Sherlock: 10 Ridiculous Plot Points Lifted Straight From The Books
Thought Moffat and Gatiss were pulling surreal plotting out their backsides this series? Turns out they were referencing the past – Conan Doyle got there first, and with a vengeance.
It may have only just begun, but two and a half weeks later Sherlock was over once again, leaving fans to contemplate another multiple-year wait for the next all-too-short instalment. With all that time to look forward to any future episodes, Sherlock's audience are naturally keen to analyse and pick apart the three episodes we just saw. More than any speculation about Moriarty's reappearance, the big question is: Are the new trio of episodes a match for the earlier ones? Aren't some of Sherlock's deductions just a little far fetched, even for him? Isn't some of his behaviour a kind of inappropriate that goes beyond plausible? Aren't some of the plot contrivances a little more out there than before? In short, isn't it all just a little bit, well, silly? The truth is that your mileage may vary when it comes to the answers to these questions, but anybody quick to blame writers Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat for some of the show's stranger detours should just look back to the Arthur Conan Doyle stories on which it's based. Yes, while the main narratives of each episode are only loosely based on those in Doyle's stories, some of the details have turned out to be a closer adaptation than you might think. Just look at these ten examples from Series 3 alone.
