# Whodunnit Season 1



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

Thought it was an interesting show. Seemed a whole lot like The Mole in a lot of ways. Strangely though, there were quite a few people on twitter who thought they were actually killing the contestants.

http://www.realityblurred.com/realitytv/archives/whodunnit/2013_Jun_24_believe-contestants-dead


----------



## MauriAnne (Sep 21, 2002)

I wanted to like this show, but I didn't. Gave up about half way through it. It seemed too staged, even for a "reality" show.


----------



## Einselen (Apr 25, 2006)

Fun show, but hopefully the contestants don't take it too seriously. The first victim, cheerleader chick, if her head only cracked the glass to later have it shatter after she fell backwards I don't think the glass would be embedded in her face like that (though I could be wrong). Also that was one hell of a shot with a slingshot!

I did like how the next victim died. Too bad it wasn't him doing that stunt. Also would be interesting to see the behind the scenes. My guess is after they retired to their rooms after dinner the producers let the next guy know he was out of the game.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Einselen said:


> Fun show, but hopefully the contestants don't take it too seriously. The first victim, cheerleader chick, if her head only cracked the glass to later have it shatter after she fell backwards I don't think the glass would be embedded in her face like that (though I could be wrong). Also that was one hell of a shot with a slingshot!
> 
> I did like how the next victim died. Too bad it wasn't him doing that stunt. Also would be interesting to see the behind the scenes. My guess is after they retired to their rooms after dinner the producers let the next guy know he was out of the game.


I thought they DID take it way too seriously. I couldn't actually tell for sure it wasn't him doing the stunt, though of course I suspected it wasn't (unless they got all stunt people to do the show).. Though will each person have to fake being a dead body for the morgue scenes?

I too thought of The Mole -- combined with the murder dinner theatre.

It was pretty decent, but yeah, them taking it way too seriously.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

Einselen said:


> if her head only cracked the glass to later have it shatter after she fell backwards I don't think the glass would be embedded in her face like that (though I could be wrong).


I'm no expert, but no, there wouldn't have been glass embedded in her head like that given the explanation that the fish tank took a little time to burst. For the glass to be embedded like it was, her head would have had to put a significant hole in the tank that would have allowed the water to pour out immediately. I'm also positive that a circuit breaker or fuse would have reacted immediately to shut off the power when the water hit the electric cord.



> I did like how the next victim died. Too bad it wasn't him doing that stunt. Also would be interesting to see the behind the scenes. My guess is after they retired to their rooms after dinner the producers let the next guy know he was out of the game.


Considering how well thought out and orchestrated the first kill was to get the desired outcome, I'm really wondering how they'll explain Dontae's running through the mansion, through an open door and into the pool when most people would likely just flail around in the area in which they caught fire.

This show is not for thinking people.


----------



## dowalker (Sep 29, 2002)

This show reminds me how much I miss 'The mole'


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

I thought it was quite an interesting show. I liked it. It's interesting how they will make the contestants play dead bodies and record reenactments of their deaths the week after they get killed. If they can keep up the surprises, I think it'll be fun to watch.


----------



## bacevedo (Oct 31, 2003)

We really liked the show. It reminded us of the mole quite a bit, which also reminded us of how much we miss the mole.

It's obvious that most of it has to be staged in order to get the shots and angles that they want when the deaths occur. It would be interesting to know how much the contestants know ahead of time. Did they tell them to stand in a certain spot so they wouldn't get hit by a burning man? Did they have to do more than one take for that shot?

You just have to sit back and watch it and enjoy it and not think too much about every little detail. In other words, try to figure out the mystery within the bounds of the show and not real life. In that case it's a lot of fun to watch.

Bryan


----------



## MauriAnne (Sep 21, 2002)

With so many comparisons to the Mole, maybe I need to reconsider and try to watch this again. Too bad I deleted it from the DVR; looks like it's available online though.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

I did think it was really cool that each had to describe the murder to the camera ("the murderer") and the person who does the worst goes home...er....I mean gets killed  It's a nice twist for a reality show to not have a vote to eliminate somebody.

There were a lot of details and red herrings which was pretty fun. For instance, I liked that they discovered the steam machine in the bathroom which would let them fog up the mirror to read the message. 

I felt a little sorry for the guy who cracked the puzzle and then all the people rushed after him to find the evidence.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

Yeah, definitely a Mole-ish vibe, but of course, not as good.

I think I've already figured out who the killer is, too. Have to wait and see if I'm right.

For the record...



Spoiler



I'm pretty sure it's Don. He was too far off the truth for a former homicide detective and what better way to allay suspicion than be marked as a victim in the very first episode!


----------



## realityboy (Jun 13, 2003)

It even said in the credits that the elimination was based on a written test. So it's pretty much The Mole with murder/investigation trappings. I'll watch it over the summer, but it wouldn't be a pick for me if there was more competition.


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

Apparently there were people watching that thought the contestants were actually being killed.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

When they told the first girl she was safe--were they saying that she was the closest to what happened, or did they just mention her first randomly?


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

DancnDude said:


> I did think it was really cool that each had to describe the murder to the camera ("the murderer") and the person who does the worst goes home...


Though that's all for show (pun intended). The end credits said that the eliminated contestant was chosen on how they did in a *written* test.

and yeah, the credits also said much of it was reenacted or some similar word.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

mattack said:


> Though that's all for show (pun intended). The end credits said that the eliminated contestant was chosen on how they did in a *written* test.
> 
> and yeah, the credits also said much of it was reenacted or some similar word.


"recreated"


> Portions of this program not affecting the outcome
> have been edited and/or recreated for broadcast


Near as I can tell, the only thing that affects the outcome is the written test and they don't show that, so basically everything is edited and/or recreated.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

I don't quite get the point you're trying to make. You think *all* of their participation is recreated, not their actual discussion at the time?

I think the "edited" comment always just means "they talked about X, and X didn't have anything to do with that week's plot, so it was edited out".. as opposed to editing out various Jeopardy! questions and changing the scores retroactively.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

For the second episode, what did the medallion actually have to do with the murder. I'm not sure I understood that part. Did it help conduct the electricity or something?


----------



## nyc13 (May 31, 2013)

DancnDude said:


> For the second episode, what did the medallion actually have to do with the murder. I'm not sure I understood that part. Did it help conduct the electricity or something?


That's why I'm out, now. It's bugging me how much the clues are just being placed there to be clues instead of how things would really happen. The glass in her forehead. The socks and medallion just sliding off the dead body into the pool. Things are being staged unnaturally only so that there can be a roughly equal number of clues in the three locations.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

This game is really more about social dynamics than it is solving a murder mystery. They are less concerned with how it would happen in reality and more concerned with distributing clues over the three clue areas. You of course have to piece the clues together, but the key to surviving this game is to get as much information as you can from the people who explored the other clue areas or found any other clues. If nobody wants to share any real information with you then you aren't going to last long in this game.


----------



## aaronw (Apr 13, 2001)

I also didn't understand the whole thing about the wrong name of the medallion, or what it even had to do with anything. I also have no idea how they can possibly be setting up one of the people to be the killer, does that person even know at this point that they are the killer, and if so, are they just told about the entire 'scene' before it happens? The group solving the murder is interesting, but some parts of it seem quite convoluted. Especially some of the people saying 'I don't want to be killed next!'. I mean, I get it, they are "playing" a part, but that's a level of meta-oddness that is just weird.

Also, they are doing a 'postmortem' (ha) blog on abc.com with some 'real life' facts from the filming of each episode, which makes for some interesting reading:

http://beta.abc.go.com/shows/whodunnit/blogs/postmortem/week-1-postmortem
http://beta.abc.go.com/shows/whodunnit/blogs/postmortem/episode-102-fire-starter-postmortem


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

aaronw said:


> I also didn't understand the whole thing about the wrong name of the medallion, or what it even had to do with anything.


At one point, one group said something like they thought the medallion exploded, starting the fire.. but I don't think there was any evidence to support that in the rest of the episode.

About the 'wrong name' thing.. They were actually being kind of clever.

The one team found out that it said Saint X, but were telling the rest of the teams Saint Y. If the other teams *corrected* them that it was Saint X, they would know that the other teams (1) had found more information, and (2) were being honest..

I think I've got that pretty much right.


----------



## bacevedo (Oct 31, 2003)

aaronw said:


> I also have no idea how they can possibly be setting up one of the people to be the killer, does that person even know at this point that they are the killer, and if so, are they just told about the entire 'scene' before it happens?


I have the same question. With The Mole, the mole was actually doing stuff that people might catch on to. On this show, what does the killer do that anyone would be able to catch on to? Just throw people off on the clues? Watch for someone trying to mislead people?

How are the contestants figuring out who the killer is in addition to solving how each murder happened? Or maybe they aren't supposed to figure out the killer and just make sure they make it to the end by figuring out how each murder happened? In that case I could see the killer is there to try to throw people off with bad clues, etc.

And yeah, the medallion thing bothered me in the 2nd episode because it wasn't a necessary part for the murder but was still something they needed to have correct for their test. Was it just a red herring for people to get caught up on?


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

Well, more pointless clues in the third episode!

The whole thing with the garage door opener seemed a little off to me - and the fact that only one person got to see the attic, so it completely relied on his honesty (or otherwise).


----------



## aaronw (Apr 13, 2001)

And the tree branch didn't make any sense either. I *sort* of understand why they are putting stuff in like that, to make plausible other theories. But, along the "how much staging are they doing" aspect, why was the DVD playing *again* in the breakfast room at the exact same time they happened to be there?


----------



## bacevedo (Oct 31, 2003)

I was convinced Don was the killer because he sure didn't act like a homicide detective. I guess they never said he was a good detective. He just acted out of character for a detective and didn't seem good at following or finding clues. But it could also be editing or the fact that he is used to looking for actual clues in a real crime and everything being set up or staged might be too obvious for him.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

I think he would do well if he could see all 3 areas of clues, but then he sucks at the riddles, which aren't something you get in a real crime. 

Am I missing it, or is there no clue given as to who the killer is? We see how it was done, but I'm missing any way to connect it to an individual. 

Not sure why I'm still watching this show....


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

Painted footprints on the doors? seriously?
Why are the people who had 'scared' cards always the last to enter the room?


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

stellie93 said:


> but then he sucks at the riddles, which aren't something you get in a real crime.


Batman would argue otherwise.


----------



## sieglinde (Aug 11, 2002)

Continuity errors - Dante was wearing shoes when he ran out of the house on fire. Actually I hope that was a stunt man. They killed one of the most irritating players which I was a tad surprised at.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

An interview with one of the creators of the show.



Spoiler



It turns out the murderer has no idea how they did each murder so they need to figure it out with the rest of the contestants. They also aren't doing any sabotage like the mole did.



http://www.realityblurred.com/realitytv/archives/whodunnit/2013_Jul_14_zuiker-interview


----------



## Einselen (Apr 25, 2006)

Azlen said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You may want to spoilerize your post as it is outside what is seen on the show.

Regarding the behind the scenes Q&A



Spoiler



It is interesting the murderer is not aware of how each murder is done and has to solve along the way. I actually think it is stupid and agree with the article that if that is the case why have it as one of the cast members. I rather see the murder take someone form the opposing side (since we have two teams right now) and lead them possibly down the wrong path so they maybe won't get to know about the clues.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Spoiler



OK, that's incredibly lame.. I'll still keep watching though.


----------



## magaggie (Apr 9, 2002)

Azlen said:


> An interview with one of the creators of the show
> http://www.realityblurred.com/realitytv/archives/whodunnit/2013_Jul_14_zuiker-interview





Spoiler



I was more disappointed that they didn't have the killer play a more active role as a way to differerentiate the show from The Mole. I loved The Mole, and even still, making the killer active just makes more sense.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

Spoiler



So the "killer" has been picked to make the show fair, since they have to guess who it is every week, but other than that there is no connection between the murders and the "killer?" Whaaaa? So the killer may have already been eliminated?


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

stellie93 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> So the "killer" has been picked to make the show fair, since they have to guess who it is every week, but other than that there is no connection between the murders and the "killer?" Whaaaa? So the killer may have already been eliminated?





Spoiler



I would hope that the producers know who the killer is and would avoid killing him/her off - otherwise who will do the rest of the killings?


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

TonyTheTiger said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I would hope that the producers know who the killer is and would avoid killing him/her off - otherwise who will do the rest of the killings?





Spoiler



Exactly. That's one reason why they hand out at least two scared cards, so that if the killer is one of the scared, they can kill off someone else.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

Spoiler



So at the end they are down to 2 people, but you don't know if you are the winner or the killer? This is so stupid--and yet I'm watching it.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

OK, not sure this conversation counts as needing to be in spoilers any more as it's mostly conjecture...

No, the finale will most likely have THREE people - the killer and two finalists. You really haven't thought this out, have you?


----------



## sieglinde (Aug 11, 2002)

The Mole had three people at the end. This is the only way you can do this.


----------



## nickels (Jan 11, 2010)

I am glad my wife made me watch this show. Now that it is down to a handful of people it is interesting to see how they figure things out and how they withhold info from each other. At this point I couldn't even guess at the identity of the murderer. This show is creepy even though you know nobody is being hurt. OK I'll guess it is Kam. Or Lindsey. I have no clue.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

Yeah, we're enjoying this popcorn WAY more than we should - and also have no clue about the killer.

The padded Chucks make me thing it's a female, though. Of course, I'm more than likely wrong!!


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

I think it was a mistake to have one of the players be the killer. What they have to solve every week is how the crime was done not who or why. If they wanted to have one of the players be the killer, they should have given them all the answers and let them steer people away from the truth. There's no point to it with the way they have it set up.


----------



## sieglinde (Aug 11, 2002)

Yeah it worked for the Mole which was a far better show


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

I was intrigued with this show at first, then fell behind in watching after the flaming guy jumped into the pool. Should I resume watching this show?


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

getreal said:


> I was intrigued with this show at first, then fell behind in watching after the flaming guy jumped into the pool. Should I resume watching this show?


No. You've escaped with dignity.


----------



## getreal (Sep 29, 2003)

scandia101 said:


> No. You've escaped with dignity.


THANKS!


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

I think it's still pretty fun. I'm still watching. Guess how much stuff you have to watch but it's ok summer fare


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

It IS the same person doing the 'dead body', even in the morgue scenes, right? Even if they're actors, how can they not crack up when they're being 'inspected'??


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

mattack said:


> It IS the same person doing the 'dead body', even in the morgue scenes, right? Even if they're actors, how can they not crack up when they're being 'inspected'??


I wouldn't be surprised if they have to do multiple takes to remove any conversation they had with the "dead body" or any time the "dead body" acted alive.


----------



## sieglinde (Aug 11, 2002)

Thank gawd that manipulative creep got killed


----------



## late for dinner (May 17, 2013)

mattack said:


> It IS the same person doing the 'dead body', even in the morgue scenes, right? Even if they're actors, how can they not crack up when they're being 'inspected'??


when the two ladies were lifting the sheet on the dead body I though they were going to check out his stuff when they saw the gunshot.


----------



## bacevedo (Oct 31, 2003)

At first I was surprised they missed so many clues in the latest murder. But then I realized they already killed off all of the actual smart investigators and are left with people who just know how to manipulate people to give them the info they want. I don't suspect they'll be able to solve the rest of the murders as easily now that they have to rely on their own investigative skills.


----------



## DancnDude (Feb 7, 2001)

I'm still finding the show pretty entertaining. The last murder was an interesting one but in the end it looks like having the Morgue to herself wasn't enough for Melina to remain. 

So now that we're at the end, time to submit your final guesses to Whodunnit! 

I'm guessing it's Cris.


----------



## stellie93 (Feb 25, 2006)

Why was Lindsay acting so weird and laughing so crazy when she came into the room--I thought she had been drugged and was dying. I think she's the killer.


----------



## tigercat74 (Aug 7, 2004)

stellie93 said:


> Why was Lindsay acting so weird and laughing so crazy when she came into the room--I thought she had been drugged and was dying. I think she's the killer.


When I heard her laugh like that, I thought you had taken Joker's laughing gas.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Demandred (Mar 6, 2001)

DancnDude said:


> I'm still finding the show pretty entertaining. The last murder was an interesting one but in the end it looks like having the Morgue to herself wasn't enough for Melina to remain.
> 
> So now that we're at the end, time to submit your final guesses to Whodunnit!
> 
> I'm guessing it's Cris.


My money has been on Melina since the first episode. I guess I was wrong! Now I have no clue.


----------



## nickels (Jan 11, 2010)

They never actually killed off Melina so you never know. Notice that nobody suspected Kam by the end of the episode. I can't wait to see how this plays out.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

I'll bet dollars to donuts that it's NOT Cris! She's never had a scared card, which the producers made a good deal of pointing out during the episode. There's no way that the killer gets a pass every week when it's easy to allay suspicion by giving the killer a scared card and killing the OTHER scared person.

I'm leaning toward Kam being the killer, but Lindsay has also been high on the suspect list.

Nope, I'm taking Kam.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

I'm still going with Melina.


----------



## jgickler (Apr 7, 2000)

I think it is Lindsay. She says she is an engineer, but something she said on the last episode seemed to make me doubt that she actually was. Maybe it is hubris, but as an engineer myself, some of the things she has said seemed pretty dumb, and she is supposedly a chemical engineer, and if she is a chem e, then she has kept all of her knowledge of chemistry to herself.


----------



## bacevedo (Oct 31, 2003)

I was thinking it was Kris, but after the butler pointed out she has never been scared I am not so sure. They could be doing that to make her the red herring, but they could also be using reverse psychology to push suspicion away from her.

Lindsay was also acting very weird and Melina acted a little out of character, too. It will be interesting to see who the killer is and see if they do a recap of hints and clues that we missed along the way (ala The Mole).

And all of them were in the limo, so how could the killer, if it is one of them, had time to tie up Giles while they were gone?


----------



## Fool Me Twice (Jul 6, 2004)

With all the reenactment going on each episode, it was difficult to get a read on who was reacting naturally to things and who was playing a character. But, Kam's actions and words were always so assured that even when he was wrong it was as if he was wrong on purpose. Also, his emotions never seemed sincere. I didn't even buy his choking up at the end over his victory. 

I will cling to an unfounded conspiracy theory that he was brought into the production side of the show at some point for some reason and was handed the victory. Much the way that Melina was written as (and coached to act the part of) an inductive savant last episode in order to heighten the drama around who would be killed (otherwise her death would have been certain to the viewers since she was isolated from most of the evidence), Kam could have been written in as the eventual winner if he had figured out who the real killer was early on. They could have simply asked him to play along in exchange for a nice reward.

Lindsey would have been the most satisfying winner for me since I never once questioned her innocence.


----------



## SleepyBob (Sep 28, 2000)

Fun show, our kids really got into it, though the ending was a bit abrupt/anti-climactic to me (yay, you won! Here's your money, the end.) I guess I kept wishing that there was a way for us (and them) to solve *Who*dunnit, a la The Mole, and I kept expecting that kind of wrap up, even though I knew it wasn't coming.


----------



## bacevedo (Oct 31, 2003)

We had suspected Kris for a few weeks now, but we know that the shows are always heavily edited to misdirect you, so we were sure were wrong. It was satisfying to finally guess correctly and not have there be a twist at the end. This is one of those shows where their direct hints (Kris, you have never been scared) weren't actually just a misdirection.

I thought it was funny that they showed people's reactions on twitter that thought people were really being killed. This is why they could use direct hints and know half the audience wouldn't even pick up on it, since they were this clueless to begin with.


----------



## aaronw (Apr 13, 2001)

So what does kris get? Also, the 'confrontation' in the room with Kris and Kam was just about the most unbelievable piece of 'acting' I have ever seen.


----------



## SleepyBob (Sep 28, 2000)

bacevedo said:


> We had suspected Kris for a few weeks now, but we know that the shows are always heavily edited to misdirect you, so we were sure were wrong. It was satisfying to finally guess correctly and not have there be a twist at the end. This is one of those shows where their direct hints (Kris, you have never been scared) weren't actually just a misdirection.


But it could easily have just been a coincidence that she had never been scared. Kris had to figure out how the murders were done and come up with a theory, just like everyone else. They did that to keep her reactions "normal", but that fact also made it much less likely people could figure it out from their conversations, since she didn't know more than anyone else.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

The Mole needed one of the players to be the mole because it was their job to quietly sabotage the players efforts and to keep money out of the pot. They didn't need to do that in this show because identifying the killer was never really part of what they did week to week. All of the questions on the Mole were about the mole. 95% of the questions in this show were about the how rather than the who. If Kris knew how the killing was done and tried to misdirect people or something like that, it would have made more sense but she didn't know any more than anyone else. I think they have the guts of a decent enough summer show and the finale hit a season high in the ratings so I am curious to see if it comes back next year.


----------



## bacevedo (Oct 31, 2003)

SleepyBob said:


> But it could easily have just been a coincidence that she had never been scared. Kris had to figure out how the murders were done and come up with a theory, just like everyone else. They did that to keep her reactions "normal", but that fact also made it much less likely people could figure it out from their conversations, since she didn't know more than anyone else.


I am not saying they gave her info so that she never got a scare card, I am saying that it was odd to bring attention to the killer on purpose. Although, it is suspect that she was the only one to never get a scare card. If she was supposed to figure out the murders with everyone else, it's unlikely she would have been able to get through the entire show without ever doing poorly on the test. Either she was given info for the test or they just ignored her tests and never gave her a scare card on purpose. Did Kam ever get a scare card?

I like the concept of the show but a few things bugged me. It's obvious that almost all of the scenes are scripted or required multiple takes. There was just too much "set up" for most of the scenes to be in real time.

Also, in regards to the killer being one of the contestants, like said earlier, it had no bearing on the show at all. The only time it would have come in to play would have been if two people tied on their test and one of them had the killer right and the other didn't. However, there was nothing in the show (that we saw) that would have given anyone any reason to suspect one person or another. They were just there along for the ride and didn't even appear to be trying to steer people the wrong way. What was their purpose during each murder investigation?

And there were times where supposedly the killer was interacting with them, but was also in the same room or was with everyone else when something occurred. (like Giles being tied up, phone call from the killer, etc.) It would have been better just to have the killer be some unknown off screen person or make things happen with multiple contestants (including the killer) off screen so that it's plausible.


----------



## Einselen (Apr 25, 2006)

Cheesy ending, but it was a cheesy show for the most part. I am with the others though in which the killer should have been a character off screen, not sure why Kris had to be the killer but maybe, just maybe, the quizzes did have more about who than how.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Darn, when they first got down to 3 people, I briefly thought that the 4th one was the killer, then taunting the other three with the final challenge. VERY briefly. I think that would've been a better way to do it.

It was interesting how the butler did have to deal with some minor improvising when the contestants said something unexpected.


----------



## nickels (Jan 11, 2010)

The problem with the show's plot is that the winner, Kam, even said he had no idea that Kris was the killer. I was not a fan of the way they had to earn puzzle pieces to solve the riddle. The last one was simple - yes you are the killer. Wrong. Ok, no you are not the killer. Kam didn't use the fine print at all. He shouldn't have been allowed to just change his guess without naming the reason why he changed his mind.

At the end of the day I liked it and hope they tweak/improve the show for next season.


----------



## MNoelH (Mar 17, 2005)

I think Kris was named the killer simply because she was the first runner up (or the person with the second best "test" score - or perhaps because she finished the last puzzle 2nd instead of 3rd).

I'm thinking it wasn't predetermined earlier in the season.


----------



## nickels (Jan 11, 2010)

MNoelH said:


> I think Kris was named the killer simply because she was the first runner up (or the person with the second best "test" score - or perhaps because she finished the last puzzle 2nd instead of 3rd).
> 
> I'm thinking it wasn't predetermined earlier in the season.


Go back to the first post and read the attached article.


----------



## bacevedo (Oct 31, 2003)

Another example I just thought of for the show being heavily edited and not making sense to have the killer be one of the contestants.

When Kam and Kris (sp?) were in the last room, they saw Kris kill Lindsay in real time? Or was that supposedly recorded like literally 60 seconds before Kris got into the room with Kam?

All 3 of them were at their puzzle machines only a few minutes before so are they trying to imply that Kris went into the room, got in the knight suit and waited for Lindsay to enter the room to shoot her with the arrow? And then get out of the suit and join Kam in the final room all within minutes?

For all of that to happen in real life, Kam had to be sitting in that final room or somewhere else for a while for them to get Lindsay all set up for her final death scene and the makeup required for that. Which then makes the entire final scene with Kam and Kris pretty much all acting because he had to have known that he won at that point and had some time to process it.

They make it look like everything is happening in real time, but I would be interested to know how much down time they had in between scenes that were supposed to be in real time.


----------



## TonyTheTiger (Dec 22, 2006)

The armor was clearly supposed to be automated. There was no need for Kris to be there at all.

Also, it would not be difficult to tell Kam to react to something that was added later in post.


----------



## jerrye25 (Jun 9, 2002)

Cris said in a couple places now that she knew from the beginning that she was the killer but she didn't know how any of the puzzles were solved because it wouldn't had been fair. If that was the case, she pretty much could have picked who she wanted to win.

She also said she didn't participate in the crimes as they were taking place, they filmed the little pieces of her recreating the crimes later.

There was a nice podcast last night with one of the Rob's from Survivor. He has been doing Big Brother and WhoDunnit podcasts throughout the season (along with some other shows...this guy podcasts everyday). He had the final five on last night all together and they talked about some of the inner workings of the show. It's at www.robhasapodcast.com.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

Glad that's over.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

jerrye25 said:


> Cris said in a couple places now that she knew from the beginning that she was the killer


Wait, I thought someone posted long ago that they DIDN'T know, and that person definitely wasn't trying to sabotage (like the mole).

Hmm, I guess I should start listening to the reality TV podcast again.. maybe they cover this show.


----------



## Azlen (Nov 25, 2002)

mattack said:


> Wait, I thought someone posted long ago that they DIDN'T know, and that person definitely wasn't trying to sabotage (like the mole).
> 
> Hmm, I guess I should start listening to the reality TV podcast again.. maybe they cover this show.


She knew she was the killer but she didn't know how she killed anybody. 
So she wasn't trying to sabotage because she didn't know any more than anyone else.


----------



## sieglinde (Aug 11, 2002)

I found the show somewhat disatisfying. I loved the Mole. The test was part of the show, it added drama. The Mole was done in a more realistic manner with less obvious scripting.


----------

