"Reichenbach" Revisited

[Inge l-w]

 

 

It's kinda blurry, but judging by Google Satellite View, I think that sidewalk is right around ten feet wide, which is 3 meters. Then you'd need to add the distance from where Sherlock is standing on the ledge to the actual edge of the roof, plus the distance from the curb to the center line of the truck.

Oi, it's hard being a filmmaker nowaday... You have people who just go and look up on Google. Or visit the place with StreetView and point out "faults" that are nothing else than usual methods of filmmaking. :P

 

I did. I can provide a pic if requested. There are actually two spots on Bart's roof where the scene was shot. One for showing Sherlock from John's POV, and another one for the showdown between Sherlock and Moriarty. It doesn't mean that S was actually cheating. It would be like accusing 221B's door being a beaming machine because the street is in London and the interior... er... somewhere else, far far away. This is how movies are shot. Now, if there was a normal show, I would say it is wrong to make cutting techniques into conspiracy theories, but with Mofftiss - I would say there is a 5-10% chance that there might be something...

 

Now, to the theories:

There is only one "true" version of the fall. It is the one we have seen in TRF. This version has huge holes, but I wouldn't fill them with anything that was shown in TEH.

 

What we see?

Sherlock jumping from the roof.

A living person falling - that's why a dummy or dead body double don't work - they don't try to stabilize their fall. It doesn't have to be Sherlock, but don't try to prove it by making screencaps of the fall - the guy flying is OF COURSE not BC. That's what the stuntmen are for.

Then there is a body hitting the pavement.

Later we see it from above with people gathering around. (it could mean someone is observing the scene from above, or it's just another camera angle)

John is coming and fighting his way to the body. I write body because it could be a double. IMO John was in shock, and because he actually saw Sherlock jumping, he wouldn't recognize a fake - we all see what we expect to see and not what's there - and John was absolutely focused on the idea of dead Sherlock lying on the ground.

Alternatively it could be Sherlock faking death with the false blood and the ball trick. But John is prevented from any longer contact with... whoever lies there.

 

So far so good.

 

I am really not sure if S deducted a possibility of Moriarty shooting himself. But even if - there were more options, and in other alternate outcomes M was alive. And that's why any preparations had to be hidden not only from John, but also from M on the roof and from the sniper who seems to hide somewhere in the building on the opposite side of the street.

So Big Blue doesn't work for me. Too big, too loud. A simple Life Net would be more handy, but M would have seen it from above. Even if he was few steps away from the edge after S asked for a minute of privacy, still the "dead-body-on-the-ground" scenery had to be prepared in few seconds.

 

 

Well, I think the Mary Poppins theory fits the best so far.

 

umbrella.jpg

Sorry, In the extra material Benedict said it was him falling onto a far closer surface and the whole thing he described as fast,fast, fast, slow, no stuntmen there. His body double was used in the explanation with the Big Blue Thing.

[J.P.]

Yep, but he's talking about filming, not the final product. There were surely few hundreds of takes for each angle of filming - for the fall in TRF and for the "fall theories" from TEH.

One take

Another take...

 

There is more somewhere, I can look for it when I'm back home.

[sherlockandjohn]

Did you spot any hobbitses?  :D

 

You know what, I didn't, not even in Hobbiton!  :P But I got to see quite a few of the LoTR filming locations, so I suppose that makes up for it.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Sorry, In the extra material Benedict said it was him falling onto a far closer surface and the whole thing he described as fast,fast, fast, slow, no stuntmen there. His body double was used in the explanation with the Big Blue Thing.

Not sure which part of J. P.'s post you're replying to, but I believe the far closer surface applied only to his stepping off the roof -- there was another roof (which we never saw) just a few feet down. The fast, fast, slow part was him talking about the interminable middle of the fall, when he was on a rope. And whatever we saw hit the pavement, I doubt that was either him or a stunt double -- just a dark, heavy thing.  But none of that rules out Cumberbatch's stunt double being used for some angles of some scenes.  (And of course, he finally got to play a role of his own -- the corpse!)

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

It's kinda blurry, but judging by Google Satellite View, I think that sidewalk is right around ten feet wide, which is 3 meters.  Then you'd need to add the distance from where Sherlock is standing on the ledge to the actual edge of the roof, plus the distance from the curb to the center line of the truck.

Oi, it's hard being a filmmaker nowaday... You have people who just go and look up on Google. Or visit the place with StreetView and point out "faults" that are nothing else than usual methods of filmmaking.    :P

Just in case anyone's wondering why that map link takes you to St. Bartholomew's Church on the banks of the Allegheny River -- the forum software has truncated the URL. I tried to repair it, but it did the same thing. So if you're wanting to look at The Scene of the Fall, let's see if I can post a full-length link when it's NOT in a quote.

 

Added:  Apparently not.  However, the link in my original post still works.  Or you can use this Google Short URL (yay! it works!).

 

[J.P.]

Okay, evil Google, you leave me no choce:



1 is the where they had to build the door and the chimneys (and one was even fuming)

2 is the edge where Moriarty sits at the beginning and from there Sherlock is jumping. The whole scene between M and S was shot there. Benedict (or the stunt double) probably jumped onto another Big Blue where the bus stop sign is - the other roof seems to be few meters beneath.

3 is the spot where we see Sherlock from John's POV.

I could swear there was a function at google maps which allowed you to link a single coordinates by clicking something, now I can't find it.

 

Another clip with flying Sherlock
 
This clip is interpreting a little too much into simple continuity mistakes.
 
And this clip (first take) is really interesting. Moriarty and Mycroft shaking hands?! I wonder if it is something that ended in a waste bin, or there are still some facts or conspiracy theories to come in S4. Edited to add: or a red herring.

 

But none of that rules out Cumberbatch's stunt double being used for some angles of some scenes.  (And of course, he finally got to play a role of his own -- the corpse!)

 

Hah! I noticed this just today!
 

[Carol the Dabbler]

Thanks for that numbered photo, J.P.!  I'd seen something like that online ages ago, but had no idea where to find it.

 

 

OK, if I'm understanding you properly, #3 is the "real" location -- obviously the one we see from John's point of view, and it also seems to be the one in the first stunt video you posted (where the fan camera was a short distance down Hosier Lane in this view).  Then #s 1 and 2 are the roof that we mostly see when we're up there (though the downward shots from there -- e.g., looking down at the bus stop area or at John -- are still from #3).  When Sherlock first steps off the roof, Cumberbatch "merely" falls onto the lower roof (where the Bus Stop logo is on your photo -- though not quite where the actual bus stop is, of course).

 

That explains why I was never able to find the #2 roof on Satellite View -- those were stunt chimney pots!

 

I believe that the shot of Mycroft shaking Moriarty's hand was later confirmed to be a "mess with their heads" moment, just to confuse the fans.  So -- a real-life red herring.

 

[J.P.]

Thanks for confirming that I was understood here.

 

I was also confused by the chimneys. But there is no other possibility. I checked all buildings we see during the scene, including St.Paul's Cathedral in the south and very remarkable buildings in Little Britain (look for Little Britain (Stop SV) in Google) in the east. Plus the facades at the other side of the street, plus the tree and the strange pipe construction on the other roof.

 

Things we do when we're bored... 

 

I think they also built that wall-thingy for M to sit on and S to jump.

[Carol the Dabbler]

I think you're right -- other than the lack of stairs and chimneys, that building fits what I remember from the episode, with that long rectangular thing in the middle.  Will have to pay attention next time I watch.  Would love to go up there and have a look -- too bad there isn't a real staircase!  :D

 

[J.P.]

Call Bart's and ask. Maybe they do guided tours  :D  

There is no staircase but a ladder, it's a shadow in the pic, but you see it clearly in the film. 

 

Here is another roof screencap from GoogleEarth in 3D.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Thanks, J.P.!  I've been trying to figure out where that roof is in relation to what one can see from the street, and that image answers the question very neatly -- basically just past the other end of the same building from where Sherlock was looking down at John.

 

[littlefoot]

I think we could explore Sherlock's "It's a magic trick" some more.

I've watched recently a live show of a fairly famous magician, and I re-watched Christopher Nolan's deceptive movie "The Prestige". Mofftiss clearly borrowed from existing magic tricks, and they really pilfered "The Prestige" for ideas.

Sherlock and Moriarty can be seen as duelling magicians, who try to best each other, like Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale in the movie. Hugh Jackman's character even says "I've beaten you", when he visits Christian Bale's character in jail after he had successfully framed him for murder - like Moriarty on the roof, when he has turned Sherlock publicly into a fraud.

Also, it's never quite clear in the movie if the narrative the audience gets presented with is what really happened. Much of the film's plot is presented to us through diaries both magicians wrote - where they deliberately tampered with the truth because they anticipated that the other would read it. There's a very interesting thread for those who want to explore the movie some more.

 

http://taylorholmes.com/2009/08/the-prestige-explained

 

I think it's worth to remember that Sherlock's version of events is recorded - much like the magicians' misleading tales in a diary. I'd conclude there's a good reason for this. There must be another intended audience or recipient than Anderson. But if Sherlock told the truth, why of all people would he go to Anderson instead of John (I'm assuming here that Mycroft knows what happened) or Lestrade? One reason could be that Sherlock has some ulterior reason to tell a bunch of half truths intended for someone else besides Anderson, and he doesn't want to tell John more lies. He has seen now how hard his first deception hit John.

 

But is there a hint in Sherlock's recorded version, that he's manipulating the truth? Something besides the jarring Big Blue? I think, we can all agree that the version we saw in RF is the truth, even if they cleverly hid the mechanisms of Sherlock's faked death. It's mostly straight story telling through nobody's eyes - with two notable exceptions. I will cover them later. So, if we find something in Sherlock's narrative to Anderson, which is notably different than what we see in RF I would conclude that Sherlock isn't telling the truth. And I found a few very interesting differences:

 

While Sherlock tells Anderson his version of RF we are privvy to the "film" in Sherlock's head. And there are indeed a few things which aren't compatible with what we saw in RF:

There's the blood on the pavement for example. In RF we get a shot of Sherlock's body from above, which shows his head lying in a blood puddle BEFORE the helpers come and do the window dressing. But in Sherlock's Lazarus version there's no blood on the pavement - until he lies down and gets blood squirted over his face. There are more little thing, and you could chalk them up as continuity errors. But there's one that can't be expained away as a mistake IMO:

 

When I saw Lazarus first, I was struck by the difference of atmoshere and light between RF and Lazarus. And then it hit me: Lazarus felt so different because the narrative in Sherlock's head is set in a different season of the year! In RF all the trees have leafs. But there are no leafs on the trees in Lazarus! Some might still explain this away with a very crass continuity error and the restricted timing of the shooting. But I don't think that works. They could've easily filmed Lazarus without showing us any trees. And Mofftiss said repeatedly they had filmed already most of the material for the real RF solution when they shot RF - which makes sense. This way you can avoid continuity errors like the missing leafs. That's basic stuff for a good director.

But the material we get from RF for Sherlock's Lazarus tale are only scenes we've seen already in RF - like Jim whipping out his pistol and portions of Sherlock's jump. We get lot's of new material - which can be easily made out by the difference of light and season. But we hardly get anything which was shot two years earlier and we haven't seen before.

Since they had a Big Blue Pillow at the set of RF, as pictures from fans show - obviously they needed it for the stunts - it's very hard to explain why they shot new material with all these continuity errors. Unless this is a hint that what we see in Sherlock's head as the Lazarus version isn't the full truth!

 

If one makes things up it's normally a mixture of invention and truth. You make things up with the material in your head right now. So, why would Sherlock's version take place in autumn or winter when RF obviously happened in spring or summer? I think, he simply took the season of the moment when he talks to Anderson as a background for the film in his head. And that was around Guy Fawkes Day in autumn.

He also populates some parts of his homeless helpers with images of persons who have been recently on his mind but who clearly don't belong to the homeless network: Most notably is the woman with the bullterrier, who is introduced to us in a photo as one of Sherlock's rats. But we see her later as a helper for staging Lazarus. Sherlock must've made that up!

There are a few other thing which don't match with the material from RF, but for me the different season is the most important thing. Even if Mofftiss had changed their minds and wanted all new material they still could've come up with shots without trees. I'm not ready to chalk up all these inconsistencies as blatant errors and mistakes.

 

Back to poor Anderson: He only listens to Sherlock's narrative and isn't privvy to Sherlock's mind. He doesn't have the chance to discover all those discrepancies. Thus we can hardly blame him for grudgingly accepting Sherlock's tale - if he ever does. He seems to change his mind quickly ;)

[J.P.]

That's interesting. I just noticed the naked trees and wanted to give it a next look...

The scene is a mix of "summer" and "winter" and what you write makes sense. 

 

BUT...

the inappropriate foliage - it happened more than once. The scene when John goes to the Power Plant to meet Irene, there are green shrubs clearly visible (and they could be easily desaturated in post production, so they don't stand out). During Christmas at Sherlock's parents' and Appledore sequence there is so much greenery around, you wonder if this is England of New Zealand. 

 

So they don't take it too seriously IMO.

[Arcadia]

Also I don't think they really expect us to watch with that level of attention. (I know I don't, which is why I'm so easily fooled!) But I think most of their intentional clues are in relatively plain sight, so to speak. Things like the squash ball and remarks like "the other one".  Of course, we don't know which things are clues until they reveal the answer, do we? *Sigh.*

[littlefoot]

Many of us Sherlockians were mystified by Sherlock going to Anderson and telling him of all people, how he did (or didn't do) it.

And it's indeed puzzling. If Sherlock told Anderson the truth it's strange. As I said above, why couldn't he tell John or Lestrade?

If Sherlock let Anderson record a bunch of lies, it's still strange. Sherlock can be cruel and insensitive without being aware of it. But why would he intentionally mess with Anderson for no reason - the only guy who still believed in Sherlock and founded The Empty Hearse? And Anderson's Empty Hearse might actually provide the answer:

If Sherlock's recorded narrative was meant for someone else besides Anderson, I'd guess it was for the other members or one other member of The Empty Hearse. Remember, The Empty Hearse was a bunch of people who not only speculated about Sherlock still being alive, they also looked for telltale signs of his whereabouts. Now, if I were part of Moriarty's network and noticed that someone was dismantling it, I would apply immediately for membership in Anderson's club! I would try to infiltrate it in order to learn more. If Sherlock suspected a mole in The Empty Hearse and wanted to feed him false information it definitely makes sense to have it recorded by Anderson.

The Empty Hearse didn't dissolve btw after Sherlock's return. They are still working in HLV, doing the inofficial drugs bust in Sherlock's appartment. That would be a very comfortable position for a mole.

[littlefoot]

J.P and Arcadia, it's true there are other continuity errors. It's fiction after all. You can never be sure what's a clue and what's a mistake - and that's quite frustrating ;)

But I think concerning the Lazarus tale the mistakes and implausibilities really add up. And why did they shoot so much new material in the first place? It costs time and money - especially an outdoor shooting with lots of extras. Why didn't they just use the material they had alledgedly shot in Season 2? Also, shouldn't such an important part of the show as this narrative be constructed with extra care?

And the different season isn't the only discrepancy in Sherlock's tale. I mentioned a few, but there are more. I will come to that separately.

[Carol the Dabbler]

There are a whole lot more questions than answers, that's for sure!

 

I concur with those who have suggested that Hartswood doesn't seem to worry much about whether trees have leaves or not.  There's a deciduous-type tree just down the block from #221 that appears to be in full leaf at Christmas time in "Scandal."

 

As for the trees at Bart's, though, there was another real-life factor at work.  The three trees that are visible along the street (just beyond the bus shelter) in "Reichenbach" had been cut down during the intervening two years.  When we were there in May of 2013, there were still places for them in the sidewalk, but the trees themselves were all gone.

 

[littlefoot]

Remember, most of the Lazarus material was shot for Season 3. By then Mofftiss & Co would definitely expect that detailed attention level from many fans. They've seen us speculating up a storm for two years after all. And they encouraged it by telling us all the relevant clues are there. Which incidentally rises the dvd sales... ;)

So I have a hard time believing Lazarus wasn't constructed very carefully, even if they slip up now and then elsewhere.

[littlefoot]

Carol, that they cut some trees doesn't matter a whole lot. The other trees are still leafless and place Lazarus in a different season.

And the huge question remains, why they didn't use simply material they had alledgedly shot in season 2. If the trees got cut down, they should've been extra aware of possible continuity errors. And outdoor shooting in big cities, especially with lots of extras is expensive. Why do it all over again?

[littlefoot]

I remember interviews with directors who talked about the difficulties of doing re-shoots after a certain time lapse, and how tedious it is to reproduce every little detail. It's definitely something directors are acutely aware of. So , it's something they rather avoid if possible.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Right, and I don't understand why they did it, either, but they did.  If you look at the Series 3 filming threads, you will see setlock photos of all sorts of scenes at Bart's.  Frankly, I think they do it primarily because when they film a cliffhanger -- even though they have the next series mapped out in a general sort of way -- they do not yet know exactly what scenes they will need for the followup.  They had to shoot a good bit of new footage for the pool scene at the beginning of "Scandal," too.

 

[littlefoot]

I know that they did reshoots for the pool scene - can't remember all the reasons for that. I think Mofftiss said that the actors had visibly aged and changed within two years (Benedict says that, too in the commentary), and it wasn't credible anymore to use the same scene they had shot for TGG. Which shows that they DO care about continuity - sometimes, lol!

They didn't have this problem in season 3 since there was a time lapse of 2 years in the story. I wonder how they'll deal with it in season 4? They can't have another time jump since the Moriarty gif conundrum has to be dealt with immediately. I guess we just have to accept and overlook age induced differences.

What strikes me as significant in the Lazarus version is the fact that they apparently didn't use anything from the unaired material they alledgedly shot during the making of season 2. All we get is footage which has already been shown in RF. Someone claimed there was one short and pretty insignificant scene, which might've been unaired old footage.

[littlefoot]

Here are two links to a treasure of a tumblr for all of you who still want to puzzle. The tumblr lady did many well argued posts on Lazarus in her theory section. You have to work your way backwards to find the relevant posts. She also did a lot of interesting stuff on Mary and Moran, which is worth a look. I don't always agree with her. IMO her original proposal of how Sherlock did it was even worse than Lazarus. But that doesn't diminish at all her other great and exact work with a lot of pictures for clarity.

Here are the links:

 

http://finalproblem.tumblr.com/tagged/sherlock-theories

 

and more specific about the pavement blood continuity problem, I've mentioned above.:

 

http://finalproblem.tumblr.com/post/72216672034/lazarus-solution-continuity-issue-blood-on-the

[Carol the Dabbler]

I know that they did reshoots for the pool scene - can't remember all the reasons for that. I think Mofftiss said that the actors had visibly aged and changed within two years (Benedict says that, too in the commentary), and it wasn't credible anymore to use the same scene they had shot for TGG. Which shows that they DO care about continuity - sometimes, lol!

 

As I recall, what they said was that because they had to use a combination of old and new footage, they were very careful about how they shot the new stuff, since the actors had aged a bit, plus Freeman had his hair a different length (which explains the really tight shots on just his face). So yes, they do care about continuity, but no they didn't reshoot the old stuff.

 

What strikes me as significant in the Lazarus version is the fact that they apparently didn't use anything from the unaired material they alledgedly shot during the making of season 2. All we get is footage which has already been shown in RF. Someone claimed there was one short and pretty insignificant scene, which might've been unaired old footage.

Just to be sure we're talking about the same scene -- what are you referring to as "the Lazarus version"?

[littlefoot]

Lazarus version is my term for the string of events Sherlock told Anderson.

RF material is everything related to the fall which is shown in RF.

 

Mofftiss said after the airing of RF they had already worked out and shot most of the scenes which explain how Sherlock did it. That makes sense. You have all the actors and extras, costumes and props in place. And you're less likely to run into continuity errors. The pool scene actually underlines my point. It was tricky to take up where they left us in TGG. And they did care and tried to create the illusion of a continuing action sequence at the pool from TGG to SiB.

 

The peculiarity with the Lazarus version is that they apparently cared very little about that. It's one thing to overlook a tree with leafs in winter like in SiB. Can and does happen in many movies. But it's quite a different kettle of fish to shoot one of the most anticipated key sequences of the show so carelessly. And it IS jarring - at least to me. When I watched I had a feeling of constant unrealness - an unrealness besides the Big Blue. I couldn't quite put my finger on it - until I realized they had filmed at a different season of the year. To be aware of such problems, especially with re-shoots or pick-up shoots is stuff they teach you at film school. I've read about directors who put artificial leafs on trees in order to avoid this kind of continuity error. Now, I don't expect them to go to that length in a tv show. But they could've easily used CGI or tried to avoid the trees alltogether. Or they could've simply used the material they had alledgedly shot during season 2, which according to Mofftiss showed how Sherlock had done it. And they didn't do that. The Lazarus version is a mixture of new scenes they shot during season 3 plus material from season 2 which we have seen already in RF. The Lazarus version contains almost nothing shot during season two we haven't seen already in RF. There's a whole post about the so-called missing material in

 

http://finalproblem.tumblr.com/tagged/the-empty-fall

 

To wrap this up: One can explain all this with super carelessness, which would really disappoint me, considering that it's one of the most important scenes in the show. Or we can work with the idea that the continuity breaks (and there are more than just the trees) might be there deliberately. Because they want to point out this is one version in Sherlock's mind - which mustn't be necessarily completely true. Like the other two versions which play out in Andersons mind, when he tells Lestrade the bungee theory and when he listens to the version of his female club member who doesn't want to wear hats.

 

Interesting observation on the side: Anderson is present and involved in all three solutions offered in TEH.