MovieChat Forums > Crime d'amour (2011) Discussion > Big time plotholes *SPOILERS

Big time plotholes *SPOILERS

posted 12 years ago by edgein15
13 replies | jump to latest

1. Cops know enough to raise an eyebrow about suspects conspicuously trying to establish an alibi. Isabelle goes out of her way on THREE occasions to make herself remembered by people.
2. Isabelle is supposedly on the verge of passing out or ODing from sleeping pills and the cops don't even take her to the hospital for a blood test OR possibly a stomach pump? That's quite irresponsible.
3. Isabelle writes the address on the envelope of the anonymous letter/documents with her own hand. A handwriting expert could most likely draw comparisons and wonder why the OTHER main suspect mailed it and why.

[–] noveltylibrary 12 years ago

the handwritten envelope was unforgiveable, but the other stuff wasn't imo.

[–] BB-15 12 years ago

My list of plot logic problems.

1. Philippe is arrested for murder because a scarf was found in his car and a piece of this scarf was found on the victim. The theory was that Philippe took the scarf with him when he killed Christine. Why would a man carry a large scarf? It was not a murder weapon. It was a woman's scarf. A man would not wear it. Philippe was never seen wearing it. This "clue" pointed to a woman as the killer.
- And the scarf is a weak clue because when Christine is being stabbed, there is blood on the knife, and on Christine's clothes. But there is no blood on the scarf.

2. Isabelle commits the perfect murder. No DNA. No finger prints. No witnesses. She would be under suspicion as her boss's assistant but nothing could be proved. She would not be convicted.
- Isabelle planting clues that pointed to her as the murderer were unnecessary. It was also dangerous. I know this is France but even a weak confession in parts of the US have lead to murder convictions.

3. Isabelle's main alibi was terrible. So, Isabelle walked into the theater. But there was no evidence that she stayed in the theater for the whole film! She needed a much better alibi.

4. I understand Isabelle wanted to frame Philippe as the murderer to remove suspicion from her. But a lot more was needed to be done for this to work. Connecting Philippe to the murder weapon and other objects at the crime scene would have made more sense.
- Also, did Philippe have an alibi? Isabelle needed to know he didn't. The framing needed to be done much better.

* The first half of Love Crime was interesting. But after the murder, the film fell apart imo.

BB ;-)

it's just in my opinion - imo -

[–] MoremiAdeyinka 12 years ago

If I remember correctly, the night Christine was killed, at the end of Her "12 only" dinner party, she and Phillippe had a quick fight. So eventually, maybe the guests who were leaving would be questioned and would state they heard them fight? How Isa would pre calculate this though, I dunno. Just a thought.

[–] lavashop 10 years ago

Isabelle was released, not because Philippe was discovered by the police to have credible motive for killing Christine, but because all the evidence pointing Isabelle to be the murderer were all circumstantial. None could hold up in court.
By admitting guilt first, and painting herself as a criminal who confessed so easily, the police felt like a fool and swung the pendulum all the way to the other end to exonerate her.

Incriminating Philippe was the icing on the cake.

As for the scarf, Isabelle wants to make it appear that Philippe wanted to incriminate her (Isabelle). With the accounting fraud in place as evidence, as well as witnesses who saw them (Philippe and Christine) quarrelling, the stupid police just assumed it was Philippe.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] startcopysend 9 years ago

In regards to Philippe's alibi, I'm not sure that's a plot hole. The time of the murder would have been calculated by forensics as around the time or not long after the dinner party. There were dinner guest witnesses that would testify Phillipe was there and even if he did drive off and have an alibi (eg cctv footage of him at a gas station or something) that wouldn't mean that he couldn't have killed her before he left Christine's. Ironically if he did have an alibi, it could appear to the police that he purposefully made sure to have an alibi to hide his crime. I think Isabelle purposefully killed Christine at that moment (almost immediately after the guests left) precisely for this reason, to nullify the effectiveness of a possible alibi for Phillipe. I think she struck it lucky that it was witnessed that he was the last one left with Christine but even if he had driven off before other guests, he would struggle to prove that he couldn't have returned to kill her before going to his alibi event.

[–] creegah-3 12 years ago

The handwriting on the envelope was done by her sister.
The murder weapon was from Christine's kitchen.
Faites attention!

Come and get one in the yarbles, if ya have any yarbles - Alex DeLarge

[–] djsnafu23 12 years ago

Yes, but itds the alibi that exonerated her, and that was SO weak! Also who says teh fall guy didnt have a real alibi? Full of plotholes

....

http://soundcloud.com/dj-snafu-bankrupt-euros

Coz lifes too short to listen to Madlib

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] El_Guapo_Caballo 11 years ago

What about the way she cuts the piece of Scarf.

[–] shaundee 11 years ago

Main one for me was "No DNA evidence" she had her face all over Christine when she was killing her and smelling her!. Great movie though.

[–] shaundee 11 years ago

* I would have looked further into the "my car is at the garage" story too - in the real world Philippe would have got off, there was no real evidence against him except a vague motive. And anyway what are you doing hanging around with 80m Euros, surely you would skip the country if you murdered someone?

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]