MovieChat Forums > The Unsuspected (1947) Discussion > The Identity of the Murderer (spoiler)

The Identity of the Murderer (spoiler)

posted 16 years ago by dasinfogod
10 replies | jump to latest

Okay, saw this one last night at the Noir City Film Festival and it was tremendous fun, but had an argument with my friends afterward.

I maintain that during the first murder, There was a reveal in the reflection on the table of Claude Rains. It was fleeting (almost subliminal), but established a reprise of the same reflection shot seen later on in the picture. I immediately thought, "Oh, they've given away that Rains is the murderer; so this is a howdoneit?" not realizing that the movie was still constructed as a mystery...

Am I crazy? Did we see the shadowy figure in the opening revealed as Rains? My friends didn't remember seeing Rains in the sequence and thought I was seeing things...

Help.

[–] dasinfogod 16 years ago

Ah, okay, I can answer my own question now...

Yes, the killer IS revealed in the opening sequence. Here's the clip; don't blink or you'll miss it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_TVnDlApko

[–] irearly 16 years ago

You are absoultely right, it wasn't even subliminal it was quite obviously Claude Rains. The look of the character reminded me a little of Lionel Atwill when the mask comes off in Mystery of The Wax Museum but deninitely Rains and a bit of a puzzler.

[–] jackboot 15 years ago

Well, you're awfully sharp, I must say!! I would NOT have caught that but for your having mentioned it, and only after going back to study the shot a couple of times, was I able to see Rains!

I that I'd chalk it up to a subliminal clue thrown to the audience. I would NEVER have picked that up unless you had mentioned it. Unless I'm frightfully dull, I think that very few people would catch that!

Well done! You should be a detective!

[–] DACREEPER 15 years ago

I must say that I caught it the first time but still wonder why. Wouldn't have worked better if we didn't know it was Rains all along? I can't help but think I would not have known it was him until the scene with Press where he reveals the blackmail he has on Press. I suppose you are right that they wanted it to play as a 'ok but HOW did he do it?" kind of a thing.

[–] Mandrakegray 15 years ago

I caught it immediately too. The early giveaway impacts the way you watch Rains as he manipulates his way through the film. Which I thought was a clever touch. One of several in the film.

[–] idcook 15 years ago

Noted that the first time I saw the film during childhood.

But, because the face is upside down as we see it, the killer’s identity might not have been so readily apparent to first-time viewers before people had home video players with freeze frame.

I doubt I did back then.

“Your thinking is untidy, like most so-called thinking today.” (Murder, My Sweet)

[–] joeparkson 13 years ago

There are several moments in the film when Rains face is reflected upside down.

Absurdity: A Statement or belief inconsistent with my opinion.

[–] Piperson 11 years ago

WAtched this for the first time today on TCM. The description of the film gave away Rains as the murderer. I don't know if this was TCM's doing or whoever provided the description. I think I would have enjoyed it more if the plot hadn't been given away.

I saw that reflection at the beginning but I couldn't tell who it was.

[–] mackjay2 9 years ago

But, because the face is upside down as we see it, the killer’s identity might not have been so readily apparent to first-time viewers before people had home video players with freeze frame.

Good observation. We just watched this film and noticed the same thing. The killer is never really in question if you catch that image right at the start, but it's done in a way so it's easily missed and probably was missed at the time of the film's release.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

i see nothing