MovieChat Forums > Never Take Sweets from a Stranger (1961) Discussion > Errors in plot.

Errors in plot.

posted 13 years ago by DavidW1947
14 replies | jump to latest

Having recently seen this film for the first time (I was only 13 in 1960 and so too young to be allowed in a cinema to see this X film), I noticed a couple of odd things in the plot, suggesting that the script may have been rewritten as the picture was being made.

At the beginning of the film, where Jean loses her candy money in the grass, her friend Lucille says excitedly that she knows where they can get some candy for nothing and takes Jean off to Olderberry seniors house. This suggests that Lucille had danced naked for Olderberry before in return for candy and that she didn't mind doing it and was used to the old man and was in no way afraid of him. But later on in the film, when she meets Olderberry in the woods, she's terrified of him. This doesn't make any sense.

During the trial, Jean tells Olderberry's defence counsel that her daddy also likes her to dance naked for him after she's had a bath, but this isn't mentioned again.

As for the doddery and frail Olderberry senior, as played by the then 70 years old Felix Aylmer, the girls could easily have outrun him and he didn't look like he had the strength to crush a grape, let alone strangle anyone. Perhaps it would have worked better with a younger actor in the role.

Another plot hole: If Olderberry senior never spoke, or was unable to speak, how did he ask Jean and Lucille to take off their clothes and dance naked for him?

[–] TommyCSL 13 years ago

I have not seen this movie yet, just ordered it with like 5 other movies on one DVD but I do have an explanation for your first plot hole. Lucille telling Jean she knows where to get candy for nothing doesn't mean she has done it before, it could be common knowledge among the children that, "You can get candy by going to Olderberry's house." and Lucille may just be passing this information to her new friend, not knowing it involved dancing naked.

I do admit your other problems do seem like they will have no explanation.

[–] DavidW1947 13 years ago

I agree with your observations about the old fellah at the end. He looked like he didn't know what day it was, let alone what he'd just done. But, despite the anomalies in the plot, it's still a good film and very well acted...although the impression is given (perhaps unintentionally) that if anyone was going to go after little girls, it could only be a very senile old man and no man a lot younger would ever do it. That's why I think it would have worked better if Olderberry junior had been the culprit instead of his father.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] warren_houghton 12 years ago

I'm watching it now and have seen it a couple of times previously.

As to your first point, that Lucille shouldn't have been afraid of the old guy at the end of the movie:

I don't find it illogical, even if the last time she met him she WASN'T afraid of him. This is because of everything she had experienced since that encounter at the beginning of the movie: her friend's family calls the cops, the old guy is arrested and put on trial, her family sends her away and apparently tells her to lie about the incident. Obviously adults or "society" think this guy is pretty weird and bad besides being really old and I think speech IMPAIRED, though I doubt incapable. Then the old guy offers them candy again and her friend is terrified. I think she would be too given the whole setup.

I'm amazed at the way lawyers can plan a strategy for twisting every possible answer the witness might give, and the scummy defense counsel demonstrates this ability. He gets her to admit she sometimes dances around naked after her bath like I imagine most kids (well, I guess girls would be more likely to dance) might admit to doing on occasion, then how easy is it to get her to say that her parents might watch her doing it and enjoy it? Just like any parent has had fun watching their kid playing in the bathtub. There's nothing sinister or dirty in it, yet the defense counsel makes it sound that way (to a weak minded juror anyway). They didn't mention it again because it was just meant to show how slimy the defense counsel was.

As for Olderberry's frailty, I'm not too bothered by the feasibility of him being able to catch one of them and eventually strangle her. I think it could work either way the movie wants to play it - he's too weak and slow to do it, or the combination of the girls being trapped in that boat and one of them being too meek to really try to get away once he grabs her lets him get away with it. These days I doubt any 9 or 10 year old girl would let him get away with this, but back then girls were supposed to be weak and subservient to their elders and all that....

I think they probably didn't give the old guy any lines to make him more menacing and to add to the impression that he was senile or crazy or brain damaged from a stroke or something. Even if he couldn't speak at all, he seemed able to move and think well enough to mime and gesture what he wanted from them.

What I find somewhat contrived is Jean having a nightmare that he was coming to get her and being terrified of him that first night, when she just got through explaining the story to her parents and not being distressed about it at all. To her it was apparently completely innocent - a game - that she wasn't frightened or ashamed about at all. I suppose the idea is that subconsciously all kids know what happened was naughty and bad, and that subconscious knowledge expressed itself in a nightmare.

Overall a good movie I thought that tried not to be hysterical about the issue. The grandmother tried to be rational about how much damage had been done in the first place, and the father didn't want the guy strung up from a lamppost, only that he be under constant supervision.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] nammage 10 years ago

He can speak, it just doesn't show him speaking. One can note the father mentioning around 30 minutes into the film about how the father said he called Olderberry and that Olderberry replied with, basically, "Talk to my lawyer.".

-Nam

I'm on the road less traveled...

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Devans00 12 years ago

I agree with the theory that Lucy acted scared of Mr. Olderberry Sr. because Jean was scared. Later, on the boat, I think the man used his "friendship" with Lucy to grab her from the boat.

Scary, creepy stuff.

No two persons ever watch the same movie.

[–] paguy27 10 years ago

There's aren't errors in plot at all. Pointless post. Human behavior explains all of those.

[–] DavidW1947 10 years ago

A pointless reply.

[–] Tin_ear 10 years ago

Yeah, that end scene is probably just there to neatly wrap up all the loose ends. Lucy was clearly being "groomed," and in any case shouldn't have been so scared of the kinko. And the whole thing about Jean dancing naked for her father, I'm not sure what to make of that. The weird part is that the otherwise non-threatening, frail geezer all of a sudden turns into a bloodthirtsy Frankenstein monster. He must realize it's too late to kill the witnesses? Or is he supposed to be insane or vengeful? Who knows.

[–] gregrchstr 8 years ago

He looked pretty much out of it when the cops found him in the cabin with the dead girl. It did seem as if the girls should have been able to get away from the old man as he seemed on the verge of collapse a couple of times while chasing after them. I expected them to bash him in the head with their oars when he pulled the boat in.