‘Sherlock’: Burning Questions From Series 3

Series 3 might be over, but we have questions. Burning questions.

It’s all over until Series 4, as “Sherlock” went out with a bang (literally!) in this season’s final episode, “His Last Vow.” Unlike the Series 2 finale, this one didn’t leave fans with a giant mess of a mystery to solve — which might be a good thing, actually, all things considered. Poor Anderson has suffered enough.

But there’s still plenty to debate over the next year, as we wait for Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson to come back and delight us once again. Here’s what we’ll be talking about until then.

..

Did you see the Mary Morstan twist coming?
In addition to the word “liar” floating amidst Sherlock’s deductions about Mary, there were also a handful of hints in episodes one and two that the new Mrs. Watson wasn’t all she seemed: her ability to recognize the skip code alerting her to John’s kidnapping; the telegram from “CAM” at the wedding which caused a flash of concern to cross her face; her uncanny recall of the room number in which murder target Major James Sholto was staying. If you picked up on these things, congratulations: Sherlock didn’t pick up on the clues until she’d put a bullet in his liver.

Was Magnusson the worst, or was he the worst?!
It was hard to imagine that anyone could outdo the manic mayhem of Andrew Scott when it came to playing a Holmesian villain. But oh, man. MAGNUSSON. The smirk! The licking! The flicking! After that, we couldn’t even be shocked when Sherlock went for the gun. Nobody who flicks John Watson’s face like that can be allowed to live. Kudos to Lars Mikkelsen for making the character so delightfully despicable. Those Mikkelsens make such delicious villains.

What was the coolest thing hidden inside Sherlock’s mind palace?
The scene that took place in Sherlock’s brain just after he was shot was one fine specimen of creative character development, and it was fascinating to watch. What was your favorite part? The curious architecture? The appearance of Moriarty? The fact that Mycroft’s condescension never wavers even inside somebody else’s head? Personally, we’re calling dibs right now on baby curly-haired Sherlock and his beloved boyhood dog.

What will they name that baby? (And what was John’s awful choice?)
Never mind how relieved we are (read: VERY RELIEVED) that the Watsons kissed and made up before the episode was over. The question now is what outrageous choice Mr. Watson had in mind that his wife couldn’t allow him baby-naming reign even in exchange for his forgiveness after she’d lied to him about everything. It must have been really bad, you guys.

Can Moriarty really be back?
Considering that he blew off the back of his head atop St. Bartholomew Hospital at the end of last season, common sense would tell us that Moriarty is, indeed, dead, and some other baddie is using the villain’s particular cachet to get Holmes’ attention. But then again, Anderson’s bungee cord theory about how Sherlock survived his fall involved Moriarty’s body and a rubber mask as a stand-in for the detective’s corpse. We know that (probably) wasn’t how he did it, but the fact that Anderson thought it was possible brings up another question: does this mean that Moriarty’s body didn’t turn up after Sherlock’s “death?”

And, like, what did we think of Series 3 overall?
Some critics have complained that this season of “Sherlock” was overly emotional, that the plots were underdeveloped, and that the show’s creators were spending way too much time winking at the fandom. Some members of the fandom have responded by telling the critics to pee up a rope.

After two years of waiting for the Baker Street boys to be reunited, we personally think that the payoff of seeing Holmes and Watson together again like best brofriends was more than enough to sustain two episodes — the stag night scene alone was a work of art, seriously — and the appearance of Magnusson to tie it all up still gave “Sherlock” a chance to do all the twisty plotty things it does best. But that’s just our take; what’s yours? Go on, we’ve got at least a year to talk about it.