Hello, this is The Gemsbok, and today's topic is Clue, a film directed by
Jonathan Lynn and originally released in 1985. Today, I am going to talk about the
cult classic comedic mystery Clue, directed by Jonathan Lynn. This is a
definitive cult classic, critically panned in its time and yet appreciated
by audiences for its campy delights more and more each year. And its target
punching bag of mystery fiction is, in my estimation, one of the most ripe for
being charmingly torn apart.
"ARE YOU TRYING TO MAKE ME LOOK STUPID IN FRONT
OF THE OTHER GUESTS?" "YOU DON'T NEED ANY HELP FROM ME, SIR."
"THAT'S RIGHT." Lynn, who later
directed the highly regarded and lightly comedic legal drama
My Cousin Vinnie, both wrote and directed this film,
"YOU GUYS DOWN HERE HEAR ABOUT THE ONGOING
CHOLESTEROL PROBLEM IN THE COUNTRY?" with some story collaboration
from director John Landis, whose work includes The Blues Brothers, Animal House,
and Trading Places. "REMAIN CALM! ALL IS WELL!"
Clue is a film with humble ambitions that deftly surpasses expectations.
"DON'T WORRY; THERE'S NOTHING ILLEGAL ABOUT ANY OF THIS." "ARE YOU SURE?" "OF COURSE,
THIS IS AMERICA." "I SEE." Seemingly discarded and ignored in
it's time for the gimmickiness of being based on a board game, it is a film which
was cared about and well-executed at every level, and which cleverly presents
a tongue-in-cheek treatment of the entire mystery genre.
"I THINK YOU HAD BETTER EXPLAIN." "PLEASE SIT DOWN, EVERYONE."
Clue is one of the many products of Hollywood's
long-standing tradition of turning anything with name recognition into a
movie. The movie was based on the North American edition of the board game—which
means little except for some minor details like the game being called 'Clue'
rather than 'Cluedo' and a character being called Mr. Green rather than Reverend Green
"OH, WHO CARES? THAT GUY DOESN'T MATTER!"
From details like these, it is clear that the film was designed
to be accessible and familiar to North American players of the game, and it
could easily have just ended up being a phoned-in cash grab along these lines. It
is not the only movie ever to be based on a board game, but it is easily one of
the best (unless the original Jumanji doesn't count since its source work
invented its game, in which case Clue would become unambiguously the best).
"WHY IS THE CAR STOPPED?" "IT'S FRIGHTENED."
To fully appreciate Clue, though, it is far less important for one to understand the board game—
and far more important for one to understand its narrative context, which means knowing a
little about the tradition of the mystery genre in television and film.
"WE'RE TRYING TO FIND OUT WHO KILLED HIM, AND WHERE, AND WITH WHAT!"
Growing up, my father and I watched our way through complete collections of
shows and films from the mid-20th- century starring iconic actors as
detectives, like Basil Rathbone as Sherlock Holmes, Peter Falk as Frank
Columbo, and Margaret Rutherford as Miss Marple. Adapting and building on the
immense popularity of mystery writers like Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (the writer
behind Sherlock Holmes) and Agatha Christie (the writer behind both Miss
Marple and Hercule Poirot), over time such films and shows have come to rely on a
system of structural and dialogical tropes.
"THAT IS THE IMPORTANT PART, AS FAR AS YOU'RE CONCERNED, I'M SURE."
"NO, MR. TRUNDELL, THE IMPORTANT PART IS, 'HOW MUCH MONEY AM I GOING TO GET?'"
And anywhere that there are established tropes, there can be parody.
"I CAME INTO MONEY DURING THE WAR WHEN I LOST MY MOMMY AND DADDY."
There are plenty of structural patterns, based on the detective
visiting an unfamiliar place or being approached by a suspicious
stranger, for instance, after which—once a dead body surfaces—a work of mystery
could be expected to be built. The most often utilized (and most often lambasted,
in affectionate parodies like Clue as much as in full-on farces like Murder by Death)
is the scenario wherein a murder mystery takes place at a small social gathering
in a fixed location, leaving a finite pool of suspects, often all with apparent motives.
"A MURDER IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, A LOT OF GUESTS FOR THE WEEKEND,
EVERYONE'S A SUSPECT—YOU KNOW, THAT SORT OF THING."
Indeed, the number of murders which these works depict
happening at high-class dinner parties and weekend vacations could make anyone
understandably skittish about socializing. Clue takes place almost
entirely within one gigantic mansion, marrying the 'one location' trope to the
scope of the board game. The mansion itself becomes emblematic of the
narrative, as the progressively deepening mystery is matched with the discovery of
circuitous secret passages and exploration of new areas. Both the
mansion interior and the weather outside become sources of tension and comedy.
Meanwhile, the dedication to the singular location frames the parodical
proceedings—with locked doors leading to as much humor as they do threat,
"THERE'S NO ALTERNATIVE; I'M JUST GONNA HAVE TO BREAK IT DOWN!"
[THUMP] "GOH! GUH! DOOH!"
and the density of the home's maze-like construction putting characters in
unexpected situations.
"COMING!"
"WHAT'S THIS? ANOTHER DOOR?"
[FWOOSH]
Another important aspect of this particular sort of
mystery (for the purposes of Clue's jokes) is its use of characters. In order to
establish a great many distinct possible murderers as quickly as possible,
these single-location mysteries are almost always jam-packed with cartoonish
one-dimensional stereotypes—from languishing intelligentsia
"LOOKS LIKE IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN DONE BY AN UNTALENTED TWELVE-YEAR-OLD."
to fast-talking executives "I'M TRYING TO RUN A BUSINESS HERE."
to put upon servants. "I KNOW WHEN THEY'LL BE HUNGRY,
AND THE FOOD IS READY. I KNOW WHEN THEY'LL BE TIRED, AND THE BED IS TURNED DOWN."
Almost every sort of classic mystery character imaginable is
accounted for in Clue by the actor's portrayal of individuals named after the
game pieces, whose traits are then dialed up to their absolute maximum. Acclaimed
character actors abound in the cast. Here are just a few examples:
Christopher Lloyd to play as Professor Plum, a man at once pretentious, overbearing, and lecherous;
"IT'S YOU AND ME, HONEY BUNCH."
Eileen Brennan plays Mrs. Peacock, a high-power, high-chat career
hostess, full to the brim with insecurity and eccentricity;
"OH PLEASE, I'VE NEVER HEARD ANYTHING SO RIDICULOUS!
I MEAN, NOBODY COULD BLACKMAIL ME.
MY LIFE IS AN OPEN BOOK. I'VE NEVER DONE ANYTHING WRONG."
Madeline Kahn plays Miss white, an aloof femme fatale with an excessively
passionate and homicidal past.
"HE WAS ALWAYS A RATHER STUPIDLY OPTIMISTIC MAN.
I MEAN, I'M AFRAID IT CAME AS A GREAT SHOCK TO HIM WHEN HE DIED."
The hectic mess of the cast is then tied together by the
brilliant, grandiose, fastidious figure of Wadsworth the butler, played by Tim Curry
of Rocky Horror Picture Show fame, who generally curates the events of the plot.
"LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, PLEASE!
PLEASE RETURN TO THE STUDY. EVERYTHING WILL BE EXPLAINED."
Now, why do I say that this is the greatest parody of the mystery genre,
rather than just being a great mystery parody or even just a funny mystery, as
described in the previous section? The answer to that question involves moving
into spoiler territory, so if you're someone who hasn't seen the film and is spoiler-
averse, let me leave you with two points: one, I strongly recommend that you watch Clue;
"NO." "NO?" "NO."
and two, if the version of Clue you access lets you choose between
'all endings' and any other option, please be sure to select 'all endings' (trust me).
"I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE, OR WHAT I'M DOING HERE,
OR WHAT THIS PLACE IS ABOUT, BUT I AM DETERMINED TO ENJOY MYSELF,
AND VERY INTRIGUED, AND, OH MY, THIS SOUP'S DELICIOUS, ISN'T IT?"
Alright, here come the spoilers, because it's time to talk about Clue's most
incredible stroke of genius, which was largely inaccessible to critics and
audiences when the film was in theaters: the way its mystery is solved.
The crown jewel of this movie, only fully available in home release versions of
the work, is a lengthy climactic sequence that pokes fun at the mystery genre's
only truly immutable staple: an excessive, minutely detailed, energetic
account of how and why the crimes were committed.
"IT IS I WHO NEED A CURE FOR BEING SO SLOW TO NOTICE THE TRICKS
THAT WERE BEING PLAYED ON ME WITH REGARD TO THE TIME OF THE MURDER."
Take a step back for a moment,
and consider your own experience of watching or reading any sincere work of
mystery. In theory, the story unfolds like a puzzle. You slowly acquire the clues,
and attempt to construct the entire solution. There may be misleading notes,
twists, and turns, but—with the exception of unique outliers like Columbo—
"I'M SORRY, I DON'T FOLLOW."
one of the principal appeals of the genre is that an astute
viewer or reader could solve the crime themselves using only the details
presented in the narrative. If watching or reading a traditional whodunit with
friends, each person might even voice their suspicions as to which character
is the guilty party as the story unfolds. But in the vast majority of situations,
unfortunately, when the solution is finally revealed, something else is
revealed as well: the artificiality of the entire mystery enterprise. The work
says person A did it, but there is still person B, and often even person C who
could just as easily have done it, and had similarly plausible motives. In the
end, the author of the mystery simply selected one of the equally valid
possible solutions, and declared that it was the true solution. The creators of
Clue are certainly not the first to notice this transparent contrivance in
most mystery writing. About ten years earlier, Murder by Death, in a
considerably worse comedic mystery in terms of
pacing, camera work, music, and actual humor (yet with considerably better
contemporary reviews), Truman Capote lists off the many grievances that mystery
fans must have with conclusions written by mystery authors.
"YOU TRICKED AND FOOLED YOUR READERS FOR YEARS.
YOU'VE TORTURED US ALL WITH SURPRISE ENDINGS THAT MADE NO SENSE.
YOU'VE INTRODUCED CHARACTERS IN THE LAST FIVE PAGES THAT WERE NEVER IN THE BOOK BEFORE.
YOU'VE WITHHELD CLUES AND INFORMATION THAT MADE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR US TO GUESS WHO DID IT."
But rather than stepping back from this
issue in that kind of meta fashion, Clue leans forward face-first into it.
"I SHALL NEED TO TAKE YOU THROUGH THE EVENTS OF THE EVENING STEP BY STEP."
It presents three equally viable, full-featured, breathless solutions to the mystery—
complete with answers for the overriding motivation of the primary culprit or culprits,
"WHO WAS MRS. PEACOCK TAKING BRIBES FROM?" "A FOREIGN POWER. HER HUSBAND, THE SENATOR,
HAS INFLUENCE OVER DEFENSE CONTRACTS."
logistical explanation of how and when each murder was committed,
"SHE CREPT INTO THE STUDY, PICKED UP THE DAGGER,
RAN TO THE KITCHEN, AND STABBED THE COOK."
and addressing of seemingly contradictory or misleading motives.
"THIS ALL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MY DISAPPEARING NUCLEAR PHYSICIST HUSBAND,
OR COLONEL MUSTARD'S WORK WITH THE NEW TOP-SECRET FUSION BOMB?"
"NO, COMMUNISM WAS JUST A RED HERRING."
Rather than simply retreating into a lazy critique of equally lazy twist endings,
Clue's tripartite ending extravaganza embraces a deep understanding of the
fact that—even under the best of circumstances, with logical validity and
well-founded explanations—there is still a deep and abiding arbitrariness to the
creation and later dissolution of mystery in works of fiction.
"SO, HE HAD THE MOTIVE." "YOU ALL HAD A MOTIVE."
And what's almost more incredible about this ending is how it
does all of that while also tying back in so elegantly to the work as an
adaptation of the board game, with the game's ever-shifting and interchangeable
list of culprits, weapons, and locales.
"BUT IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHO KILLED MR. BODDY, I DID,
IN THE HALL, WITH THE REVOLVER."
So, the structure is all in place for a
rather special piece of moviemaking: a really sincere attempt to translate
and adapt a board game into a worthwhile film, that also happens to be an
exceedingly clever send-up of mystery as a format. And yet, I have still left out a
great deal, from the tactful implementation of minimal slapstick
"THIS IS INCREDIBLE." "NOT SO INCREDIBLE AS
WHAT HAPPENED NEXT!" [THUD]
to the clever repartee that permeates the script
"YOU WERE ONCE A PROFESSOR OF PSYCHIATRY, SPECIALIZING IN HELPING PARANOID
AND HOMICIDAL LUNATICS SUFFERING FROM DELUSIONS OF GRANDEUR."
"YES, BUT NOW I WORK FOR THE UNITED NATIONS." "SO YOUR WORK HAS NOT CHANGED."
to the amazing way that the movie toes the line between moments
of genuine tension and disarming swathes of charming comedy,
"JUST CHECKING." "EVERYTHING ALRIGHT?"
"YEP, TWO CORPSES, EVERYTHING'S FINE."
a line which other movies often inelegantly trample. Clue is a film that does not take itself
too seriously at any time, and in which its creators seem to be having as much
fun as its audience. Whether you are a longtime fan of mysteries, or merely a
fan of good light-hearted comedies, this is a movie about which I hope you will take the hint.
"GO AWAY!" "BUT YOUR SOULS ARE IN DANGER!"
"OUR LIVES ARE IN DANGER, YA BEATNIK!"
[DOOR SLAM]