I've always had the impression that even though Alicia may not want the political titles, she enjoys the power those political titles/positions bring. Alicia never likes to admit that she enjoys having Peter as a governor/State's Attorney/potential VP candidate because his position/bullying/pulling strings opens doors…

This. Sometimes, I wonder if Josh Charles saw the cliff before anyone else and left the show because it. Hmm.

It's not that surprising to think about, given the fact that most male/female leads in movies always have a considerable age gap. The older man/younger woman trope will never go away in Hollywood, it seems, because it's one of the ultimate male fantasies.

It's not that surprising to think about, given the fact that most male/female leads in movies always have a considerable age gap. The older man/younger woman trope will never go away in Hollywood, it seems, because it's one of the ultimate male fantasies.

Can someone please tell me about the ending? I have no plans of watching this.

Ah! See what you did there? You downplayed!

I feel bad for him because when this show ends—hopefully sooner rather than later—I fear he might not be able to find any substantial acting work because of his lack of material to work with on The Good Wife.

You thought Season 2 wasn't boring?

And if Leo hadn't been wearing that fur, the bear would have left him alone.

I don't understand what you mean.

Lol! The cookies were wonderful. Thanks for asking!

It wasn't bold at all. And having Sherlock, a man, explain the movement and the women's motivations, instead of having Molly or someone else do it, just undermined the moment for me. I know that was Sherlock's mind palace and as such, he has to be the most clever person in the room but it just didn't sit well with me.

I think the actors and the writers could have had great fun and still provided us with a compelling plot. I just find it frustrating that we waited a year plus and got this. I even remember reading quotes from Benedict Cumberbatch about his initial reluctance with the special: "I thought they had finally lost the…

I remember watching that episode so distinctly, the whole season for that matter, and thinking someone had turned a dial too far to the left. Sherlock (the show) was just off. Same thing happened with this special. I kept checking my clock, thinking, "Any minute, they're going to get to the good stuff. We're going to…

I think you're mistaking my questions about the episode as misunderstanding the episode. I know what happened and I understood what happened. I just didn't find it as highly entertaining and clever as you apparently did.

We can agree to disagree but you don't need to be sarcastic.

Something could have been easily explained in the first ten to fifteen minutes of series 4 or could have been a subplot in series 4.

But my question is why? Why waste the time, energy, money, the actors, for this self-indulgent, self-parody thing? We've waited over a year for this. More than enough time for Moffat and Gatiss to make a half-decent murder mystery to keep us going until series 4 (which might not air until 2017) and we get this…

Thank you!! You can clearly see the divide between Doyle's influence in series 1 and 2 and Moffat's heavy-handedness in series 3. Moffat, at his worst, is notorious for convoluted, over the top plots and slapstick (I'm thinking of series 3, episode 2 here). Same thing happens with Doctor Who.

I mentioned this possibility (though in not as much detail) in my original post.