MovieChat Forums > Clue (1985) Discussion > A Lot of Confusion

A Lot of Confusion

posted 8 years ago by rzurik
9 replies | jump to latest

Let me just start off by saying that I DO love this movie. I have been watching it since I was a kid when it was on every Halloween on Comedy Central, and could not tell you how many more times I have seen the film since. I just really have to rattle some points off the top of my head with some of the holes I have noticed. It is really more to vent but any feedback would be dope.

1. Why does Ms. Scarlett say that Prof. Plum was missing from the kitchen when the Cook was found dead? He def was not, he is seen in the same frame entering the kitchen with the group right before Mr. Green finds the Cook.

1A. If Prof. Plum is there in the kitchen and in the billiard room prior to that, WHEN does he supposedly kill Mr. Boddy? He was with the group when Yvette was screaming in the billiard room, with the group in the kitchen when the Cook was found and helped carry her body back to the study when he noticed Mr. Boddy's body was gone. If Mr. Boddy was supposed to be killed during this time and Prof. Plum is accounted for on screen; how did he do it? He even asks at the end "So, who did I kill?". I cannot put the pieces together on that one.

2. How the hell did Col. Mustard know where the secret passage was from the conservatory to the lounge was? It is just stated as a fact in the third ending scenario, but I don't see how he could have ever known about it.

3. If the third ending is to be believed, why did Wadsworth answer the J. Edgar Hoover phone call and then continue the night like nothing had happened? If the phone call was not for him, why did he continue the charade? He must have known something was up.

4. How could the Butler (Mr. Boddy) go along with all of this from the start? I would have never participated in anything like this if I were in his shoes. He even acts as a dastardly guy, and it's all a trick? a ruse? I cannot wrap my head around that either. Why the gifts? Why the lights off? Just pull the gun and expose Wadsworth. Why GO through all of that??

Sorry, thanks. There are def more issues for me, but I am tired of typing and I would just ramble. Cheers.

[–] hilaryjrp 8 years ago

You opened an IMDB account just to ask these questions? You should have read the board and found the answers. If the movie's so awful for you, just don't watch it anymore.

[–] vilafire 8 years ago

What a jerk response. They said they are a fan of the film and plaster great questions. The horror!

[–] hilaryjrp 8 years ago

It's a "jerk response" to suggest a brand-new IMDB member *read* the board first?

Okay.

[–] avortac4 (3744) 3 years ago

"You should have" is not a suggestion, it's a retroactive demand. Which is a jerk move.

Are you also suggesting someone should read the whole board before asking a question?

If you are going to be THIS nitpicky about who can ask a question and in what circumstances, why don't you ever nitpick the people that simply state 'this movie > that movie' or 'This female actor) is hot', or 'Which (female actor) do you think is the hottest?', as if THAT is the most pressing matter in the world or the most interesting topic of discussion, etc.

Maybe to a teenager with hand in his pants, but come on, do we have to worship them?

Also, suggesting someone created (not 'opened' - it's not something that's closed that you open, it's something that doesn't exist that you create into existence) an account just to ask that question is insulting, plus implying that they SHOULDN'T have done (as if it's somehow too much trouble for such a worthless activity, also implying their question is worthless) it is definitely a jerk move.

Then ASSUMING they're asking or posting about their completely valid confusion, long post (which yours isn't - did you reply to someone just to be a jerk, by the way? Not adding your own thoughts about the movie or anything valuable or helpful - that's a jerk move), because they thought the movie is "SO AWFUL FOR YOU", and THEN giving them a command,

.. TELLING THEM WHAT TO DO, like you own them and can order and command them around!

Now, if THAT isn't a jerk move, I don't know what is.

[–] avortac4 (3744) 3 years ago

Yes, it is, especially for the reasons I mentioned, but your reply to someone validly criticizing your jerk-response, is also a jerk-response.

First of all, what does it matter how 'new' or 'old' someone is? Secondly, why put 'read' between asterisks? Third, what kind of logic are you applying here? Surely everyone has to start somewhere. Maybe they did read and still didn't get it. This is a discussion board, everyone has the right to ask questions and to write completely valid points and especially this kind of nice, long posts that you don't seem to be able to write at all.

Are you jealous because you can only write two lines of text in a post?

(See how it feels..?`)

You're downplaying your own jerkiness, that also makes your response a jerk-response. And if everyone had to read a whole board before asking a question about the movie, we would have no posts TO read...

There's one more point - think about watching movie, thinking of a point, hurrying to discuss it before you forget, etc. and being DEMANDED and ORDERED AROUND by some jerk-poster, that you have to READ pages upon pages of text before you can even ask anything!

Is _THAT_ the kind of world you want to live in? If it is, you're a jerk. If it isn't, you made a jerk-post, because you're making someone else experience things you're not ready to experience yourself, making you a hypocrite and that is a sign of a true jerk. No offence.

[–] aavfreak (3322) 3 years ago

I'm just curious if you realize you're responding to a post from the old imdb boards.

[–] vilafire 8 years ago

This movie, as much as I love it (I paid a lot of money for the book even!), it does not hold up well to scrutiny but that's in keeping with the genre really. Many of the classic whodunits from the Golden Age are equally flimsy in their solutions.

[–] HalHopandPop 8 years ago

1 and 1A. Notice that Professor Plum (and Mrs. Peacock) are at the back of the pack when the group enters the kitchen to look for the cook. When Colonel Mustard says 'I think you'd better explain yourself, Wadsworth!' the camera cuts to Wadsworth and both Plum and Peacock are now missing behind him. They reappear when Mustard says Peacock was the one with the knife. So in endings 2 and 3, Mr. Boddy was killed in the short time Peacock or Plum was missing from the kitchen. And in ending 3, we find out Wadsworth is actually Mr. Boddy, so Plum was confused about who he killed.

2. Probably the same way Scarlett knew about the passage in ending 1 - Yvette told him. They knew each other, as those photographs indicated.

Milo, I've told you again and again - please, don't walk on the chickens!

[–] Sandman81 (1509) 3 years ago

1) and 1A) These are movie mistakes. Just have to let it slide in order to enjoy the movie.

2) Could also be a mistake. But if we really want to try to make it work for the sake of the movie either he stumbled into it, or Yvette told him.

3) Also doesn't make a ton of sense. Why would Hoover call the house while an active sting operation is going, and an undercover agent could be in danger? But for the sake of the movie again, maybe figured they were already in too deep into the night, and 3 more of his informants were still alive, including the cop, so might as well finish the job and hope he could get out in time.

4) Staying with the 3rd ending, perhaps he was under orders from Wadsworth, who was still blackmailing him, to go along with the ruse and allow him time to escape. And if he did anything to blow his cover, then he would expose him and everyone else. Obviously, he had no idea he was going to be killed. Which makes several more possibilities.
1) Wadsworth planned to have "Mr. Boddy" show up, confront him with his crimes, then turn him over to the police. Once he was at the station, Wadsworth would escape and flee to another country, and by the time the police discovered they had the wrong guy, it would be too late.
2) The plan was for one of the guests to kill Mr. Boddy and the other informants thus removing several threats to Wadsworth. When Mr. Boddy arrived at the house and saw the glares he got from the 6 guests, he realized he was in grave danger. That's when he first tried to flee but was stopped by the dogs. He even tried to warn everyone that it was a hoax. So when he was brought back to the study he threw last desperate attempt to save his life and giving everyone the weapons and telling them to trust the devil they know. Then he turned off the lights so to protect the person who actually did it. Afterwards he would tell them the truth and they would all be free of the blackmail.