Episode 2.3, "The Reichenbach Fall"

[pirinja]

Thanks for the welcome Carol and Caya! I just got into the show, and it's so nice to talk to fellow fans about it!

 

@Carol: Ahh, I see what you're saying, and I completely agree. The tabloids are so dreadful that I doubt they would've taken the time to actually research "Rick Brook" before writing a smear story on Sherlock. It just bothers me that Moriarty, Sherlock's archnemesis and  a supposed genius, wouldn't bother to do a thorough job of something! This is just my inner-fangirl speaking, but it's like he doesn't quite deserve to be Sherlock's nemesis if he can't even do one job properly, haha.

 

 

[Julia Mae]

 

 

As for the ball, a lot of people are dedicated to the ball theory, and I can see Moffat using it.    But I tend to expect him to be hiding the means, to make the significant clues more subtle, so when the BIG REVEAL happens in Series 3, he can flashback and show what was there all along that the viewers didn't notice.

If it turns out that What Really Happened is not what any of us expected, I don't expect it to be the least bit convoluted. I think it'll be a real face-palm moment!

 

 

I agree completely, I don't think it will be convoluted at all.  I also think we'll have to ignore a lot of "reality" in terms of what actually appeared on screen to be able to accept it.  I think I'll post the ring so we can all listen together.  Stand by!

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

I will say that I'm wondering whether The Truck may be just a tad too obvious.  Yes, I know it was on screen for all of -- what? -- one second?  But even though I watched the episode several times before I spotted it, I knew it had to be there.  Its presence seemed obvious, because open-topped garbage trucks were a favorite escape mechanism on 70's and 80's American television.  And probably the reason it took me so long to spot it was that it isn't an American-style open-topped garbage truck.  Nevertheless, it's very close to the old American cliche, which may have been enough to keep Moftiss from using it for real, but demoting it to red-herring status.

 

 

 

 

I think I'll post the ring so we can all listen together.  Stand by!

 

Oh, the telephone ring.  Duh!  Took a while for that to sink in.

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

Thanks for the welcome Carol and Caya! I just got into the show, and it's so nice to talk to fellow fans about it!

Good time to be getting into it -- you won't have long to wait for the third series! And great to have you join us, so we have one more fellow fan to chat with!

 

 

@Carol: Ahh, I see what you're saying, and I completely agree. The tabloids are so dreadful that I doubt they would've taken the time to actually research "Rick Brook" before writing a smear story on Sherlock. It just bothers me that Moriarty, Sherlock's archnemesis and  a supposed genius, wouldn't bother to do a thorough job of something! This is just my inner-fangirl speaking, but it's like he doesn't quite deserve to be Sherlock's nemesis if he can't even do one job properly, haha.

Moriarty apparently didn't believe in wasting energy, especially his own. He didn't bother coming up with some all-purpose method of breaking into high-security institutions, he just did it the old-fashioned way, one institution at a time. And he ridiculed Sherlock for wanting everything to be complicated. So it wouldn't surprise me at all if his motto was "good enough is good enough" for just about everything.

[Julia Mae]

The pictures here should correspond very closely to the show, except the last two I just stuck in to get to the end of what I recorded.  You'll not how silent it is after Sherlock hits the ground, until the sound effect of John being hit and falling.  Then the phone rings.  THAT'S when they bring back the music, the pitch of the violin set to match the pitch of the phone ring that starts again during the overhead shot.  The top sound is the music, the next level is John groaning, the bottom is the ringing, which is almost totally obscured.

 

I think they made sure the first ring was isolated, except for a faint groan from John, so we couldn't cry foul later, they can say "It was quite clear." 

 

BUT - arguing against my hypothesis is the fact that if you go back to ASIP, when the phones ring after John leaves the crime scene, whether in the phoneboxes or the restaurant, they make a distinctive double-ring.   Anyway, check it out.

 

 

 

[Julia Mae]

 

Moriarty apparently didn't believe in wasting energy, especially his own. He didn't bother coming up with some all-purpose method of breaking into high-security institutions, he just did it the old-fashioned way, one institution at a time. And he ridiculed Sherlock for wanting everything to be complicated. So it wouldn't surprise me at all if his motto was "good enough is good enough" for just about everything.

 

 

I agree.  We don't even know for sure anything was erased, really, we just see the stuff he gave Kitty.  Sherlock said she wasn't smart, maybe she never really checked him out.  It's a tabloid-ish paper anyway, isn't it? 

 

Earlier, during the trial, there are newspaper reports that refer to Moriarty as being born in Ireland, so someone has checked him out and that research can't be erased.   And of course, the government had him locked up and beaten on for a while, that's hardly something Sherlock could pay Jim to volunteer for or get Mycroft to go along with.  To what end?

 

I believe all of this supports the idea that Sherlock and Mycroft ran a con on Moriarty, all the while letting him think  he was calling the shots.  (The Most Dangerous Game) All Moriarty needed was to believe Sherlock believed it (Sherlock coming all emotionally unglued in the reporter's apartment seems pretty convincing) so he could maneuver Sherlock into a position to die in disgrace.   

 

After that, Moriarty doesn't care, he's not planning on living any longer.

 

[Caya]

 

After that, Moriarty doesn't care, he's not planning on living any longer.

 

Wow, your video was ... super, actually, but brought back all the Reichenflashbacks (I sure won't watch that episode again before S3 is out *shudder*).

 

So you think that Moriarty's suicide wasn't spontaneous? Makes a lot of sense, with the whole "staying alive" motif, and he probably didn't bring the gun for Sherlock (too easy). Poor bugger, if he'd received the help he so obviously needed he would have been better off (not to mention a whole lot of other people, as well).

 

[Julia Mae]

 

 

After that, Moriarty doesn't care, he's not planning on living any longer.

 

So you think that Moriarty's suicide wasn't spontaneous? Makes a lot of sense, with the whole "staying alive" motif, and he probably didn't bring the gun for Sherlock (too easy). Poor bugger, if he'd received the help he so obviously needed he would have been better off (not to mention a whole lot of other people, as well).

 

 

Go to the end of The Great Game and watch the pool scene.     When Sherlock takes aim at the bomb, Moriarty is not visibly upset, frightened or  willing to walk away even though he knows he will die, also.   When the phone rings with the "Stayin' Alive" tune,  whatever he hears causes him to become instantaneously very angry.   Why is he angry?  If it's indeed Irene Adler on the phone,  what could she tell him to make him angry?  He's angry, it seems to me, because he has to interrupt his plan: to kill Sherlock and die, himself.  RATS!  I have to live some more!

 

Moriarty tells Sherlock over and over I.O.U.   A fall.  Why?  What did Sherlock ever do to him, really, other than act as an agent for law and order?  But there are all kinds of cops and detectives and guys who beat him up for Mycroft, I mean, he isn't obsessing about owing them a fall.  This is all on my blog, but it's obvious that Moriarty actually knows Sherlock, or of him,  from their childhoods.  Something happened.   If you rewatch The Great Game,  Moriarty tells Sherlock that it's personal, "This is between you and me, Sherlock."    Moriarty has to destroy Sherlock as pay back for something.  Then he gets what he wants: oblivion. 

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

BUT - arguing against my hypothesis is the fact that if you go back to ASIP, when the phones ring after John leaves the crime scene, whether in the phoneboxes or the restaurant, they make a distinctive double-ring.

I have a bit of background in telephone technology, and if the central office serving that particular phone booth has fairly new (i.e., not hard-wired) equipment, it could conceivably be made to do just about anything as regards ringing if the right person (e.g., Mycroft) wants it done. Also (and this is just a conjecture, since I have very little experience with London pay phones), maybe the single and double ring are both used, for different purposes (for all I know, it's the double ring that's the exception).

 

 

I believe all of this supports the idea that Sherlock and Mycroft ran a con on Moriarty, all the while letting him think  he was calling the shots .... All Moriarty needed was to believe Sherlock believed it....

And they were simultaneously conning John. For his own good, of course, the elitist bastards! (Though I must admit that does seem to have been the safest course of action.)

 

 

He's angry, it seems to me, because he has to interrupt his plan: to kill Sherlock and die, himself.  RATS!  I have to live some more!

Yes -- when he says, "Sorry. Wrong day to die," he does sound genuinely regretful.

 

 

Moriarty tells Sherlock over and over I.O.U.   A fall.  Why?  ... it's obvious that Moriarty actually knows Sherlock, or of him,  from their childhoods.  Something happened.   If you rewatch The Great Game,  Moriarty tells Sherlock that it's personal, "This is between you and me, Sherlock."    Moriarty has to destroy Sherlock as pay back for something.

I disagree somewhat. While it's certainly possible that Moriarty is carrying a childhood grudge (after all, Sherlock did try really, really hard to ruin Jim's perfect murder of Carl Powers), I don't see that as a necessary assumption, or as necessarily the only factor, or even the main factor involved.

 

I am 5-foot-8, a bit tall for a woman (90th percentile), and I've noticed a bizarre reaction from a few of the many men who are slightly shorter than me, around 5-foot-6. I'm guessing that they fear themselves to be "deficient," but find consolation in the fact that at least they're taller than most women. Then when I show up, their reaction seems to be, "How dare you!"  If they can take offense at my very existence, then it seems to me that Jim could take offense at the very existence of the only person who's ever seriously challenged his intellectual superiority.  True, that reaction could date from the Powers incident.  But I suspect that it's Sherlock's existence that galls Jim, more so than the incident itself.

 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

And that, in itself, is a childhood incident. Sherlock is only ten years old when Moriarty kills Powers so Moriarty isn't very old himself.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Wow, your video was ... super, actually, but brought back all the Reichenflashbacks ....

And a void in the English language has now been filled -- great new word, Caya!

 

I watched most of the video once, but then the download failed (and I can't listen to videos at the library), so I shall be forced to watch the episode again soon (and that for me will not be a hardship!).

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

It is almost subliminal. And to my hearing it's almost the question, is there a phone ringing...or is it part of the music. I don't I would have noticed it at all if Julia hadn't pointed it out.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Part of the music, or the ringing in John's ears as a result of the impact.  I didn't really notice it either until somebody pointed it out, somewhere else.  Don't recall where/who that was, but they thought it was John's cell phone, which is, of course, another possibility.

 

[Julia Mae]

I have a bit of background in telephone technology, and if the central office serving that particular phone booth has fairly new (i.e., not hard-wired) equipment, it could conceivably be made to do just about anything as regards ringing if the right person (e.g., Mycroft) wants it done. Also (and this is just a conjecture, since I have very little experience with London pay phones), maybe the single and double ring are both used, for different purposes (for all I know, it's the double ring that's the exception).

Oh, that's really interesting. And I doubt that British technology is that different from ours.

  

 

And they were simultaneously conning John. For his own good, of course, the elitist bastards! (Though I must admit that does seem to have been the safest course of action.)

It's also traditional in terms of Canon. There was one story, cannot recall the title, where Sherlock convinces Watson he is deathly ill, denigrates his ability as a doctor, to get him to bring another doctor, the bad guy in this case, to the flat. (iirc) Why would he lie to Watson? According to Sherlock, Watson is just a terrible liar. And, of course, in the Canon, Sherlock hides his continued existence from Watson.

 

 

Moriarty tells Sherlock over and over I.O.U.   A fall.  Why?  ... it's obvious that Moriarty actually knows Sherlock, or of him,  from their childhoods.  Something happened.   If you rewatch The Great Game,  Moriarty tells Sherlock that it's personal, "This is between you and me, Sherlock."    Moriarty has to destroy Sherlock as pay back for something.

I disagree somewhat. While it's certainly possible that Moriarty is carrying a childhood grudge (after all, Sherlock did try really, really hard to ruin Jim's perfect murder of Carl Powers), I don't see that as a necessary assumption, or as necessarily the only factor, or even the main factor involved.

 

I am 5-foot-8, a bit tall for a woman (90th percentile), and I've noticed a bizarre reaction from a few of the many men who are slightly shorter than me, around 5-foot-6. I'm guessing that they fear themselves to be "deficient," but find consolation in the fact that at least they're taller than most women. Then when I show up, their reaction seems to be, "How dare you!"  If they can take offense at my very existence, then it seems to me that Jim could take offense at the very existence of the only person who's ever seriously challenged his intellectual superiority.  True, that reaction could date from the Powers incident.  But I suspect that it's Sherlock's existence that galls Jim, more so than the incident itself.

 

5'10" here, and I know exactly what you mean.  I've also been told women "shouldn't" be taller than  some height the man picks because it's shorter than he is.

 

I don't think it was Carl Powers.  I don't think it was anything we know about so far.  I thought I'd posted this, but I can't find it, now.  Anyway, you remember the suggestion in the DVD commentary that Sherlock's father had possibly had ... an affair or something?  Gatiss says they might "have it later" yet, he told Benedict Cumberbatch it was okay to say and he refused, anyway. 

 

There's nothing in the Canon, afaik, about Sherlock Holmes' parents.  But we have Mycroft in the very first episode talking about upsetting Mummy.  I think it will have something to do with their parents.  Is that necessarily true?  No, of course, not, it's speculative in the extreme for me.  But I think the evidence so far supports it as an hypothesis.  I think that Carl Powers business just is the clue that leads us back to both their childhoods, rather than being the only motivation behind his obsession with paying a revenge debt to Sherlock.

 

[Julia Mae]

And that, in itself, is a childhood incident. Sherlock is only ten years old when Moriarty kills Powers so Moriarty isn't very old himself.

 

Can I ask, and I'm not disagreeing at all, how you know he was 10 years old?  I'd love to have a confirmation of that.

 

[Julia Mae]

It is almost subliminal. And to my hearing it's almost the question, is there a phone ringing...or is it part of the music. I don't I would have noticed it at all if Julia hadn't pointed it out.

 

And I watched it at least ten times without noticing it until my daughter pointed it out, and she'd only seen it the one time two years ago! (Oh, to have a young brain again!) 

 

Carol said:

Part of the music, or the ringing in John's ears as a result of the impact.  I didn't really notice it either until somebody pointed it out, somewhere else.  Don't recall where/who that was, but they thought it was John's cell phone, which is, of course, another possibility.

 

I hadn't thought of John's cell phone.   Huh.  Why would anyone be calling John, though?  I mean, it wouldn't be random, it would have to be part of the story, have some plot purpose. 

 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

The mention of Sherlock's age at the time of the Powers incident is mentioned in TGG when John and Sherlock are in a taxi. I think it's either 10 or 13.

[Carol the Dabbler]

If it's there, I haven't been able to find it.  Here's the scene from Ariane DeVere's transcript:
 

SHERLOCK (softly): Oh.
(John looks across the lab, trying to see what his friend is looking at.)
JOHN: What?
SHERLOCK (softly): Carl Powers.
JOHN: Sorry, who?
SHERLOCK (still staring into the distance): Carl Powers, John.
JOHN: What is it?
SHERLOCK: It’s where I began.
 
Later, the boys are in the back of a taxi.
SHERLOCK: Nineteen eighty-nine, a young kid – champion swimmer – came up from Brighton for a school sports tournament; drowned in the pool. Tragic accident.
(He shows John the front page of a newspaper on his phone.)
SHERLOCK: You wouldn’t remember it. Why should you?
JOHN: But you remember.
SHERLOCK: Yes.
JOHN: Something fishy about it?
SHERLOCK: Nobody thought so – nobody except me. I was only a kid myself. I read about it in the papers.
JOHN: Started young, didn’t you?
SHERLOCK: The boy, Carl Powers, had some kind of fit in the water, but by the time they got him out it was too late. But there was something wrong; something I couldn’t get out of my head.
JOHN: What?
SHERLOCK: His shoes.
JOHN: What about them?
SHERLOCK: They weren’t there. I made a fuss; I tried to get the police interested, but nobody seemed to think it was important. He’d left all the rest of his clothes in his locker, but there was no sign of his shoes ...
(He leans down and picks up a bag containing the trainers.)
SHERLOCK: ... until now.

I'm sure there've been all sorts of fan stories regarding Sherlock's childhood.  Maybe you're thinking of one of those?

 

[Bakerstreet Irregular]

Huh, that's very strange. I could have sworn it was in the episode. I'll have to take a listen.

[Carol the Dabbler]

... if the central office serving that particular phone booth has fairly new (i.e., not hard-wired) equipment, it could conceivably be made to do just about anything as regards ringing if the right person (e.g., Mycroft) wants it done.

Oh, that's really interesting. And I doubt that British technology is that different from ours.

 

Right, the technology is fairly universal (even though the details vary all over the place -- for example, the Japanese dial tone sounds very similar to the American busy signal). Alex also has a background in telephone technology, so I ran this by him, and he agrees -- depending on the equipment serving that phone, just about anything is possible.

  

 

Why would he lie to Watson? According to Sherlock [in the canon], Watson is just a terrible liar.

 

And our dear John doesn't seem to be much different!

 

 

5'10" here, and I know exactly what you mean.  I've also been told women "shouldn't" be taller than  some height the man picks because it's shorter than he is.

 

Good Lord, nobody's ever actually said anything like that to me -- that's incredibly rude!  The hostile  looks that I occasionally get are quite bad enough.  (And I once had a boss like that -- which made for a very interesting couple of years!)

 

Since a somewhat-tall woman and a somewhat-short man each differ from the norm in a way considered "inappropriate" for their gender, you'd think they might feel a common bond -- but I guess there are buttheads in any group.  Oddly enough, I've never gotten that hostile vibe from a really short man.

 

 

I hadn't thought of John's cell phone.   Huh.  Why would anyone be calling John, though?

 

Same reason they'd be calling the phone booth?  

 

[Julia Mae]

The mention of Sherlock's age at the time of the Powers incident is mentioned in TGG when John and Sherlock are in a taxi. I think it's either 10 or 13.

 

I just rewatched to be sure.  They never mention an age.  It's interesting because on tumblr I just asked someone how they knew the ages when they posted this:

 

friendly reminder that Moriarty was eleven years old when he committed his first murder ... Friendly reminder that Sherlock was 8 when he tried to solve it.   (It's here  )

 

 

I have the idea, for some reason that Sherlock is 27 when Series One opens, I don't know why I think that.  I think we logically have to make him at least 30, which would make him 10. I always thought of Carl Powers as being like 13-14 from the picture. But I don't think we have a bit of Canon for all of this. 

 

 

[Julia Mae]

And our dear John doesn't seem to be much different!

 

And we don't want him to be!  John has that old-fashioned thing called "character." 

 

Good Lord, nobody's ever actually said anything like that to me -- that's incredibly rude!  The hostile  looks that I occasionally get are quite bad enough.  (And I once had a boss like that -- which made for a very interesting couple of years!)

 

I was sitting down at the time, had gone to a mixer thing with a girlfriend, I was in my twenties, when some man came and struck up a conversation by telling me some woman who must have been 5'8" had the nerve to ask him to dance!  Then he said, "Women shouldn't be taller than 5'6', right, I mean, what was she thinking?"  He just dripped contempt.

 

So I stood up.  I had heels on.  (BTW, as a young woman I was darned hot!)

 

He left.

 

Buh-bye!

 

 

 

I hadn't thought of John's cell phone.   Huh.  Why would anyone be calling John, though?

 

Same reason they'd be calling the phone booth?  

 

The ring is pretty deliberate. I'm really sorry you couldn't play the video, I tried to make it short and simple so you could. Anyway, it's deliberately subtle, but also quite distinctive. I mean, there's no sound leading up to it, so it's soft but nothing interferes with it. I cannot imagine this is accidental, or not part of the solution.  So, if calling the booth is a signal, it only works if someone can hear it.  And no one is near John but John.  If Moffat rings John's phone then, it can't be a signal.  I'm back to the phone booth.

 

BTW - at my library, each computer has it's own CPU and you can plug headphones into it.  Not at yours?

[Julia Mae]

And that, in itself, is a childhood incident. Sherlock is only ten years old when Moriarty kills Powers so Moriarty isn't very old himself.

 

Wait!  I got it:

 

 

After he solves it, Sherlock puts the solution online along with Carl Powers birth-death years: 1978-1989.  That makes Carl Powers 11.  That makes Moriarty 11 if he is a classmate.  I don't think he has to be, but I'm okay with him being the same age. 

 

Why do I think Sherlock was so young?  I have a vague memory of listening to an interview with Benedict Cumberbatch where he said something about 27 and I thought, "Hay! That's the age I thought he was playing him!"

 

I think I have that memory.  My memory is not that good.  Maybe someone else said it. But I do recall having the thought. 

[Carol the Dabbler]

John has that old-fashioned thing called "character."

Oh God, yes!

 

 

... he said, "Women shouldn't be taller than 5'6', right, I mean, what was she thinking?"  He just dripped contempt.

 

So I stood up.  I had heels on.

 

 

... if calling the booth is a signal, it only works if someone can hear it.  And no one is near John but John.  If Moffat rings John's phone then, it can't be a signal.  I'm back to the phone booth.

Quite true -- if it is indeed a signal -- which I am more than happy to believe at this point. But we don't know that for sure.

 

 

BTW - at my library, each computer has it's own CPU and you can plug headphones into it.  Not at yours?

I've been taking my own laptop (which I assume could be fitted with headphones, have been meaning to look into that). Don't know about the library's computers, could check, I suppose.

[Carol the Dabbler]

After he solves it, Sherlock puts the solution online along with Carl Powers birth-death years: 1978-1989.  That makes Carl Powers 11.  That makes Moriarty 11 if he is a classmate.  I don't think he has to be, but I'm okay with him being the same age.

Here is, I think, all that Moriarty says (through one of his victims) about Carl Powers:

 

YOUNG MAN: Clever you, guessing about Carl Powers.

YOUNG MAN: I never liked him.

YOUNG MAN: Carl laughed at me, so I stopped him laughing.

... though he does repeat the bit about stopping Carl, later at the pool.

 

And note that Sherlock says:

 

JOHN: Anything on the Carl Powers case?

SHERLOCK: Nothing. All the living classmates check out spotless. No connection.

JOHN: Maybe the killer was older than Carl?

SHERLOCK: The thought had occurred.

 

 Somebody has pointed out that Moriarty could well have been a competitor of Carl's from another school (which might explain the laughing) -- so maybe not a classmate, but the same age more or less.

 

On the other hand, Moriarty could have been one of Carl's neighbors, or even one of his younger teachers -- anybody, really.  Kids laugh at a lot of people.  I'm also intrigued by Sherlock's use of the word "living" -- what if Moriarty was one of Carl's classmates, but disappeared by faking  his own death and changing his name?

 

About all that we can really say for sure about Moriarty's age is what we see for ourselves.  He's clearly an adult, but clearly not an old man.  Somewhere between, say, twenty (and mature for his age) and fifty (but well-preserved)?

 

Or we could just look up Andrew Scott on IMDb.     Seriously, I think that may be our best bet, barring any textual "smoking guns."  After all, actors are cast in their roles because they are a good fit for the character.  As of "The Great Game" (filmed, I assume, in late 2009 and/or early 2010), Andrew Scott (born October 21, 1976) was 33 years old, and so was Benedict Cumberbatch (born July 19, 1976).  So in 1989, both Moriarty and Sherlock were presumably something like 12 or 13 years old.