Up on the Roof

[Dreamfire]

Just been grabing an eyeful from up on the roof. Noticed something very nice.

I'm counting on you guys using the same words as me, which I realise can be quite iffy, but.

In the beginning when the guys are all standing around the body in the car Jim and Fisk have a very high level of rapport, as shown in their mirroring body language. There was a discussion somewhere else some time back about mirroring gestures and I made a comment that people naturally do this when they are in rapport. Here is a great example.












And this is followed up later by Fisk asking Jim "Anything to share Jim?"

Fisk's expresion and Jim's both convey a dissatistfaction with the scenario,





and not the almost romantic, "He is a hero" look that we get from Karen, who is not in the same head space at all.
( If you recall she looks so fondly at Terry, even more thanis shown in these caps, you'd have thought he just saved a baby's life noit just happened to get shot.

Anyone who had studied Morphic fields ( Sheldrake anyone?) might speculate say Fisk is picking up Jim's emegeing doubts from the morphic field they share as pragmatic optimists.

Anyhow, excuses for screen caps aside.

I don't get why Terry would be thouhgt of as a hero. Well, no, I do but I would not think of him as a hero. Getting shot is not courageous. Jim did a courageous thing by taking out the bad guy at great risk to himself. Terry didn't manage to take out a bad guy, in fact he let him get away...

But I can see that perhpas in the NYPD in the BJ world people think they are a hero if they get shot in the line of duty. Makes 'em look self sacrificing or something.

I know I haven't commented on Glenn's comment directly, which is why this thread is awake, so...

I think he was talking about Terry because Jim had not shown up yet. But, on the other, ambiguious hand, he might have been talking about Jim, 'cause he's just the sort of guy who would talk behind someone's back... and about soeone he hardly knew. I must admit, Semple may well be the character I most like to hate.
His combination of stupidity and the fact that he wears a detective badge just get's me off side somehow...

[housemouse]

I have always thought Semple was referring to Terry when he made the comment about wanting to be a hero. I just figured he was explaining to the other cops why Terry went through the door first and got himself shot. I'm sure it would never have crossed a guy like Semple's mind that Terry made it through the door first because he wasn't lugging an extra forty pounds.

Why, in that situation, would Glen even be thinking of Jim and his wish to be or not be a hero? He is at the hospital with his partner, Jim just happens to show up during the conversation.

It never even occurred to me that he might be talking about Jim! Why, here is another example of why I loved that show - and love this board - so much. So many different takes on a single line of dialog!

[mlm828]

greenbeing said:

There's a very good chance, after reading all the speculation on the board, that Jim and Terry are both no longer with their old squad. Fisk doesn't say: "Hey, Jim, a couple guys from your old squad." He just says: "Your old partner." Which doesn't mean much. But Jim didn't know Glen, either, so either Glen transferred in after (a cop transfers because he's moving up, or there's a problem; we can't sell change of scenery), moved up after (although what's the chance of a big hambag like him testing up to homicide detective, instead of testing up to something a little more leisurely?).

I've been meaning to chime in on this point for a while, but it's just been too damn hot.

I agree that Jim and Terry probably didn't work at the 77th, where Terry is working at the time of "Up on the Roof." We don't have a lot of facts to work with. We do know that Jim worked at the 34th precinct sometime before the shooting, because he mentions it to Galloway. In one of the "deleted scenes" maggie read, there is a reference to Jim working at the 25th precinct. Beyond that, it's just educated guesses.

In my opinion -- and that's all it is, just an opinion -- Terry would not have stayed at the precinct where he worked with Jim, after the shooting. I think he would have transferred if at all possible. In their old precinct, he would have been surrounded by reminders of Jim, and I think he would have wanted to get away from that. In addition, there would be other people there who had worked with Jim and knew him. They would talk about Jim and ask Terry about him, and Terry probably would want to avoid having to explain why Jim was ducking his calls.

Another fact is that Glen didn't know Jim, indicating he didn't work in Jim and Terry's precinct before the shooting. Of course, that could be explained by Glen's transferring into the precinct after the shooting. Glen's comment that he'd heard "a lot of good things" about Jim could indicate that he was working in the precinct where Jim and Terry worked together, but it's equally possible he heard those "good things" from Terry.

All in all, I think it's more likely -- in view of Terry's guilt -- that he transferred to a new precinct after the shooting.

[maggiethecat]

ashatan said:

Anyone who had studied Morphic fields (Sheldrake anyone?) might speculate say Fisk is picking up Jim's emerging doubts from the morphic field they share as pragmatic optimists.

Excuse me but . . . huh?

Not that I really want an answer . . . .

[Katryna]

maggiethecat said:

ashatan said:

Anyone who had studied Morphic fields (Sheldrake anyone?) might speculate say Fisk is picking up Jim's emerging doubts from the morphic field they share as pragmatic optimists.

Excuse me but . . . huh?

Not that I really want an answer . . . .

Oh, thank you Maggie. I thought I was the ONLY one on the board that didn't get it! Oh - and no need for an answer to me either!

[bjobsessed]

kathy said:

maggiethecat said:

Excuse me but . . . huh?

Not that I really want an answer . . . .

Oh, thank you Maggie. I thought I was the ONLY one on the board that didn't get it! Oh - and no need for an answer to me either!

Well, this has been driving me crazy since Natasha said it because I have absolutely no clue what she's talking about either. I just keep hoping she'll explain it. Since you brought it up, here's a link for anyone that is curious. I don't know if it's the best one or if the author does a good job, but it is one of the few that is in plain English. I'm not even going to try and explain it for two reasons. One, some of you don't want to know and two, I don't get it enough to explain it anyway. If anyone really wants to know, type in the guy's name and you'll get all kinds of choices.

www.context.org/ICLIB/IC12/Sheldrak.htm

[Dreamfire]

Okay, Okay, I didn't answer 'cause Maggie intimated she did not want and answer . And Kathy was, like adamant . O, please don't go crazy, this was not my intention.

Your article is fascinating O, I've never seen it before. It makes this stuff sound like gobbledeegook fantasy or some such.

In fact what I am refering to is what you and I might call "being in the same head space" perhaps. You know, like when your partner says what you were just thinking, or your pet get's up, just as you thought, time for a walk and before you said anyting. That thing we take for granted that says we're in sinc.

in 1999 Rupert Sheldrake wrote a nice little book called "Dogs that know when their owners are comming home." I bought it cause it looked like light hearted and fun reading.

In it he details studies done on people and their pet's showing how many many pets are connected to their owners despite being some distance apart and can pick up on the intentions of those owners. It's a cute, light hearted read.

If you can imagine that your thoughts have a particular tone or note, say, and that if your pet is attuned to it they will pick up on your thoughts even if they are not right by you.

I have had examples of this, my dogs will be out in the garden with DH, I will get in my car to come home and they will desert him, going to wait at the front door until I get home 20 minutes later. That's why I can never sneak in!

The term Morphic Feild gives us a word to use to explain this. If you need a visual image, think of it a a colored cloud that hangs around you. Anyone else witha similar colored cloud is in the same morphic field and may well sprout thoughts incredibly similar to your own. If you meet you will find you are "in sinc" get on well, and agree easily.

For example, manyof us on the board dip into the "RE is the best" morphic field on occasion ( ok, obsessively!)

From the outside we can spot people who are in rapport (is this also foreign?) as they often display the same posture, body movement etc, even if there is a time delay. And yes, even blind people in rapport will follow and lead with gestures etc. because it is not neccesarily picked up on visual clues.

Anyone who has attended acting workshops will tell you of a fun game where two people sit back to backso they cannot see each other. They then talk. As they talk about things thery disagree about their body language will be very different form each other. As they are direct to and do talk about things they think similar thoughts about their body language will start to become similar, their posture, hand movements, placement of their feet. None of this is driven by visual clues in this game.

Hope this helps kill off the confusions.
N

[hoosier]

I thought that the 'morphic fields' probably had something to with vibes or auras. Remember how Jim said that Marty gave off 'bad vibes' and that was how he could id him in the locker room?

I have to agree with mlm that Semple most likely transfered but surely not because of some problem Terry's comment that 'no one would partner with him' and then Fisk asking if the entry into the apartment was 'above board' reads like this is a man with a problem. He was probably marking time until retirement. For Terry, this was a partner so totally different from Jim it was a relief.

Jim and Terry??? Terry's remark about thanking Jim for being there. Was he referring to the roof ....or the bank? Was he trying to slip an apology in under the radar? Thanking Jim for having his back that day since Jim had dodged his calls for a year and wouldn't give him the time of day his first day back? Jim was concerned about Karen's safety number one and Terry's second. His mind was still processing what he had heard and what Terry had told him and even then it wasn't jiving hence Fisk asking him if he had anything to add. Jim wasn't on the roof when it went down so why would Terry have said that unless he was just grateful that Jim showed up at all?

[maggiethecat]

housemouse said:

I have always thought Semple was referring to Terry when he made the comment about wanting to be a hero. I just figured he was explaining to the other cops why Terry went through the door first and got himself shot.

After all this time, O Mighty Mouse, you have convinced me. It was all about Terry being "first through the door," a position usually reserved for his ex-partner, come Hell, high water, or Mark Watt (see "Seoul Man").

Semple was talking about Terry.

Not that this isn't a fine excuse rewatch the episode . . . just to double check, you understand.

And amen. Do so love this board and the fact that we're still chewing/analyzing/discussing after a year and a scant thirteen episodes. Then again, if each episode minus commercials comes in at 40-minutes plus, that's a total of something like eight and a half hours. Longer than all three Godfather movies. Or Lonesome Dove.

[housemouse]

maggiethecat said:

housemouse said:

I have always thought Semple was referring to Terry when he made the comment about wanting to be a hero. I just figured he was explaining to the other cops why Terry went through the door first and got himself shot.

After all this time, O Mighty Mouse, you have convinced me. It was all about Terry being "first through the door," a position usually reserved for his ex-partner, come Hell, high water, or Mark Watt (see "Seoul Man").

Semple was talking about Terry.

It never even occurred to me that Semple might be talking about Dunbar. I found the posts discussing that very enlightening, and of course I need to re-watch to see if you might have changed my mind.

[hoosier]

A little confused here--

Terry said that he would drop his coat off at the squad. Jim and Karen go back to the roof and find the handkerchief and Jim pulls out his cell. Terry meets Jim at the riverside, dropping the coat on the bench, telling him to test it to his heart's content. Jim pulls the hankie from his pocket and shows it to Terry.

Okay, here's my problem. What did Jim say to Terry to get him to come to the river? Did he ask Terry to bring it there as a way of avoiding some uncomfortable questions from the rest of the squad? I really don't think this was a blooper. We weren't privy to that phone call and I was just wondering what he could have said to Terry to get him to meet him , especially after the way they had parted.

[mlm828]

hoosier said:

What did Jim say to Terry to get him to come to the river? Did he ask Terry to bring it there as a way of avoiding some uncomfortable questions from the rest of the squad? I really don't think this was a blooper. We weren't privy to that phone call and I was just wondering what he could have said to Terry to get him to meet him, especially after the way they had parted.

A very good question! I agree it's not a blooper -- just something left to the viewers' imaginations. I would have loved to be privy to that phone call. It's possible Jim used the coat as the pretext to get Terry to come meet him at the river, but that's just a guess. Based on Terry's reaction when Jim unfolded the handkerchief, I don't think Jim revealed, during their telephone conversation, what he really wanted to talk to Terry about. Any other theories, anyone?

[Dreamfire]

If Terry had not lied to Jim about Titus shooting first. Either at the beginning or later in the hospital. Would Jim have given any creedence to Titus' continueing claims that he did not "shoot no cop"?

Would he have put all that thinking time in?

Was this a loose end, a piece that didn't add up that caused Terry's downfall?

Or would Jim have listened anyhow, dug into it anyhow, gone looking for the handkerchief anyhow?


Reminds me of the Cop killing where it was Eric's lie about not having been in the appartment that got Jim looking in that direction....

[hoosier]

Jim knew the order of the two different gun shots if no one else did, recognizing Terry's 9 mil as coming first contrary to what Terry had said of shooting in self-defense. Terry's story just didn't add up. You could tell that Jim agonized over it. Regardless of his feelings about Terry, could he really believe that he would make up such a story just to cover his ass (no matter thats what Karen believed) and then when he came to the conclusion that Terry had shot himself and was framing Titus for his own perverse reasons, how was he going to prove it? Since Jim has to rely on his other senses to feed him information, it was the order of the gun shots that bothered him most.

[mlm828]

I think Jim's hearing Terry's shot first was the key to figuring out what happened on the roof. Even if Jim felt intuitively that something wasn't right about Terry's version of what happened on the roof, he would still need some facts to work with. Without that one inconsistent fact, Jim would not have had a reason to disbelieve Terry's story. And Titus, with his record, had no credibility -- as shown by Karen's skeptical response to his story of dropping the gun in the stairwell. If Jim had not heard Terry's shot first, I think his reaction to Titus's story would have been the same as Karen's.