when talking to Sherlock as his ‘client’ though
Yes I thought about that like right after I posted this. So it could be her telling it? But that doesn’t make all that much sense to me unless she doesn’t actually exist and is, in fact, just a warped version of Sherlock himself.
it could just mean that sherlock and john aren’t narrating TLD and someone else is. eurus is also likened to the east wind, and people have been writing metas about how mary is actually the east wind so maybe it’s mary that’s narrating TLD?
OOH now that I like. And someone else pointed out that Smith is holding a pen at one point; it seems to be a villain writing episode.
yeah maybe it’s literally just a skewed narration from the Bad Guys, which makes sense, sorta, as both John and Sherlock lose their shit in … odd ways during that episode
Yes yes could be. My brain was not meant for meta lmao
Someone is definitely writing it because they kept talking about how Sherlock rewrote that story A Meeting in Samarra all throughout TST which kinda didn’t really have much to do with the content of the episode, unless Mary is the merchant somehow.
And then some very clever, detail oriented people, or the True Sherlockians as I call them, found that on the floor of 221B when the flat was blown up was the wedding song Sherlock wrote for John and Mary. That’s a pretty big inconsistency since they made sure to show us that Sherlock left the sheet music at the wedding for John and Mary to keep. So it shouldn’t have been in the flat at all. Unless they forgot to show us John moving back into the flat. Which is pretty important to the entire show so I doubt they would have.
The whole thing was screwy so I don’t know.
Yes it just makes sense to me for TST to have been Mycroft’s rewriting and TFP to be John’s but TLD confuses me.
tbh if you look at the way john acts just before he supposedly attacks sherlock, he’s being super soft and gentle?? i just find it hard to believe he went from ‘[softly] he’s not laughing sherlock’ to hitting him at all, like, i don’t think he did tbh
i was just wondering about this the other day and then i remembered like, in HLV when john is talking about what would happen if sherlock got dragged away by security and he mentions that sherlock would get his head kicked in? because hes upset with sherlock? but he never actually hits him or anything in that episode- i think it’s similar. he did probably hit him to stop him but he likely didnt go as far as is depicted, he was just like imagining it or making it up because he was upset with sherlock, like in HLV. this is all the more likely to me bc of the fact that john is explicitly telling us what happened here, like we know for SURE this is john’s retelling, also like that moment in hlv
i’m suddenly convinced of mary alive and manipulating them via td12 based solely on the line “hypnotizing, mesmerizing me, she was everything i dreamed she’d be”
Sherlock Holmes didn’t live at this address. He lived on Montague St in Bloomsbury, just around the corner from the British Museum.
“When I first came up to London I had rooms in Montague Street, just round the corner from the British Museum….“ MUSG.
Michael Harrison, in The London of Sherlock Holmes (Drake Publishers: New York, 1972), decides that Holmes lodged at 26 Montague Street, because his researches turned up an intriguing fact: in 1875, a certain Mrs. Holmes (Sherlock’s mother?) leased the house next door at 24 Montague Street. This is accepted Holmesian theory.
156 Montague is in a different part of London, near Spittalfields, and is not canon compliant. So why this address on the envelope in 221B? Two Holmes nerds would not make this mistake. It’s one of those things that any Holmesian would have picked up on.
Oh. 156-26=130 – a 130-year-old case, still unsolved?
And then TFP featured MUSG and Victor Trevor/GLOR, both pre-Watson – is it a hint that we have yet to see John’s version of The Final Problem then?
Nice thought! Maybe.
There was a screencap going around that Google Maps shows Faith’s flat at 156 Montague?
Yes. Thing is that address is 156 OLD Montague Street, which is a different street. Google maps brings it up as there isn’t a 156 on Montague Street, I think the highest number there is 30. Basically the British Museum is the canon link to the Bloomsbury Montague address. Not sure how we got over to Spittalfields for Faith’s flat.
Google Maps defaults to Faith’s flat because there’s no higher number than 30? Coincidence? Shall we add this to the list of intentional fuckiness?
Think so!!!
156 Old Montague Street is a red brick house but doesn’t look very much like Faith’s house we see in Sherlock’s window deduction. There’s some very scarce info on the building here.
Old Montague Street was called just Montague Street until 1874. In it’s vicinity stood one of the Whitechapel workhouses, that later became an infirmary. On it’s site was also the Whitechapel morgue, described as just a shed, where, in 1888, at least the body of one Ripper victim, Mary Ann Nichols, was examined. Other sources name even more victims who were brought to Old Montague Street morgue. Read up on it here.
That brick shed was accessed via Eagle Place. It’s all been since demolished, but I found a pic that shows where this mortuary was located, compared to the modern outlet of Old Montague Street. To me, this looks awfully like the block of houses to which 156 Old Montague Street belongs.
This is just the Google Maps location:
This overlay shows where the morgue was located:
So, there was a morgue, connected to Jack the Ripper, about 30 metres away from 156 Old Montague Street. Coincidence?
I’m not a Ripperologist, though, so I don’t know how reliable this research is. I tried to look up Eagle Place on the Booth Map but couldn’t find it. This is how the above area was mapped in 1889:
Green is the location of the workhouse/infirmary, red is the alleged location of the mortuary.
Any thoughts from people who know more about this?
While writing meta, I was to re-watch this scene from TST where Mary’s A.G.R.A.-stick introduces us to Ajay. Since I’m looking up every number/date in series 4 right now, I thought I’d go for this one, too.
“26473” – seemed like a date to me: 26/4/1973. So I researched it in combination with Sherlock Holmes – and was linked to “Heinrich Gies” (unfortunately, I only found sources in German, I’m sorry), a German actor and theatre intendant. (The 26th of April in 1973 is the date of his death.) Gies did a Sherlock Holmes adaptation called “Sherlock Holmes und das Halsband des Todes” (translated: Sherlock Holmes and the Necklace of Death), loosly based on “The Valley of Fear”. And guess what? The Valley of Fear has many parallels regarding series 4, even as far as names are concerned:
Porlock: code-name at the beginning of TST; Moiarty’s agent who is actually a mole of Holmes’s in TVoF
Wilson: the criminal occurring in The Canary Trainer which Dimmock is supposed to arrest in TST; a sergeant in TVoF
Then, we have Mr Douglas, the victim in TVoF that is hunted by an American criminal gangA.G.R.A. he joined in order to betray them (hello, Mary!) and outruns death by faking to be murdered, but is alluded to be killed in the end either way; Holmes is convinced that Moriarty is involved (hello, Mary’s posthumous DVD that mirrors Moriarty’s posthumous DVD!). This also heavily mirrors the events of TAB, btw: Mr Carmichael is haunted by the American demons of his past and Sherlock deduces that Lady Carmichael, the wife, must have done it, but he is lacking the ability to figure out one reason: her motif. (Yeah, Sherlock, it’s complicated, isn’t it.) TVoF-allusions confirmed.
And then, the final proof that Moftiss indeed adapted TVoF in series 4: the matchbox Eurus uses in TFP to set Musgrave on fire. Apologies, I can’t make a screenshot of it right now, but note: There are french words written on it that can be translated in (you guessed it):
“The Valley of Fear”
It’s stuff like this that confirms to me things like the camera being in the shot in TST, the missing blood on the floor in TLD, John’s feet in the well in TFP, Sherlock getting his boat back in TFP, that fucking Skull, etc etc ETC are all purposeful.
We could say they wrote something bad, ok, but they are meticulous with shots and props.
JOHN: Sherlock, any chance of a – an end date for this speech? Gotta cut the cake. SHERLOCK: Oh! Ladies and gentlemen, can’t stand it when I finally get the chance to speak for once, Vatican Cameos. MARY: What did he say? What’s that mean? JOHN: Battle stations. Someone’s gonna die.
So basically “we just decided cake is code for death during filming for S4″ is lies as usual and it had already been a thing. Maybe they didn’t want us to miss this one for some reason so they straight up told us.
JOHN: I’ve smelled eighteen different perfumes; I’ve
sampled … (he stops to think) … nine different slices of cake which
all tasted identical; I like the bridesmaids in purple …
Some of us wondered whether Mycroft was about to die in s4, even before acknowledging the cake code, after watching TAB… Mycroft is a symbol of the writers in this show, so I wonder – Maybe all these cakes in TAB forshadowed the show’s own reichenbach? Or the death of the writers’ reputation after the fourth series? Maybe we were right about “Mycroft’s” death from the start? @ebaeschnbliah
Sherlock Fandom Archive 