|
Post by Nalkarj on Dec 12, 2018 16:19:28 GMT
That other one was solved so quickly I thought that YOU had found the answer right after posting the question ! If only they all worked that way but with all the answers what would the inquiring mind have to inquire about ? Nalkarj is so much more well versed in the whodunit form, both literary and cinematic, than I am, despite my being a voracious consumer of them, from British TV dramas to neglected little B programmers of the ‘30s - ‘40s. By the time of the big reveal, I’ve usually lost the thread through an inability to keep the players and events straight, and am often as not even more baffled by the explanation that the preceding proceedings (howzat for a phrase?): “Mona had the goods on Carter, but didn’t know he was on to Dorothy’s scheme to blackmail Freshette over Cynthia’s letters to Gianelli. So when McIntire figured out what Lady Espeth was up to, he knew she had to be gotten out of the way before Billings could find her will, not realizing that Barbara and Carruthers had witnessed a new one leaving everything to Malcolm. As soon as Lombard made his slip about seeing Tony and Wilma together, I knew that the killer was…yes, you, Mr. Deveraux!” In other words, there’s more fun in the investigation than in the solution, right? WRONG, Doghouse! Wrong again! Lordy, why do I stick around with you people? Don’t you remember how Inspector Plodder revealed at the end that the killer was not Mr. Deveraux–but rather that he had been protecting his wife, Barbara Deveraux, who been masquerading as Betty the house maid in Act I? And how, under that guise, she had seduced her husband, making him the only adulterer never to have actually committed adultery? Now, admittedly, even I would have claimed it wasn’t fair-play were it not for the obvious clues of the oil-stained balustrade, the smashed flowerpot (which practically gave the whole game away, don’t you think?), the disappearing wind chimes, and of course the collected works of Proust in Sir George’s library. Honestly, you people! Admittedly, I don’t usually try to keep up with mysteries either–I just like that “wow!” surprise at the end.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Dec 12, 2018 16:32:38 GMT
Speaking of Columbo … how are we to find the solution of the Great Columbo Airplane Mystery if they keep showing the same late in the series episodes over and over again ? Somebody’s gonna have to bite the bullet and buy a box set of all the Columbo episodes…and then watch ‘em. And no, piker that I am, that’s not an offer (we’re working our way through the entire Midsomer Murders inventory at the present time). I have just had my 10 seasons of Columbos returned after lending them to a sick relative several months ago - now have to go through them to solve this? Any idea if the query relates to an early 70s season or a later 80s/90s season? I am missing several Columbo movies from the late 80s which don’t seem to be readily available in Australia - in some boxsets they are packaged as “season 8". This consists of 4 episodes. Sorry, guys, I hadn’t seen these till now. I honestly don’t think it’s a Columbo, unfortunately. I e-mailed a bunch of Columbo-website “webmasters,” and all of them said it wasn’t one–either ’70s or ’80s. And what’s even more troubling is that I can’t find anything with this plot, other than that real-life D.C. case I referenced above (which, needless to say, ain’t it). I’d be willing to chalk it up to my misremembering “Swan Song”–but did Lynx, jervistetch, BATouttaheck, and I all happen to misremember it? By the way, someone on Reddit recommended the episode “ 45 Minutes from Home,” from The Streets of San Francisco, as a possibility. I know it’s not what I saw, but I wanted to show you guys just in case.
|
|
|
Post by jervistetch on Dec 12, 2018 17:45:49 GMT
Maybe we all have a psychic connection like the CLOSE ENCOUNTERS people had over the Devil's Tower mountain. I know it exists somewhere. Lately I've been thinking it may have been a pilot episode or TV Movie for a series that didn't get picked up.
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Dec 12, 2018 23:02:05 GMT
Nalkarj is so much more well versed in the whodunit form, both literary and cinematic, than I am, despite my being a voracious consumer of them, from British TV dramas to neglected little B programmers of the ‘30s - ‘40s. By the time of the big reveal, I’ve usually lost the thread through an inability to keep the players and events straight, and am often as not even more baffled by the explanation that the preceding proceedings (howzat for a phrase?): “Mona had the goods on Carter, but didn’t know he was on to Dorothy’s scheme to blackmail Freshette over Cynthia’s letters to Gianelli. So when McIntire figured out what Lady Espeth was up to, he knew she had to be gotten out of the way before Billings could find her will, not realizing that Barbara and Carruthers had witnessed a new one leaving everything to Malcolm. As soon as Lombard made his slip about seeing Tony and Wilma together, I knew that the killer was…yes, you, Mr. Deveraux!” In other words, there’s more fun in the investigation than in the solution, right? WRONG, Doghouse! Wrong again! Lordy, why do I stick around with you people? Don’t you remember how Inspector Plodder revealed at the end that the killer was not Mr. Deveraux–but rather that he had been protecting his wife, Barbara Deveraux, who been masquerading as Betty the house maid in Act I? And how, under that guise, she had seduced her husband, making him the only adulterer never to have actually committed adultery?
See what I mean? Ah, now, the physical evidence: that's something that rarely confuses me; must be the way my brain works. I can forget someone's name in two seconds, but I always know a smashed flower pot from an oil-stained balustrade. I hope I don't make myself a snob by saying so, but where TV whodunits are concerned, the Brits tend to run circles around U.S. for the "wow" factor. A lot of that has to do with what hubby and I call "guilt by casting." For instance, if one of the characters is played by Ronny Cox, odds are overwhelming that he's the killer. Closest the British shows get to this kind of "tell" has to do with character more than casting: one that serves very little apparent purpose to the plot, lingering benignly on the periphery while providing seemingly innocuous color or likable eccentricity is often a safe bet. But again, not being as well-read as you in the fiction department, I wouldn't know if this may be a fairly standard aspect of the written form.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Dec 12, 2018 23:11:00 GMT
See what I mean?Ah, now, the physical evidence: that’s something that rarely confuses me; must be the way my brain works. I can forget someone’s name in two seconds, but I always know a smashed flower pot from an oil-stained balustrade. I hope I don’t make myself a snob by saying so, but where TV whodunits are concerned, the Brits tend to run circles around U.S. for the “wow” factor. A lot of that has to do with what hubby and I call “guilt by casting.” For instance, if one of the characters is played by Ronny Cox, odds are overwhelming that he’s the killer. Closest the British shows get to this kind of “tell” has to do with character more than casting: one that serves very little apparent purpose to the plot, lingering benignly on the periphery while providing seemingly innocuous color or likable eccentricity is often a safe bet. But again, not being as well-read as you in the fiction department, I wouldn’t know if this may be a fairly standard aspect of the written form. It’s a fair point about celebrity-casting as killers, mostly as they want to get the most out of the celebrities they manage to get–just having that person as an interviewee doesn’t do much, so the celebrity is indeed the killer! I admit I haven’t really seen that large of a disparity between American and Brit productions in the celebrity regard; Death in Paradise and Jonathan Creek, for two, have also made guest-stars the killers, though admittedly sometimes they’re a bit trickier with this than usual (especially Creek). But you’re right that American mystery shows, on the whole, tend to be woefully obvious. Monk was smart about it: if there was a guest star, they would usually go the Columbo route and tell you right away he was the killer. ( Monk went for surprisingly complicated plots–not Jonathan Creek-level, but at least Death in Paradise-level.) While Murder, She Wrote and its ilk were probably the worst offenders in this regard.
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Dec 13, 2018 17:06:22 GMT
It’s a fair point about celebrity-casting as killers, mostly as they want to get the most out of the celebrities they manage to get–just having that person as an interviewee doesn’t do much, so the celebrity is indeed the killer! I admit I haven’t really seen that large of a disparity between American and Brit productions in the celebrity regard; Death in Paradise and Jonathan Creek, for two, have also made guest-stars the killers, though admittedly sometimes they’re a bit trickier with this than usual (especially Creek). I haven't yet sampled Death In Paradise, and have seen only early episodes of Jonathan Creek (and yearn to see more). Although I recognize or know many familiar players that have repeatedly turned up on Morse, Frost, Poirot, Foyle, Lynley, Marple, Midsomer and the like, it may be that I'm less familiar with where they fall on the celebrity scale across the pond. Although it rarely approached greatness in either drama or mystery, something I always admired about Diagnosis Murder was its refusal to adhere to a specific format, employing both "open" and "closed" forms, serious, lighthearted or spoof episodes, an occasional dabble in the supernatural and multiple instances of "stunt casting" (one episode featured a half-dozen M*A*S*H refugees from both film and series; another gathered a guest cast of stars from '60s TV spy shows; yet another reunited Mike Connors, Julie Adams, Pernell Roberts and Beverly Garland for the wrap-up of an unresolved case from a 1971 Mannix episode, complete with flashback clips therefrom). And once in a while, it would tackle a subject in deadly earnest, such as child abuse or euthanasia. It did, however, suffer from the Murder, She Wrote "typhoid Mary" syndrome, where our crime-solvers were like homicide carriers, with bodies dropping left and right around them (often representing personal acquaintances) no matter where they went or what they were doing.
|
|
|
Post by divtal on Dec 17, 2018 18:14:53 GMT
I'm just seeing this thread for the first time. Two questions: --Might it have been an episode of Quincey, M.E., with Jack Klugman? --Did the plot involve the sugar bowl, next to the coffee machine in the airport office? I can't pinpoint it any closer than that. But, I do remember that plot line on some show.
|
|
|
Post by jervistetch on Dec 18, 2018 2:17:35 GMT
I don't think so. I have never watched a single episode of Quincey. I'm not sure why. I always heard it was a good show and I love Jack Klugman. I don't remember the sugar bowl thing but it sounds like a very intriguing plot point. Welcome to this mystery, divtal
|
|
|
Post by divtal on Dec 18, 2018 3:09:08 GMT
OK. I'll try to add whatever remaining brain power I have, to the cause.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Dec 20, 2018 21:18:34 GMT
I'm just seeing this thread for the first time. Two questions: --Might it have been an episode of Quincey, M.E., with Jack Klugman? --Did the plot involve the sugar bowl, next to the coffee machine in the airport office? I can't pinpoint it any closer than that. But, I do remember that plot line on some show. Hey, divtal, thanks so much for joining the mystery! Like the Sleuth singer, this is one I let go for a while and then eventually return to! Like jervistetch, unfortunately I don’t remember a sugar bowl and know I haven’t seen an episode of Quincey—also like Jervis, I’m not sure why I haven’t, as I like Jack Klugman and mysteries! Thanks again, though. Do you remember this?
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Mar 11, 2019 18:43:33 GMT
OK, guys, so someone who’s also been investigating this just e-mailed me: I’m fairly sure that I’ve never seen The Streets of San Francisco—I think there was another episode from that show that was also recommended as ours—but I wanted to let you guys know. jervistetch , divtal , Doghouse6 , BATouttaheck , OldAussie , Lynx
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Mar 11, 2019 18:54:19 GMT
Hey, one more thing (reference not originally intended)… I don’t remember any shots in the plane; I don’t think the episode, whatever it was, showed the killer actually flying to or from. For jervistetch, BATouttaheck, Lynx, divtal, and anyone else who remembers this: do you remember anything in the plane?
|
|
|
Post by jervistetch on Mar 11, 2019 19:08:32 GMT
Nalkarj I just read the summaries of the two suggested episodes and, sorry to say, neither of them sound remotely like our phantom episode. p.s. I thought I had a hazy recollection of a man in a cockpit flying a plane but I can't really be sure.
|
|
Lynx
Sophomore
@lynx0139
Posts: 345
Likes: 195
|
Post by Lynx on Mar 11, 2019 20:38:24 GMT
Yes an external sht of the pilot in the cockpit ( medium sized plane), but that's it. No shots of the interior of the plane.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Mar 11, 2019 22:20:51 GMT
jervistetch , Lynx Thank you both very much! I don’t have a memory of a shot of a man in the cockpit, but so be it. To be honest, on the possible-misremembering side of the equation, my biggest problem is that I can’t remember anything else about the episode other than the alibi.
|
|
|
Post by BATouttaheck on Mar 11, 2019 23:03:39 GMT
Rare viewer of Streets of San Fran so that's not it for me either … Nalkarj
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Apr 5, 2019 20:39:06 GMT
Someone just PM’d me on Reddit and thought the episode is “Murder in Malibu,” from the Columbo revival series. I haven’t gotten a chance to look through the video yet, but I thought I’d let you all know:
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Apr 5, 2019 21:23:32 GMT
^^^^Yeah, so that’s not it.
|
|
|
Post by BATouttaheck on Apr 6, 2019 1:29:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Apr 10, 2020 19:25:28 GMT
Ehh, might as well bump this just for fun.
|
|