I mean, I'll give you that them being a couple is kind of incriminating, but that's hardly worth a thought to a DA. There is no evidence at all that they were involved in her husbands death. Are we supposed to assume that they'll go to jail? I wouldn't even think there would be a trial. What else was there against them? I loved the movie though. Just not so sure about that ending.
shareWell after the pictures came up I am sure we can assume that the murderer is going to have to come up with a alibi since it was already established they took his car. So they see the picture with him and her fooling around in the park, they are going to want to question the guy in the picture. Who we already know is the killer of her husband. I haven't seen the movie in while but I remember someone seeing him early the next morning in the office building. Oh don't forget he worked for her husband. So I am sure we can conclude prosecuter, or whoever they call them in France had a open and shut case. I was under the impresssion they confessed though. At least she did.
shareSo they see the picture with him and her fooling around in the park, they are going to want to question the guy in the picture. Who we already know is the killer of her husband. I haven't seen the movie in while but I remember someone seeing him early the next morning in the office building.
On top of having no alibi and the cops knew he worked with the husband. Plus her ripping and runnning around town asking about him leaves him not being able to use her for a alibi. The cops are going to find out he stood her up and was no way to get a hold of him. Because he was stuck in the elevator that meant he was in the building after hours which puts him at the scene of the murder. Next time I bet he will use the steps. lol
shareYou make some good points, and I don't know how advanced things were with coroners and determining the time of death of people at that time, but still, your points don't really prove anything. Sure, he was at the scene of the murder, so? He works there. He could have easily forgot something upstairs that he was going after and BAM! no power--stuck on the elevator. How could he have gotten into the office when all the doors were locked? Of course we all know he used a grappling hook to get up there, but that was gone by the time the police discovered Carala dead.
And maybe I missed something in the film, but when did the police ever mention speaking to people who ran across Mrs. Carala asking for Tavernier? I certainly don't remember it, but like I said, I may have missed something. Sure, Tavernier would have been a suspect (if the police believed it wasn't a suicide), but there certainly was not enough evidence to prove his nor Mrs. Carala's guilt.
The more I think about this, the more the end of this movie bugs me.
I haven't seen the move in a while but I'll look at it again tonight. But his car was missing and he had to admit someone stoled not be implicated in the tourist murders. His alibi was he was stuck in the elevator. But also he was having a affair with the dead mans wife. And she was asking all over the place for him as if she was waiting for him to have done something. I guess when they went to court they had a pretty good case. Remember he forgot the rope dangling outside the office window, that is why he was going back. Also there was a man who worked in that building who knew everybody was gone that is why the elevators were shut down. Well the killer had to know that routine. He was suppose had gone home. If he was coming back for something legit he would had told the man he was still in the building. But let me see the movie again.
shareI think the ending was void of the details for the sake of dramatic effect.
- My interpretation was that the cops(et al) had already determined it wasn't a suicide by the time the detective confronted Mrs. Carala in the darkroom (i.e. I'm sure they could tell pretty quickly that someone else shot him and simply set the gun in his hand).
- Secondly, Julien's interrogation was intense, they weren't letting him sleep, etc... Part of me wonders if it is meant to be implied that he spilled the details to the cops about murdering Carala when they were laughing at his elevator story. (In other words, he confessed, which sparked their pursuit of Mrs. Carala. If so, they probably would have *just* started searching for her when she arrived at the motel.)
- It seems probable that upon being teased and pressed upon, Julien would have decided to tell them how/why he ended up being stuck in the elevator. I'm sure he felt he was cornered either way, and that he'd rather be known for the "more diginified" murder of the greedy, socially irresponsible Carala for "the sake of love," rather than the seemingly random, brutal, psychopathic murder that he was being blamed for in the papers.
I was surprised by the ending as well. He was wearing gloves and he left the room locked so while the photos look bad, there really is no evidence. I don't know what the French legal system is but I'm sure they need actual evidence not just motive and proximity.
Come to think of it, how did the police come to the conclusion that it was murder, not suicide? I must have missed that subtitle, it was late.
I have just finished watching this movie and I am pretty sure the cop says to Florence in the darkroom that Tavernier will probably get 10 years with 5 off for (something I didn't quite catch), but that since Florence is definitely an accomplice in the murder of her husband, the jury will be much more severe with her. The film ends with Florence rambling on about twenty years of nothingness etc. I think we need a comment from someone with knowledge of the French judicial system.
shareagree. when it goes to trial the da will balk & tavernier will walk.
Golf clap? Golf clap.
Came to say this. Motive without evidence doesn't get you a conviction.
share