Talk:A Murder Is Announced

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Discrepancies sorted out[edit]

I've just finished the novel and took the liberty of correcting all the errors I found on the page. Not too many, but many enough to mislead someone who hasn't read the book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fibratus (talk • contribs) 11:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A few discrepancies[edit]

Having just read the book, just a few notes to whomever wrote the synopsis:

Everyone assumed Rudi had shot himself. It wasn't that he didn't expect to get shot at, it was, as his girlfriend implied, he didn't seem to have any reason to start shooting.

Phillipa never revealed herself to her sister (whom she hadn't seen since they were three) until the Inspector's scene which caused the murderer to reveal herself. The only reason she did it was because the Inspector falsely accused Edmund (with Edmund's knowledge) of being Pip. As she was in love with Edmund (and married him at the end of the novel), she felt the need to be honest to protect him.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.195.19.41 (talk) 14:18, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the movie we just saw on BYUtv, the sisters knew before the final 'reveal' due to a letter. The movie may take some liberties.-- AstroU (talk) 16:00, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The book has a sizeable plot hole at its base: if Charlotte waited out the war in Switzerland and then returned home, where did she get the money to buy herself a fairly spacious house in the countryside and to entertain at least three people at her own expenses (Dora, Patrick and Julia). She has spent about a year in the UK when the events in the book take place, and has been able to do pretty much what she wanted, at a time when everything had become much more expensive due to the war (as pointed out by Craddock midway through the book). Yet Charlotte would not have had much money of her own - she has never had a job and her father was not that wealthy - and whatever money she supposedly laid her paws on when her sister died, there wouldn't have been much left of it by 1945 when she was about to return to England. Add in an expensive pearl necklace that she must have bought soon after her sister's death to hide the scars (unless it was an old gift to Letty from Mr. Goedler and she just nicked it...). She doesn't seem to be receiving any advance money from the Goedler fortune either, though the prospect of it is the ultimate reason for her deception. How does she actually make ends meet, so far? The operation would have taken a pretty sum of money up to the point when the Scherz shooting happens. 83.254.159.121 (talk) 22:58, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Charlotte became Letitia, so she had access to the money Letitia earned in her 20 years working, saving and investing. -- Prairieplant (talk) 03:09, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adaptations[edit]

I strongly disagree with the description of the TV adaptations. I have just watched both again, and think both excellent. There are variants from the book in both, but the more recent version deviates nothing like so much from its original as subsequent dramatisations (both in this series, and Poirot) were to do. The Joan Hickson series contains contradictions regarding Inspector Craddock's relationship and attitude to Marple. The remake, however - quite unlike what the article says - shows his attitude change, from finding her a nuisance to realising her usefulness. The biggest flaw I found in the McEwan one is that Hinch is only grabbing wet washing, not driving away, when Murgatroyd is trying to tell her "She wasn't there". The grapevine seems to operate by telepathy, leading to her murder. Unless I missed something. Rogersansom (talk) 17:17, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw the TV movie produced by the BBC on BYUtv, and would like to know the names of the actors (playing the novel characters). -- AstroU (talk) 05:50, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I just read more carefully the article, and with TV/movie adaptations, actors are noted in the Film, TV, theatrical adaptations section. TNKS, AstroU (talk) 16:25, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Norman Shrapnel[edit]

This reviewer's name appears as "Normal" in the Literary Reception section. What came up with "Edit" did not go far enough down the page, so I couldn't correct. Rogersansom (talk) 08:04, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on A Murder Is Announced. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:20, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Plot summary is too long[edit]

Changes to the plot summary that make it longer have to stop. It is 1,321 words long as it stands now. Wikipedia guidelines would prefer 800 words maximum length. There is too much detail in this summary, though it does have correct order of events. The task now is to cut out excess detail.

Supporting the phrase "drop the case" in the summary, in Chapter 8 of the novel, Chief Constable Rysedale said "We can write finis" in conversation with Craddock at the beginning of the chapter, and "The case is just going to be dropped" in conversation with Craddock and Miss Marple. After reading the police notes, Miss Marple, said Rudi was a fall guy, so Craddock interviewed Rudi's lady friend again, and learned this was true, someone hired him for the stunt. Rysedale then agreed for Craddock to work from this new theory of another person as the murderer of Rudi, and to work with Miss Marple. So EEBuchanan I think we can leave that wording.
The real goal is to cut out a lot of this too-long plot summary. All of Christie's novels have complicated plots with a lot of red herrings mixed in with real clues. This one is not different in that aspect. The challenge is to write a good summary while dropping a lot details. It is not easy, I think, but it has been done for most of her other novels, that is, write summary close to 800 words long. -- Prairieplant (talk) 15:18, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Duly noted. EEBuchanan (talk) 16:26, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:A_Murder_Is_Announced&oldid=1197182227"