| 1 | [[foldercontrol]] |
| 2 | |
| 3 | [[folder: The Game]] |
| 4 | * Seriously, whodunit? |
| 5 | ** TheButlerDidIt. |
| 6 | ** Whoever you're playing as. You just don't know it yet. |
| 7 | *** Just want to point out, on the boxart for the original board game, all the other guests are staring suspiciously at Mr. Green. |
| 8 | |
| 9 | * In ''{{TabletopGame/Cluedo}}'', you can not only not know you're the killer, or how you did it, or where, but also win by finding out that you are the killer and announcing your guilt. Why? |
| 10 | ** Main/MemoryGambit |
| 11 | ** Of course, depending on who you're playing against, how you're playing and how melodramatic you / they are, this can be made all part of the fun with a vainglorious rant; "Haha, you fools! Little did you realize that the killer was amongst you all along!" Etc. And then you 'kill' all of their pieces and make a getaway. Or maybe that's just me. |
| 12 | ** I always assumed you knew you were the killer, but found the clues that would implicate you. When you discover them, you can dispose of them or clean them, and your announcing that you're the killer is actually informing them that the murder will never be solved. |
| 13 | *** That doesn't explain why you repeatedly sabotage any possibility of pinning the crime on one of the others. |
| 14 | *** To make it look like you're innocent of course, since all the others are doing the same thing. And with the evidence against you gone, it doesn't matter it can't be pinned on someone else; the case will remain unsolved. |
| 15 | *** Also, it doesn't explain why you can make suggestions that involve yourself as the killer. It'd be all right if the suggestion just included the person, as it would just be asking for someone to back up your alibi, but the way it is in the game makes it sound like a SuspiciouslySpecificDenial: "Surely someone must have proof that I didn't kill Mr. Boddy... in the lounge... with the lead pipe...?" |
| 16 | *** I imagine it's intended to be something more like this InUniverse: "I couldn't have murdered him in the lounge with the lead pipe, I was on the other side of the house at the time! You saw me, didn't you Mustard?" It's just phrased like that for players of the game for consistency and clarity. |
| 17 | ** The movie gives another possible explanation: having reconstructed the entire night, you're able to prove that the killing was justified, so your admission is just part of a long, triumphant [[TheSummation summation]]. |
| 18 | ** Maybe you're not one of the suspects after all; you're one of a team of ''detectives'', each of whom is following one of the murder suspects. In that case, revealing that the person you're trailing is in fact the murderer makes sense. |
| 19 | *** This is how it's played in one of the computer versions--and you can progress from something like "rookie" to "chief inspector" depending on how many games you've won. |
| 20 | ** How about this: Every suspect is guilty of a lesser crime, and cannot reveal what they know without revealing their own crimes. They are offered a deal: anyone who gives them useful information gets total immunity for any past crimes. The killer notices a loophole and confesses his crime (which is the most useful information he could possibly give), thus gaining immunity. |
| 21 | ** One of the video games (on Genesis Mega Drive and probably other consoles) has fun with this. The murderous player doesn't get away with it even if they win. (Mr. Green says "I won! I won! I'm going to jail but I won!") |
| 22 | * My assumption was always that, if the player who wins WAS the murderer, then that basically means they got away with their crimes. |
| 23 | |
| 24 | * There's also the question of why finding out the means and location of the crime are not only independent of figuring out who did it, but still equally important. |
| 25 | ** If you don't know where or how it was done, claiming to know who did it would ring kind of hollow. |
| 26 | ** Yeah, knowing the particulars can help to nail the killer. You need evidence, and the more you know about the details of the murder, the likelier you are to find it. |
| 27 | |
| 28 | * For that matter, how do you not know where it happened? Some of those weapons are blunt instruments, but a few are pretty messy. The large trail of blood between Mr. Boddy and the room where he died is a pretty big clue. |
| 29 | ** Main/BloodlessCarnage strikes again. Also, didn't you see the movie? They were lucky if they could figure out ''when'' he died, much less where. |
| 30 | *** No, it was pretty easy to figure out who killed Mr. Boddy. Mr. Green, in the hall, with the revolver. |
| 31 | *** And then he went to sleep with his wife. |
| 32 | *** Flames. Flames on the side of my face... |
| 33 | ** For the location and the means of the murder, it's possible that the killer murdered Mr. Boddy in one location, but he was found somewhere else, and the various weapons are randomly scattered around the house. When you make a "suggestion" and somebody else proves it wrong, they are pointing out the flaw in your reasoning. For example: "I suggest it was Colonel Mustard in the Conservatory with the Lead Pipe." "Impossible. (shows the pipe) The Pipe has no blood on it!" |
| 34 | *** And for people, it's a matter of "Professor Plum couldn't have done it; he was with me at the time!" |
| 35 | *** [[Franchise/AceAttorney Objection!]] How can you prove the pipe wasn't cleaned after the murder? |
| 36 | *** The killer obviously didn't have time to clean the weapon before the body was discovered. Ever tried to remove blood off something? Not easy. |
| 37 | *** This troper remembers a commercial for the board game in the 90s where everyone's debating the evidence around Mr. Boddy's... body. An argument breaks out about the murder weapon, which ends when Mr. Boddy's... body reaches up and points at the knife, ''which is still jammed in his back''. |
| 38 | ** [[VideoGame/IWannaBeTheGuy Maybe he explodes when something touches him.]] |
| 39 | ** [[Main/InteractiveFiction Or when he's killed, he screeches angrily, writhes in agony, and fades away in a cloud of green smoke?]] |
| 40 | ** All the games of Cluedo I've played have indicated that Boddy was found on the staircase (in the centre of the board, where the mystery cards are usually placed) and murdered somewhere else. Presumably the unnamed killer ditched the weapon, and possibly made an effort to disguise the wounds (if there were any) on Boddy's, um, body. |
| 41 | ** It's possible that the second the killer, uh, kills the poor Mr, Boddy, they cover the wound so no blood can be left behind. It's possible to use every single weapon bar the rope as a blunt object (the candlestick, the lead pipe, the wrench, the knife, and the revolver, provided you use the butt of the revolver and the non-pointy end of the knife). Then again, there was a pretty clear case of strangulation in ''Franchise/AceAttorney'' that was classified as blunt-force trauma (Stolen Turnabout; look at the picture of his corpse, he was totally asphyxiated with his tie). Further, hitting someone hard enough with the blunt object or smashing someone's head in post-mortem would leave it pretty ambiguous as to what actually killed him, even if it was strangulation or a gunshot wound. Most weapons, again bar the rope, can be used to pierce Mr Boddy with either enough force or just outright shooting him. Presumably to cover up what killed him, most versions of the game leave Boddy's, er, boddy on the steps. They push the corpse down to cause a few post-mortem contusions. I suppose no matter how you look at it, the rope is the odd weapon out since it's got nothing in common with the other weapons (except the poison used in other versions, where neither leave obvious signs of usage if the strangulation marks are left under his collar). I suppose it could be used to trip Mr Boddy or beat him to death if used like a whip (which would take far too long), but since it's usually depicted as a noose on the box art and in the card pictures, you're supposed to assume it's used to strangle. [[TakeAThirdOption Or the guests don't dare approach the body at all, and that's why nobody knows how he died]]. |
| 42 | |
| 43 | * Why are there no bathrooms in the Clue house? |
| 44 | ** Maybe they're in the underground tunnel. |
| 45 | ** They're probably all upstairs. |
| 46 | *** Thank you for clearing up something else for me. I never knew what the layout was in terms of 3-D space. The staircase is at the center of the board: does that mean everything above it is the upper floor? But of course, as you've said, it must mean that we're seeing only ''one'' floor, and for some odd reason the murder couldn't have occurred above. Maybe there was a door locked from the other side at the top of the stairs or something. |
| 47 | *** Perhaps the upstairs is all guest bedrooms and such, and for some reason, they knew he wouldn't be on that floor, preferring to have his butlers and maids tend to that part of the house. And getting his dead body upstairs would also be too much of a hassle. |
| 48 | ** Amusingly, there ''is'' a bathroom in TheMovie, and it's even a plot point (being where Boddy's body is hidden). There's also a gag where Wadsworth accidentally soaks himself in the shower of a second bathroom, having mistaken its knob for a doorknob in the dark. |
| 49 | *** I always kind of assumed that the eight little enclaves (the six where the pieces begin the game and two blanks) were some assortment of bathrooms and closets. Most are in places where they could be stretched (Miss Scarlet's space is next to the Hall, where a coat closet might be. Mrs. White's is near the Kitchen, where there might be a pantry, meat locker, or wine cellar. Mrs. Peacock's space next to the Conservatory could be where gardening supplies are kept.) The rest could simply be half-baths, with there being full baths upstairs where the bedrooms presumably are. |
| 50 | |
| 51 | * I know it's just a board game and it's all supposed to be abstract, but wouldn't it be really easy to at least narrow down the murder weapon by examining the late Mr. Boddy? Even a kindergartner should be able to tell (for instance) whether or not he had been stabbed, thus ruling the knife in or out. |
| 52 | ** Perhaps he was all of shot, strangled, bludgeoned etc to death and the object of the game is to find out which instrument dealt the fatal blow? (c.f. the Inspector Morse novel "Service of All The Dead" where [[spoiler: the victim was stabbed to cover up the fact he was really poisoned]]. |
| 53 | ** Or perhaps he was bludgeoned; any of the weapons can be used as a blunt instrument, including the knife. Well, okay, maybe not the rope. |
| 54 | *** It's a moderately heavy rope (in some depictions), wrapped in a bundle and tied around the middle. You could probably bludgeon someone to death with that with a good run at it (or simply tie a large knot in one end and swing it at him. Think of the torture scene in ''Casino Royale,'' except aiming at his skull.) |
| 55 | *** Or use it to trip Mr. Boddy, who falls and fatally hits his head on the floor. Nope, the rope is still under suspicion. |
| 56 | ** You'd allow a kindergartner to do that? |
| 57 | *** "Now Molly quit yer crying and tell the police how he died!" |
| 58 | ** They're all suspects so they might know better than to turn the body over and examine it for fear of leaving fingerprints or DNA. |
| 59 | |
| 60 | * It REALLY bugs me that some moron decided that Clue needed to be [[http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26203228/?GT1=43001 made hip and modern]]. |
| 61 | ** I like the new Clue game, played it earlier. It even includes the possibility of your character being murdered by the murderer... which brings up the odd possibility of your character being the murderer... |
| 62 | *** So your character kills the guy and then commits suicide, big deal... |
| 63 | *** What if the murderer commits suicide, then another character is killed by the murderer? |
| 64 | *** The killer just faked their death? |
| 65 | ** I don't mind the idea of updating the game (let's face it, it IS a bit dated), but a video game designer? A trophy? And the design of the game box? Is this a whodunnit in The Hills or something? |
| 66 | *** The problem with all that is that it's going to get dated very quickly. The original Clue's 1920s setting fits in well with early detective stories (the actual game was post-UsefulNotes/WW2, so it didn't get outdated so much as the original wasn't even trying to be current). The modern day setting just isn't really known for being mystery-themed, and I'm afraid that, in ten years or so, it's going to come across as a lot more dated than the original. To put it simply, the original can get by on atmosphere, and I'm not sure the remake can do the same. |
| 67 | *** Bingo. The original was a classic. This modern version is tacky now and is going to be tackier later. Even if they did a modern version, it could have been done much better. |
| 68 | *** [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence Planned Obsolescence]] |
| 69 | ** You're all in luck: "Discover the Secrets" is out of print, and the classic edition is still for sale. You can kill Mr. Boddy, but you can't kill Clue! |
| 70 | |
| 71 | * How does it work out that the last person not to be accounted for is decided to be the killer? |
| 72 | --> '''Professor Plum:''' I surmise that Miss Scarlet killed Mr. Boddy in the Ballroom with the Knife, since nobody saw anyone else in the ballroom, the knife is missing, and everyone else is accounted for... By the way, I know for a fact that I was not the one who killed him, and that he wasn't killed with the knife in the kitchen. [[UsefulNotes/LogicalFallacies I saw myself not killing him there all evening]], see, [[BreakingTheFourthWall I've got a card with my face on that proves it]]. |
| 73 | --> '''Mr. Green:''' But Miss Scarlet was with me in the library when the murder happened! |
| 74 | --> '''Professor Plum:''' She must have seduced him into being her accomplice! [[MiscarriageOfJustice Lets lock them both up]]! |
| 75 | ** [[DeadpanSnarker Maybe its a board game designed to be process of elimination.]] |
| 76 | ** If you have your card, that basically means that you have some kind of incontrovertible evidence (multiple witnesses who saw you on the other side of the house, etc.) that means you didn't do it, and which you can produce to anyone who challenges your innocence. |
| 77 | |
| 78 | * So [[LetMeGetThisStraight Let me get this straight.]] There is a piece of evidence that somehow has all the evidence that can convict the criminal, and NONE of them figure to look inside? |
| 79 | ** They have to find it before they can prove it. Presumably the conclusive piece of evidence has been well hidden. |
| 80 | ** Or just not available. I think of the three cards being sealed away as a metaphor for the fact that there ''is'' no direct incontrovertible evidence if you're not in forensics in-universe. All you have collectively is who ''wasn't'' the murderer, where Mr. Boddy ''wasn't'' killed, and what ''wasn't'' used to kill him. And you're stuck investigating it with a bunch of people, one of whom might be the murderer, and in any case, are only willing to "show their cards" to prove a suggestion wrong. But not all at once, of course... |
| 81 | |
| 82 | * What is the rationale behind a character suggesting himself/herself (i.e. Professor Plum suggests Professor Plum in the Conservatory with the Revolver)? |
| 83 | ** To clear one or more of the three for themselves and/or in the sight of the other players. |
| 84 | |
| 85 | * Why [[TheBusCameBack back to Chef White]] in the 2023 instead of Chef Orchid? |
| 86 | ** Mrs. White was a chef in several versions of the game. Dr. Orchid was a botanist. Although it’s possible to have chefs be herbalists, just not too likely. |
| 87 | *** Why couldn’t they just stick to Orchid permanently? |
| 88 | [[/folder]] |
| 89 | |
| 90 | [[folder: The Movie]] |
| 91 | * What the hell kind of federal agent would allow multiple murders to happen in front of them without immediately dropping cover and calling in back-up? Ultimately, of course, they got a confession of the real killer(s) and brought down a blackmailing ring...but at the expense of six lives? |
| 92 | ** The film to its credit pointed out that it had been made deliberately difficult for anyone to escape the house, but still, you'd think a trained undercover agent would have enough wits to get around that. Climb out a window and shoot the guard dogs! |
| 93 | ** Because he didn't have cause yet, and couldn't figure out who the murderers were (and thus who to arrest) until TheReveal. |
| 94 | *** He has plenty of cause--there's just been a murder! Even if he thought the death of Mr. Boddy was going to be a singular event, and that it would be best to keep up the masquerade to get more information, after the death of the cook it should have been obvious that everybody was in danger. |
| 95 | ** Possibly he'd been sent in with explicit orders to neutralize the security threat posed by Mr. Boddy's blackmail materials - materials, which might have included dirty laundry on other government personnel not present - no matter the cost. He had to keep playing along until he either found the whole stash, or the blackmailer was indisputably confirmed dead. And he couldn't be sure that ''Yvette'' wasn't in on Mr. Boddy's scheme: she'd been recording the incriminating conversation in the study, after all. |
| 96 | ** He might not have been immediately able to. By the very nature of the job, undercover operatives generally don't have quick access to back-up, since having a whole bunch of FBI agents lurking around would potentially spook the people he was going undercover on. Back-up might not have been immediately available to him and if he'd revealed his cover there might not have been anything stopping the others from murdering ''him'' to silence him before getting the hell out of there, meaning that he wouldn't have had much choice but to keep up his cover despite the bodies dropping around him if he wanted to figure out what was going on. |
| 97 | *** Except that back-up ''was'' available--[[spoiler:the door-to-door evangelist was the Chief, and the moment the group steps outside, G-men and police leap out of the bushes to surround them.]] |
| 98 | ** (The obvious answer is that if [[spoiler:Wadsworth/Mr. Green]] jumped out a window and the cops stormed in after the first murder, the movie would have been only twenty minutes long. The meta-answer is that whatever character jumps out the window is instantly exempted from being the murderer, which potentially ruins one of the three endings. ''But still!'') |
| 99 | ** The cook's and Mr. Boddy's (apparent) death happen in such quick succession that Green had no chance to prevent them, whether he'd revealed himself or not. After that, events snowballed so quickly that he didn't have a good opportunity to assume command of the situation ... plus, there's no guarantee the others would've ''believed'' he was an FBI plant, as opposed to the killer trying to bluff them all into a vulnerable position. |
| 100 | ** The '''real''' question (for the third ending) is, [[spoiler: why didn't Mr. Green come clean with the ''police officer'' while the two of them were alone in the dining room? The cop wasn't a suspect, having arrived after Mr. Boddy and the cook were dead, and would have certainly assisted a federal agent upon request. Between the pair of them, they could've taken all the suspects into custody, prevented the last three murders, ''and'' taken Wadsworth alive]]. |
| 101 | ** [[spoiler: He did try to signal the cop. He expressly and blatantly disagreed with the others about trouble in the house. And he tried to meet up with the cop only to be horrified by the world's most disturbing FakeOutMakeOut ever. He probably thought backup was on the way when the cop asked to use the phone, only for the cop to end up dead.]] |
| 102 | ** Green couldn't easily summon backup. A "portable" radio back then would have been nigh impossible to conceal, as would a recording device (see Yvette's tape recorder). The Chief didn't come until later in the evening,or the other guests would have seen him. Green's sole advantage was his concealed weapon, And given the fact that there was talk of info on a new fusion bomb being involved, he may have been under orders to find out how much of that had been leaked. |
| 103 | |
| 104 | * In the movie version, Wadsworth takes a phone call from the FBI. This is perfectly fine for 2 of the endings, but in the third if he had known that the FBI were snooping around there's ''no '''way''''' he would have done and revealed what he did at the end. But when the endings are stuck together ''that's'' the ending that we are told is what really happened. |
| 105 | ** But we've no proof that Wadsworth would have let them leave after revealing himself -- well, at least not Mr. Green. Remember, the FBI call in the third ending was for Green, but ''Wadsworth'' took the call. Even if the caller was careful in what he said, Wadsworth was obviously keen to Green's cover ('''Green:''' 'I was going to expose you." '''Wadsworth:''' "I know.") and could have shot Green on his way out, or more likely staged some other accident. |
| 106 | ** For that matter, why would J. Edgar Hoover himself call the house in which there was an ongoing undercover investigation? Finding out that the head of the FBI so much as knew his telephone number might cause even the most hardened criminal to give up his plans and flee, possibly after murdering the rest of the guests. (And even if it ''wasn't'' the real Hoover, but another senior agent who gave that name as an alias...really, you'd think the FBI could come up with a better, less immediately-identifiable codename.) |
| 107 | *** WMG: He was just that [[SmugSnake arrogant]]. |
| 108 | ** FWIW, it was the ''cop'' who answered the call from J. Edgar Hoover, not Wadsworth. And given that the cop had just feigned a threat to arrest them all for murder ''just so they'd open the library door'', Wadsworth may have thought it was another bluff, to intimidate them into explaining why they'd locked him in there. |
| 109 | |
| 110 | * In the Third ending, Wadsworth turns out to be [[spoiler:Mr. Boddy, the true Blackmailer, and the first victim was actually his butler. If you paid any attention to Mr. Boddy at all, you'd see that this is absolutely nonsensical. His behavior clearly shows that there is no possible way he could be anyone other than Mr. Boddy. Just rewatch a single one of his scenes, and you'd realize this.]] |
| 111 | ** Perhaps the butler was an actor before he was blackmailed, and Wadsworth[[spoiler:/Mr. Boddy ordered him to ''act'' like Mr. Boddy.]] |
| 112 | *** [[spoiler: Or the butler's name ''really is'' Mr. Boddy. Considering Wadsworth intended for nobody but himself and the six blackmail victims to leave Hill House alive, he'd have no particular need to conceal the real name of the servant he was setting up as a target for the vengeance of the other six.]] |
| 113 | ** He certainly does have a lot of repressed rage and tries to get them to turn on Wadsworth. He also tries to escape. I suspect he'd stopped being the butler awhile ago and knew he was dead no matter what, so was acting without much in the realm of inhibitions. |
| 114 | ** You know, the great thing about having three alternate endings is that, if you don't like one of them, you still have two others to choose from. |
| 115 | *** Except in the home release versions, the plate before the last ending is "This is how it really happened," thus it is the "right" ending. |
| 116 | *** With respect to the creators, so what? DeathOfTheAuthor, my friend; those schmucks can't tell you what to do. Title cards aren't legally binding and the very fact that there's three possible endings provided to begin with means that the creators are on shaky ground saying what the "right" ending is; otherwise, they'd have just provided that one from the start. |
| 117 | |
| 118 | * Some of the logistics surrounding the informants escape me. First of all, how did the cop just happen to show up that night? [[spoiler: The other informants (the cook, Yvette, the telegram girl, and the motorist) were all asked to be there by Wadsworth/Mr. Boddy, but the cop seemed to show up by chance. And it seems even less likely since he supposedly worked in Washington, and they party was in New England. He could've been invited, but why would he wear his uniform and drive his squad car?]] Secondly, who was the "they" Yvette was referring to right before [[spoiler: she was strangled?]] And who did she expect to be in the billiard room, since she seemed surprised to find [[spoiler: Mrs. White]] there? Thirdly, if [[spoiler: Wadsworth/Mr. Boddy wanted to get rid of his informants, as he said in the real ending, why didn't he just kill them all himself instead of relying on a GambitRoulette?]] |
| 119 | ** I was always bothered by the cop's presence myself. The only answer I can come up with (and it's rather lame) is that [[spoiler:Wadsworth, Miss Scarlet, or Mr. Boddy]] somehow arranged for him to be transferred temporarily from the Washington police force to one in New England so that he could be out driving that night to discover the motorist's car. [[spoiler:Wadsworth/Mr. Boddy]] is TheChessmaster and so could have pulled that off, but it still seems incredibly contrived and unbelievable. But then this is after all [[BellisariosMaxim just a zany]] [[MST3KMantra screwball comedy]]. On point two, the "they" would likely be Colonel Mustard and whichever woman she wasn't talking to depending on the ending, since they both knew her (Miss Scarlet quite well), and she was expecting to meet Miss Scarlet. [[spoiler:In the ending where Miss Scarlet did it, she obviously wasn't expecting her employer to kill her.]] Admittedly this makes more sense if she was talking to Mrs. White, since it would hardly seem the case (were she talking to Miss Scarlet) that Mrs. White would know every inch of her body. (Unless she'd caught Yvette with her husband and got an eyeful?) Third question is easiest to answer: [[spoiler:he wanted them to kill the informants so that he could keep blackmailing them while his own hands stayed clean. As he himself said "Now there is no evidence against me."]] |
| 120 | ** "They" was everyone, as Wadsworth had shown photograph negatives, and everyone had huddled around to look at them (well, except Peacock...) |
| 121 | ** 1. The cop ''was'' invited. Wadsworth said that everyone had been invited there. He wore his uniform perhaps because he was uncertain what would happen and a uniform is really a cop's best (psychological) weapon. Really, who's to say? 2. "They" was the people who had seen the photo of Yvette ''in flagrante delecto'' with Col. Mustard. 3. Whether there is a "real" ending depends on what version you watch, but in that ''particular'' ending Wadsworth obviously found it to his advantage not to be the actual killer of anyone, in case there was legal trouble. |
| 122 | ** For what it is worth, during his phone call just before he is killed, the cop does say he isn't on duty, so he wouldn't need to have been transferred from Washington. Perhaps the letter requested he wear his uniform and drive his squad car? This may have been to help identify him to the other guests so he could be more readily killed, to psychologically set him at ease so he wouldn't be suspicious, or simply to scare the guests. |
| 123 | *** No way in the 1950s he would have driven his work car from DC to New England. It's too far. |
| 124 | *** Good point. Then I guess we have to assume that at some point he ''did'' get transferred to a New England police force, and then the letter was sent requesting he show up right after his shift/with the uniform and squad car, thus making it a short and easy drive. |
| 125 | ** Or alternatively, the gathering was arranged / the letter requested that he arrive immediately after his shift was over, so he didn't have time to change or drop his squad car back at the police station. |
| 126 | |
| 127 | * When they locked the weapons in the cupboard, why did they leave the candlestick and the knife out? What, a weapon can only be used once and then it's no good? And there was really no point in locking up anything but the rope and the revolver. If someone wanted to bludgeon someone else to death, they wouldn't need the wrench or the lead pipe to do it, there were plenty of other things in the house they could use as a makeshift cudgel (there were other candlesticks on the mantle, Col. Mustard grabs a billiard cue at one point). |
| 128 | ** The knife was stuck in the cook's body the entire movie. Even when Col. Mustard tried to pull it out, he couldn't. Stuck good. No good reason for the candle stick. As for the rest of it, yes other stuff in the house can be lethal, but it's easier to kill someone with a gun than a pool cue. Just saying. |
| 129 | ** The candlestick was missing at that point. We see it on top of a door frame (why? how?), before it falls on Wadsworth. That's because (as we find out later) it had been used to kill Boddy for real. |
| 130 | *** For that matter, about that knife... isn't there still an entire kitchen full of knives that could be used as weapons? |
| 131 | *** Yeah, including the one she points at Wadsworth in the opening scene. Or the one Wadsworth uses to cut the matchsticks. |
| 132 | ** Each weapon offered by Mr Boddy had fingerprints added by several different guests: it would be simpler to misdirect attention from the murderer by using Mr Boddy's weapons. |
| 133 | |
| 134 | * In the third ending, how did Col. Mustard find the secret passage to kill the motorist? He "discovers" the secret passage after the murder (and in fact it's entrance is in a room he has never visited by that point), and unlike Wadsworth, Scarlet and Peacock he knows no one familiar enough with the house who could have informed him of the passage's existence. |
| 135 | ** This also applies to Mrs. Peacock in the second and third endings--how did she know of the passage from the study so she could kill the cook? It is stated that Yvette knew the house and all the passages in it to inform Miss Scarlet (and she in turn learned it from [[spoiler:Wadsworth/Mr. Boddy]], no matter which ending), so she could have told Colonel Mustard, considering their close history. But Mrs. Peacock had no connection to the maid... |
| 136 | *** It's revealed in the second and third endings that [[spoiler: the cook used to work for Mrs. Peacock]], so it's possible that the cook told Mrs. Peacock about the kitchen/study passage. Aside from this, though, is that [[spoiler: Mrs. Peacock was the only one left behind in the study when the cook was killed - she didn't ''need'' the secret passage if she were quick enough]]. |
| 137 | ** You're not the only one to find plotholes with regards to the multiple endings: |
| 138 | *** [[spoiler: Actually, the third, supposedly real ending contains a few plot holes: How would Boddy/Wadsworth not know that Green was a fake if he had all the evidence against them and set this up to kill his informers? Also, how would J. Edgar Hoover know to call Wadsworth's residence if it was Green and not Wadsworth that worked for him? The first and second endings do not suffer these two plot holes.]] |
| 139 | *** And the answer comes: [[spoiler:Green wasn't just sent in by the FBI out of the blue; he ''had'' been blackmailed, just under false pretenses - he tricked Boddy into thinking he was a closeted homosexual. And the FBI knew where the meeting was, so they knew where to call him. Alternatively, Mr. Boddy might have never actually met or seen the people he was blackmailing, which is why none of them recognize Boddy, and it makes sense since his blackmail was based on informants.]] |
| 140 | *** That's what I always considered to be the answer too. However, there is one other point to consider, which could either support or undermine your case: [[spoiler:the scene in the study where all the guests are revealing their secrets. When the time comes for Mr. Green to be unmasked, he pre-empts TheReveal from Wadsworth and states his homosexuality. After this, we see a scene of Wadsworth staring bug-eyed at the letter from Mr. Boddy and then, it appears, ''shifting the relevant page underneath the stack, unread''.]] While in the first two endings this makes sense, because Wadsworth may not have known all the secrets (being both a butler and an FBI agent) and Mr. Green really was gay in them, in the third ending [[spoiler:you would think Mr. Boddy would know better than to shift the page aside unread, ''especially'' if he didn't actually know all the secrets firsthand nor had met his victims face-to-face. Nor does he seem the type to be that appalled or startled by such a secret.]] So either [[spoiler:Mr. Boddy was feigning his shock in order to fool his victims, knew about the secret, but had been fooled himself into believing Green was the genuine article]], or [[spoiler:he hadn't yet been told what the secret was by Green's informant (the Evangelist, since as Green's boss he would know him and Wadsworth didn't seem surprised by his appearance in any of the endings?), and the information was so shocking he moved the page aside unread, thus being fooled because he didn't bother to check the credentials.]] The latter hardly seems in character, unless he's just that arrogant, so it must have been the former... |
| 141 | *** Is it not possible that Green really was gay, and really was blackmailed for it, and managed to organize the sting without exposing his gayness? Also, Boddy doesn't have to know who Green's boss is. He just has to let someone at the FBI know. Back then (see TheFifties and the RedScare, which was also a Gay Scare), that sort of allegation wouldn't need to be delivered to the top dog; it would find its way up the chain quickly. Besides, he could always find out who to tell later when he needs to know. Of course, blackmail never actually involves carrying out the threat, just the fear that you will. |
| 142 | *** It could be, too, that the FBI got wind of this serial blackmailer, perhaps via Senator Peacock's people, and managed to hook Boddy with the "gay person at the state department" bait way before all of this, and paying the blackmail for a while, with the intent to follow the trail back to Boddy. Boddy would have had no idea that Green is FBI. After catching the Hoover call, he may have surmised *someone* was FBI, but not known who, which is why he looks so distraught afterwards. It could be, too, that the owners of the house were either friends with Hoover, or perhaps had reported people as suspected Communists (or homosexuals) -- and Hoover, realizing he wasn't talking to his agent, could have come up with a cover story like this. |
| 143 | *** Also, in all cases the murder of the cop makes no sense. [[spoiler:When Wadsworth uses his key to lock the Cop in the library for the second time, he puts the key back in his pocket. However, later on in the film, the door to the Library is unlocked from the outside and the Cop is shortly after killed by either Miss Scarlet or Mrs. Peacock, depending on who the murderer was in the different endings. However, nobody stole Wadsworth's key before the guests split up into pairs to search Hill House again, Wadsworth never mentions that the key was stolen from his pocket to unlock the Library door when he takes the guests through the events of the evening step by step, and it is never said that Yvette had a key to unlock the rooms of the house. It would be impossible for the murderer to unlock and open the door to enter the Library.]] |
| 144 | *** Not that we know for sure whether [[spoiler:anyone had a chance to take the key; there are plenty of scenes where everyone is huddled together.]] |
| 145 | *** Also, I would have to look again very closely to be sure but it is possible Wadsworth left the key in the library door--if not the first time, then when they split up to search again. EDIT: According to the John Hatch book mentioned below, Wadsworth does indeed leave the key in the library door; the author mentions "audiences are left to spot it on their own", so presumably it can be seen on a larger screen/clear Blu-ray image. |
| 146 | *** In the ending where [[spoiler: Miss Scarlet killed everyone except Mr. Boddy and the cook]], another possibility is that [[spoiler: Yvette gave her keys to the house]], so [[spoiler: she]] wouldn't necessarily have needed to use Wadsworth's key to unlock the library. |
| 147 | *** The second ending also has a pretty huge plot hole. [[spoiler: Mrs. Peacock is shown yelling at / hitting a pipe, in the basement, apparently at the time that she is supposedly to be killing the motorist, in the living room.]] |
| 148 | *** You're thinking of after the power was shut off--when the motorist was killed we didn't see anything of [[spoiler:Mrs. Peacock]] other than [[spoiler:her searching the cellar. The part where she was hitting the pipe ''was'' right after the power was shut off though--and even though the switch was at the top of the cellar stairs, it wouldn't make sense she went up, shut it off, went back down to bang on the pipe, then went back up again to take out Yvette and the others. Unless she was establishing her alibi with Professor Plum...]] |
| 149 | *** And another thing: [[spoiler: if Mrs. White really did kill Yvette, why did the film show Yvette descending the staircase while hearing White scream from the master bedroom upstairs (from being startled there a moment ago) right before entering the room where Yvette's killer already was?]] |
| 150 | *** Speaking of [[spoiler: Mrs. White]] being Yvette's murderer, it's revealed in the third ending that [[spoiler: she was the one who turned off the electricity and then got the rope to kill Yvette]], but shortly after the lights are turned off, [[spoiler: we see Mrs. White in the upstairs bedroom. At least Mrs. Peacock was in the cellar, so it wouldn't have taken much time at all for her to shut off the electricity in the second ending, but for Mrs. White to have been the one to turn off the lights and kill Yvette, she would've had to go downstairs, switch off the electricity, go back upstairs to scream in the bedroom, then go back downstairs to get the rope and go into the billiard room before Yvette got there, all in the span of, what, two minutes?]] |
| 151 | *** The answer to all of these plot holes: [[Memes/UminekoNoNakuKoroNi small bombs.]] In all seriousness, though, UnreliableNarrator might fit a bit better for some of them. |
| 152 | ** This film is a rare example of plot holes not only being intentional but fully [[JustifiedTrope justified]]. If all the clues added up to one ending then there would be no point in there being two more as well. The film, if you scrutinize it carefully from start to finish, is a deliberate dead end of contradictory evidence, because only then can three different endings equally fit. |
| 153 | |
| 154 | * This may sound stupid, but in the beginning, why don't the guests know what [[Main/NastyParty the dinner party]] is all about? There are at least three instances where one of them (either Mrs. Peacock or Colonel Mustard) asks about what's going on, but it seems rather unnecessary since Wadsworth had written letters to them explaining why they had to come. Are the guests just playing dumb, is it for the audience's sake, or what? Also, why would Wadsworth give a letter to Mr. Boddy when they live in the same house? |
| 155 | ** The way the letter was written, as Wadsworth read it, the blackmail wasn't outright revealed--and unless each person assumed all the others were being blackmailed too, they wouldn't guess this could be the reason they were all invited, nor would they admit it aloud. As for Boddy's letter, two possible reasons--Wadsworth was trying to hide what he was doing from his employer so that he would be lured to the house and didn't realize what was going on until it was too late, so he mailed the letter anonymously; or it was designed to fool the guests into not knowing he was their blackmailer as opposed to another victim, because Wadsworth wanted them all in the study before that was revealed. A third option, for the third ending only, is that [[spoiler:there never was a letter, it was all made up by Mr. Boddy to mislead the guests as to his true intentions and identity, and he ordered his butler to go along with the lie]]. This could also be true even in the first two endings, if Wadsworth only claimed there was a letter, Boddy went along with it to keep from revealing he was the blackmailer, and in actuality he'd just handed it to Boddy or verbally told him to come to the house. |
| 156 | *** Or an even simpler explanation: they ''didn't'' live in the same house any more. Wadsworth said his employment ended when his wife killed herself, since with her dead Boddy no longer had a hold on him. Since presumably this gave Wadsworth time to get all the evidence and make the arrangements for the party, he also would have been living elsewhere so could have mailed the letter to his old employer. As for the FBI agent ending, either Wadsworth faked having a wife who knew socialists so as to get into his employ (much as [[spoiler:Green did in the third ending]]), or the story about his wife was a lie, the FBI had found out what Boddy was up to on their own and directed Wadsworth to send the letters, so he never lived with Boddy. Which could explain why Boddy brought the weapons and acted so hostile toward Wadsworth--he didn't know him and suspected a sting. |
| 157 | *** They knew ''why'' they were being invited (their blackmail), but they didn't know ''what for'' (what ''about'' the blackmail?) Was it for further extortion? Was it for exposure? Was it for resolution? |
| 158 | *** The letter they all received stated that "Mr. Boddy will bring to an end a certain long-standing, confidential, and painful financial liability," so each of them went into the dinner party knowing their blackmailing finally be over. |
| 159 | *** It may be that none of them knew beforehand that all the ''others'' were victims of the same blackmailer--for all they knew, the dinner party was just a cover and at some point in the evening, Mr. Boddy would approach them privately. They began to suspect something more was afoot during dinner, when they realized all the guests were connected in some way or another...but with no way to be certain, the smartest thing for each of them was to keep quiet and see where all this was going, since it could still be coincidence (everyone in D.C. knows one another, after all). Certainly a few people were getting nervous enough to ask what's going on during dinner. Immediately after dinner, Wadsworth straight-up told them what was going on. From the time of their arrivals to the moment Wadsworth spilled the beans was perhaps (in universe) an hour--not a lot of time to form an opinion, certainly not enough time to trust a stranger enough to ask "yo, are you being blackmailed, too?" |
| 160 | ** Another thing: Who was the person who told Yvette to "shut the door" minutes before she was killed? The voice that asks, "Did anyone recognize you?" is obviously female (which would mean that that particular voice belongs to [[spoiler: either Miss Scarlet, Mrs. Peacock, or Mrs. White]], depending on the ending), but the voice that says, "Shut the door," sounds male. |
| 161 | *** They didn't want to pin down the gender of the anonymous voice, so they made it inconsistent. |
| 162 | |
| 163 | * In the third ending, [[spoiler:Mr. Green shoots Mr. Boddy dead]]. Is this truly acceptable, considering that in the other two endings, the murderer is simply arrested? In all three situations, the murderer has the gun and makes it clear that no one else will get shot if they can simply leave. In fact, [[spoiler:Boddy killed considerably fewer people than Ms. Peacock did in her ending]]. It shouldn't have been because of the blackmail threat; if it was, [[spoiler:Prof. Plum should have gotten off for the murder he committed]]. |
| 164 | ** If I'm not mistaken, [[spoiler:Mr. Boddy takes a shot at Mr. Green, or at least has the gun on him. If Mr. Boddy knew that Green was with the FBI, he almost certainly would have shot him, and Green was revealing himself anyway.]] |
| 165 | *** When [[spoiler:Mr. Green]] pulls his gun to arrest them all, [[spoiler:Mr. Boddy]] points his gun at him and puts his finger on the trigger. Under those circumstances, it would be perfectly legal and acceptable for [[spoiler:Mr. Green]] to shoot him. |
| 166 | ** [[spoiler:Boddy]] has a gun, Green pulls out his gun, [[spoiler:Boddy]] then takes aim directly at Green, so Green shoots in self-defense. Keep in mind Green is only FBI in the last ending, so the parallels to the other two endings don't apply. |
| 167 | |
| 168 | * So, uh. Mr. Green couldn't be a kick-ass FBI agent and gay at the same time? Ahem. |
| 169 | ** The FBI under Hoover wasn't exactly known for it's acceptance of homosexuals. So sadly no. |
| 170 | *** Pretty much this. Green states that if his homosexuality was revealed, he would lose his job on security grounds. Homosexuality was so much a stigma at the time that federal employees who were revealed to be gay would be removed from their positions not only due to prejudice, but because their sexuality really would put them in a position to be blackmailed, effectively making them an unwilling security risk. How much of that logic was just an excuse for discrimination is anyone's guess. |
| 171 | *** Has less to do with the FBI and more to do with the makers of the film. |
| 172 | *** No, it really has to do with the FBI. At the time the film was set, being gay wasn't just socially unacceptable; in many states, it was a felony. |
| 173 | *** HarsherInHindsight, or just Historian's Fallacy. In the 1950s homosexuality really was seen as a social threat, and not just in the U.S. In the U.S. it was closely associated with communism, which was also considered very, very bad (along with socialism and pacifism). So while technically yes, a person could be a kickass FBI agent and gay, he could not be a kickass FBI agent and ''openly'' gay. Kind of like how Salvatore of ''Series/MadMen'' could not be a kickass ad man and openly gay. |
| 174 | ** And Mr. Green's boast that he would sleep with his wife may have partly been because he really shared the attitude at the time about homosexuals, was disgusted with having had to portray one sympathetically (in the ruse within the movie), and wanted to distance himself from it as much as possible, even for the benefit of a bunch of un-American murderers. |
| 175 | *** Or he ''was'' gay/bisexual, his wife was TheBeard, and not even his bosses knew about it. |
| 176 | *** That's an interesting theory. But I don't see why he would feel the need to pronounce it to everyone in the room, when none of them were gay or even accused of it. |
| 177 | *** Because, again, of the ValuesDissonance and views of the people at the time. Even the other guests, who had been revealed to be murderers as well as perpetrators of other crimes, would have been appalled by his secret and could possibly have informed on him to people in power, perhaps even as part of some sort of plea-bargaining deal, and he still would not have wanted his bosses to know if he intended to keep his job. |
| 178 | |
| 179 | * In the first and second endings, why did the murderer bother to kill the singing telegram girl? She had no direct connection to either of those suspects, and unlike the motorist, she hadn't actually come into the house, so she's had no chance to see or recognize the person she ''did'' have a connection to. If the killers from either of those two scenarios had just let her recite her singing-telegram message without interruption, she'd presumably have left to go on to the next address on her itinerary, none the wiser. |
| 180 | ** She was still an informant to the blackmailer. |
| 181 | ** But not an informant against ''them''. Leaving her alive would have been a loose end for somebody ''else'' on the blackmailer's list, but not for the person doing the killings. And it would certainly have been safer than leaving a corpse in plain sight on the front stoop. |
| 182 | ** She's still aware of the conspiracy and could in turn uncover the whole thing if the police ever got hold of her, especially as Scarlett plans to ''continue'' blackmailing them. |
| 183 | |
| 184 | * Why did Wadsworth tell everyone to use an alias when he was planning to have them all confess to the police later that night? |
| 185 | ** Presumably so they would feel safe enough to come out into the open to the party. As was the case if they'd known the police would be coming ahead of time, knowing their real names would be used would likely have made them too afraid to show up. |
| 186 | |
| 187 | * When Wadsworth is revealing what Mr. Boddy is blackmailing each of the guests with, why does he accept Colonel Mustard's claim that he can afford to live above the means of a colonel's salary because he inherited money from his parents? He doesn't look like he ''believes'' Mustard, but he shuts his mouth and allows a change in subject. However, depending on which ending you watched, Wadsworth either gathered all the evidence against the guests together (including the evidence of Mustard's illegal income) into one envelope and invited the witness against Mustard to come to the house or [[spoiler:Wadsworth did all that ''and'' he was Mr. Boddy all along]]. Either way, he knows the true source of Mustard's wealth and has the evidence to prove it sitting right in front of him, so why does he let Mustard's deception go unchallenged? |
| 188 | ** Two possibilities. In the first two endings, Wadsworth was trying to get the guests to confess to the blackmail so Mr. Boddy could be put away. Why he didn't do this for the other guests, I don't know, but he may have been waiting for the motorist to arrive before exposing Mustard's real crime, when he had a witness to testify to it and not just written documents. Perhaps it was because, as a military man, he thought Mustard would be more likely to go along with the "visiting a house of ill-fame jeopardizing his Pentagon post" accusation (which does after all suggest something about his manliness) than something which would reveal his lack of patriotism and completely undermine his military record (being a war profiteer). As for the third ending, [[spoiler:being Mr. Boddy would make him more likely to [[ForTheEvulz twist the knife]], allowing the matter to drop only so it could be revealed later to humiliate and expose the colonel]]. Considering the reaction the revelation got (Green suddenly linking Mustard and White through Yvette), he may also have held off on revealing it until it became necessary--either to theorize about why Mustard might have committed murder(s) (after they'd happened) or [[spoiler:to throw suspicion onto him and off of himself]]. |
| 189 | ** Wadsworth's reaction isn't one of disbelief at the veracity of Mustard's story, but at the fact that a grown man (and WWII veteran -- Colonel ranks ain't just handed out like candy) nonchalantly used the words "my mommy and daddy." |
| 190 | ** Compare with Peacock's reasoning for acquiescing to the blackmail -- "I don't want a scandal, now do I?" even though she insists what was done was not illegal or even improper. Likewise, perhaps, Mustard doesn't want attention to be brought to his wealth as a former colonel. And perhaps he has a Pentagon job and his wealth would be used as a political cudgel against excessive defense spending. So he doesn't want it exposed. |
| 191 | |
| 192 | * How the hell did the candlestick end up on top of the door frame? The doors are huge and no one is that tall to place it there without a chair. Why would you go through all that trouble to put a murder weapon out in the open in a place it doesn't remotely belong? And while we're at it, what could have supposedly caused it to fall when it did? At least the chandeliers only fall after being shot. It's the only forced prop movement in the film. |
| 193 | ** That's...a good question. What supposedly caused it to fall--I presume we're meant to believe the vibrations from Wadsworth shouting jostled it loose. As for the rest, presumably the killer put it up there to hide it (notice no one even seemed aware of it until it fell) so no one would know how Boddy was killed. But as for how it was put up there...I have no clue. In two of the endings it was a woman--Yvette (and how in the world could she have climbed up there in that skirt?) or Mrs. Peacock (also in a fairly tight dress), and in the third, I'm not sure Professor Plum was tall enough to have reached it. There were chairs in the hall, but on the other side near the library and billiard room, and moving them would have taken too much time and made too much noise. Hmmm... |
| 194 | ** It's perfectly possible to do it without a chair if you put a hand and a foot on one side of the door frame and the other hand and foot on the other, something small children often do for fun. You wouldn't have to climb very high, and both Yvette and Mrs Peacock could have just stuffed the upper half of the candlestick in the front of their dresses with the bloodied part away from their bodies, and Professor Plum could have tucked it in a pocket. You wouldn't have to push yourself very high up to do it (not even Yvette) once you got into position, then you just hold yourself in place with both feet and a hand and use one hand to place the candlestick above the doorframe. It wouldn't take long at all, either; certainly much less time than it takes to get and then put away a chair. Also, since we don't see much of the bathroom, it's possible there's something to stand on just inside the doorway. ''Why'' anyone would put it up there, though, that's the real question. Also, Wadsworth was moving while he was talking/shouting, and might have been bouncing a bit on his feet. 'Course, the most probable reason for why this is, is simply RuleOfFunny. |
| 195 | ** As stated above, the why would be both to hide the candlestick itself and keep them from knowing how Boddy was killed. |
| 196 | *** And possibly, if it's a scenario in which the killer is short, to mislead the others into thinking the culprit was taller. |
| 197 | |
| 198 | * So, how many husbands did Mrs. White have again? When asked, she says "five", but earlier, we hear she is being blackmailed because of the disappearance of "her husband" (heavily implied to be her most recent one) who is then revealed to be her *second*. But, I guess she had 3 since then that weren't worth blackmailing her for, for whatever reason? |
| 199 | ** She had 5, Wadsworth was only bringing up a few of them specifically to get the point across. |
| 200 | ** Simple: Mrs White has had five husbands, but was only being blackmailed for the second, because it was the only one there was bona fide proof she'd killed because she was supposedly informed on, though it's never said who told on her (or Green, for that matter) to Mr Boddy. We're probably meant to presume Yvette did it. Also, she would have been a lot more careful in murdering her husbands in ways that look like accidents after starting to be blackmailed, so she only had ties to the death of the second. |
| 201 | *** It's also worth noting that while Colonel Mustard accuses Mrs. White of being a multiple-man-murdering BlackWidow, we can only confirm that she was widowed once, with her murdered second husband. The first husband (the illusionist) "disappeared," but for all we know, he ran off with his LovelyAssistant, and we don't know anything about the other three. Maybe she's just a serial divorcée who looks good in black. |
| 202 | * Where did Yvette vanish to during the OfCorpseHesAlive scene, and why? The latter is probably due to the fact they thought the cop would find it odd to see a maid indulging in partying/foreplay with house guests, and because there was no one for her to be 'involved' with except the dead motorist and she wouldn't do such a thing. Still, it's odd that the cop didn't find her absence suspicious, ''especially'' since he had halfway recognized her from Miss Scarlet's brothel. Though I suppose he may have thought she was off doing her job... In any event, after the cop is locked back in we see her...suddenly flounce back in from the back of the house. She wasn't in the kitchen, since the cop looked in through the serving hatch from the dining room. So...she was hiding in the ballroom, or the conservatory? Strange... |
| 203 | ** She may have been in one of the secret passages. After all, in the first ending, she was the one who told Miss Scarlet about them. She was most likely just inside the passage between the Conservatory and the Lounge. |
| 204 | |
| 205 | * How many bullets were fired from the gun and when were the fired? |
| 206 | ** I have to assume this is sarcasm, since the answer is spelled out in the movie (and on the main page) but for the sake of completion: one shot fired at Boddy in the study, one hit the chandelier by accident, two at the lounge door, one for the singing telegram girl. And then the last one gets the second chandelier in the first ending only. |
| 207 | |
| 208 | * In the first two endings [[spoiler: Wadsworth is an FBI agent]]. Does that mean his backstory is all untrue? Why would Mr. Boddy put up with him then? |
| 209 | ** Remember, we only had [[spoiler: Wadsworth's]] word for his previous relationship with Mr. Boddy and how [[spoiler: he came to be his butler]]. Perhaps they [[spoiler: had a (seemingly) routine employer/employee relationship]], and Mr. Boddy figured out what was going on (or at least enough of it) when he saw all his victims and just took advantage of the situation presented to him. |
| 210 | *** Not just that, but it easily could be that the death of his wife made him not only want to deal with Boddy, but to save other people in similar situations, so he joined up with the FBI to help hunt down and stop people like Mr. Boddy as a career. It's not exactly uncommon, it's cliche even, for someone who loses their family to crime to take up crime-fighting or something similar. |
| 211 | |
| 212 | * How exactly is the police officer still making that phone call moment's before he's murdered? The murderer turned off the power to the entire building. |
| 213 | ** Old telephones weren't electric. The only cord is for the phone line, not a power line. The phone wouldn't have been affected by the lack of power. |
| 214 | *** Well.. They ''were'' electric, but they got their electric power from the phone line, not from the house power. This was true well into the 80s and 90s (technically still true today if you happen to still have a POTS landline and a non-cordless phone). |
| 215 | ** All telephones are electric! But a standard landline telephone gets what it needs entirely through the phone line. As long as there's power at the exchange, the phone will work. |
| 216 | |
| 217 | * Okay so who informed on White and Green to Boddy? We're told the Cop told on Scarlet, the Motorist on Mustard, the Telegraph informed on Plum, and the Cook told on Peacock, but Yvette is never specifically stated to have informed on anyone, but we're meant to presume she informed Boddy on Scarlet AND Mustard, but she has no reason to say a thing about White, because the likelihood she would know Mrs White killed her husband is so small. Absolutely nobody in the house has ties to Green, which is probably a hint at the fact that he was innocent of the murders in all three endings- zero motive for anyone but Boddy. It's strongly implied Boddy learnt everything he knows from a different source, never learning anything for himself. So, who told him Green was gay and White murdered her second husband? |
| 218 | ** Actually I think the possibility Yvette knew Mrs. White killed her husband is pretty good, considering she was sleeping with the man. All she had to do was be coming over for a liaison (or already there for one and hiding in the next room) to see/hear the murder. Or she could simply have suspected it, and after informing Boddy he did some investigating on his own and found the proof. As for Green, the fact Wadsworth showed no surprise when the evangelist shows up at the door suggests he'd been told the man would appear because he was Green's informant. [[spoiler:Considering the evangelist was actually Green's boss, he'd be in a great position to know if he was gay, or claim he did.]] In the ending where Wadsworth is the FBI agent, I guess we have to assume [[spoiler:the evangelist, Wadsworth's boss, just happened to also be Green's informant]], unless there was a State Department official who informed off-screen whom Wadsworth never invited. Maybe because he didn't consider Green's crime [[FairForItsDay worth putting him away for]]? |
| 219 | *** Green's implication that he was never really a homosexual bears out the theory that the FBI deliberately leaked false information to Boddy in the hopes that he would take the bait and attempt to extort Green. The "informant" who provided this false information to Boddy could well have been [[spoiler:the evangelist]], who, as stated above, would have been in a great position to know if Green was gay (and thus seemed like a reliable source to Boddy or his informants). The ploy worked, and Green used this identity as a "victim" to continue gathering information on Boddy's informants before they made an arrest. [[spoiler: The evangelist]] would have then been invited to the party along with all the other informants, which is why Wadworth wasn't surprised to see him...[[spoiler:and Green, who knew the evangelist would turn up, played along with the others to maintain cover.]] |
| 220 | ** I assumed Mr Boddy just learnt of it himself and there was no informing, or because [[spoiler: Green was just a plant in the supposed True ending that has more holes than Swiss cheese]], the information was ''deliberately'' leaked to Boddy so as to get Green an in to put an end to the whole blackmailing thing and that it was specifically because Hoover was so harsh to gays that Green's cover was being gay (as that would definitely cost him his job and maybe his life, so that put him at just as much risk as at least Mrs White), which may itself have been suggested by Green himself either because he IS gay and it was just him trying to utilise the FictionAsCoverup trope (and if someone else suggested it, it's AccidentalTruth), or he truly ''isn't'' gay and it was just a proposition for him to pretend so Boddy would blackmail him. |
| 221 | ** Maybe [[{{WMG}} Wadsworth/Boddy and Green were working together the entire time]]. Green himself could have been one of Wadsworth's informants for someone working in the Bureau, and in setting himself up as a plant for the FBI, suspicions regarding his sexuality would be dropped, a la FictionAsCoverup. Wadsworth, on the other hand, was using the evening to tie up loose ends (perhaps his victims or informants were getting too antsy), and getting Green to shoot him dead in front of a number of witnesses would be a surefire way for him to fake his own death without suspicions arising later. The gun Green fires is his own, it could have easily been filled with blanks, and unlike the other gunshot victims, Wadsworth gets a few last words in before "dying", just the dramatic end one might expect from someone who had orchestrated everything leading up to this. |
| 222 | ** Maybe the Motorist reported on more than one person? Remember, he recognized Colonel Mustard as his ''old'' boss, which implies he hadn't remained the Colonel's driver after the war. If driving people around was his specialty, the man could have gone on to become Mrs. White's private chauffeur, or a driver for the State Department who'd been responsible for shuttling Mr. Green to and from work. |
| 223 | ** Yvette probably was the one who told Mr. Boddy about Mrs. White murdering her second husband. She could have witnessed the crime either while on her way to sleep with the second husband or while hiding in another room during the fatal confrontation; or she could have merely informed Mr. Boddy that she suspected Mrs. White and he found out on his own. As for Mr. Green, if he was an undercover FBI agent, the information was deliberately leaked to Mr. Boddy. If he really was gay, maybe after leaving Mr. Mustard, the Motorist became a driver for the State Department and was Mr. Green’s driver. |
| 224 | |
| 225 | * If the house belongs to a friend of his, and it looks pretty well-kept, why in Heaven's name would Wadsworth think it acceptable to stack the bodies in the cellar? |
| 226 | ** We never see the cellar. It's entirely possible Wadsworth knows the house's owner well enough to know he's never set foot there. |
| 227 | ** No, we certainly do see the cellar, when Plum and Peacock investigate it. However, based on the look of the place, it probably doesn't get visited often if at all. In any event we have no idea exactly how often this friend visits the house; it may not be he even lives there or takes care of the place much. The main floor is well-maintained, polished, and cleaned, but the rest of the house is pretty drab, dusty, and cluttered with antique junk. If the house is only one of many properties and the friend only visits once in a blue moon to do inventory or make sure it's in good condition, [[FridgeHorror it could be a very long time before anyone discovered the bodies]]. Also keep in mind that in all but one of the endings, Wadsworth is only saying this to get the murderer to spare himself/the other guests; as soon as the murderer had escaped or was in custody, he'd very likely have called the police and coroner. |
| 228 | *** Wadsworth and Yvette and the cook have obviously been setting up the place, they would have probably cleaned it up before the event. |
| 229 | ** Potential FridgeBrilliance: if Wadsworth is really the blackmailer, the "friend" who owns the house might even be another blackmailing victim who was forced to let Wadsworth borrow the house for his charade, after which the "friend" would be forced to deal with the consequences. |
| 230 | |
| 231 | * What was the message the singing telegram girl was carrying? |
| 232 | ** It's not plot-important. But for the sake of an answer, most likely something that wouldn't raise her suspicions -- a bogus Happy Birthday or such. |
| 233 | |
| 234 | * The biggest plot hole in '''all three''' endings is the cook's murder - specifically, the circumstances of how her body was discovered. She comes tumbling out of a tiny closet that's barely big enough for just her, but because of her weight, '''four''' of the guests struggle to move her body to the Study and then lift her onto the couch. ''How did the killer move her dead body into the closet by him/herself?'' There doesn't seem to be any logically possible way for that to have occurred! (I suppose it's possible that the killer used the secret passage and surprised the cook while she was already in the closet, but that's a big contrivance...) |
| 235 | ** It's not a closet, it's a walk-in freezer. It's possible the killer dragged her in there while she was dying. Perhaps the killer dragged her in there and *then* stabbed her. Or perhaps the killer waited until she was already in there, for whatever reason, and killed her then. Also, Peacock and Mustard alone are able to hold the cook's body upright during the fake dance scene, so it's not that one person *couldn't* carry her, but it was easier for four to do it, especially to pick her up off the floor. |
| 236 | ** It may not be true to reality (it was just a flashback told during TheSummation and not reflecting what actually happened), but the one time we get to see the Cook's murder in the first ending, [[spoiler:Yvette]] is shown stabbing her while she's at the sink washing dishes; the freezer is right behind them, so the murderer could easily have caught her as she fell and dragged her back into the freezer before she was fully dead and her weight would be too much to bear. |
| 237 | |
| 238 | * When the Motorist comes to the house, he claims he was there because "my car broke down" and he saw the lights and wanted to use the phone. Aside from the fact we know he had been invited to inform on Colonel Mustard and was likely saying this upon request in his letter from Wadsworth to keep the others from being suspicious, there is another discrepancy: when we see the Cop discovering his car, it instead looks as if it's been in an accident, up on top of a mound of earth at the side of the road. What was the point of this lie? To make the Motorist seem even less credible, as foreshadowing of TheReveal he was an informant and had been invited? Because otherwise it doesn't seem to make much sense he wouldn't admit he'd had an accident, especially when there was a storm going on. On a related note, the Cop simply says he found "an abandoned car", not one that had been in an accident. Perhaps both of these are artifacts from an earlier script, or a case of what was filmed not matching the (unchanged) dialogue? (It's also interesting to wonder what the Cop would have given as his reason for coming to the house if the Motorist's car hadn't been there to be discovered.) |
| 239 | ** Possibly the motorist parked his dying car on the side of the road, unaware that the soil beside the roadbed wasn't very stable. After he'd left his vehicle, rising water from the storm undermined the shoulder and his car tipped partway into the ditch. |
| 240 | *** The 2023 behind-the-scenes book ''What Do You Mean, Murder?'' by John Hatch may shed light on this: the original script called for scenes where the Motorist is seen driving through the storm, nearly goes off the road thanks to an unexpected tight curve, and then does crash in order to avoid hitting a stray cat, leaving his car in the position it's seen in in the finished film. The scenes were filmed, but eventually cut to keep from breaking the tension by undercutting the focus on events at Hill House. So presumably when the Motorist says his vehicle "broke down" he was simplifying, or else after he ended up hanging over the embankment, the engine actually did stall/the wheels were caught in the mud or were elevated too high to reach the road, and so he could honestly say it was broken down after his accident. Either way, the discrepancy is at least partly due to the deleted scenes. |
| 241 | |
| 242 | * In the second and third endings, it's revealed that [[spoiler: either Mrs. Peacock or Professor Plum]] was the one who killed Mr. Boddy while everyone else was in the kitchen to find the cook dead. During TheSummation, Wadsworth says that the murderer used the kitchen's secret passage to go back to the study, but how could [[spoiler: Mrs. Peacock/Professor Plum]] have gotten into the passage without anyone noticing? Are we to assume that everyone was so focused on the cook's corpse that they didn't hear the sound of the secret passage opening and closing? For that matter, how would [[spoiler: Professor Plum]] have known about the passage in the first place? Unlike [[spoiler: Mrs. Peacock]], [[spoiler: he]] didn't have a connection to anyone who was familiar with the house. |
| 243 | ** Actually, in the first ending it was told was that [[spoiler:Yvette]] ''stayed behind'' in the study, and only after killing Mr. Boddy did they use the secret passage to rejoin the others, which would have definitely been when everyone was still distracted by the cook's body. And the simple truth is, staying behind in the study to kill him, putting him in the bathroom, and then going back into the kitchen which was ''right next to it'' would have been the easiest way to do it and wouldn't even have required use of the secret passage at all. So really, the whole thing was an excuse to justify the presence and reveal of the second secret passage, solely because it's a MythologyGag to the game. |
| 244 | *** Except that [[spoiler: both Professor Plum and Mrs. Peacock]] ''are'' in the kitchen with the others in the beginning of the scene where the cook's corpse is found--they're standing on the stairs with Colonel Mustard, Miss Scarlet, and Mrs. White as Mr. Green has a look around the room. So either the killer used the secret passage while most everyone else was gathered around the cook, or just slipped out of the kitchen and hurried back to the study. The latter scenario might be simpler and less risky than going through the secret passage, except Wadsworth never says anything about Mr. Boddy's murder in the second and third endings that contradicts what he says about it during TheSummation, so the murderer must have used the kitchen/study passage. Perhaps everyone was too distracted by the cook's body to notice the killer going into the secret passage (it's worth mentioning that the conservatory/lounge passage opens without making a sound during the scene where the motorist is killed, presumably because he's too focused on his phone call to notice any noise being made), but my question of how [[spoiler: Professor Plum]] knew about the passage still stands. |
| 245 | *** It is noteworthy that Professor Plum and Mrs. Peacock are not shown in the kitchen until sometime into the scene, after Colonel Mustard accuses Mrs. White and then suddenly realizes who had the dagger; prior to this the scene conspicuously shows only Green, Mustard, Scarlet, and White gathered around the Cook's body, and when Mustard turns to demand answers from Wadsworth he is standing alone by the banister near the kitchen door. So there was plenty of time for one of them to have either gone through the passage or down the hall to the study, then return only near the end of the kitchen scene. (Presumably in the third ending Plum must have either gone through the passage or hidden somewhere in the hall until Mrs. Peacock recovered enough to make it to the kitchen, or else she'd have been there to witness him killing Mr. Boddy.) How Plum would know about the passage indeed makes no sense...so I think this is an artifact of the script being written with contradictions to allow for different endings. The secret passage was included as a MythologyGag and works for the other two endings via Yvette and the Cook; the third ending probably didn't use the secret passage at all, but the dialogue had to stay to explain the first two endings, so... |
| 246 | ** This is a relic from the unreleased Fourth Ending. In that ending, Plum's antagonism with Mrs. Peacock was manufactured and the two are secretly working together to take down Boddy. Peacock gave him information about the secret passage, which she learned from the Cook. |
| 247 | |
| 248 | * Minor nitpick for both the Movie and Game. If the UNO WHO occupation and psychiatrist occupation for Professor Plum is true, why exactly is he called PROFESSOR Plum? Should it not be Doctor Plum? He has a [=PhD=], presumably, so he would be a doctor. He does not teach at a college campus though, and has never been mentioned to do so. He's also never been mentioned to teach at a campus before in any other iteration of a game, last time I checked. |
| 249 | ** In the original game, Plum was established to be a college professor. The movie likely held onto the name for the sake of recognition, even though the character's backstory changed. |
| 250 | ** The movie also establishes that the "Plum," "Green," "White," etc. monikers are pseudonyms, so "Professor" might also be part of that. |
| 251 | ** While Wadsworth is explaining why each of the cast is being blackmailed, he notes that Plum was "once a professor of psychiatry."[[note]]He would also likely have a MD since psychiatry denotes a medical doctorate, psychology would be a [=PhD=][[/note]] The Professor title, besides being alliterative and the source material's name for him, is likely meant to be a taunting pseudonym for "Plum", reminding him of his disgrace from medicine. |
| 252 | |
| 253 | * Mr. Boddy's behavior makes no sense no matter how you slice it. At first, he's as oblivious to the reason for the meeting as everyone else, and he tries to break out of the mansion when Wadsworth detains them all. But only a few moments afterwards, he reveals that he knows exactly why he's there, and that he's also come prepared with weapons that the guests can use to ensure Wadsworth's silence. It beggars belief that Boddy's too stupid to realize that the guests have a much stronger motive to kill ''him'' (which they do, either directly or indirectly), but the third ending makes it even worse because it establishes that "Boddy" was only the butler the whole time. If "Boddy" is an unwilling participant in Wadsworth's scheme, that'd sort of explain why he attempts to flee the mansion, and why he tries to redirect the guests' ire towards Wadsworth later, but if he hates Wadsworth that much, the obvious solution would be to reveal "Wadsworth's" identity. And if he's a willing accomplice (presumably because Wadsworth bribed him to play the role of scapegoat without telling him that his death would be part of the ruse), that still raises the same questions as in the other endings, especially the question of why he goes from trying to run away to planning ahead. |
| 254 | ** In the third ending, it could well be that everything was planned by Wadsworth/Mr. Boddy from the start, including the bringing of the weapons--as implied by his thanking the guests for getting rid of his spies and informants, he may have assumed they would all do whatever they had to do to protect their secrets. So he has the butler bring the weapons, fakes being frightened when "Boddy" reveals the plan to have him killed, all while knowing one or more of the guests would try to kill "Boddy" and then the informants when they showed up. (If they weren't successful, presumably the gun would be used to hold them hostage until the storm ended and he could escape, and then attempted murder could be added to the blackmail.) Then either everything the butler did was all part of the act, or once he realized (after Wadsworth revealed about them being locked in, and the dogs) that he likely wasn't getting out of Hill House alive, this only increased his urgency to bring out the weapons and get one of the guests to kill Wadsworth. As for why he didn't try and reveal his employer's real identity, because he knew they wouldn't believe him, especially after how he'd played the part of the villainous Boddy so well up until that point. In fact, since he and Wadsworth both may have assumed the guests would be more likely to try and kill the man supposedly blackmailing them rather than the one revealing their secrets, they may have ''planned'' for "Boddy" to fake his death, to the point of keeping up the ruse all evening until the cops arrived (depending on the ending, Boddy didn't know someone at the house was an undercover FBI agent who could call in his backup, Wadsworth really did call them, or they had fakes planned to show up), after which the miraculously still-living Boddy would resume the blackmail. (What they didn't expect, or at least the butler didn't, was that someone would try again, and successfully.) |
| 255 | ** In the first two endings, it seems likely that Boddy is paranoid enough (especially after receiving the letter, which said the cops would be told everything unless he showed up) and cunning enough to bring the weapons along just in case. The seeming obliviousness was just an act, as was the escape attempt, to keep the guests from figuring out his identity until TheReveal (and in the case of the latter, to create confusion and put more pressure on/frighten the guests as to their situation). As to why he didn't guess they'd try to kill him instead of Wadsworth, he counted on their fear of his menacing nature, the past blackmail, and his threat to reveal everything about them in court to make killing the seemingly harmless and mild-mannered Wadsworth look more attractive. After all, if they failed, attempted murder could again be added to the blackmail charges, and better the devil you know (continuing to pay the blackmail until a better opportunity to escape it presents itself) than take a chance on Wadsworth and the justice system freeing them without revealing everything. |
| 256 | |
| 257 | * Something about Yvette's death scene that's always bugged me -- when she walks into the billiards room and starts talking to the person who kills her, she's suddenly speaking in an American accent, only to switch back to French when she shouts out "It's you!" as she's being strangled. So, two questions here: 1) what's the deal with her accent, and 2) who exactly did she think she was meeting with? |
| 258 | ** Yvette worked as a prostitute; chances are the French accent--and, by extension, her name--was a fake one she put on while with clients. As for who she thought she was meeting with, my best guess is Miss Scarlet, who was her employer. |
| 259 | |
| 260 | * When Miss Scarlet and Colonel Mustard find the dead Motorist in the Lounge, it seems rather odd that they somehow aren't able to see him until the flashlight beam shines over him on the floor. The {{Novelization}} states the lights were actually off in the room when they entered, and it does look somewhat dim, but still, everything (including the body) is easily seen by the viewer (and the carpet is white or some other light color, so it's not like it would blend in). So is this the case of a script change, and/or HollywoodDarkness, so we're meant to assume the room is actually darker than it appears since we have to be able to see the set while the characters don't? Or is there some other reason why the characters are oblivious in a dim but otherwise visible room? (Perhaps, since Wadsworth was the only one who saw the interior of the Lounge when he took the Motorist there, they were simply looking around at the unfamiliar room to figure out which one it was--as they did at the darkened Ballroom doorway--before the flashlight made them look down?) |
| 261 | ** Follow-up: the John Hatch book mentioned above also reiterates that the Lounge was originally meant to have its lights off--as in the {{Novelization}}, the original plan was for someone else to unknowingly be in the room with them, who would knock the flashlight away after they discovered/tripped over the Motorist's body in the dark, followed by a brief scuffle before they started screaming about being trapped with the murderer. Once it was realized that this wouldn't work for the endings where one of them was the murderer, the script was changed to what appears in the finished film. So presumably them acting as if they can't see the Motorist is an artifact of the scene originally supposed to have been in the dark, and one of the above explanations must be applied. |
| 262 | |
| 263 | * There is a fire burning in the study fireplace all through the evening -- that's where the murderer destroyed the evidence. But when Mr Boddy turns the lights off, the room is plunged into utter darkness. How does the light switch extinguish and relight the fire? |
| 264 | [[/folder]] |
| 265 | |
| 266 | [[folder: The Books]] |
| 267 | * Why the heck does Boddy keep inviting all these crazy folks back to his place when they're alternately trying to rob him blind, off each other, scheme with each other to off someone else, or scheme to kill Boddy ''and'' rob him blind? There's been 18 books in the first run of the series; that's enough for each of them to have done in Boddy an average of three times each! |
| 268 | ** Because they always carefully explain to him how it was all a series of innocent misunderstandings and fluke accidents. |
| 269 | ** It seems to be a combination of Mr. Boddy's childish naivete when it comes to his friends (one story has him thrilled to have the company of several of his friends, and then some time later wonders why they broke in through the window in the middle of the night) and them having just enough PetTheDog moments to be likable. |
| 270 | *** It's definitely naivete, which is even lampshaded by Boddy describing himself as a "big-hearted, thick-headed fellow". One story had him banning weapons from the mansion, and when one of the guests asks him how he's going to enforce it, he says that he's going to make them promise, scout's honor. The guests get around the ban by displaying the weapons in plain sight while giving ridiculous excuses for them (Miss Scarlet wears the Rope as a necklace, Colonel Mustard uses the Wrench to hold his monocle in place, etc.) Suffice it to say that Reginald Q. Boddy is TooDumbToLive. |
| 271 | *** Or, perhaps he's far more intelligent than he looks. Think about it -- this is how his friends act when on ''good'' terms with him. Imagine how they'd react if he kicked them out and told them to never come back. They'd probably divvy up the weapons and storm the mansion by force. |
| 272 | *** In one suspect's case, Boddy says outright that he's too afraid to do anything about her in the intro to book #13 -- specifically, "Friends suggest that I should get rid of Mrs. White. I would, but I'm afraid that if I tried, she would get rid of me first." |
| 273 | |
| 274 | * Given the number of times the guests have failed to kill him, the real question is why haven't they given up already? |
| 275 | ** MoneyDearBoy. It has been mentioned that they're all in his will. |
| 276 | |
| 277 | * In book #6, chapter 2 ("A Dynamite Dinner"), it's said that a demolition crew came and planted a huge bomb in one of the nine downstairs rooms so the mansion could be blown up the next day to make way for a huge golf course, leaving a message for Mr. Boddy with one of his guests on their way out to let him know that he had a day to clear out. And yet, Boddy was completely unaware of this until he heard about it from an article in the newspaper. ''How in the heck'' did whomever was responsible for this get away with it? Because even if the laws of eminent domain came into play, they should have notified the land's owner well in advance of the whole thing, and it's clear that never happened. |
| 278 | ** Likely given Boddy's sheer [[TooDumbtoLive obliviousness]] that he might had been informed but never realized the implications until then. Or given real-life cases of city planners either failing to notify homeowners of disruptive construction, this could've been an extreme case of [[PoorCommunicationKills bureaucracy failing]] |
| 279 | |
| 280 | * In book #6, chapter 6 ("Caught Blue-Handed"), Boddy stores his collection of rare and priceless ballroom dance records in a cabinet in the Ball Room, and then locks the doors, which the guests find out about and promptly go to a lot of effort to try and steal them. However, the solution reveals that they're not actually worth a dime. So why go to all the effort of hiding them and drawing the guests' attention to them? |
| 281 | ** Sentimental value? Maybe Boddy's just really into vinyl. |
| 282 | ** Given some of Boddy's more bizarre games, it's likely he did this deliberately knowing they'll go for it. It's not the only time he has tricked the guests into thinking something is more valuable than it really is, or to perform some ridiculous task for his amusement. |
| 283 |
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/context.php
FollowingContext Headscratchers / Clue
Go To
- Show Spoilers
- Night Vision
- Sticky Header
- Wide Load
