[AC-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by kari-no-sugata

I like the following idea a lot:


A couple of thoughts:

This is specifically a movie script and not a novel, so "tricks" like the cameraman being the culprit are possible, particularly when you consider how involved the cameraman was - more like a 7th person than an omnipotent or fly-on-the-wall viewpoint.

Some things will be red herrings (in terms of solving the mystery) and some wont be. For example, the rope might be part of the second half and not part of how the murder was done. As others have mentioned, I think the "sealed room murder" is quite possibly a red herring too - or rather, it's more to confuse the characters within the movie and the viewers.

One of Holmes's famous expressions is "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth". If none of the suspects could have safely done the murder then it must be someone else. All you have to do is realise that the cameraman is a valid "someone else".

There's also the meta-mystery about why Hongou hasn't completed the script and why they haven't asked her. I think she is partially getting a bit of revenge upon her classmates - the ones who forced who to take on the most difficult job and tied her hands in all sorts of ways in terms of the plot/setting. I'm not saying she faking the illness but more like after falling ill she realised she had a chance to get a bit of revenge.

I'm guessing that "The blind spot of 10,000 people" is what the final title of the movie will be - I guess it's a bit of a poetic expression. I think "the cameraman is the murderer" is a very nice and simple yet daring solution that fits this potential title very well and also allows Houtarou to look very cool by coming up with it.

Seing something out of the camera perspective does not count as 'introduced'. While I agree that the Camera man is the blind spot of probably everyone´, it would still contradict the first Knox rule to claim that it has been the narrator without properly introducing him, thus at least once showing a mirror image to show that the camera man is actually a person within the story.

Another problem is Knox 8th:
It is forbidden for the case to be resolved with clues that are not presented.
Where have they shown a clue that the camera man might be the culprit? There is not even a clue that he is a person at all - no one even talks or looks at him/her.

If anything the camera man would be the detective btw.