Super movie with 4 holes

[deleted]

1) While it's a bit too convenient and coincidental that Charles, after the auction of the apartment's contents in 1963, walked away with the exact amount of money he'd stolen in 1945, there are certainly ways in which he could have ended up with a comparable sum. The script dropped enough hints (including his many passports and his mysterious life of "secrecy and lies") to indicate he was involved in shady activities which, while not enough to make him rich, were sufficient to finance his lifestyle with Regina. Six Degrees Of Separation made reference to an upper level of society that lives "hand to mouth," only on a grander, more affluent scale - a description that could have easily applied to Charles and Regina. Even if he'd squandered all the money he'd stolen, the sale of the apartment's contents (which could have included works of art that had appreciated in value by the early 60s) would have made up for any financial losses he'd experienced.

Of course, this is also one of those cases where the needs of cinematic storytelling trumps real-life logic; it's simply easier for the audience to follow the action if the amount of money (in this case, $250,000) remains constant from 1945 to 1963.

2) The French police reported what they had found in Charles' compartment after he'd been thrown off the train; it's quite possible he had a suitcase that Carson Dyle made off with and later discarded (in some secret place) once he'd discovered it didn't contain $250,000. After all, even though Paris is far less traditional than many cities, it's hard to imagine Charles boarding the train at Gare Montparnasse in his pajamas.

3) This is once again a case of the needs of cinematic storytelling overruling real-life logic. It's important that Dyle's name appears clearly and legibly - not just so Regina can read it, but so the AUDIENCE can read it as well. We always have to keep in mind that movies are heightened reality, and a certain suspension of disbelief is necessary (let's not forget that Cary Grant's character is by turns charming and menacing, depending on the needs of each particular scene).

4) The film never suggests that the vendor who winds up with the three priceless stamps is the same vendor who sold them to Charles; in fact, when Reggie gets a chance to talk to him, he admits he's familiar with the stamps (because of their notoriety), but he also makes it clear this is the first time he's actually set eyes on them -

I know them as one knows his own face, though I had never seen them.

4) It wasn't a "street fair" per se. As Sylvie says, it's a stamp market. We see scores of booths of stamp dealers, any one of whom could've sold Charles the stamps, or connected him with a collector willing to sell.

$250,000 was a LOT of money in 1945. A family of 4 could live comfortably on an income of a few thousand, so Charlie and Reggie could have lived well on the interest.

What I dont understand is if Crookshank knew that Mrs Lampert was innocent, then why did he scare her like that and not just tell her that he works for the embassy? Very sneaky, and couldve gotten her killed.

This is Mike. He saves ghettos.

1) Plenty of gpod answers already.

2) Minor issue, since the killer could have made off with the clothes. He was obviously traveling extremely lightly -- in fact, the real question is why he'd bothered to weight himself down with PJs.

3) Huge problem. Poisoned, OK. Shot, just marginally OK. But strangled? No way.

4) As others have said, he didn't have the appointment there to buy the stamps. Maybe he was meeting Dyle there, or maybe he went there to make contacts. (I don't quite remember the chronology.) One doesn't buy and sell $100,000 items at a street market.

Edward
Can't he do something useful, like start an avalanche or something?

Actually, here's another hole. The stamps have been stuck onto the envelope as if they were to be used as postage. A collector would never do this. It might have dramatically lowered their value, and certainly risked damaging them.

Edward

I see I'm two years late to the party (Charade was just on today 01/13/2014 on Encore, I believe) but I thought Walter Matthau's character wrote "Dyle" on the floor so that Audrey Hepburn would suspect Cary Grant-she didn't know at the time that Matthau was Dyle--and would therefore call him (Matthau) with the information about the stamps instead of trusting Grant.