Agatha Christie's Poirot : Murder at the Victory Ball (Season 3)

Murder at the Victory Ball (Season 3)

My husband and I watched this one last night and really enjoyed it. Very colourful, lots of fun period detail, and the mystery was actually quite confusing. But when I thought about it later, I detected a serious flaw that pretty much undermines the whole story. (I'll try to keep spoilers out of my description, but some are inevitable.)

The whole plot hinges on the murderer having a duplicate costume of the murder victim, so he can impersonate him during the ball and give a false impression of when the crime took place. But if that's the case, then this murder was very seriously pre-meditated! Those Harlequin costumes were custom-made, and one-of-a-kind, being copies of the china figurines. Another one would have to be custom made as well, they couldn't be just bought from a costume store.

And that makes nonsense of all the action at the ball. The Viscount discovered his girlfriend was using drugs which provoked their fight. That couldn't have been foreseen, any more than her leaving early in a huff. If the murderer had already decided that the Viscount was a threat and had long ago decided to murder him, then why on earth wait to do it until the night of the Victory Ball? And not even bring along a more sensible murder weapon?

Flat, drab passion meanders across the screen!

Re: Murder at the Victory Ball (Season 3)

Coincidentally I have rewatched this episode just recently and have noticed the same problem. Christie has used this plot device several times in her works when the murderer conveniently happens to own a duplicate dress, coat, costume or whatever is needed to impersonate another character.
Perhaps we are not supposed to verthink these sort of "cozy" mysteries.

Hang on tightly, let go lightly