MovieChat Forums > Scoop (2006) Discussion > Other plot holes

Other plot holes

posted 17 years ago by Badger1492
42 replies | jump to latest

Aside from the one mentioned already (Peter's secretary is supposedly poisoned to keep her from revealing that Peter is the Tarot Card Killer. The plot continues, and we discover that Peter is actually a "copy cat killer", and only killed the last victim (long after his secretary was killed). The man actually arrested as the Tarot Card Killer even reveals details only the real killer could have known. If this is true, and Peter is not the Tarot Card Killer, why was his secretary ever poisoned?), here is another:

When Woody finds the envelope with "Betty G" written on it, it eventually leads to them realizing that Lyman killed Betty G. But why on earth would Lyman write her name on a piece of paper and then keep it in his bag for anyone to find, either before or after he killed her? He had been seeing her for years and wanted to keep it a complete secret. Even if the envelope had held money for her, why would he write her name on it? It seems like a plot point added for convenience rather than reality.

I liked this movie although it isn't one of Woody's tightest scrips for the above reasons. I also thing Scarlett is wonderful as the rather naive young reported; she even snorted when she laughed once!

One more thing: this theme, a wealthy man being blackmailed by a lower class woman that he ends up murdering, has been done in Matchpoint and Crimes and Misdemeanors, and now Scoop. Do you think Woody is obsessed with this idea?

[–] carebearhend 17 years ago

I thought that they explained that Peter had frequented the prostitute with the cufflink as well as the one he really did kill and that was why Peter killed his secretary-- to hide that he visited any prostitutes at all.

It was kind of a throw away line in the movie, but I was wondering about this very plot point so I noticed it when it was mentioned. It seemed almost as if they realized this might be a hole so they threw that explanation in there so that it would make sense.

Otherwise, it was never for sure that she was poisoned-- she could have just keeled over-- (maybe.)

[–] daftrascal 17 years ago

This bothered me too but I think you are about right. The explanation at the end goes, "Lyman lost a cufflink at the flat of a prostitute, who was later killed by the Tarot Card Killer. Well this upright chap certainly enjoyed patronizing some dodgy women. Unfortunately for Elizabeth Gibson, she elected to blackmail him."

This leaves it unclear whether he killed his secretary. If he had overheard her he might have killed her just to avoid a scandal over visiting a prostitute. That seems kind of drastic to commit murder to avoid the possibility of a scandal. More ironic would be that the secretary's death was a pure coincidence. Thinking about it I'm sure this is right. The problem is that it's not made clear enough at the end so I bet there are many who came away thinking he killed his secretary and thereby didn't get the entire twist of the movie. This also makes WA's character the absolute hero since he was the only one to make the "Betty G" connection while everyone else (Srombel, Secretary, Sondra) was completely misled. WA to a tee.

[–] Dejay 13 years ago

Well, the dead secretary tells the reporter in the beginning she heard a "click" in the phone line, as if someone was listening in. Peter later listens in to the phone conversation between Sondra and Sid, so that's a pretty strong hint that he also killed his secretary.

[–] superstarII 17 years ago

Secretary. Later in the movie Hugh Jackman said it was some heart failure thing. So I think secretary was plain wrong thinking Peter Lyman was the killer. And she just died of a natural reasons.

[–] suzysak 17 years ago

I think he said she had a blood clot, but I could be wrong...

[–] anders925 17 years ago

He did say she died of a blood clot but that still doesnt rule out a poisoning, as a blood clot or something similar seems a very possible result. I think he did kill the secretary for many of the previously mentioned reasons. If he left a cufflink at the flat of a prostitute that was later murdered, its not just the scandal of visiting prostitutes but the scandal of being a key suspect in a murder investigation. What more could you ask for in motive to kill. Also, whoever said WA is the only one that made the connection between betty g and peter wasnt paying very close attention. WA discusses this with ian mcshane's character and tells him that he told scarlett everything he was told to say as if it had suddenly came to him (very clearly revealing that it was the dead reporter mcshane who actually made the connection).

[–] okawesome 17 years ago

you don't get a blood clot from poisioning. you get poisoned.

[–] AlNU 17 years ago

Just to clear the last message. When you someone dies of poisoning, the actual reason of death isn't poison itself, but the affect the poison does to your body. So the blood cloth may be (and in my opion was) the effect of poisoning and he made it to hide the relationship with the prostitute.

[–] Isaac5855 17 years ago

I don't think the secretary ever said in the beginning exactly how she died...she simply used the words "I died."

[–] LNrocks_13 15 years ago

yeah she says 'I *think* i was poisoned'

[–] josephnatescott 9 years ago

Correct me if I'm wrong (I haven't watched this movie in months) but I see no plot hole with the secretary.

The secretary noticed that Lyman was interested in the serial murder case (interested because he was planning to use it as a cover for killing the one prostitute), and, because she happened to know him well, happened to know that he was an unsavory man who wasn't what he seemed on the surface, she guessed that he might _be_ the serial killer. He overheard her talking about that guess on the phone and, by his lights, he needed to kill her to avoid her bringing that up with people after he killed the prostitute, so he poisoned her.

[–] tedbb 17 years ago

"The plot continues, and we discover that Peter is actually a "copy cat killer", and only killed the last victim (long after his secretary was killed). The man actually arrested as the Tarot Card Killer even reveals details only the real killer could have known. If this is true, and Peter is not the Tarot Card Killer, why was his secretary ever poisoned?)"

On the boat Peter says something about studying the Tarot case and rehearsing his plan to kill Betty so he might had killed another one before and that's why his secretary was poisoned

"When Woody finds the envelope with "Betty G" written on it, it eventually leads to them realizing that Lyman killed Betty G. But why on earth would Lyman write her name on a piece of paper and then keep it in his bag for anyone to find"

He didn't write anything it was just a letter from her (probably blackmail) with a sender's name on it

btw. the movie was really entertaining, hilarious in places

[–] aps722 14 years ago

Good point. Lyman doesn't seem the type to use nicknames anyway. 'Betty' doesn't sound like something he'd say or write.

There's a word for people who think everyone is conspiring against them.
That's right: perceptive!

[–] akeshishian17969 17 years ago

There are no plot holes in this movie - absolutely NONE. Having finally seen it (we only just got it here in Australia) I'm frankly amazed by the number of people questioning the plot. Don't people pay attention to what they're watching?

[–] millenia 14 years ago

I have to agree with this. I don't get where people always dig up these ridiculous "plot holes".

The whole movie was about coincidence. How Peter visited the prostitute that got killed by the Tarot killer, how the secretary found out, how she died, how she ended up on the ferry with the biggest scoop artist there ever was, the only one that would make the story from the grave. How he found a journalist student from the Splendini's box and how she just seemed to be perfect match to Peter. And even more...

Secretary dying was obvious coincidence. Envelope was explained. The hiding place... at what point would have Peter had time to switch the place as he just found out that the place was discovered? Phone up to the help there and go "btw could you move the key to that dead prostitute's apartment from my secret hiding place" He thought it would be safe until he got back but then he got the call about Sid poking around there and decided he had to kill both Sondra and Sid.

Honestly I was hoping this movie to be a great romance and eventually Peter's father would have been the Tarot killer or something like that. Was a bit disappointed on that thought :) But the movie was still pretty good and I'm no Woody fan.

[–] slemmet 9 years ago

Actually there is a plot hole. He knew she managed to sneak into the room to discover the tarot deck, so she must have known the combination, yet he placed a new vital piece of evidence (the key) in the same place AND kept the same combination to the door, which later allowed Woody Allen to sneak in there. That is a plot hole, no question about it. Even a complete moron would change the combination to the door.

[–] malti2001 17 years ago

I'm pretty confident it was Hugh Jackman who snorted in that scene. It struck me as very weird given his character. Not that it takes anything out of Scarlett's fantastic rendering of the role...

[–] grvity 17 years ago

I think it was definitely Scarlett.

[–] grvity 17 years ago

Why would Peter hide the key in the same spot as the tarot cards, which Sondra found?

[–] phyrkrakr 16 years ago

You don't ever use the same hiding place multiple times, especially if you don't think anyone has found it yet?

Also, it was in a room to which only he (supposedly) had access, so it isn't like he had to be incredibly clever with his hiding places.

[–] jakob_tis_player 16 years ago

I thought Scarlet told he wshe had found it? Might just be a mistake by him, but still..

And GREAT movie by the waym even though i liked Matchpoint better.

[–] slemmet 9 years ago

Actually this is a plot hole. He knew she managed to sneak into the room to discover the tarot deck, so she must have known the combination, yet he placed a new vital piece of evidence (the key) in the same place AND kept the same combination to the door, which later allowed Woody Allen to sneak in there. That is a plot hole, no question about it. Even a complete moron would change the combination to the door.

[–] josephnatescott 9 years ago

"Why would Peter hide the key in the same spot as the tarot cards, which Sondra found?"

Why would a desperate sociopath do something you consider crazy?

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] hppg 17 years ago

That was the only thing that really confused me...if he killed his secretary or not. One thing nobody has mentioned yet, which makes me think he might have done so, is that the secretary thought she heard a click on the phone line as though he was listening in (then she died), and later on in the film Peter is shown listening in to Sondra's phone conversation, which suggests he does that a lot.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mahuna00 16 years ago

Speaking of plot holes, how about firing off a shotgun once in an apartment in an apartment building, then waiting around in the hallway with the shotgun in hand, then firing off the shotgun again in the hallway! Nobody came by, stuck their head out their door, called the cops, etc. Not at all credible.

[–] whblakemore 16 years ago