Oh, and once again, the end of the Doyle story in BBC occurs before, long before, the end of the actual story.

I wasn't that captivated by the Sherlock Holmes vs. Dracula novel I read.

There's a Holmes vs. Dracula novel? Of course there is. And Amazon's telling me there's a Sherlock Holmes vs. Zombies novel, too. [link]

I think I'll read House of Silk, first.

I don't think I'll bother with House of Silk, now that I've read the reviews and see that it places the death of Holmes at a date before His Last Bow, which is canon-canon and all.

That's worse that Supernatural tie-in novels getting Dean's eye color wrong.

Oh, and Plei, may I tag "you can be kind and still scheme. These are not mutually exclusive" ? Pretty please?

There's a Holmes vs. Dracula novel? Of course there is.

Yeah, and I found it kind of meh. Not enough Dracula for my tastes. But if I have to chose between Sherlock and Dracula, I'm going for the guy with the fangs. (Story of my life.)

Yes, yes you may.

One of the more interesting readings, by the way, that I've seen of the final scene and Mycroft's conversation with John in the cafe, is that part of the reason he's so certain she's actually dead is that he had a hand in putting her into that situation.

But it's had many many iterations and was almost constantly in play in movies/tv/comic strips/comic books for 80 years.

But they weren't revisited in the same way that Sherlock Holmes or Dracula is. The constant movies were essentially one franchise, though without the stricture we nerds apply today. Outside of that within my viewing lifetime, there's been one TV show, one live action movie, and one cartoon? And not that recently.

Not that it's not a well-visited trope. Just that it's not comparably visited. There's always a Dracula somewhere.

it places the death of Holmes at a date before His Last Bow, which is canon-canon and all.

That's unfortunate. If they're gonna meddle with the death date, I'd rather go with the way King pushes everything forward into the 1920s.

Plei, that is interesting. I can't imagine that he would tell John that she was dead and not expect Sherlock to figure it out, whatever other factors were in play.

I like the theory that Mycroft and Sherlock conspired to get her away from the terrorists, and now she's working for Mycroft. Mycroft tells John the cover story to let Sherlock know what info has gotten into general circulation, and so John can inadvertently help get it there. [I read this somewhere on Tumblr, and, like most things Tumblr, I doubt I'll ever be able to find it again for linking. Sorry.]

Oh, and to the terrorism point, we're watching a show where the title character was willing to give up state secrets for his flatmate, where the flatmate killed for the title character when they'd barely met, and where the brother of the title character does all sorts of cheerfully dubious things for king and country, and where no one has hands that are especially clean.