At the end of the movie, the male protagonist was still found out about the crime, and Hitchcock probably didn't want him to jump out of the law of "reward for good and evil". However, there are still some points in the plot that can be handled better. I will list them first, but remember that the flaws do not hide the flaws.
Personally, I think it is too simplistic for the murderer to be stabbed to death by scissors, and it may be more reasonable to replace it with a sharp blade. Although the murderer was a little confused because the male protagonist called late, he was still ready when the phone rang. In this case, even if the male protagonist called on time, the murderer would still be attacked by the female. The main counter-kill? If so, then the perfect murder told by the male protagonist to the murderer is not valid at all, because the chances of the female protagonist killing back are too high. Unless the perfect murder that the male protagonist thinks in his heart is the murderer being counter-killed and the female protagonist dying in prison, but this is inconsistent with his hasty actions after learning that the murderer is dead , and the first "good and evil" in the movie. When there is a report," it came out, and the murderer was killed.
In the play, the heroine was unable to clear her suspicion of committing the crime, and was almost unjustly killed, until the detective discovered that the key in the heroine's bag was not the key to the house, but the key to Ms. Only by using small denomination currencies in large sums is the turning point. To be honest, the suspicion of the former alone cannot clear the suspicion of the heroine, because although the key in my bag is not my own, it is from the murderer. Although it is unreasonable, it can be explained that the key fell out of the pocket after the murderer's death. , the hostess mistakenly thought it was her key, and put it into the bag in a panic. Only in combination with the second point, when the male protagonist has a lot of money that can be used to hire a murderer, the female protagonist becomes less suspicious, but the question is, why is the male protagonist in such a hurry to spend money? You can put the whole box of money under the bed, and spend it slowly after the limelight, so why spend a lot of money. At the same time, in the movie scene, the male protagonist spends cash. There is neither bank record nor surveillance video. The detective can easily lock the total amount of money spent by the male protagonist? The male protagonist spends money and the detective finds that it is more appropriate for the male protagonist to spend money to explain the plot needs.
One final flaw is that the male protagonist never inspects the carpet on the fifth step these days? The process of the female lead being convicted should be measured in months, at least, but the male lead never touched the carpet on the steps once? Even if he brings the house key every time, he will not fail to review the details of the matter. The detective is only suspicious of the situation including the male protagonist spending a lot of money and having the financial resources to hire murderers. The only way to lock the male protagonist's crime facts is that the male protagonist knows the key under the carpet. Maybe this setting is still in line with the director's desire. The "good and evil pay off " point of view, because the male protagonist is evil, so he will reveal his faults, even if it is not the key in the movie that leaked him, it can be a casual chat after he relaxes, and the secret conversation with the murderer is discovered by others. kind of thing.
Personally, I think "reward for good and evil" not only means to stop the wicked from doing evil, but also to teach people to be open and friendly. If the heroine encounters such a case that cannot be cleaned up, she will also go out with her, and the hero will suffer. Is murder directly related?
View more about Dial M for Murder reviews
