I know I’m repeating myself, but I just can’t get past the fact that a lot of this episode just didn’t make sense. For one, out of all the crimes he could potentially have chosen, he just happened to pick the two that were, in fact, one. The idea that someone would scan the local obituraries then pose as the recently deceased to use their apartments to create alibis is definitely interesting, and deserved more than just being used as a handy set-up for a relatively unbelievable and medically dubious delayed action stabbing. Even the “meat knife” idea that Tom came up during Sherlock’s speech, roundly poopooed by the gathered audience, was more realistic. I could see that happening, and in fact I thought the solution might have been something similar to that.
What I’m saying is that this Sherlock was an odd one, all told. It was much more lighthearted than normal, playing more as a grim comedy than a detective series. The writing was as fantastic as ever and the idea that Sherlock would know that Mary was pregnant (the “sign of three” [Watson, Mary, and baby]) from observing her behaviour alone before Watson did – a trained doctor – was really funny, and the wedding scenes did look positively sumptuous; I just didn’t know whom Gatiss and Moffat were trying to please with this one. Given that the next episode is the season finale, I wonder what’s in store for us.
References to the novels:
- Sherlock encounters Irene Adler while he’s thinking through the case.
- “The Sign of Three” is also a reference to “The Sign of Four”, the second Sherlock Holmes novel.
- The dwarf with a blowpipe features in “The Sign of Four” novel.
- John Watson proposes to Mary in “The Sign of Four”, which the wedding references in this episode.
Random Robservations
- I just don’t buy it. I just don’t. Sorry guys.
See you next week! If you spotted any references yourself, then feel free to post below!