Coaxial

The Friday Docback Joins
'The Crusade'!! DOCTOR WHO
Story #14, And More!!

Published at: Jan. 20, 2012, 10:27 a.m. CST

 

 

 

Merrick here...

...with a look at "The Crusade" - the 14th DOCTOR WHO story - which aired between March and April in 1965.  Also...

 

FIRST IMAGES FROM DOCTOR WHO: THE ETERNITY CLOCK 

From the previously discussed PS3 game due later this year, these come to us via the game's official Twitter stream.   

Wonder if it'll be in 3D?  Not sure if I want it to be, as I'm not the world's biggest 3D proponent.  But as that option can be toggled...DW in 3D could be kinda fun, at least for a moment or two...

For those who missed the game's announcement trailer, here it is again...

 

 

 

 

 

"The Crusade" 

 

The Doctor (William Hartnell) and companion Ian (William Russell), Vicki (Maureen O’Brien) and Barbara (Jacqueline Hill) materialize in  the 12th Century and immediately become embroiled in tensions between Richard the Lionheart and Saladin.  

 

 

“The Crusade”  is an interesting beast.  In many regards, its story is unnecessarily, almost dissuasively dense - this isn’t one to watch in the background, or when one is unduly distracted or fatigued.  Ironically, this density cloaks a basic storyline that most would consider relatively simple, straight forward, and conventional in nature once its fat is trimmed away - perhaps the convolution is an unnecessary effort to conceal this truth?   A thumbnail description:  this one’s about two warring houses during a Crusade, a King who offers his sister in marriage to the enemy in a fatigued effort to stem hostilities - but said sister wants none of it.  Our heroes get caught in the middle.  That’s a pretty fair encapsulation of the whole of “The Crusade,” but sometimes its waters are a bit murky, and it’s hard to see matters quite so clearly.  

 

What “The Crusade” lacks in succinctness is more than made up for in its strength of conviction, which is evident across the board.  Douglas Camfield’s direction makes every effort to prevent proceedings from bogging down, and does so successfully for the most part.  Performances are startlingly earnest, especially from Julian Glover (badguy Donovan in INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE - he’d ultimately appear in 8 DOCTOR WHO adventures over the years) as King Richard...   

 

 

...and the inimitable Jean Marsh (who would eventually appear in 15 DOCTOR WHOs altogether) as his sister Joanna.  While some actors might’ve considered “The Crusade” “just an episode of DOCTOR WHO”?  Glover and Marsh attack their roles with an energy and conviction one might expect to find in a well-performed Shakespeare play.  There is genuine and unexpected intensity evident in their contentious moments -  masterfully performed and skillfully scripted.  

 

Which brings us to David Whitaker’s writing.  Whitaker, an early series script editor who would later script “Power of the Daleks” and “Evil of the Daleks,” here contributes what may well be one of DOCTOR WHO’s most literate and eloquent scripts, ever.  I realize that’s a potentially reckless quantitative judgement given that I haven’t seen every DOCTOR WHO episode yet, but...my hunch is my assertion will ultimately stand.  “All wise men look for peace - the terms of peace make wise men look fools...” laments Richard in the story’s second installment.  “Hold one hand out in firendship, but keep the other on your sword” intones Bernard Kay’s Saladin as he laments that even offers of peace must be greeted with defensive suspicion.  Such dialogue abounds here, and I haven’t even shared the best of it.  ‘Tis a lovely script with many shining moments, although its overall elegance is sometimes bogged down by its excessive preoccupation with political intrigue the schemings of its not altogether trustworthy characters.  

 

“Crusade” opens with an amusing discontinuity:  the “TARDIS grind” (sounds like a dance move) - whose use was recently established during external shots of the vehicle’s materialization/dematerialization (at this point in overall series continuity) -  “hums” strangely into existence here instead of "grinding."  It's a creepy sound effect evoking a mad scientist’s laboratory.  Maybe whoever was driving actually remembered to release the brakes this time?  Other noteworthy elements include Ian being Knighted by Richard (“Sir Ian of Jaffa”), only to be incapicitated and gnawed on by ants when he sets out on a quest to rescue Barbara.   Barbara is once again seriously threatened by douchey  villains...

 

 

This is an unfortunate but  interesting phenomena for Barbara, who was also imperiled by the scuzzy trapper Vasor in “Keys or Marinus” and put in harm’s way in The Romans.”  While those two episodes strongly implied the threat of sexual violation, the danger here doesn’t feel as extreme.  Taken on the whole, however, these moves feel oddly  lascivious for a show purporting to be aimed at “children”  - a proclamation I find myself questing more and more as I move deeper into DW and its overall mythos.  

 

 

Hartnell’s Doctor and O’Brien’s Vicki have a lovely moment together in Part 3, when the Doctor...in an uncharacteristic moment of awareness and sympathy, comforts Vicki like only a surrogate father/grandfather could.  It’s truly touching.  

      

 

“The Crusade” emerges as a rather strong entry despite itself.  The assertive passions of many of its principal performers, combined with Whitaker’s often lovely dialogue, raise this story well beyond the frivilous mundanity it could easily have slipped into, bring us what...at this point in the show’s overall progression...are among DOCTOR WHO’s most memorable moments.  The story’s conclusion does unravel a bit in terms of pacing and elegance, but not to the point of tainting the more solid storytelling which preceded it.  An interesting and sometimes surprising adventure.  

 

Two episodes of “The Crusade” are not available on video, having presumably been lost when BBC destroyed a number of early DOCTOR WHO recordings.  Accordingly, this review is based on two full episodes and two episodes which were reconstructed via Telesnap.  The two full episodes are available on the “Lost in Time” DVD collection HERE in the U.S. and HERE in the U.K. - these DVD include the two full episodes as well as the audio tracks for the two installments whose video is missing.  The Telesnap version are not included on the DVD.  

 

A genial tip-of-the-hat to Docbacker Bytor and Ken Plume for helping out with the recons.  

 

 

      

 

 

PREVIOUS DOCBACKS

 

[SEASON / SERIES SIX DOCBACKS]


"The Impossible Astronaut"

"Day of the Moon"

"The Curse of the Black Spot"

"The Doctor's Wife"

"The Rebel Flesh"

"The Almost People"

"A Good Man Goes To War"

"Let's Kill Hitler"

"Night Terrors"

 
 
 

"The Doctor, The Widow and the Wardrobe" (2011 Christmas Special)  

 

[RETRO-WHO DOCBACKS - MOST RECENT DOCBACK IS HIGHLIGHTED]

"An Unearthly Child" (Story #1)

"The Daleks" (Story #2)

"The Edge of Destruction" (Story #3)

"Marco Polo" (Story #4)

"The Keys of Marinus(Story #5)

"The Aztecs" (Story #6)

"The Sensorites" (Story #7)

"The Reign of Terror" (Story #8)

"Planet of Giants" (Story #9) 

"The Dalek Invasion of Earth" (Story #10)

"The Rescue" (Story #11) 

"The Romans"  (Story #12) 

"The Web Planet" (Story #13) / SHERLOCK - "A Scandal in Belgravia" (Story #4)

"The Gunfighters" (Story #25)

"The Colony in Space" (Story #58) 

"Day of the Daleks" (Story #60) + Preview of the DotD Special Edition

"Invasion of the Dinosaurs" (Story #71) and SHERLOCK: "The Reichenbach Fall" (Story #6) 

"The Android Invasion" (Story #83) and SHERLOCK: "The Hounds of Baskerville" (Story #5) 

"The Talons of Weng-Chiang" (Story #91)

"The Sun Makers(Story #95)

"The Awakening" (Story #131)

"Frontios(Story #132)

"Time and the Rani" (Story #144)

"Paradise Towers" (Story #145) + New WHOvian Documentary / Newsbits

DOCTOR WHO: THE COMPLETE SIXTH SERIES 

Merrick's Personal Journey With The Doctor (How Merrick Got Hooked On DOCTOR WHO)

DOCTOR WHO Title Sequences & DW At Comic-Con 2011

"The Crash of the Elysium" (Manchester version - interactive DOCTOR WHO adventure)

Why Eccleston Left, Here Comes Caroline Skinner, And Season/Series Six Part 1 on Blu-Ray And DVD

New Trailer For Season/Series Six Part 2

 

 

 
DOCBACK CODE OF CONDUCT
 
1) a Docback should be about completely open and free discourse regarding all things WHO with, obviously, some variation on subject matter from time to time - the real world intervenes, discussions of other shows are inevitable, etc.)... 

2) matters of SPOILAGE should be handled with thoughtful consideration and sensitivity.  Posts containing SPOILERS should clearly state that a SPOILER exists in its topic/headline and should never state the spoiler itself . "** SPOILER ** Regarding Rory" is OK, for example.  "** SPOILER ** Battle of Zarathustra" is fine as well.  " **SPOILER** Why did everyone die?"  Is NOT good.  
 
 
And, above all... 

3) converse, agree, disagree, and question as much as you want - but the freedom to do so is NOT a license to be rude, crass, disrespectful, or uncivilized in any way.  Not remaining courteous and civil, as well as TROLLING or undertaking sensational efforts to ignite controversy, will result in banning.  Lack of courtesy may receive one (1) warning before a ban is instigated.  Obvious Trolling or Spamming will result in summary banning with no warning.  One word posts intended to bump-up any Docback's figures on AICN's "Top Talkbacks" sidebar will be considered actionable Spam - they not only complicate efforts to access Docback from mobile devices, but impede readers' abilities to follow or engage in flowing conversation. 
 
In short, it's easy.  Be excellent to each other.  Now party on...

Readers Talkback

comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Jan. 20, 2012, 10:33 a.m. CST

    FIRST!

    by The Marquis de Side 3

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 10:44 a.m. CST

    Happy to see Doctor Who so popular now...

    by The Marquis de Side 3

    I always believed in the show ever since I first watched it in the 1980s on my local PBS stations in Maryland. But for loving the show I was always made fun of because the other kids thought the show was lousy. They mocked its special effects, which only goes to show they only judged the show from what they immediately saw. I watched the show anyway, and even collected the Target novels, New Adventures books and even a few of the toys. The stories were always exciting and unique. By the 90s, only a few Americans (and not the mass public) watched it as a cult show. I recall how on PBS pledge drive nights the phones would mostly be silent with no one calling to support the show. Now it's one of the biggest hits on TV! Happy everyone's watching it now, and as the new series plays on TV, hopefully more people will rediscover the classic series. Long live Doctor Who.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 10:51 a.m. CST

    Silence

    by Mifune73

    Big hands I know you're the one!

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 11:07 a.m. CST

    marquis 3 - I feel your pain...

    by obijuanmartinez

    Remember lugging Pinnacle & Target "Who" novelizations around in my middle-school years, and hearing stuff like "You actually watch that show? It's weird, and the special effects SUCK!!!"

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 11:09 a.m. CST

    So in that game is there any way to flip a switch and...

    by obijuanmartinez

    ...play as one of the REAL Doctors (kinda like the 10th anniversary 'Halo' that lets you toggle between slick new graphics and the originals) Just kidding Matt Smith fans...he's not my fave, but he's definitely not as bad as Sylvester McCoy!

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 11:30 a.m. CST

    Merrick, did you get to watch The Reichenbach Fall?

    by notspock2

    if so, what did you make of it? Oh, and thanks for the Lockbacks these last few weeks...

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 12:24 p.m. CST

    Games in 3D

    by ElPaw

    Are actually pretty good. Graphics cards already render in 3D, only to flatten to a 2D view., so it's not a case of post-processing. And it helps with reflexes in fast games e.g. action or FPSs.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 12:30 p.m. CST

    Happy Birthday Tom Baker!!

    by thelordofhell

    78 years old........pretty young for a Timelord

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 12:38 p.m. CST

    Happy Birthday Mr. Baker, and

    by Michael_Jacksons_Ghost

    may your scarf gain a foot in length with each birthday!

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 12:44 p.m. CST

    "Exterminate"?

    by The StarWolf

    Gets my vote for official entry in the "someone had far too much time on their hands" competition.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 12:46 p.m. CST

    Oh yes, 3D. Oh yes.

    by gotilk

    And like you said, it can be toggled. Depending on what TV you have, you'll probably want to. As much as I ADORE 3D, the eye strain for me hit at about the 4 hr mark. What 3D gaming really needs are wearable 3d goggles (with head-tracking... head tracking is KEY) or retinal projection. Ultimately retinal projection is the way to go (it exists, too, and is safe) because you have full immersion instead of a virtual giant screen. AND the 3D will not have any eye strain because each eye is getting an image projected on it instead of a *resolved* 3d image. It looks like an interesting game. I have a ps3, so I feel lucky for once. Now if I can just get the thing repaired in time at lower than the cost of a new one. lol It stopped reading discs after I watched Iron Man 2 blu on it. It should have nothing to do with the disc, but I have now met one other person that same thing happened to with the same movie. Coincidence? Probably.

  • Whotininnies? No, it must be there. Let me check again. Nope.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 12:53 p.m. CST

    Daleks and Silence and Hats, oh my!

    by DoctorTom

    Well, given it's a Doctor Who game with Matt Smith I am going to expect there to be a hat showing up in the game at some point. I'm curious as to whether the Silence and the Daleks will just be on different levels (or missions) of the game, or will they be appearing at the same time, and if so are the Daleks affected by the posthypnotic control of the Silents?

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 12:54 p.m. CST

    obijuanmartinez - I actually like Sylvester McCoy

    by DoctorTom

    I know some people would see it as heresy, but I like him more than I like Pertwee (my favorite two, though, being Tom Baker and Matt Smith).

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 12:57 p.m. CST

    That said, I do have to say that...

    by DoctorTom

    overall I don't care for Season 24, especially Time and Pip and Jane Baker, er, Time and the Rani - I put that one down at the level of The Twin Dilemma and Timelash (actually, slightly worse than Timelash because that at least has Paul Darrow and you can try to imagine if they had let him go as over the top as he had wanted to).

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 12:58 p.m. CST

    Gotilk - Whotininnies

    by DoctorTom

    The Silence made you forget to notice where the link to the new Whotininnies is. I'd post it, but they made me forget too.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 1:02 p.m. CST

    The Silents were already creepy enough...

    by gotilk

    ..but with wet hands? Now they will invade my nightmares. Damp hands are extremely creepy. Or maybe they are just standing there waiting for towels?? Prepping for surgery? Eep.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 1:04 p.m. CST

    doctortom

    by gotilk

    Who made me forget? What were we talking about again? Drawing a blank.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 1:24 p.m. CST

    CBS greenlights a Modern Sherlock series

    by ElPaw

    "Elementary", to be set in New York. I wonder what gave them the idea?

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 1:24 p.m. CST

    Only heard this one

    by PhaseRat

    I haven't seen this one, but I have heard the novelisation as read by William Russell. I thought it was interesting and I recall some tense stand-offs. I thought this one was completely lost, so to hear that 2 episodes exist (must research better) makes me happy. I have baulked at buying Lost in Time for a while now, it seemed like too much for so much incompleteness, but as time passes I'm finding myself drawn to it time and again. I guess my wallet will just have to take the hit.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 2:09 p.m. CST

    I enjoyed Crusades when it was released on Lost in Time

    by DoctorTom

    the whole DVD set was worth it, and it was a nice touch for them to have included the audios for the two unrecovered episodes so that we could at least listen to the entire story without having somewhere else to get the rest of the story.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 2:31 p.m. CST

    So....apparently Time Lords ARE real!

    by Michael_Jacksons_Ghost

    Link. http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/man-two-hearts-survives-double-heart-attack-223043465.html And he managed to regenerate as well!

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 3:02 p.m. CST

    I read the book a long time ago and have seen what is available

    by HornOrSilk

    But it's been so long ago, I can't comment on it; don't remember this one much. Rare for me.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 3:06 p.m. CST

    Sherlock to return this year...?

    by Peter

    Sherlock will be back for a third series of three 90-minute episodes, hopefully before the year is out, he (Moffat) says.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 3:07 p.m. CST

    The quote above is from The Guardian, today.

    by Peter

    DAMN you, AICN comments system. Proper attribution: http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2012/jan/20/steven-moffat-sherlock-doctor-who

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 3:16 p.m. CST

    2 actors in L.A.

    by Daniel

    2 of the lead actors in this story, Maureen O-Brien and William Russell, are going to be in L.A. next month doing the Gallifrey doctor Who convention. http://www.gallifreyone.com

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 4:05 p.m. CST

    I agree, Merrick

    by ByTor

    Always loved the dialog in The Crusade. David Whitaker definitely had a style I like.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 5:51 p.m. CST

    The uncanny similarities between me and Steven Moffat.

    by Peter

    Actually, the mildly convergent similarities that barely merit the word 'coincidence'. Steven Moffat was born in Paisley, Scotland and became a teacher in Greenock. His father was a Headmaster in Johnstone. Steven now lives in West London and writes witty, mercurial television scripts. I was born in Paisley, Scotland and became a teacher in Port Glasgow (right next to Greenock). I trained as a teacher in Johnstone and moved to West London, where I.... don't write witty, mercurial television scripts. But I wish I did. Go figure. I'm like Steven's slightly younger, very much less-successful, murderously envious doppelganger. Go figure.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 8:12 p.m. CST

    Laughing at Moff's mention of "My Fair Lady"

    by Perigee

    I've always found "My Fair Lady" to be one of the most hysterically kinky musicals ever placed in front of a camera. Higgins totally Doms Eliza. In the meanwhile, we have Freddie Hill, who sings the only popular stalker song in the world. ("On The Street where you live.) She totally hits subspace ("I could have Danced All Night") but rebels, and walks out for Freddy. But Freddy is even more submissive than she is ("Show Me"), and she gets horribly discouraged. In the end, she comes back to her Dominant, and happy ending all around. To suggest that Sherlock is Eliza to Adler's Higgins is... well... at least Adler was up front about it.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 8:23 p.m. CST

    Damp-handed Silents still creeping me out.

    by gotilk

    They must have been in the bathroom and made each other forget they needed towels.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 8:23 p.m. CST

    petermck

    by gotilk

    That is an eerily similar life trajectory.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 8:25 p.m. CST

    I have no idea, daniccus.

    by gotilk

    But someone needs to get them some paper towels or something.

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 8:34 p.m. CST

    RE: Exterminate: Roy Skelton = Best Dalek voice ever

    by obijuanmartinez

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 8:43 p.m. CST

    doctortom RE: McCoy & How Colin Baker got totally ripped off...

    by obijuanmartinez

    McCoy just felt to me like a poor Troughton rip-off. Tried watching all his stories, and aside from the Dalek one and the one w/ the Brigadier (where they were calling the Doctor "Merlin"), I just couldn't get into him. I say the saddest Doctor to me is still Colin Baker - I remember seeing him on his first USA convention tour and he was super-stoked to be the Doctor; moreover, he envisioned himself becoming an even longer-standing Doc than Tom Baker. But between that crippling BBC hiatus and the fact some of his story scripts were just awful (I mean seriously - 'The Twin Dilemma' - how can you take a new Doctor out of the gates by knee-capping him w/ a god-awful story like THAT?). There were moments he really shone & you could see some brilliance ('Attack of the Cybermen' is my fave C-Bake story) and lament what could've been. Alas...

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 8:44 p.m. CST

    elpaw - I hope you're just having us on about 'Elementary'

    by obijuanmartinez

  • Jan. 20, 2012, 10:27 p.m. CST

    Astonishing Moffatt Quote - River Robs The Cradle?

    by veteran_of_mu

    From petermck's link at http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2012/jan/20/steven-moffat-sherlock-doctor-who ~. He wrote a storyline recently about Doctor Who's mother~ *HE* *WHAT* ???!!!???!!! The only 2 referents I can think of are the mysterious time lady who hung out with Wilf at the end of 10, and, well, River Song. Or possibly Sexy ... but that just gets worse ... Am I missing something rather important?

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 12:44 a.m. CST

    @caractacuspotts

    by Perigee

    The storyline didn't have to be accepted or filmed, at least by the limited context of your quote... ...but I always wondered about Wilf's Mon Mothma. It's a shame that she's disappeared without so much as a trace since. She might be the only RTD construction I'd ever want to see again. Heh. I have to admit, I wonder how The Doctor's Mother would handle him. Or he, her. There's been so much obstreperous child shot through The Doctor in So Many of his incarnations, it would be interesting to see how The Momma would be characterized. The disapproving matron? The patient and long-suffering? Or just someone who can pull the reins back with a look... ~Take that rediculous thing off your head.~ ~Coolie hats are Cool...~ ~They are NOT cool; don't be an idiot. Take that thing off. NOW.~ ~...yes, mother...~

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 12:52 a.m. CST

    20 Questions about Sherlock S1E2 The Blind Banker

    by veteran_of_mu

    Well, I did it. Subjected myself a 2nd time to the dog's breakfast that is ~The Blind Banker~. Just to look for something - anything - that might be valuable in sussing out the 2nd season. And, no, I didn't find much. But here's my questions anyway. Most of them can be answered with, ~Because, Caractacus, the writing and direction on this one stank.~. But just in case one of you has an answer I don't, here's what I couldn't figure out, stupidest question first: 1) Crossing the date line twice made the date on the banker's watch become 2 days old? Maybe Watson was right about this Sherlock being an idiot when it comes to physics ... but I think my money is on Stephen Thompson being an idiot when it comes to physics. Or did Sherlock's banker travel by Tardis? 2) ~Traders trade at all hours - that message was meant for someone who came in at midnight~ says this Sherlock. ... well, in my work I happen to know quite a few traders and they *NEVER* come in at midnight. You have to remember these guys are rich. Filthy rich. They're not shift workers. Instead they run their trades via sleepless computers. Where they need to do things manually they have desks all around the world and hand off trading activities so as to follow the sun. So ... is this really the same writer who gave us the excellent S2E3? 3) It's plain that Sherlock doesn't need to charge for his sleuthing services. Someone with his powers could learn and exploit market trading without raising a sweat. So ... why did he need to split rent with John Watson? 4) Windows that open on skyscrapers - where do they find buildings like that? I've worked in a lot of highrise buildings including several banks, and never ever saw a window that opens higher than the third floor. Has anyone ever built such a building? 5) ~What kind of a message would everyone try to avoid?~ ... good question, what kind? Death threats you generally want to know about. In fact why doesn't Sherlock bother to tell John about all the people who have been attacking him recently? The swordsman, the strangler ... don't you think John might be more likely to survive if you passed on a message like that? So maybe Sherlock is referring to spam? Legal service? What? 6) Watson's phone number from his CV: 07700 900581. That's not the usual 555 stuff ... so in our universe whose number is that? Can one of our UK members say whether that's the real format of a British phone number? 7) Watson turned off the spellchecker on his computer when he made up his CV. He spells college ~collgege~. Is he a luddite? 8) ~It's an ancient number system. Hang Zhou.~ According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzhou_numerals it's actually Su Zhou. Anyway ... does this sudden revelation mean Sherlock already knew this and forgot it - in which case he's stupid - or that the shopkeeper just told him and he can't resist lecturing John about it - in which case he's stupid - or he just looked it up on google and is now expositing this as if he was brilliant - in which case he's Irving The Explainer. And now Watson can suddenly figure out which combination of numerals mean ~15~. Is Watson smarter than Sherlock? Later Sherlock and Soo Lin think the spray over the banker picture represents the numeral 1. But in fact it actually represents the numeral 11. Why? 9) ~No one's been in that flat for at least 3 days~ ... OR that torn old yellow-pages book has been kicking around the street for several weeks and accidentally fetched up on that doorstep. How is this a reasonable justification to break into someone's home? ~Someone else broke into the flat and knocked over the vase just like I did.~ ... AND someone caught the vase before it smashed just like you did OR someone spilt their tea just like you didn't. ... how come Sherlock has forgotten to eliminate the impossible? And why does Watson have his panties in a bunch about Sherlock not letting him in? 10) Looking at a picture of 2 Chinese infants - a photograph that could have been taken at any time by anyone of anyone - Sherlock says ~Small. Strong hands. Our acrobat.~. Is this line evidence that Sherlock is on hallucinogenic drugs in this episode? 11) ~He's still here~. Perhaps he lives there and just discovered burglar Sherlock. 12) General Shan is wearing her sunglasses at night because ... ? Is Elwood taking her to see the penguin? Why? 13) ~It's been painted over~. What villains in their right minds wander around in the middle of the night with cans of brick coloured paint to cover over walls covered in yellow code paint that no one can notice because it's night time anyway? Roh-Ro Raggy! 14) Sherlock checks the 1st word on the 15th page of all books the 2 murdered smugglers had in common. Why doesn't he also check the 15th word on the 1st page? Or the 15th word in the 1st chapter? Or the 1st word in the 15th chapter? Or the 1st word of the 15th paragraph? 15) ~Bring it to the tramway their secret hideout~ - Sherlock figured out which part of which tramway how? Is London particularly short on disused tramway tunnels? 16) Why does Sherlock try to untie Sarah? Why not just push her chair over? 17) Eddie Van Coon lost 5 million pounds one week, made it all back the next, but this guy needs to steal from the Black Lotus to impress his girlfriend? Anyway why wasn't the information about the hairpin tortured out of him and/or Lukis rather than just killing them and having Sherlock figure it out? 18) Speaking of which Shan says, ~We did not anticipate. We did not know this man would come.~ - the man she's been manipulating into finding the Hairpin and also taking photos of for the past several days? Does M(oriarty|ycroft) kill her because she's bad at lying or is this just more bad writing? 19) What was the meaning of the sigil spray painted outside 221B at the end of the episode? 20) Soo Lin Yao says her brother is called the spider - Zhi Zhu. In S2E3 also by Thompson Sherlock uses that image to describe Moriarty. Connection? There you go Lockbackers, now you never need to watch this horrible thing again yourselves ... because U May Question Reality Afterward ...

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 1:02 a.m. CST

    I'll take 3...

    by Perigee

    3) It's plain that Sherlock doesn't need to charge for his sleuthing services. Someone with his powers could learn and exploit market trading without raising a sweat. So ... why did he need to split rent with John Watson? Because Sherlock has no interest in money. He has no interest in profit, astronomy, physics, breakfast, politics, top 40 radio, or damn near anything else. And if he doesn't have an interest in it, he ignores it. He is an extremely true-flying dart that will only be thrown at a bullseye. So, what he Could do has no bearing on what he Would do. At the same time, a roommate - The Right Roommate - can be Useful. And Sherlock uses useful. Sherlock Uses. A lot. So someone to handle the finances, the cleaning, the day-to-day ephemera would clear him from drudgery to deal with whatever bizzare yet vital nonsense he had his laser mind focused on at the time. Having a fan certainly doesn't Hurt. Sherlock (Holmes) always had a wide streak of hidden (and not-so-hidden) vanity, and a groupie would have its pleasures for the Id.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 1:09 a.m. CST

    And 12...

    by Perigee

    12) General Shan is wearing her sunglasses at night because ... ? Several reasons, as I recall. 1) So she can watch you weave then breathe your story lines 2) So she can keep track of visions in her eyes 3) So she can forget her name while you collect your claim 4) So she can see the light that's right before her eyes ....Silly Rabbit.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 2:07 a.m. CST

    caractacuspotts - My favorite moment in the article was...

    by gotilk

    Viewer: *It's too complicated. I'm not following it.* Moffat: *Well, you could try putting your phone down and watching it.* UNGH! I know exactly what he means. I have seen people in theaters, people who paid cash to sit there. And they only occasionally take their eyes off the phone screen and look at the movie screen. I don't get it. I mean, I get that people love social networks and texting and all that. So do I. But CONSTANTLY? My niece is a great example. She used to have conversations, some of them even philosophical... truly. She's a sharp young woman. But now she can't seem to string 4 or 5 words together before checking in on her little black mirror. Or even worse, showing me some meme/viral thing that I've already been exposed to 40 or 50 times. If it wasn't so heartbreaking it'd be infuriating. Sure, I'm older and from a different generation. But not as much as you'd think. My generation was the one that got on the Internet before there was a web. It's not a *you kids get off my lawn* thing. And it's not a luddite thing, or anti-anything other than an anti-miss-out-on-life-itself thing. What I think scares me more than anything is that I think this behaviour will only get worse, and evolve.. not go away. Sure there will eventually be backlash and comedians/writers will be BRUTAL in the way they go after these kids, but it won't really change. I think we'll just get used to it. Until the day comes when it's all heads-up displays and we won't be able to tell when and if someone is actually paying attention to what we're saying or checking their e-mail/feeds/playing a game. I don't want to be a pessimist, and I try really hard not to be one. But I think I'm sadly right about this one. I hope I'm wrong. As for the thing about *Doctor Who's Mother*, I doubt the Moff would ever call HIM *Doctor Who* and the article appears to be written by someone barely paying attention. Example: The writer writes... *How did Sherlock Holmes survive that death plunge? If, indeed, he did.* Ahem.... IF he did? IF? I'm doubting the writer even watched the episode now. That aside, it's actually a fun article to read and a fine interview. Really distracted me from the wind outside that sounds like it's threatening to land one of the trees in my front yard into my lap. I just wish the writer had done a little more homework. My latest theory is that the body on the ground is Sherlock Holmes' Smarter Brother. http://youtu.be/RlM0YqKdKgc

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 2:32 a.m. CST

    HOLY CRAP!

    by gotilk

    I just thought of something. Now I have not figured out why this would be an advantage, other than the obvious. But Sherlock didn't even need to actually be on that building. The person/body that actually jumped/fell/was tossed from the building didn't even need to be the person Watson watched on the roof. From that distance, it could have been anyone, acting like they were on the phone, dressed as Sherlock. Sherlock could have been walking downstairs, getting ready to leap into place to have his (fake) arm checked for a pulse, talking to Watson and looking out windows on the way down to keep track of what was going on outside. Once he reached the spot where he needed to lie down on the pavement, he could have watched his stunt buddy jump to his (rubbish truck) death. All Sherlock would need to do is throw off his temporary disguise (coat.. hat... even a wig) into the trash and step into place.... OR even better, jump from a second story window into place as the body flew by. I'm not sure why I never considered this. It is entirely possible that Sherlock, immediately after Moriarty's death, ran to the stairs and prepared himself for his quick disguise and placement, all while talking to Watson on the phone... as his double stood on the roof acting like he/she was on the phone. How come I didn't think of this before? Did anyone else??? We just assume because the camera is showing Sherlock... But wait. When Sherlock is talking on the phone, you can clearly see the city around him. But is he seeing it from a great height? Hard to say, it's just a skyline and we are not shown a full body shot of HIM actually talking on the phone on the roof (showing HIS face). Only from about the elbows up. It could be on any balcony, it could even be a different, lower roof from which he could climb down quickly. And Watson is so distracted, he could walk up behind him and he would never ever notice him. Watson is VERY focused on that rooftop. (and from a specific vantage point) I need to re-watch and look for wardrobe clues, too. I didn't really pay attention to that. Also, I would like to focus on the people near him on the ground. This is great fun, isn't it?

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 2:41 a.m. CST

    U May Question Reality Afterward ...

    by gotilk

    That was brilliant, caractacuspotts . Nicely done.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 2:45 a.m. CST

    OR

    by gotilk

    Maybe, just maybe, I have had too much Kava tea and it has become mildly hallucinogenic.

  • Sherlock gave a HAND SIGNAL. Moriarty thought it was his "code." It wasn't. That is the start of how Sherlock gets out of it.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 5:04 a.m. CST

    Don't be suprised when you find that Moriarty is alive and well.....

    by sam jacksons wig

    ...this is definately the kind of swerve that Mr Sir the Moff is capable of pulling!!!

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 5:25 a.m. CST

    Sam while possible I doubt it

    by HornOrSilk

    I think they will not divert themselves that far from the original. I could be wrong. But, even if he is dead, don't think his influence ends in his death. I think that is going to be the real shocker. He's set himself up so when he dies all kinds of bad things happen...

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 6:12 a.m. CST

    I hope they were commenting/referencing the

    by Bedknobs and Boomsticks

    Orientalism prevalent in adventure stories/dreadfuls/pulps from the late 1800's up through the 30's, because the whole Asians are all mysterious, wisdom-spouting, and ninja-like angle is embarrassing.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 6:18 a.m. CST

    The Moriarty Arc

    by veteran_of_mu

    It would cheat the viewer to have Rich Brook back again. But Sam, have a look at the very end of Hounds. That uncredited older actor with lank grey hair, long fingers, stooped shoulders, starched suit and ghoulish mien - that is the classical image of Professor James Moriarty. Then when his chilling glance sweeps the room all the Sherlocks rise from the walls just as they do for our hero. They never did that special effect for Rich Brook. I really don't think this scene could possibly be clearer. It makes sense of the entire arc of the series. The Professor's security was compromised when the dying cabbie in S1E1 let slip his name to Sherlock. The Professor knew this had happened because, after all, he was the cabbie's sponsor. He kept tabs. So he had to devise a defence - and that defence was Rich Brook, the hound who represented the name Moriarty to the world. This was the purpose of the triple threat and all the attendant publicity. Not to go down in a blaze of glory discrediting Sherlock. To convince the world that Moriarty was (a) an invention of Sherlock and (b) dead. That business taken care of, the Professor can return to his darkness and his web. And Sherlock knows he's there - which is why Sherlock must feign death himself. That's the only way he can live ... until the Professor himself is properly flushed into the light.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 6:21 a.m. CST

    @bedknobs - the whole episode was embarrassing

    by veteran_of_mu

    One can only imagine the Moff was too busy with DW at the time to sort things out ... contractual obligations to produce 3 episodes, perhaps.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 7:21 a.m. CST

    Blind Banker

    by HornOrSilk

    Sign of Four.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 8:21 a.m. CST

    Various mulit-topic posts from me to follow:

    by Rebel Scumb

    Hey Docbackers, sorry I haven't been around much. Stressful start to the new year, and had to have one of my cats put down :( Still working away diligently on my novel, but wanted to drop by and catch up a bit this morning. I figured I'd break up my variety of topics into seperate posts so people can skip whatever doesn't interest them (plus I adore point form)

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 8:22 a.m. CST

    Sherlock

    by Rebel Scumb

    I watched season 2, part 1, thought it was great. I think I'll save parts 2 and 3 for when the blu-ray comes out though, gives me a treat to look forward to. Which is also one of the reasons I haven't been here is just to avoid spoilers and just also the general temptation of wanting to watch them right now!

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 8:25 a.m. CST

    Dr. Who PS3 game???!!!

    by Rebel Scumb

    I'm glad I dropped by here today, I had no idea there was a game in the works! That said games made from movies/shows usually tend to be rushed and clunky, but there are a few exceptions, Batman Arkham Asylum being the best example, so I will definitely check this out!

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 8:28 a.m. CST

    caractacuspotts great stuff.

    by notspock2

    I'd like to steal your brain. Maybe you should go up for the job of show runner when the Moff passes it on?

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 8:31 a.m. CST

    Tom Baker/Jon Pertwee Era Unit stories, a recent revelation

    by Rebel Scumb

    So I've been working my way through all the classic era dr who I got over the holidays. Watched a whole bunch, Seeds of Doom & Android invasion were especially good. Anyways, a line in one episode caught my attention because Sarah Jane said something to the effect of 'oh like back during the cold war' which I found really odd because when the show was made the cold war was still ongoing, and the episode was set in present day, and Sarah Jane is from that era. Only, apparently it isn't.... Because though a throw away line in one of the behind the scenes things, one of the writers/producers says something to the effect that all the Pertwee/Baker stuff with Unit and the brig and SJ takes place in the future, well what was a projected future of the 1970s So could potentially be occuring in say, the 1990s but in what the writers speculated 1990 would be like. It's weird, because looking back, I guess they sort of all were made in that context, like in android invasion how britian has had a manned mission to jupitor and whatnot. But it is weird and I wondered how many people knew this was the intention of the writers, because it's certainly easy to watch these episodes and believe they take place in the year they were made. Also When Sarah Jane shows up in the RTD era, her age is appropriate to her having had been Sarah in the 1970s. Oh well, wibbly wobbly But I was just curious if anyone else knew about this

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 8:32 a.m. CST

    The Crusade

    by Rebel Scumb

    Is this story available on dvd?

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 10:03 a.m. CST

    rebel scumb UNIT ERA

    by HornOrSilk

    The time sequence for the UNIT time is all out of synch - though it seems this happened especially with Mawdryn Undead. It was supposed to be in the "future" but now it is mostly seen as being in the 70s. Time has been rewritten for this one!

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 11:23 a.m. CST

    rebel scumb Welcome back!

    by gotilk

    Great to see you. Sorry for your loss. It can be rough because they're part of the family. I also have noticed watching older episodes that they had a futuristic feeling when supposedly they were in the present day (back then), but that may be just me putting it into the context of the RTD era. Like many, I didn't go back and seek out the Baker era , for instance, until after I had watched the first RTD series. And I was so young when I first watched those episodes on PBS. Great observation.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 11:25 a.m. CST

    I still say....

    by gotilk

    there's a whole NEW LEVEL of fear involved in knowing The Silents can take away your memory AND appear to have LUBRICATED HANDS! AAAAHHH!!!!

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 11:51 a.m. CST

    Thanks Gotik!

    by Rebel Scumb

    She was 18, so certainly it was not completely unexpected, but having had her for over half my life (I'm 32) it's been an odd adjustment to get use to. Under the circumstances she passed in the best possible scenario (at home and very comfortable)

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 11:52 a.m. CST

    I believe shada & nightmare of Eden are due out this year

    by Rebel Scumb

    which leaves only terror of the zygons unreleased from the Baker era. I have all of the Lala Ward stories currently available, but haven't watched any as I'll wait until the last few are out so I can actually watch a classic era season in order I've got all the Davison's but watched them as I bought them which put them horribly out of order, will eventually need to go through properly

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 12:16 p.m. CST

    The end of S2 E3 of Sherlock (touches on a spoiler)

    by DoctorTom

    just to mess with people's heads - how do you know that it was Sherlock who was watching Watson at the grave site? How do you absolutely know that it's not Moriarty or someone else in a Sherlock mask? They had been established in the episode. Season 3 - Sherlock comes back in episode 1 with his story of how he survives. Episode 3: the real Sherlock comes back, and reveals that it's Moriarty pretending to be Sherlock in episodes 1 and 2.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 12:18 p.m. CST

    caractuspotts-blind banker

    by glenn_the_frog

    First off all, the episode was written by Steve Thompson, not Moffat, so anyone throwing around the accusation that he was busy with Who at the time is being silly... 1)He wound his watch to match the time in whatever direction was closer. Since its a traditional watch, AM or PM doesn't matter much, so its very easy to throw it off by 12 hours, or even a day. Many many times my watch has been off by a day by virtue of 12 hours, and thats without traveling. If he left at 5PM, and arrived at 2PM local time, he'd wind the watch backwards by three hours, rather than winding it forward by 21, simply because its easier. Alternatively, he fist got the watch in the other time zone, and didn't wind it *forward* enough. Either way, after two trips it accounts for a 2 day discrepancy long as he always wound in the same direction. 2)Chalk it up to the production schedule and tech of that particular office. 3)It was established pretty clearly that Holmes just doesn't think about bills. That's one of those minor nusiances thats beneath him. He doesn't care about things like rent or personal space... (which is what makes it so hard for him to find a roommate to begin with in the first place) Watson does. 4)Yes. Because people are stupid and build in obvious safety flaws into things all the time. 5)Sherlock was referring to Watson... who again, was worrying about bills, which is beneath Holme's attention. Again, Sherlock doesn't think about others or trivial things. 6)I don't live in the UK, I dunno. 7)Spellchecker is a pain. It underlines everything as you type it and its annoying, especially when you have words the computer doesn't know. Some people just hit spellcheck at the end of a writing (if its important) or never at all if is not. 8)Just because Sherlock knows how to analyze and pull off obscure facts, doesn't mean he knows everything about everything. They had to get an expert on spray painting for instance. Just because he knows about the number system, once its named, doesn't mean he knows it on sight when he sees it for the first time. I know about Watergate and the Nixon scandal, but I couldn't tell you anything about it without doing research, for instance. But once he DOES know what it is, of course he lectures about it. He ALWAYS lectures about it. And they were mistaken about the numbering because chinese characters stack. Unlike 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 etc, they aren't made up of unique symbols, they're made of multiple lines that add into each other. 1 is one slash, 2 is 2 slashes, 3 is 2 slashes with a scribble, etc. Without seeing the entire thing, you can't know what it is. 9)They based the date of the phone book on when it last rained. It didn't matter if it had been around for weeks... it had been there when it last rained, which was the important thing... and in the person's front door. The window was unlocked and the vase was positioned where it was which caused a stain... Holmes assumed that someone just a little earleir than him had done the exact same thing... because the evidence suggested someone had done the exact same thing. Assuming someone had spit tea there would have involved *adding* facts to the case. Holmes had just done it himself, and gotten an identical result. Why speculate further when he got the likely, and correct, answer the first time? And Watson was upset because already, after only two episodes, it was about the 27th time Holmes dragged him along somewhere, only to ignore him. When you're called back home from across town, just so Homes can use your phone rather than walk across the room, it gets old fast. 10)I think Sherlock had already demonstrated his ability to pick apart a person's history at a glance... we don't need him to explain EVERY time what subtle cues he's looking at to come to a conclusion. He looked at the person in the photo, and knew a few things about them instantly. 11)With the front door locked and a 3 day old wet phonebook right at the front door and having entered through the window and knocked over the vase they didn't know was there? Probably not someone that was supposed to be there. If anyone had entered through the front door, they would have either taken the phone book, or tossed it aside if it wasn't theirs. When the scene and all the evidence is presented and fairly deduced, you can't hold it against the moment that you personally don't think the factual deductions are right. 12)If you want to hide your identity some, without wearing a mask, sunglasses are helpful. Or maybe her eyes were light sensative. 13)A criminal organization that doesn't want their message spread to provide a clue that has been following and tailing Holmes. And the paint didn't have to be brick colored, just a color to cover up the graphitti. 14) He could have checked that out, but it was irrelevant anyway. He was trusting his hunch on the order (which he was right about). But without a first word translated her was never going to be able to crack the code, even with the proper book in his room 15)Location of the messages, where their handoff spot was, various other clues. 16)Because if she's untied then she's free. If she's pushed over she's still in the way and you risk hurting her. If it had come down to that it would have been a last resort. 17) He pocketed a pretty hairpin that he didn't think anyone would notice. He didn't know its value, he thought it was an inconsequential trinket no one would notice. Not idea that they were looking for it. And telling a guy "You just stole a 9 million dollar hairpin" kind of clues them in on it and gives them a chance to hide it or sell it 18)They thought Watson was Sherlock. They had it all 100% under their control and according to plan. They didn't realize the second guy they HADN'T got, that they hadn't really taken notice of, was the dangerous one. 19)A signal to anyone else that showed up that had any inkling of the case that "we have Sherlock Holmes and have killed him. Stop pursuing this matter." Of course, they only had Watson. 20)Sure, why not.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 12:30 p.m. CST

    Welcome back, rebel!

    by DoctorTom

    It's nice to have you posting again! That is odd about the cold war. UNIT at the time was supposed to be slightly in the future - that's why in Pyramids of Mars you had references of her being from 1980. And, contrary to what some people have tried to claim about her rounding the year up to the nearest decade, the Doctor had the TARDIS go to 1980 to show her what her world would be like in her time if they didn't stop Sutekh. Not 1975, 1976 or 1977 - 1980. So, things were okay with the unit dating until Mawdryn Undead messing things up. Of course, if they had been able to get William Russell as they originally planned, it would have been Ian and not the Brig, so we wouldn't have had the dating problem. Nowadays, I like to claim that the Time Lords had made time wibbly wobbly during that period so that when they exiled the Doctor to Earth, Torchwood couldn't find him because of the temporal indeterminancy that they created - if Torchwood were going to find the Doctor at UNIT HQ in 1980, the wibbly wobbly timey wimey field kicks in and resets UNIT time to 1975, making Torchwood show up 5 years late (and vice versa). As for the cold war, don't forget that Nixon and Brezhnev had started detente in the 70's, so your classic Cold War period had already passed. They might have just been forecasting an end a little earlier in the series; they weren't predicting Reagan heating things up in order to win the cold war, they were probably thinking more that it would just peter out.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 1:11 p.m. CST

    "1980, Sarah - if you want to get off." -- Dr. Tom Baker, PYRAMIDS OF MARS

    by obijuanmartinez

    Sarah is from 1980

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 1:34 p.m. CST

    Mad Love for Julian Glover, BTW...

    by obijuanmartinez

    So consistently solid - his supporting roles in TV on Doctor Who, Blake's 7, Space 1999 & Game of Thrones (my fave is Scaroth from 'City of Death'), as well as film roles we all know & love (General Veers, Walter Donovan, the voice of Aragog, Kristatos from 007) are just awesome...

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 1:34 p.m. CST

    Hi guys

    by Kevin Bolinger

    Just quickly checking in, been busy trying to get back to having a real job, so might not be around as much to be witty and wise assed :P

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 1:49 p.m. CST

    I had no idea that Julian Glover voiced Aragog

    by Rebel Scumb

    that's awesome! He's always been a favorite of mine to

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 3:34 p.m. CST

    Replies

    by veteran_of_mu

    @perigee, I'm convinced. Knock #3 off my list. And, yes, I'll pay #12 as based on Corey Hart's classic. Sounds like someone needs to mash it up. @rebel, Condolences. I have a cat about that vintage who had got to the point that he couldn't jump up on the bed any more. We had discussed preparing our child for his passing. Then as a last resort we put him on LDN. No comfort to you at this time, apologies, but in case anyone else has an old cat I should note this has done wonders - he not only jumps onto beds and dressers but chases our younger cat around like he was the same age. There's a mailing list on yahoo groups, LDN_4_Pets, that has dosing info. That said, Welcome Back! When I was a kid I was certainly aware that the Pertwee/Baker stories were set in the near future of the 1980s. Looking back, I'd rather forgotten that. Things like missions to Jupiter seemed just on the horizon in those days because, after all, we'd just seen men land on the moon. And, but for politics, we really would have had missions to Jupiter back then - see http://www.ted.com/talks/george_dyson_on_project_orion.html @notspock2, I don't believe the job is open ... And anyway I rather think I'd have to actually publish something before someone ever thought I could actually run something. But a fellow can dream ... @gotilk, What a revolting idea. Then again, since the silents are not a race, they have to be generated from humans somehow ... oh, now I really don't like that even one little bit ... @hornorsilk, Interesting. What connections do you see between TBB and TSOF? @doctortom, Nice HAT. @glenn_the_frog, First, thanks for taking the time! As for who wrote the episode, while I'm certainly silly, I meant that Moff may have been so busy with Who he didn't have time to tell Thompson What. Consequently Thompson didn't know ... Third Base! 1) I like your explanation just fine. But it wasn't Sherlock's explanation. Thompson's script at http://www.bbc.co.uk/writersroom/insight/downloads/scripts/sherlock_the_blind_banker.pdf says ~It actually said the day before yesterday. He crossed the date line twice, and didn’t alter his watch.~ I'm willing to pay you on this, however because the full explanation would have taken too many lines to deliver. 2) Sorry, honk. That said, if this scene had been set in the 1980s, I'd pay. But I admit I have insider info ... 3) Already paid perigee on that. 4) Example of one of those windows? 5) Very cool. I didn't think of that. If I had one of the old Marvel No-Prizes I'd give it to you. 6) I guess I'm going to have to ring it. I promise not to let people know if it turns out to be the Moff's private line or something. 7) I was born with perfect spelling. Don't hate me, it's just a quirk. I still use a checker to prevent the risk of typos. Then again Watson is certainly a risk-taker so I guess that's in keeping. 8) Sorry, we're talking about Sherlock Holmes here. Man has a perfect memory of every street in London, of 140 types of ash, of the release schedules of watch manufacturers, of the history of weather forecasts of every location in Britain. It is not credible that he has a faulty recollection of something, nor that looking at symbols he knows he will have any trouble recalling their provenance. 9) London is a soggy place and the phone book was mostly wrapped in plastic. It could have stayed damp for months and been kicking around the street all that time. It's simply not enough to go on. Likewise the damp rug. This is the sort of conclusion Watson would leap to, but Holmes, never. I'll pay you on the reason for Watson's tantrum, however. 10) The person in the photo is an infant no older than kindergarten age. It is not reasonable for Holmes to jump to any conclusion about their relation to a cat burgling acrobat. 11) Agreed it hinges on whether the line of reasoning is well founded. If it were then my point would be moot. 12) I'm going to wait for perigee's Corey Hart mashup. 13) The Tong think Watson is Holmes and if they saw him notice that message they would have seen the flash of his phone and know that a sudden paint job wouldn't destroy the information. Really it's too silly. 14) Sherlock Holmes does not play hunches. He deduces from evidence that is invisible to ordinary men. There should have been a reason for this assumption - or it should have been cut. 15) Double Ditto. 16) Let's just agree that he didn't think he was about to be strangled ... again ... 17) You don't tell him. But you also don't kill him. You just torture him. Sit him down in front of a crossbow, that sort of thing. Shan thought of it immediately when it came to Watson - but not with banker? Why not? 18) I'll pay that! 19) Huh? Sherlock and Watson had escaped them by then. I mean the symbol in blue paint that looks like an eye. Of course it could mean, ~detective lives here~. But then 221B Baker Street already means that ... 20) The question is ... what connection? Again, thanks for taking the time!

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 3:35 p.m. CST

    Hey, darthdevious

    by gotilk

    Nice to see ya. Don't get too caught up in all that real life nonsense. lol No, real jobs are nice to have. Nice reviews, the latest ones. See you on the tubes!

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 3:37 p.m. CST

    caractacuspotts

    by gotilk

    Yes, revolting is a good word for it. Then again, any alien/creature/monster with damp hands... or any appendages otherwise made moist is revolting. Even saying the word moist out loud is kind of revolting.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 3:38 p.m. CST

    Moffats comment about missing something...

    by dj_bollocks

    Tesselecta ? ;op

  • With all that said, I really thought they finally found their way with the "Trial of A Timelord" season even if it was a rehash of places where we'd already been with Troughton and Tom Baker.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 4:15 p.m. CST

    Curious...

    by gotilk

    I know Doctor Who has graced the stage in the past (even recently?). Has anyone ever captured it on video? Has it ever made the rounds in fan circles?

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 4:22 p.m. CST

    Thanks Caractacuspotts

    by Rebel Scumb

    I don't think it would have helped her case, among other things she had a heart rate of 300+ and your kind words are greatly appreciated. Glad to hear your cat is doing so much better!

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 5:50 p.m. CST

    caractacuspotts

    by glenn_the_frog

    I dunno. Overall it flowed to me as if Holmes WAS picking up on the little details, he just wasn't filling the audience in on every single minute detail. if you just take it as a given that what he says out loud is generally deduced fact based on 16 little things, rather than random guess, does that make any difference? He says *well this man was clearly left handed*... then you believe he's right before he bothers to list of the dozen little things that indicate it. If using the wet phonebook as first piece of evidence really throws off all the follow up stuff for you, then yes, the scene falls apart a little bit. Does it help that they knew the address already and were aware the tenant hadn't been seen in days, and the phonebook was a confirmation rather than the first clue? It didn't bother me at any rate. But yes, for some of the other stuff, the secret society had quite a few stupidities to it. I can rationalize some of it, but... there was some shenanigans in there. I can't really get around the fact they killed some people when interrogation or holding would have worked better than leaving a big yellow message in public. But then, they thought Watson was Holmes... even though the man has a website that presumably has his picture on it... so maybe they're just not that smart.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 6:34 p.m. CST

    The Game Is Afoot^H^H^H^H^HOn!

    by veteran_of_mu

    Oh boy, I'm stupid. Glenn has absolutely put his flipper on it. I am sooo stupid! I watch S1E2 twice, list 20 questions about it, and act like I actually know what's going on. What an idiot! Check this out. Soo Lin Yao says, ~I hoped after five years ... maybe they would have forgotten me. But they never really let you leave. A small community like ours - they are never very far away.~ SHE LIVES IN THE FLAT UPSTAIRS! I am flabbergasted. That's not a mistake. It's not a continuity error. It's in the script, it's in the production schedule, it's something every member of the cast and crew had to know. It's not wrong and it's not a coincidence and it's not stupid. What it is, is a mystery. Right there in plain sight, an invitation for us to play Sherlock. This, all of this, can't just be stupid. There's a story that explains it. And it's up to us, Lockback Irregulars, to figure it out.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 6:36 p.m. CST

    gotilk there were some pirated videos

    by HornOrSilk

    You can them on youtube; but the picture quality is so low, I decided not to watch them. I just have the BF audios..

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 7:58 p.m. CST

    Moffatt's Wife Sue Vertue Intimates Legal Action Over Sherlock

    by veteran_of_mu

    Vertue is quoted in http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2089811/BBC-Sherlock-producer-threatens-legal-battle-New-York-plans-rival-series.html : ~We understand that CBS are doing their own version of an updated Sherlock Holmes [...] We are very proud of our show and like any proud parent, will protect the interest and wellbeing of our offspring.~ Ms Vertue said that CBS had made an offer to the BBC ~a while back~ about filming a remake of the series.

  • ...to ship poor Colin off the farm, and into early retirement. Man, the 80s were not kind to the Doctor! Was never a huge fan of Davison either, and I thought McCoy was just god-awful. Although Doctor Who's answer to Boba Fett (Commander Lytton, the mysterious, dangerous soldier for hire) turned in his only 2 appearances in the 80s. Always thought Lytton was super bad-ass, and wished he could've returned somehow!

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 10:33 p.m. CST

    Thank you, hornorsilk.

    by gotilk

    I'll seek out the audio. I find myself drawn to the peripheral works, even though I have not seen the whole of the official Doctor Who episodes throughout the last 3 decades.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 10:35 p.m. CST

    caractacuspotts wow!

    by gotilk

    Now I need to go back and watch that episode again. It is the one I skipped when re-watching. You know, DocBack would still be a great place, but not quite as great without your contributions. Thanks.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 10:35 p.m. CST

    I quite liked the Davison era having seen it only recently

    by Rebel Scumb

    But I don't nessesarily think what makes it great is Davison himself Actually this may seem an odd criticism but I actually find with most eras of classic Who (yes even tom baker) that the doctor himself (no matter who is playing him) is fairly inconsequential to my overall enjoyment of any given story It's one of the things I really prefer about new era who, because the doctor himself is an actual character with a story of his own, and not just the situations and locations and guest characters driving the story forward.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 10:42 p.m. CST

    That first Troughton *EXTERMINATE* clip **

    by gotilk

    in the above collection, the one that just keeps doubling and building until it's almost glossolalia is VERY creepy and effective. I can imagine being freaked out back then if I was a kid watching that in a dark room with a little glowing black and white TV. YIKES! ** If it is indeed the first Troughton clip in the video. I cannot be sure.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 10:58 p.m. CST

    @caractacus - ~Lockback Irregulars~ - My Hero!!

    by Perigee

    So let it be written; so let it be done. I love that!

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 11:10 p.m. CST

    Very brief off-topic update about Ready Player One adaptation

    by gotilk

    Just watched an interview in which the author, Ernest Cline, explains that he did in fact have to make compromises to bring down the licensing budget on the film version when he was writing the screenplay. He mentioned things like.. *you can't have people in your movie acting out scenes from another movie* .. so changes like that did have to be made. BUT the good news was that he said ... *If Ready Player One gets that kind of a fanbase (referring to books like Harry Potter or other books with huge fan-bases) .. then...* meaning, or suggesting that if the book ends up being huge (and it looks like it just might), perhaps some of those things can make it back into the movie. Fingers crossed.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 11:17 p.m. CST

    Sic Balls, Sue!!

    by Perigee

    Maybe its undue outrage on my part, but dammit, CBS has NO place in ripping off Sherlock. It pisses me off. No End. FACT! (as one of the trogs out in AICN proper would state...) Undeniably, it's going to be derivative. And unnecessary. It's going to be dumbed down to suit the moronic 'Merican viewer. Watch Watson be cast a woman... I Just Know It... Using some spent-out Rockford Files rehash scripts... grr... It'll be ~PSYCH 2~ or ~MENTALIST 2~ with an accent. All that money, wasted, when they could co-produce (as in, cough up money and shut up) the real deal with the BBC and squeak us out an extra episode or so... May Vertue Triumph.

  • Jan. 21, 2012, 11:32 p.m. CST

    @Gotilk & MOV & Merrick & London Lockbackers on the TBB Mystery

    by veteran_of_mu

    @Gotilk, I'll let you watch it again - very interested to hear what HATs result but I'm moving on to S1E3. Still I remain flabbergasted ... I don't think it is possible that this contradiction can be unintentional. Then again taking this seriously seems a bit ... sociopathic ... but then, in for a penny, in for a pound. @MOV, I suspect we're going to want a list of shooting locations for TBB to solve this. I wonder if you would be willing to help out with that? For the ease of armchair Sherlockology I'm anxious to continue on to S1E3. Probably won't get to that for a few days. But the question burns ... and we need to prepare ... @Merrick, We could probably use a bit of publicity on this one in next week's Lockback. See if we can recruit more irregulars ... @London Lockbackers, Since what Soo Lin Yao said is a blatant lie, what is The Blind Banker actually about? We need your help to find out! We need people on the ground in London once we know locations. Because if this mystery is real we're probably going to have to actually look for real graffiti. Unless it's already been removed ... and it is possible there are fiends out there putting up fake yellow graffiti using Su Zhou numbers even as we speak! Bastards! Let's see ... we're going to need one of those London A-Z guides for a start so we can properly decipher the message on the wall. We'll want the book form, not the online, because we need the index. There's plenty available at http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=london+a-z+book&hl=en&safe=off&prmd=imvns&resnum=4&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1440&bih=764&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=3533658381969482398&sa=X&ei=h5sbT6yQPKihiAfN0pTzCw&ved=0CFAQ8wIwAA#ps-sellers - looks like it's the Cabbies' Bible. But then what year do we need? That's critical ... might need a few recent editions ... To arms, Lockbackers! Hurry! Time's wasting!

  • Well I feel dumb. All this time I thought MOV just believed in a righteous path, but poor spelling.

  • Jan. 22, 2012, 12:40 p.m. CST

    I hope Sue Vertue makes sure CBS pays dearly

    by DoctorTom

    if only for coughing up a bunch of money to the BBC to license Sherlock. The problem I see here is similar to what kept me from watching Once Upon a Time on ABC. In both cases, the property had been offered to the network, who turns it down when realizing *hey, wait a minute, these characters are in public domain! So what if we rip off a copywritten and (at least in Fables' case) trademarked modernization? As long as we file off a few of the serial numbers we can try to make it different enough to do it ourselves without having to pay for licensing it!* Good for Sue saying that they're going to aggressively protect Sherlock as a property!

  • Jan. 22, 2012, 6:20 p.m. CST

    I agree, doctortom.

    by gotilk

    I hope it forces them to acknowledge the source of *their idea* as well as pay for it. I tried to watch Once Upon a Time, but I just couldn't take it. And not just because the virtual sets look bad and cheap. There's something off about it. On another subject... I always kind of hoped HOUSE would jump the shark by now and give us a fully serious Sherlock Holmes episode, costumed and all, period version. With absolutely no *it was a dream* explanation or anything. Just an out of the blue episode. Will not happen, but it would be fun. If only to see Hugh Laurie playing Sherlock Holmes.

  • Jan. 22, 2012, 6:31 p.m. CST

    gotilk, don't give up hope

    by DoctorTom

    This is supposed to be House's last season, so they might slip in an episode like you want. I suspect though that if they do anything like that, that it will be a modern time thing and House wakes up from a drug induced dream of being a doctor instead of a consulting detective, and looks over at his medical friend Wilson (or, if not waking up, then a pull-back to show House on a couch talking to his shrink Wilson, describing the entire series as drug induced fantasies). Of course, if they were to do something like that, I'd want the Philip K Dick/ (British) Life on Mars twist about going back into the dream being a doctor, and in there finding out that the thoughts of him being a detective and Wilson being a shrink were caused by him doing too much Vicodin again and hallucinating, but leaving it open as to which one was the real reality. I don't think they'll go that route, though.

  • Jan. 22, 2012, 7:09 p.m. CST

    doctortom

    by gotilk

    Now THAT would be fun to watch. It does get repetitive and I have a hard time forgiving it for that at times, but House is a fun show to watch if only for the stellar cast and top-notch writing team.

  • A new Sherlock series will bomb on CBS plus they are going to have to pay Sue Vertue and the BBC a shitload of money.

  • Jan. 23, 2012, 2:39 a.m. CST

    WHOTININNIES!

    by gotilk

    ...is a great podcast, in fact my favorite. I would say the best podcast out there right now. One I would NEVER, EVER pressure the makers of to hurry up and produce because I'm scared they have thrown in the towel. Ever.

  • Jan. 23, 2012, 4:14 p.m. CST

    hmmm, nobody's around?

    by DoctorTom

    People must be caught up with work. Question for people - has anyone listened to the Tom Baker audios from Big Finish yet?

  • Jan. 23, 2012, 4:28 p.m. CST

    doctortom

    by gotilk

    I've really wanted to listen to those, but have not found the time to yet. I'm still reading Snow Crash (finally) and loving it. Kind of startling that it was written before 1992.

  • Jan. 24, 2012, 12:02 a.m. CST

    Making dynamic tension - a question for authors

    by veteran_of_mu

    Bit of a tangent, but I'm wondering about how to design groups of characters. Beginning with pairs, but up to ensembles. Reason I ask is thinking about Holmes and Watson, or doc and companion, it's the structure of relationships between the characters that's more important than the characters themselves. Without Watson, for example, Sherlock is insufferable. So … how do you go about designing those structures?

  • Jan. 24, 2012, 8:52 a.m. CST

    Caractuspotts

    by DoctorTom

    I would imagine that you would have to start with one character and start working up a design for him, then start thinking of what kind of character would play well off of him or what kind of character would he need around him. One example here might be Nero Wolfe. He probably started as the thought of doing a series based on someone like Mycroft Holmes. The weight part was accentuated, which would lead to the thought that he might not want to actually go out of his house, preferring to do his deductions at home. This immediately leads to the necessity of him having someone who can do the leg work for him and report back. From this you start to get Archie Goodwin. Setting him up with perfect recall works from a story structure standpoint, since he can give Wolfe the evidence required without Wolfe questioning the veracity of it. Archie would pretty much need to be a detective in his own right, working for Nero Wolfe. The smartass quality of Archie is something that would work well with having Archie being the narrator of the stories, gives a bit of personality which can spark things between him and Wolfe, and also fits in well with selling stories at the time, as hardboiled detective stories were popular when Rex Stout started writing the series. This way, he could combine elements of the hardboiled detective story and the more traditional Sherlock Holmes style story. Also, going from Wolfe being fat like Mycroft and not wanting to leave home, it would make sense that it's because Wolfe likes food, which leads to the potential to add Fritz in as a character. A good place in Doctor Who to study how to structure the characters would be to look at the Robert Holmes double-acts, and how he structured the pairs to work off each other.

  • *There is a clue everybody's missed* he says tantalisingly. *So many people theorising about Sherlock's death online – and they missed it! We've worked out how Sherlock survives, and actually shot part of what really happened. It all makes sense.* Okay, so what are we missing?

  • Jan. 24, 2012, 10:13 a.m. CST

    Caratacuspotts.

    by notspock2

    Not a pro, but I intend to be one day- I'd say this is one pattern to be aware of. Make sure the desires and world views of the characters who are allies are also in opposition to each other while they work to achieve a result they agree on. As an example of this opposition from Sherlock - Sherlock = emotionally detached and believes emotion is a weakness, Watson = believes Emotion is a strength and a necessary part of getting on in life- he believes there's value in being nice to people. Both want the same thing, to solve the crime. Both want to do it in ways that conflict with each other. The dramatic tension comes from the opposition in the characters world views how the characters act upon their viewpoint/beliefs and how this causes them to fight each other... In addition to that and what I think makes Sherlock utterly compelling- Sherlock is also not only in opposition to Watson, but his viewpoints and methods are extreme and contradict the viewpoints of the world at large- wherever he goes he's in conflict which makes pretty much everything he does dramatic.

  • Jan. 24, 2012, 7:48 p.m. CST

    I think what we're missing is this.

    by notspock2

    Sherlock smiles. He asks for a moment of "privacy" and he smiles... This contradicts what Molly has told us about Sherlock when he thinks he's on his own, so I suspect that at that point, Sherlock can see that his team are all in place...

  • Jan. 24, 2012, 7:51 p.m. CST

    With that some, notspock...

    by Perigee

  • Jan. 24, 2012, 8:03 p.m. CST

    Rats. Content below..

    by Perigee

    A couple of interesting things. 1) That WIFI camera with sound that Sherlock retrieved, hacked and told no one about was in attendance and monitored. 2) Sherlock being all dumb and drawing out your basic villain plot unveil. For the audience below. No matter what happened up there, he needed a confession to get off the hook. And, not at all incidentally, getting confirmation of the key being non-existent would untie several hands. 3) Twice the camera panned down to two busses cued up while Sherlock stood on the ledge. He needed his 'private moment' to get M away from the ledge so his team could get in place. 4) Dead Sherlock is the girl's screamer Sherlock. Not a mask, likely - plastic surgery. Somebody had to deliver him timely. Someone had to kill him. Checking a pulse does not give a cause of death. 5) The HOUND was loose. The camera distortion and sound was a giveaway, selling Sherlocks death to Watson. Someone had access to the HOUND. And to dead faux Sherlock. 6) At the time of the fall, as has been noted before, the war a garbage truck. The busses were gone. One falls on top, one drops off, and away you drive. 7) All of the newspapers mentioned Sherlocks death in full, front page news. None mentioned the suicide of the man who stole the crown jewels and walked away. Which, you would think, would be pretty huge news, considering they both died at the same place and time. Somebody had to squelch that part of the story. All signs point to the Diogenes Club.

  • Jan. 24, 2012, 8:06 p.m. CST

    AND yes - I Watched them. I Watched them all, dammit..

    by Perigee

    So much for my plan of miserly squeezin through the months. I was Sherlock crack-addicted.

  • Jan. 24, 2012, 11:28 p.m. CST

    notspock2

    by gotilk

    Good points, all. Especially the part about character having differing world views but similar or the same goals. Makes for some great conflict and opens the story up to be about more than what it appears to. Subtext and all.

  • Jan. 24, 2012, 11:33 p.m. CST

    perigee (Sherlock spoilers)

    by gotilk

    Number 7: and what bothers me about all that is that Moriarty's (the *actor* rather) suicide, which could be proven with physical evidence, would bring into question Sherlock's being a liar and a cheat. So why hide Moriarty's suicide? Puzzling. Am I missing something major?

  • Jan. 25, 2012, 6:15 a.m. CST

    #7

    by veteran_of_mu

    Is interesting. It must either serve Moriarty's purpose - or Sherlock's.

  • Jan. 25, 2012, 6:20 a.m. CST

    11 Questions about Sherlock S1E3 - The Great Game

    by veteran_of_mu

    1) Is it fair to think that the woman's handwriting on bohemian stationery means Irene Adler? 2) Carl Powers was killed because he laughed at the killer but all his classmates check out. Then Rich Brook talks about the pool where ~little Carl~ dies. This confirms Moriarty was an adult when Carl Powers died, most likely one of his teachers. Powers being the same age as Sherlock at the time, and Rich Brook being about the same age as Sherlock now, can Rich Brook he anything but a hound? 3) There's a really nice reference for Doyle fans. Sherlock uses a solution that indicates how old Monkford's blood is. In the Doyles stories that's a bit of chemistry invented by Sherlock Holmes. Anybody else notice? 4) The old woman says Moriarty's voice was ~so soft~. Would you say that Rich Brook's voice is soft? Me neither. But then why would the real Moriarty expose himself to the old woman? 5) Sherlock: ~You're taunting me in your own voice~ - wtf? 6) Sherlock: ~It's dangerous to jump to conclusions - need data~ - foreshadowing the Reichenbach Fall? 7) The Van Buren supernova that Sherlock uses to discover the painting is a fake is itself a fake. At least there is no mention of it in the Planetarium sequence. Interestingly, there is a Van Buren supernova in our universe - but it was discovered in 1994: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/releases/94/release_1994_9419.html . It could have been a 19th century discovery in Sherlock's universe of course. And so it could have been mentioned off-camera in the planetarium. But this certainly suggests Sherlock has an encyclopaedic knowledge of the entire history of astronomy. Now looking at it rationally, for Sherlock to be ignorant of Copernicus would require him to be ignorant of most European history since the Inquisition - which is clearly impossible. Is it fair to think then that his professed ~ignorance~ is just his idea of a joke - or is there some other reason for it? 8) Sherlock deduces that the Bruce Partington Plans were the missing pip. He asserts that Moriarty's tests were intended to distract him from it. But then ... why did the pips stop short? That ends the distraction and Sherlock predictably solves the remaining mystery. Something's hidden here ... perhaps the connection between Mycroft and Moriarty? 9) Interesting fake-out when it appears for a moment that Watson is Moriarty ... nah, couldn't be ... 10) There's an awful lot of Tardis-blue in the pool scene. Perhaps all of Sherlock takes place in the Doctor's library? That would explain some timey-wimeynesses like the Van Buren supernova ... 11) ~I'm so changeable. It's my only weakness.~ - Sherlock gives a knowing look. Why?

  • Jan. 25, 2012, 6:23 a.m. CST

    On my #8

    by veteran_of_mu

    Then again Moriarty has no interest in the plans. So ... why did he stop his game early?

  • Jan. 25, 2012, 9:48 a.m. CST

    Caractuspotts

    by DoctorTom

    1) Possibly. I'm not sure they had thought of putting in the Irene Adler bit in season 1, though. 2) It's not necessarily a confirmation. We don't know when Carl laughed at Moriarty, it could have been when they were younger. We've seen that Moriarty likes to spin out plans, this could have stemmed from him taking a few years to get revenge. It could have been something from elementary school or junior high that Moriarty nursed all that time, and he keeps flashing back to the *little Carl* who taunted him. 3) Didn't catch it at the time (been a while since I've read the Sherlock stories) - nice catch 4) If Moriarty's talking softly, then his voice might be called soft. If there's a difference between the young Moriarty/Richard Brooks and the older Moriarty, then there's no reason at all for the older Moriarty to expose himself (so to speak) to the old woman. Stepping outside the show, the script was written before the parts were cast, so those lines were already there before they knew who was playing Moriarty. I would still think that you could call his voice soft in certain situations (like if he's whispering to them through the earbuds). 5) Through his voice as opposed to through the voices of the victims he had relaying messages. 6) Not really, that's a pretty standard thing for Sherlock (Doyle's or Moffat's) to state. 7) The cracks in time caused by the TARDIS blowing up in Season 5 ate the Van Buren Supernova (as well as the ducks in the duck pond). Actually, it's not professed ignorance. His mind compartmentalizes things and he doesn't store things he feels are irrelevant. This is discussed in the commentary for the episode - he actually doesn't keep the information that the Earth goes around the sun, let alone the rest of astronomy. 8) You can either take the Bruce Partington plans as the final pip, or that the final pip is for the Final Problem, version 1 - Moriarty kidnapping Watson and putting Holmes in a situation where he has to figure out a way for both him and Watson to stay alive. 9) You're right. Nothing else would fit for Watson to be Moriarty, least of which is the fact that the timelines don't work. The killer from Study in Pink had been in contact with Moriarty well before Watson showed up in London, presumably he was active while Watson was still in Afghanistan. Also, there was no record of Watson being at the school with little Carl. It's more likely that Mycroft is the puppet master behind Moriarty than Watson being it. Still, we might find out that the updating of the 3 Moriarty brothers might mean that both the one we've seen called Moriarty, and the old man from Hounds are both James Moriarty - they might just be 2 of the 3 James Moriarty brothers. Or the old man was his father, and it's a James Moriarty dynasty.

  • Jan. 25, 2012, 9:55 a.m. CST

    10 and 11

    by DoctorTom

    10) I don't see it taking place in the TARDIS. If it did, there's some problems since that scene would have been at the TARDIS swimming pool that we were told was jettisoned to get thrust to go between the regular universe and the bubble universe in The Doctor's Wife. If you're going to make the Doctor Who/ Sherlock connections, you'd be better off saying that the Sherlock scene at the pool took place in London at the same school that was in School Reunion - it looks like the same location that was used to show the poolside conversation/showdown between David Tennant and Anthony Steward Head. 11) At that point it looks like Sherlock is playing ego to Moriarty's id. I guess this would make Watson the superego.

  • Jan. 25, 2012, 1:15 p.m. CST

    #2 - Carl Powers and Young Sherlock

    by veteran_of_mu

    Hi Doctom, Sherlock says that all the classmates check out. It is reasonable to assume that Young Sherlock would have also checked out any other obvious childhood relations - playmates and siblings.

  • Jan. 25, 2012, 2:03 p.m. CST

    Caractuspotts

    by DoctorTom

    It depends on how much time had passed between the two. If it were something from years in the past it might not come out. Say the slight to Moriarty happened in grade school or early in junior high, then Carl and Moriarty end up going to different high schools, or Moriarty dropped out and didn't go to high school. Moriarty wouldn't be appearing on the list of classmates, since they'd be looking at his high school classmates. Also, what Moriarty saw as a big insult might not have been that big a deal to Carl. Think of a typical jock putting down a nerd with all his friends laughing, something the jock doesn't think about as a big thing but leaves a lingering resentment with the nerd. The jock and the people he's around don't remember it (usually because the jock does that to other nerds also).

  • Jan. 25, 2012, 3:21 p.m. CST

    Dynamic Tension

    by veteran_of_mu

    Thanks Doctom and !Spock2 for your thoughts. I particularly like the idea that every relationship is under tension … that each involves an attachment keeping the 2 together and a force keeping them apart. I can imagine drawing diagrams of those and I expect that we would see interesting patterns in such graphs. It would be particularly interesting to see tensegrity structures and polyhedra turn up … But I don't imagine such graphs are sufficient to describe drama because they don't describe the perceptions of the characters. These will obviously diverge - yielding an extra dimension to the drama. Still I can see a way to diagram this too … Now in the course of an arc these character perceptions and relations change. It would be particularly interesting to diagram the most compelling arcs and observe what qualities they have in common …

  • Jan. 25, 2012, 11:51 p.m. CST

    Congrats to Matt, Karen,the Moff and gang!

    by Terry

    Hi all, Yeah, been away for a bit. 2 major crashes, one involving a car and the other involving my pc. Both are sorted now. Hope you have all been well. I just saw that Matt Smith and Karen Gillan won NTA awards. Congratulations to both and also to Moff. No matter how good actors are, they still need the story to act upon. Well done all! I hope to be around more soon.

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 6:20 a.m. CST

    Characters Cause Spots

    by veteran_of_mu

    Sorry, I meant to say Character Ensembles may be easier for authors to create and manipulate than individual characters. Indeed this may be the reason we fail at creating dramatic fiction. Very few of us write successful fictions but most of us tell stories of one sort or another. Perhaps the simplest of these are "he said she said" - the kind of ramble you hear people tell on buses. Those of us who have attempted to lift such narrative collaboratively - which is to say folk who have participated in social role playing games - focus on the creation of the character, the arc of the individual. But beginning a story with the structure of relationships necessary to it should be easier because it eliminates the hard work of trying to discover same. And the despair that comes from having written your protagonist into a corner. Anyway that's the way I'm thinking about it. Start with the end in mind, then embody the themes of the narrative, not in characters, but in structures of relation between characters. Then pick whatever points of view are necessary to explain the evolution of that structure ...

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 9:01 a.m. CST

    phineas999

    by gotilk

    Great to see you. Car accident?? No perm damage I hope, and all involved are well.

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 9:07 a.m. CST

    caractacuspotts

    by gotilk

    I think success in writing great character interaction AND great characters is a combination of observation (of real interaction) and observation of great characters that already exist. With trying to find a formula (which is actually VERY interesting to me) we run the risk of being formulaic. And I don't mean that trying to find your own formula is formulaic in and of itself, just that it could be a risk. I believe finding your very own formula is a great thing. Right now what I' doing is the opposite of what I usually do. I didn't start with an ending in mind, but with a universe first. By plotting out and mapping the universe, I'm HOPING that the characters can find their way through their development through that changing universe and its timeline. One of the things I'm working on now is a scientific breakthrough timeline. Getting ages of characters right, etc.

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 9:28 a.m. CST

    Welcome back, phineas999!

    by DoctorTom

    Glad to see you've worked through the relative crashes, and hope that things weren't too painful at the time (physically or mentally) Shame that Doctor Who lost to Downtown Abbey for most popular drama, but I'm not too surprised - Downtown Abbey's had a good bit of press over here in the US about how it's almost singlehandedly revived PBS (maybe if they'd put out a little more publicity for Sherlock we'd be seeing more said about it, but then the people talking about Downtown Abbey are the ones that usually think of Upstairs, Downstairs and various historical costume dramas for PBS when they don't think Sesame Street). Congratulations for Who on the Virgin Media TV Awards for nabbing 5 awards, including TV Show of the Year. You've got to love award shows where Karen Gillen can get awards for both Best Actress and for Hottest Female.

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 9:34 a.m. CST

    caractacuspotts

    by gotilk

    Sorry, left something out. A question. I have all of these incomplete works, on google docs, on paper, in text files (some of them just recovered from a seemingly dead drive, thank goodness... remember to back up!!), many completed short stories and novellas. I am finding as I read through them now, some of them as old as 10 years, that I have unknowingly written stories that already FIT into my own little universe I have created gradually over time. They may not fit into a certain period in a time-line, but they are all (even when only barely) science-fiction stories. Now... I tend to make glaring mistakes like mixing tense, point of view, things like that. Many times it's done so that I can write stream-of-consciousness and worry about editing later. But sometimes I do it as a way to mix up the narrative, make it interesting or give it a cut-and-paste feel to it. Have you ever done anything like that and how has it worked out for you? Also, if it's not too much, which do you find the most difficult to pull of? Past tense? Present? Passive voice? One of the most frustrating thing about a lot of online fiction I read (and some novels, sadly) is the mixture, done badly. Drifting, I believe they call it. Something starts in the first person and drifts into passive or past tense, things like that. But I'm trying to mix it for the purpose of telling the story in a unique way. In one way, 2 of my characters at a certain point in the main story, become one character. So at a point of transition, the story shifts to her point of view and is written in present rather than the past tense. Do you , as a reader, find that an annoyance or something interesting? And thank you, by the way. You are an inspiration.

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 9:35 a.m. CST

    Interesting bits from teh NTA awards

    by DoctorTom

    *Speaking after receiving his award Matt Smith gave some clue to the future telling Radio Times that he has one more year of Doctor Who left and then he was going to try his luck in Hollywood. Although he later told the BBC Entertainment News Team he has no plans to leave. * I wonder if Moffat and Matt Smith plotted together beforehand to get the press stirred up with comments like this. Now, it would definitely be amusing if we find out that both statements that Matt Smith made are true - 1 more year of Who before Hollywood, and that he has no plans to leave. Add to that BBCHollywood are interested in doing a Doctor Who movie - someone check to see if Moffat's made any plans to visit Hollywood to film a Doctor Who movie in a year or two. Maybe Jane Trantor didn't have the heart to tell Peter Yates that even if they hire him to direct the Doctor Who movie that he's not going to be showrunner on it. :)

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 9:36 a.m. CST

    that should be 'the', not 'teh' in the previous header

    by DoctorTom

    dyslexic typing strikes again.

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 9:38 a.m. CST

    doctortom

    by gotilk

    Now THAT is interesting. Imagining a Yates directed, Moffat-written Who film. Hmmm. :) ?

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 9:40 a.m. CST

    And, since there's vague tie-ins

    by DoctorTom

    congratulations to RTD and Phil Ford for getting to keep the SJA crew together to do a new children's series, Aliens vs. Wizards. No more borrowing Doctor Who monsters for them (unfortunately). I do have to say, though, that calling the aliens Nekross reminds me of the Necrons from Warhammer 40K (maybe mashed up with Macross from Robotech - maybe they want to give the idea of undead aliens?)

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 9:46 a.m. CST

    Gotilk - I doubt it's going to happen

    by DoctorTom

    but is IS really fun mashing up the different rumors into one big agglomeration like that, isn't it? If we were going to have a Doctor Who movie, though, I'd rather see Edgar Wright, Duncan Jones or Matthew Vaughn than Peter Yates. Of course, with movies we're used to the director being a bigger deal than we normally do with tv shows, so they effectively are co-showrunners. Still, getting a director who has a decent pedigree on co-writing and producing who could work with Moffat would be interesting. Any word on how Moffat reacted to Wright and Cornish's work on the Tintin script after he left?

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 9:51 a.m. CST

    doctortom

    by gotilk

    I have only read that Moffat felt terrible leaving the project. I agree with you though. Especially Duncan Jones for a director. Wright and Vaughn are both fantastic too.

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 9:52 a.m. CST

    That is also great news that the SJA crew is still working

    by gotilk

    .. very good news. Should be fun to watch.

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 1:23 p.m. CST

    Gotilk, you know what would be nice?

    by DoctorTom

    If we were to get new Whotininnies in tomorrow's thread. Not that I want to put pressure on anyone.

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 3:04 p.m. CST

    doctortom , I agree

    by gotilk

    This would be a nice thing, pressure free of course. NOW. lol

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 3:33 p.m. CST

    Interesting posters about Sherlock popping up

    by DoctorTom

    http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/01/26/sherlock-viral-or-something-geekier/

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 3:53 p.m. CST

    #believeinsherlock

    by gotilk

    Nice stuff. I like the designs of the posters a lot, especially the one with Moriarty and the missing eyes. It implies a mask. I like it. I just hope no-one actually tried to demonstrate how one could pull off the ending of series 2 and survive. Could turn nasty really fast.

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 3:53 p.m. CST

    Tries rather, not tried.

    by gotilk

    Oops.

  • Jan. 26, 2012, 3:54 p.m. CST

    I AM surprised none of the poster designs include

    by gotilk

    the tabloid shot of him in his deerstalker.

  • Catherynne Valente's being a guest blogger on Charles Stross' blog, and she's just entered a post on the topic of how you would go about faking your own death - really asking people how they would do it. It should generate some interesting comments. http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/index.html

  • Tonight's "The Big Bang Theory", the gang are watching Who, Penny, of course, walked out in the middle of it.

  • Jan. 27, 2012, 10:27 a.m. CST

    Just to prove that Doctor Who has high standards -

    by DoctorTom

    The director of last year's hugely popular film Drive, Nicolas Winding Refn, has revealed that he wanted to direct an episode of Doctor Who - but was turned down. He told Short List.com: I would have loved to direct Doctor Who but they didn’t want me — they turned me down last year. Maybe if they revive Blake’s 7 I could do that. I love it. It’s great. That could be fun to update.

  • Jan. 30, 2012, 2:17 a.m. CST

    caractacuspotts

    by gotilk

    Where oh where did you go?

  • Jan. 30, 2012, 2:17 a.m. CST

    Last.

    by gotilk

    I thought we had quite a fun discussion going this week.