(Untitled)

[aprilstarchild]

So there was a Sherlock panel at San Diego Comic-Con. And they showed a short bit from an episode of series three...and someone recorded the audio, which is here as of right now. (BEWARE: SPOILERS. Also, screaming

Comments

[splix]

I had the same reaction.

Boo hoo, lady.

[aprilstarchild]

Excellent icon choice.

There *was* a video, apparently, but that's already gone. Pfft. Seeing their faces would make it easier to understand what they were saying. I mean, I got the general idea....sorta...but yeah. (Is it Sherlock's speech? Or just him narrating?)

[splix]

I didn't see the video, but from what I gathered, it was Sherlock making a speech interspersed with flashbacks. At least that's how I interpreted it.

[aprilstarchild]

Yeah, that sounds about right. Apparently there was hugging though. And it is indeed John who's getting married, but anyone following the setlock stuff knew that.

[killerweasel]

Oh huzzah, I was hoping someone would have a link to the 'evil footage' that should not be tumblr'd.

Ugh, the shrieking.

Well, at least now I know why all of the Lestrade people went all bonkers yesterday on tumblr.

How do we know that the footage they showed at Comic Con was actually something from the episode and not just something they made to throw people off?

[aprilstarchild]

Actually, I still don't understand why Lestrade people went bonkers. I have an auditory processing issue and can only understand maybe a third to half of what was said--can you explain it? :D :D

If it was meant to throw us off, I don't think Sue would be throwing such a fit.

[killerweasel]

Sherlock called Lestrade 'Gavin' and they flipped the heck out because it 'reduced Lestrade to a running gag where Sherlock, who has known him for YEARS can't remember his name' and 'made Lestrade into some form of comic relief'. It is a 3 minute clip out of an hour and a half of episode. How does that impact the entire thing and ruin a character? Sheese!

Personally, I don't think that what they showed is actually a real thing that's going to be aired because Moffat & Gatiss are the biggest trolls in the universe.

[aprilstarchild]

Ah!

I wondered if it was something silly at first myself.

I guess we'll find out...about six months from now. *sob*

[drinkingcocoa]

1. Whatever they showed will not be in the episode exactly as is: it's a rough cut and they "promised" (promised who? BBC?) they wouldn't let the footage out.

2. Which means Sue et al. didn't have a problem with people seeing it, but they were asked by others to keep it unofficial.

3. I'm guessing that's why we're getting mixed messages.

4. It may well be that they made this to throw people off, but I can see it going either way.

[aprilstarchild]

In other words, she knew damn well what was going to happen, but is doing it to make it look (to the BBC higher-ups) that she's at least trying? That would be kind of clever, actually.

[drinkingcocoa]

I'm imagining this conversation:

SV: We're going to Comic-Con! We can't wait to show the fans what we've been working on, which we love!

Powers That Be: It says in the contract that you can't show anything that's not according to the strict promotion policy. You don't have any finished footage yet.

SV: But we're dying to squee with them!

PTB: The contract says you can show anything you want, but it can't be broadcast.

SV: But there's no way to control the internet and what people put on there.

PTB: You can tell them not to.

SV: What if they don't listen?

PTB: Then it'll be your fault for not being able to control them.

SV: I'll ask nicely.

In my imagination, she's not doing it cynically or cleverly, or trying to look like she's trying; I think she's really trying. That's the vibe I get off her, anyway. I don't think she's as >:-) devious as her husband and Gatiss.

[aprilstarchild]

I like the way you think. I've decided that this is my headcanon.

(Can you have headcanon for things that actually happen?)

[clevermanka]

You know, I'm losing respect for Vertue and Moffat by the second. They write good stories (usually sometimes) but sweet bleeding jesus they seem to be a couple of asshats.

[aprilstarchild]

I think I like drinkingcocoa's theory above. Hmmmm.

[clevermanka]

To me, manipulating your fandom and/or your production company isn't clever. It's asshattish. Bleh.

[drinkingcocoa]

*sigh* Have it your way. But that's what you do as an artist under contract. The legal department has their restrictions and you have to figure out how you can be true to yourself without making too many compromises, which seems to happen in television and film to a sickening degree. They wouldn't have brought this clip to Comic-Con if they hadn't wanted to squee with the fans; I can only imagine that they tried to work out what was possible considering the legalities.