The thing with 'Sherlock' is that a) you need to give each episode your full attention (I cannot take people seriously when they attempt to critique it AS THEY WATCH, for clearly they are only half-watching!) and b) it's only once the episode is over that the individual plot threads come together and can, therefore, be fully appreciated and understood.

There was more exploration of John and Sherlock's friendship - the stag night scenes were hilarious and there was quite a bit of Johnlock going on (I loved Sherlock's little 'I don't mind' aside when drunk John put his hand on Sherlock's knee and then hastily removed it! Sweet!). Then there were the seemingly unconnected cases (the 'ghost' dater and the 'invisible' stabber) that came together neatly at the end and provided the answer to the wedding murder question.

My only niggle this series is Mary. I can't help but wonder why the show's creators decided to take John down the matrimonial path and away from Sherlock... unless it is to be only a temporary measure. Until tonight I had almost assumed that Mary would die in episode 3 (after all, that's her fictional fate) but now I'm not so sure. Why add a pregnancy to the mix? To make her end even more tragic? Or is Mary here to stay? If so, again, I wonder why. We only get three episodes every two years: do we really need a gooseberry? Even a sweet, well-meaning one? Tonight, despite all Mary's gushing over Sherlock, I couldn't help but wish her miles away every time she made an appearance! More of the boys, please - less of dull domesticity!

No.

And that's not what the phrase means anyway.

fixed it for you

If so, I think it could only be accidental / unintentional on Mary's part. I don't see the series devastating Watson twice in four episodes. And it (Bad Mary) would be such a departure from the books.

File Jump the Shark next to Deus Ex Machina as the lazy go to phrase for people on internet forums who think it means 'an episode I didn't like'.

and don't you just wear that privelege so boastfully?!

Why would the BBC get rid of him? Nearly 10m watched episode 1 live, and Sherlock is a HUGE international success commercially (as is Doctor Who, whether you like it or not - and I do share some of your concerns about that show).

And it's absolutely not a soap. But a sophisticated contemporary drama also lays a trail of breadcrumbs which are all scooped together at a later date. Lots of people rave about The Bridge - the narrative structure there is very similar.

All I can really say for now is watch the finale and then judge the series as one story with three parts. After watching the finale, my view of this episode did change somewhat (although I still don't think it's very good).

The rather overlong scene in the debating chamber with the women was rather over indulgent for me. The whittling down of the women with " not you, not you"" was seemingly a strong reference to "I'm a Celebrity" in which case you could call it brilliantly clever weaving in such popular culture references, or it just misfired as a scene. I don't know which.

Sherlock said the Major had been killed hours before he'd arrived at the wedding - but how did Mayfly Man stab him with the belt when the whole point was he had to use the wedding to draw him out?

Yes but massive viewing figures, critical acclaim and worldwide success don't matter. The BBC have already circulated an emergency memo to the top brass letting them know that some people on DS aren't happy. The game is up!

Read the instant feedback coming through here and Twitter, where real people are reacting in real time to what is on screen. They don't like it. They don't understand why it's changed. They don't accept Moff's detached smug explanations. They don't want it.

As has been explained here by other doubters and critics - it's all very well making scenes laugh-a-minute and clever-clever and fit for Tumblr gifs, but away from the Internet echo chamber, real people in living rooms over the country are switching off.

Moff could do well to visit somewhere he can't see from his ivory tower. He may notice a fair amount of commercial breaks and Netflix logos where once his programmes used to be.

Benedict has so much dialogue to learn - I was considering it tonight. It must be reams of script.
And he's so busy with other things too.
Respect!

If I'm too specific, though, it will give it away. If you search through the articles on Sherlock on DS or radiotimes.com, the clue you need is there. In fact, the relevant bit of info was covered by EVERY media outlet. It just requires a little detective work to put the clues together ...

Did the ending remind anyone else of Derek at Rodney's wedding in Only Fools and Horses?

It's satisfying as a fan to re-watch episodes and with hindsight be able to look for and spot hidden 'clues' and elements of foreshadowing but the fact that there are clues to the mystery of an as yet unknown episode cannot justify such weak and wishy-washy offerings as series 3 has served so far. Despite all the hype episode 1 never delivered a concrete resolution to how Sherlock actually faked his death (which after 2 years of waiting for the writers to go "oh he could've done it several ways" feels like a real cop out) and although there was a crime to solve it was quite jumbled and in the end was sorted by a bomb having an off switch (lazy). Episode two felt equally as confused narrative wise with much jumping about and again although the threads were tied at the end it was weak overall when compared to series 1 and 2 which have clear,stand alone episodes which all contain character, comedy AND crime. I am a real fan but very disappointed with series 3 so far. I can only hope that the finale somehow makes up for eps 1 and 2 but even so the feel of the show has changed immensely and I won't be rushing to buy the dvd.

Or Fifteen to One?

I think that whole best man speech was a play on how interminably long wedding speeches can go on for in real life.

I thought it was like a game of Guess Who.

I bet you regret picking that name....

Really? You do realise they are long-term partners and have two children together?

Isn't that pretty much what happened today? He solved a crime.

You are feeling the pain of us Doctor Who fans who have watched the dreaded Moffat take the show over the shark so many times the jet-skis are worn out.

You're actually making things up. Away from the internet echo chamber the first episode got the highest ratings of the series and was almost universally well reviewed. Its pretty desperate if you're having to make things up.

In the books Watson got married and stayed married - I think she brings a great dynamic to the show.

I just got to thinking about how differently the episode may have played out if it was written before they knew what the reaction to previous episodes was. I suggest It would have been an entirely different episode, at least in tone. They can't possibly have put in some of the stuff they did tonight without thinking "that one'll go down a storm on Tumblr".

Don't get me wrong, part of the shows appeal is its playful humour and creative visual style - but they seem to be trying to outdo themselves with each passing episode now. Balance is needed.

She's an obvious weakness for Watson, and something that can be exploited to separate him from Holmes.

What I think we were seeing this week were precient glimmers of next week's impending doom