I was under the impression (from reading all the books and general reading around the matter over many years) that no reason was ever given. It was another sign that Sir Arthur really wasn't that bothered about the character.

You are WAY too easily distracted. Concentrate more on the story - it's more fun that way.

The alternative 'falls' were definitely filmed in April 2013 - see this report which shows both Derren Brown and Andrew Scott on set as well as the regular cast:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...Dr-Watson.html

I was wondering how much the on screen action reflected the way they got on in real life, but far from being a distraction, I was happy with it. I was chuffed to think that Martin has got such a delightful partner, if their scenes in Sherlock were anything to go by.

(I am very slightly obsessed with Martin Freeman, and I do want him to be happy. Sorry, I can't help it )


I don't know anything about EastEnders as I never watch it. Or, at least, I've only seen it once or twice. Though I suppose that qualifies me to go and post about how rubbish it is on the EastEnders forum. But I won't.

My understanding was that some elements used in The Empty Hearse were filmed at the same time as The Reichenbach Fall, and the rest in a day as part of TEH's shooting block.

Some of the later filming would have been to accommodate and acknowledge some of the fan theories (the Derren Brown bit, I would imagine). I would imagine the scene including Andrew Scott as Moriarty was shot shot at the same time as TRF for simple reasons of logistics, getting his bit out of the way while he was on location, rather than bringing him in again at the later date to shoot a single scene.

EDIT: Having just read adams66's post above, scratch the bit about Andrew Scott.

Can anyone tell me if I've already missed the episode starring Lars Mikkelsen?

No, me neither - but it seems to keep the Ratings Thread going in the quiet times!

deleted

No you haven't - this Sunday

Nope, he was briefly in The Empty Hearse, but hasn't starred

You jest, surely!

Brilliant, thanks! Love a bit of Lars.

Some people actually do think that Moff's DW stuff is grown up and complex. I have no idea why.

It's not that the Moff stuff is complex. It's worse than that - it fails at being complex.

The legacy of Doctor Who is 50 years of smart storylines. Moff can't write them, so he acts like a hyperactive NaNoWriMo entrant.

What's the deal? Are you scared to voice your opinion in the Doctor Who forum or something?

I was responding to a specific point.

So how do you explain your hate to the Moff when your user name is a reference to a who ep he penned.

Gosh, is that how it works? I'm a big fan of Hemingway but I don't like To Have and Have Not. Very poor compared to his other novels.

Call me a bluff old traditionalist but I tend to judge a piece of writing on its actual merits, not merely on who wrote it. Surely anyone who uncritically adores all of a writer's output is the very definition of 'fanboy'.

Maybe he really is the Moff! It's the sort of timey-whimey thing he would do. Put us off the scent of how bad Sherlock has become by reminding us that Doctor Who ain't perfect either.

Enjoyed the show but seemed to be nothing to leave you guessing, watched it again today after someone pointed out a big clue, things will get nasty and dangerous in the next episiode.

can't help wondering if Watson's wife is a bit dodgy , there's been a couple of things , but then again it could be a red herring .

Ok. don't post here much anymore but jumping in here to say I though that episode was really great.I don't really understand a lot of the Moffat bashing and the nepotism allegations- Amanda Abbington was pretty great in ITV's Mr. Selfridge (as far as I knopw she'll be in series 2) and for me she's been great as Mary- the off screen stuff is of little interest to me.

I am borrowing this description for a review I read elsewhere but Sherlock is not a detective story, it's a story about a detective.

If you just want plot twists and a fancy procedureal this isn't the show for you. Those shows are fine, they wouldn't particularly interest me but some people will most definitely prefer them.If you are uncomfortable with exploring the relationship between the central characters (and I don't mean relationship in any romantic sense),or about seeing Sherlock express emotion,or deal with human emotions; if he must remain the character he was in episode 1 of the first series with no character development than this isn't the show for you. There are many good procedurals out there where the episodes can stand alone.

Sherlock is character driven, it is about the relationship between Sherlock and Watson, has been since the first episode. That is the story they have been telling all along. Yes, they are trying to solve mysteries and crimes but those plots are secondary to the relationship between the central characters. For me a truly great show is never plot driven because plot, plot twists, plot contrivances can only take you so far.Really great drama is character driven. It packs a punch becuase you know and care about the characters. If you don't care about the central relationship between Sherlock and Watson this episode won't interest you, I can see how you might find it boring. If all you want is a murder mystery, and not for the show to waste time on 'emotions' then again this isn't the show for you. If the only thing you can say after that 90 mins is 'I guessed it was the photographer before Sherlock' than congrats but that wasn't really what this episode was about, it wasn't a straight whodunnit.

If you do like character driven drama than it was wonderful. Being 'dead' for 2 years has changed Sherlock, he can do detached, smart, cocky show off no problem but what happens when you start to let people into your life and start to care about them than it changes you.The worst thing that could have happened in my view would be to have had Watson under-react to losing his best friend. Somebody coming back from the dead is not a small thing.This consequences of this should be explored onscreen.

Life and our life experiences change us. Mycroft still looks down on ordinary people but Sherlock is changing. He cares about Watson, therefore he wants to do right by him.To be his Best Man is so far out of his comfort zone it challenges how we see Sherlock. He's not as blindly dismissive of people as he was, he know respects Molly therefore he goes to her for help. It doesn't mean he's changed completely but it shows character growth. This is a great character exploration and last night's episode was a fantastic showcase for Benedict in particular.That final scene on the dancefloor was particualarly effective. For all the talk that nothing would chance between them, Watson's marriage does change things.

I do not accept suggestions that this is soap operabecause it dares to explore how the characters feel. it is not soap opera. There were none of the silly plot contrivances that blight soap weddings, there were no silly stumbling blocks, the wedding went off without a hitch. The Bridge and Groom are happy and seem well suited. Sherlock and the geusts are there to celebrate the day. There was no convoluted drama, no innapropriate emotion. I also don't see why it's a problem that it was very funny in parts, that's a sign of good writing.If you can't get any joy out of seeing Sherlock drunk, that's fine, but I enjoyed those scenes.

I think we won't fully be able to review this series until the end of next week's episode. Something shocking/dreadful is going to happen which has been the reason time has been spent on characterisation. I think people are too quick to judge. If you reviewed last week's epsiode on the basis of the first 5 mins you would be completely wrong. If you based your views on the first thirty mins of this episode you'd be wrong too.People were very quick to slate Moriarty on the basis of a cameo in season 1 but he turned out to be a fantastic villain and the Reichenbach Falls one of the best epsiodes.

So perhaps I might suggest we sit back and just let them tell the story they want to tell and see where Series three leaves us. Again, to borrow from something else I read online- there's something about Mary and I suspect next week we're about to find out.

No i think your spot on, she knows something is wrong as well. am sure Sherlock knows but not sure if the letter he left before leaving the reception was some kind of warning.

It's a lil bit scary how seriously some people take this programme. Dread to think what a specialist forum must be like if this thread is just dipping your toe in.

My user name was chosen for reasons other than sucking up to Moff.