BBC's Sherlock Theories

I told you right on my byline that this blog would be full of random thoughts. You can't fault me.

Yes, like anybody else worthy of talking to, I've become OBSESSED with BBC's "Sherlock." In case you've been living under a rock, the series is just two seasons long, with three 1 1/2 hour episodes in each season. Yes. That's only 6 episodes. But they are all BRILLIANT! If you haven't seen the series yet, don't read the rest of this post. If you think you don't want to see the show, you're wrong. It's all on Netflix and there's still time until Season 3 airs. This post will still be here. Go watch.

For the rest of you, you know what I'm talking about. The Reichenbach Fall. THE CRAZIEST SEASON FINALE EVER. I've watched the entire series through three times and I still have a TON of questions, but I have also noticed a couple of things that may or may not be important. For instance....

Sherlock's Hat

People are obsessed with this hat, and for good reason. Moffat, the show's creator, found a way to seamlessly introduce a very antiquated hat style into a thoroughly modern show. It shows up sometime during the second season, I believe (correct me if I'm wrong), but it isn't until Reichenbach that Sherlock expresses his frustration with it. What I think is interesting is his word choice during that scene, but first we have to back up a bit.

In the episode "A Scandal in Belgravia," we meet his nemesis/femme fatale Irene Adler, who is not fooled by Sherlock's disguise as a priest on her doorstep. "Do you know the big problem with a disguise, Mr. Holmes?" she says. "However hard you try, it's always a self-portrait."

Now think about Sherlock Holmes grabbing that deerstalker out of the theater dressing room before running out to his cab. Sherlock used that hat as a sort of disguise from the paparazzi. What's so intriguing about this? Well, nothing, until you get to Reichenbach and his little rant about the hat (pay attention at 6 seconds):

Did you hear that? "Why has it got two fronts?"

I'll let that sink in.

Sherlock's deerstalker is his disguise, which is (according to Irene Adler) a type of self-portrait. What does a hat with "two fronts" have to say about Sherlock and what does it remind you of? Maybe Janus, the god with two faces? And where have we heard that before? Right! Moriarty used that as a clue to his identity, hinting at his alter ego. There's always the obvious answer that this scene was alluding to Sherlock pretending to be a fake at the end of the episode, but I wouldn't put it past Moffat to make it more than that.

The Girl's Scream

Lots of people have crackpot theories about Moriarty hiring people that looked like Sherlock, which would cause the little girl to be scared of him, etc. But none of that makes any sense to me. Let's break it down.

Sherlock shows up at the school and discovers linseed oil near the boy's bed, which was used to leave a note (Help me!) and illuminate the kidnapper's footprints as they left the room. Knowing that the little boy would only have a few seconds, he used them to scribble out a (very legible) note and paint the bottom of his kidnapper's feet? Sorry. Even the smartest boy, while under duress, simply wouldn't have TIME to do that and not cause a struggle with his kidnappers. The book of fairy tales was planted in the girl's room as a clue, and the linseed oil was planted in the boy's room as a clue. Moriarty/the kidnapper left the note and left the glowing footprints, then left the bottle of oil behind knowing that Sherlock would deduce something out of it.

The kidnappers then took the children to an abandoned candy factory and gave them piles of chocolate to gorge themselves with. Yes, the candy wrappers were painted with mercury and left them violently ill, but what child isn't mindful of the fact that eating too much candy will make you sick? In my opinion, they weren't frightened of their kidnappers at all. Their father is a high-ranking official and ambassador in the US. They were probably used to meeting strangers under his orders and may not have thought anything of following the man anywhere. And then to be given candy?! Best kidnapping ever!

I think it's highly more likely that the kidnapper showed a picture of Sherlock to the kids and told them they were being moved because this man wanted to hurt them. Children like people who give them piles of candy. They were probably inclined to believe him. Then to see that same bad man at the police station, when you were supposed to have been rescued? Cue the freak-out.

IOU

I'll admit it. This is the one thing that has me all confused. We've established that there is no "code" that can open any locked door. Moriarty himself said as much, and was disappointed in Sherlock for pretending to believe it. But if there's no code, what does IOU refer to? It shows up several times in the episode, on windows, as graffiti.... What did the tapping mean? I've seen theories (I can't seem to find them right now) that point to all of it being a red herring. SO WHY DID MORIARTY THANK SHERLOCK BEFORE HE KILLED HIMSELF??? What happened to a) make Sherlock finally show his hand and b) cause Moriarty to see it? What's more, why didn't Sherlock just tell John what was happening? Why is it so important to confess to John that he's a fake? John knows he's the real deal, why bother trying to fool him?

Molly

Lastly, I want to stand up for the fact that Sherlock does, indeed, know that Molly is in love with him. And he uses that knowledge to his advantage. He spurns her advances as often as he can, but brings them out as soon as he needs something. All you need for proof is the cafeteria scene in "The Blind Banker."

Molly tells him that she can't let him see the bodies. Sherlock then compliments her new hairstyle. She folds, and when she turns her head away, see how quickly his smile drops.

He knows.

He rebuffed John in the first episode, because he didn't want things to be awkward with his future flatmate. You can't convince me that he hasn't picked up all the hints Molly has been throwing at him for the past God-knows-how-many years.

He knows.

He just doesn't have any compunction about manipulating her.

What do you all think is the thing we're missing? Any other good theories you heard? This one is one of my favorites and would be SO INTRIGUING and SO MOFFAT if it were true, but there are just as many loose threads with it as with the others (namely, the scene on the roof and Moriarty's suicide don't make sense anymore). All in all, I can't WAIT until Season 3 airs and we finally get some answers!