bala

Well there was 2 door that i could see Front was where the guy was coming in so Sherlock walked to the back and saw another guy. If there was one door why would he walk towards the door when Watson told him he coming surely he would hide if there was only door ?. There must of been two doors since they (victim and killer) both came from different direction ?.

codebreaker

Turning the pacemaker into the murder weapon is a scary thought but it was a hell of a way to control him before the killing, being able to get a photo of the guy behind a moving train was impressive

bala

Yes but seriously Holmes should of better than interview the guy in front of a window

bala

I have say i didn't expect that ending it ain't often Sherlock get surprised but what a hell of a shock last 30 seconds and look on his face was priceless. . I am not ruin the surprise but i suppose he should be happy since he didn't know.

codebreaker

Moriarty having Sherlock jumping through hoops to solve the case was interesting but finding the gate to the big house unlocked and the key in the door was suspicious

codebreaker

The series of flashbacks between Sherlock and his former lover, Irene were interesting but her being Moriarty I didn't see coming

bala

Yes that nice twist can you imagine of all the people and again a women first they made Watson into a women and now Moriarty but i have say she was great actress

bala

Who would of thought Moriarty weakness would be Watson figure out she was in love with Sherlock and would come to his rescue if he fake relapse

codebreaker

The fake overdose to capture her was a nice conclusion

bala

I have feeling she will escape

codebreaker

That would spoil it as every major villain in every show seem to escape which is getting too predictable

sanggye

Nice return, Sherlock going home, even for 1 episode was cool, and seeing 2 literary characters, Lestrade and Mycroft and the mention of Langdale Pike (who was a columnist in the books) and of course the address of 221 B were the best parts of this episode.  The murder investigation was trivial and really a small part of this episode.

[ Last edited by sanggye at 9-27-2013 14:46 ]

bala

Yes it was nice returning episode and Watson learn a few things about Holmes but blow up Holmes stuff was priceless

codebreaker

Watson not knowing Mycroft was Sherlock's brother was interesting as he must of came up when she searched his history in the early episodes and there was no way Sherlock would only look for Gareth without trying to solve his case but his theory about the gun and how he got rid of it was impressive

sanggye

Nice catch with the history, though believe it or not it is possible to research one's history and not find any information about siblings, especially when it is not obvious..  Especially taking in account of not getting along, different schools, the time period (before social networking and public usage of the internet. and her history search might have not covered that.

I found the murder and solving to be blah, especially the deduction, all he saw was one item.  It had been too long since the murder, there was no gun powder residual (even Holmes said that) I can list at least  other 8 reasons, only one of which has to deal with a gun.

But this episode was good, not because of the murder, but for the interactions in it, and also the usage of some classic Holmes' elements with those interactions.

codebreaker

Watson offering the son of a former patient a all paid scholarship after he approached her for a loan was an interesting decision and killing the mathematical genius for his equation was beyond me

kellemanske

I think it was a bit unbelievable that the math problem is so complex they reward you with 1000000 dollars and then it turns out that this is the second person in a matter of weeks that solves it.

sanggye

There are million dollar awards to solve certain math problems, look up millennium prize problems.  And it wasn't that a second person solved it, it was that using the other's work they were closer to solving it.

kellemanske

I know about the millenium prizes, I believe that. I just don't think it is possible that the women solved it and then a few weeks later the other two were close to a solution. They hadn't seen her work. That's why I'm mad. If it's such a difficult math problem (which I believe) they shouldn't let 2 parties solve it seperately from eachother.

sanggye

It happens all the time in real life, take for example Alexander Graham Bell, who did not invent the telephone, but was the first to patent it in the United States, at the period of time, others were working on the same thing.  This has happened quite a few times in the history of innovation.