MovieChat Forums > The Letter (1940) Discussion > Plot holes - Spoiler Alert

Plot holes - Spoiler Alert


I like the movie but thought it contained a lot of plot holes. For one, it was kind of odd that Mrs. Crosbie had laid out such a meticulous and convincing story for the police but she did a horrible job of pulling together a story to tell her husband about the letter. Someone as devious as she was would have had something much more plausible for him. She knows him and would know exactly what he would be likely to believe.

Another problem is who she killed. I know it was meant to be a crime of passion but given her mindset, I would expect her to find a way to kill the wife instead of the husband. She would have known that the life of a native would have been less regarded by the British system; especially if it was determined she was killed by someone in the white business community.

Mrs. Crosbie's own worker, the head boy, was working with Mrs. Hammond and had full run of the Crosbie home. Mrs. Hammond had been on the property once before, if she wanted to kill Leslie she could have done it or had someone do it without anyone knowing what happened. Why would she demand payment for the letter then turn it over to Leslie so she could be acquitted? In the trial her husband was made to be the bad guy.

Why not release the letter to the court and show she was not what she claimed. His name was already soiled; the letter would not have made it worse. It would have showed he was not a potential rapist as Leslie claimed. What happened is they tried to change some things in the original story but ended up creating plot holes as a result.

In the end, if she knew she would be killed if she stepped out, why did she try to scream and struggle when she saw her head boy standing there with Mrs. Hammond? I realize she probably felt she had no reason to live and may have accepted her fate but her reaction at the moment suggested she did not want to die.


Woman, man! That's the way it should be Tarzan. [Tarzan and his mate]

reply

1. The most important thing was that she had to get away with murder. First of all she had to save her own life so her account of the facts had to be perfect. She couldn't be bothered with her husband. She was in love with her lover and by the time she has to tell the truth about the letter to her husband, her emotional state gets from bad to worse. She can't lie to him anymore.

2. She called Hammond to her house because she knew things were bad between them and she wanted to save their relationship. When he said he doesn't want her anymore and that he has a wife, she lost her mind and killed him. It was something on the spur of the moment. She had to deal with things right there, she couldn't wait any longer. And killing Hammond's wife would not have made him love Leslie again. She was smart enough to know that.

3. Hammond's wife wanted revenge badly. She knew the letter would get Leslie convicted and hanged, but she would get no satisfaction that way. So she made Leslie come to her and pay for the letter (and she humiliated her by throwing the letter on the floor and make Leslie knee before her to get it). She made Leslie think that she got away with murder and that she could get on with her life like nothing had happened. She was there, in court, at the day of Leslie's acquittal to give Leslie a hint that things are not over. And at the day of her big party, when she thought Leslie was happy and celebrating, she first put a knife on her doorstep, as a warning, and then killed her.

4. The release of the letter in court would have meant Leslie's conviction and hanging.

5. Leslie knew she had lost everything (her marriage was over because she was still in love with her lover)and there was nothing to be done. She went outside to find the knife and when she saw that it was gone, she walked in the garden to find the person who she knew was there and wanted to kill her (Hammond's wife). She wanted to die, but she got frightened and scared, like most people would.

reply