The Problem(s) With Clue

clueposter.jpgOne of my favorite movies of all time is Clue. I think it’s hilarious and clever and I’ve seen it Idontknowhowmany times. I first saw it as a kid, too young to get most of the jokes, but my brother (who’s four years older) watched it at home one day and I happened to see most of it. I quote it a lot. Often around people who haven’t seen it themselves. I’m sure this makes conversation with me interesting.

That said, as I’ve gotten older, and more stuff about it makes sense, there’s still some things that don’t work for me. That I can’t resolve. So, here I am. I’m currently watching the movie, waiting for the incongruous stuff to happen.

Do I really have to clarify a spoiler alert for a movie that was released twenty years ago?

Clue is based on the premise of six strangers getting together for a dinner party. They have been invited to dinner and assembled together for reasons of which they know nothing. There’s also the butler, the maid, the cook, the 7th guest Mr. Boddy, and various and sundry random people who show up throughout the movie, but since most of them die pretty quickly, you don’t need to know any more about them.

So first of all, Small Tim Curry, you are so cute and British in your tuxedo. Also, I gotta say, when I was 8, the running gag with the dog poo amused me a lot. On the other hand, the total perviness of Christopher Lloyd’s character went right over my head.

Professor Plum (not yet outed as a total perv) picks up Miss Scarlet on his way to dinner, her car having broken down. They are following their written directions when Professor Plum catches sight of the house for the first time and stops the car.



Back at the house, the guests all arrive, Wadsworth brings them all into the dining room to get to know each other, and it turns out there’s one extra chair.

Random aside: I didn’t realize until like last year that Col. Mustard and Leon, Roseanne’s boss in the old sitcom Roseanne, are the same person.

Col. Mustard: Is this place for you?
Wadsworth: Not me, sir, I am merely a humble butler.
Col. Mustard: What exactly do you do?
Wadsworth: I buttle, sir.

That might be my favorite line of the whole movie.

Okay, so, all the guests have arrived, are brought to the dining room, start to get to know each other.

This guy has nothing to hide. Clearly.

Totally not hiding anything!

I’ve admitted nothing. Just avoiding a scandal.

Dinner is interrupted by the arrival of Mr. Boddy, who you can tell is sinister because of the music that accompanies his entrance.

And here we have my first niggling issue. As is ultimately revealed, Mr. Boddy and his butler have switched places—that is, Wadsworth is the mastermind, and Mr. Boddy is the patsy. How did Wadsworth (who is actually Mr. Boddy) convince Mr. Boddy (actually the butler) to take on the identity of someone who would, upon being revealed, be an almost immediate target for violence (if not murder)? Surely the butler knew he was looking at a fight, and possibly bodily harm, masquerading as a blackmailer? Whose idea were the weapons, the butler’s or Wadsworth’s? Did the butler actually think that the distribution of weapons would keep him safe? Who wrote on the envelope that Wadsworth opens? Was it Wadsworth, writing to himself to throw off the trail? What was the actual plan here?

After dinner (which takes like four minutes), Wadsworth brings them all to the study and tells them why he’s brought them here: They are all being blackmailed. What follows is a systematic and comical outing of each of the dinner guests and their dirty secret. Halfway through the scene, Wadsworth admits that he’s tape recording the conversation (thus rather freaking everyone out, since avoiding a scandal and/or jailtime is why they’re paying blackmail in the first place).

Wadsworth: Professor Plum, you were once a professor of psychiatry specializing in helping paranoid and homicidal lunatics suffering from delusions of grandeur.
Prof. Plum: Yes, but now I work for the United Nations.
Wadsworth: So your work has not changed.

Yes. I am merely transcribing jokes that I find funny. Deal with it.

Point of order: Mr. Green says that “tape recordings are not admissible evidence.” Maybe they weren’t in 1985 (when the movie was made), or in the 1950s (when the movie is set), but tape recordings certainly are admissible evidence now, provided that all the voices present on the recording can be identified with certainty.

Mr. Boddy now introduces a twist of his own, and Wadsworth’s plan starts to go off the rails, though I honestly don’t know by how much. He gives each guest a weapon, wrapped in purple ribbon. I wonder if he knows which weapons are going to which guests? Or is he just handing the weapons out randomly? This is probably another thing I’m not supposed to be thinking about.

Okay, so. Each guest has a weapon. Mr. Boddy suggests that somebody use their weapon to kill Wadsworth, turning off the lights for murdering privacy (like it can be done anonymously when each guest has a different weapon? I guess the guests with bludgeoning instruments have plausible deniability, but it’s not like Mrs. White can strangle Mr. Boddy and then claim somebody else did it). Wadsworth, incredibly, did not see this coming. Lights go off. Thunk, chunk, groan, gunfire, shattering, screaming noise, lights come back on.


Screaming noise.

Several of the people in this room are thinking remarkably quickly. Mr. Boddy is on the floor, playing dead (as we find out later). Professor Plum bends over to check on him, and though Mr. Boddy is clearly alive, Plum thinks fast and doesn’t give away the sham (why? So he can have a clear shot at him later?). Mr. Boddy and Professor Plum aren’t coordinating their actions, so it’s pretty remarkable to me that they engage in precisely the same course of action to achieve (I’m assuming) very different ends.  I guess Professor Plum doesn’t see the point in outing Mr. Boddy as still alive, since at that point Mr. Boddy will say, “Yeah, and you’re the one who tried to shoot me.  Ass.”

Screaming noise.

Immediately after this (and after pulling a screaming Yvette from the billiard room), the guests find that the cook has been murdered, carry her body back to the study, and realize that Mr. Boddy’s body has disappeared while they were in the kitchen. Scarlet uncovers the negatives that incriminate Col. Mustard, and it occurs to me here that Scarlet and Yvette know each other, but unlike Yvette and Mrs. White, this mutual acquaintanceship isn’t acknowledged at by either person. Just another instance of people behaving in a way that is either prearranged, baffling, or thinking really fast and trusting the other person to play along.

And now, as Mrs. Peacock enters the bathroom, Mr. Boddy staggers out. At this point, from a narrative perspective, it’s random and threatening (because we don’t know that Mr. Boddy was playing dead in the study). Mr. Boddy’s dead, but he definitely didn’t just fall out of the toilet he’d been stuffed in; he’s stalking towards Mrs. Peacock. From a later perspective, why did Wadsworth and/or Yvette and/or Professor Plum (because those were the people missing in the kitchen when they found the cook) stuff him in the toilet? How’d they get him in there? Did they really think that nobody would need to use the bathroom all night? How did they know Mr. Boddy needed to be bashed over the head again? Did they see him get up?

Mr. Green has blood on his hands? This is never explained. And how did the candlestick get over the door?

And here we have the line which is not my favorite, but is probably the one I quote most:


Okay, so.  We bring Mr. Boddy back to the study again.  We bring the cook to the study.

Wait, what?

The group starts trying to figure out how might have killed Mr. Boddy, and Wadsworth suggests locking up all the weapons so that the homicidal maniac that’s somewhere in the group can’t kill anybody (people don’t kill people! Lead pipes kill people!). He goes to put the key to the cupboard in his pocket, which freaks out the rest of the guests, so he suggests throwing the key out the front door so nobody can get to it. Brilliant! That’ll do it!  But there’s somebody at the door.

The motorist! Who has been invited by Wadsworth, and has presumably been given a story about his car breaking down and needing to use the phone (what did Wadsworth tell the guy the real game was?). No idea on whether the Motorist has been told that his old boss will be there, but either way, neither of them give even a flicker of recognition. Also, the Motorist’s cover story is thorough enough to attract a cop to his abandoned vehicle (but not to Scarlet’s abandoned vehicle?). This is pretty much repeated for each visitor: visitor arrives and knows enough to not admit that they know anybody at the party. The guest who knows the random arrival also never admits they know the arrival (so that they might have the chance to kill them). Presumably, the two murders that have taken place up to this point have derailed whatever Wadsworth’s original plan was. But he was hoping for his accomplices to get murdered, right? So is he genuinely unnerved at their arrival (since they can further derail things if they discover the bodies, instead of getting murdered as planned), or is he just locking them into separate rooms to isolate them so that they’re vulnerable to attack?  I should just stop thinking about this, because I am confused.

They split up into pairs to search the house, and at this point, pretty much everybody starts slipping away from their partner to murder somebody. The first to go is the motorist, who is got to by way of a secret passage into the lounge (how does Col. Mustard know about the secret passage, again?). Mustard and Scarlet find the secret passage and “find” the body, and Scarlet genuinely freaks out, while Mustard, presumably, fakes it. They’re yelling and pounding on the door, everyone comes running, Yvette shoots the door and the chandelier, and the World War II veteran pleads with the rest of the guests that he “can’t take any more scares.” I guess he might have PTSD, but still. Come on dude. You were in a war. Get it together.

And the doorbell rings again! It is a police officer. And Mr. Green, who moments ago “had nothing to hide,” suddenly has things to hide and slams the door in the cop’s face.  He inexplicably remains in this “must not tell the cop about the bodies even though the cop is the MOST APPROPRIATE PERSON TO TELL” for the rest of this sequence. The cop presumably recognizes Scarlet, but neither of them say anything (again with people recognizing people, or knowing that something fishy is going on, and yet not announcing it to the group).

The house phone rings, and the cop answers it. It’s J. Edgar Hoover. This is strange. One of the guests is undercover (either Wadsworth or Mr. Green, depending on the ending). This surveillance operation is important enough to get J. Edgar Hoover involved, but for some reason Mr. Hoover thinks it’s appropriate to totally blow his employee’s cover by straight up calling the house and introducing himself. What? J. Edgar Hoover, I am disappoint. You should know more about paranoia and surveillance than this. And most undercover operations fall apart once something like a murder happens, because a cop can’t commit crimes or let certain kinds of crime be committed if they are in the vicinity. So there’s an undercover operative that just lets murder after murder happen? What?

And now Mr. Green shows the cop around, still not taking advantage of the opportunity to get the fucking cops involved, and we find ourselves in one of the funniest and yet totally squeakiest sequences of the movie: making out with corpses. That’s right folks. WHAT IS GOING ON HERE.


I just want to emphasize that with most movies, I would be annoyed by the plot holes by now, but in Clue, I’m not. I’m loving the hell out of this. Better than most movies (I think it’s the pace, either of the movie itself or of the dialogue, which is rapid), Clue sets up falling dominos of ridiculousness that compound into….well, six dead bodies for one thing, but until I start actually looking for plot holes, at no time do I start yelling at the characters to simply take the sensible way out like I do with most slapstick comedies. The characters are so completely not in control of events that I actually kind of buy them letting the situation get out of hand. You have to wonder how long it would have gone on for had the cops not shown up when they did, because none of the characters show the slightest success towards actually altering the course of the evening. They spend all their time exhibiting coping mechanisms and directing courses of action that make no difference (like searching the house for someone who isn’t there). Oh, and killing each other.

Cop: You’re too late, I’ve seen it all.
Wadsworth: You have? …I can explain everything!
Cop: You don’t have to.
Wadsworth: I don’t?
Cop: Don’t worry, there’s nothing illegal about any of this!
Wadsworth: Are you sure?
Cop: Of course! This is America!
Wadsworth: I see.
Cop: It’s a free country, don’t you know that?
Wadsworth: I didn’t know it was that free.
Mr. Green: *maniacally nervous smile*

Also, sometimes Wadsworth is really good at coming up with lies off the cuff (“Yes sir, it was the chandelier. Fell down, almost killed us. Would you like to step this way?”) and sometimes he’s totally shitty at it. (“Yes, you could use the phone in the—noo. You could use the one in the st—no. Would you please wait in the, um, the, um, the lounge?” NO THAT DOESN’T SOUND SUSPICIOUS AT ALL, WADSWORTH.  YOU ARE TOTALLY NOT HIDING ANYTHING.)

Not hiding anything.

Search of house resumes, someone throws the switch to turn off the house’s electricity, and now we’re at the movie’s biggest WTF moment for me. Yvette sneaks downstairs, into a darkened room, and is murdered. What?

Murderer (whispering): Shut the door. Did anyone recognize you?
Yvette: They must have. And not just my face. They know every inch of my body. And they’re not the only ones.
Murderer: *throws a noose around Yvette’s neck*
Yvette: IT’S YOU! *dies*

WHAT THE HELL. Okay, first of all, how did Yvette set up a clandestine meeting with anyone in the house? If she set up a meeting, how the a third party find out about it and get to the meeting instead (Yvette was surprised when she saw who she was talking to, after all). Okay, so maybe Yvette slipped downstairs hoping simply to meet somebody that she needed to have a private word with, but hadn’t actually set up a time and place to meet anyone. That’s more likely. (And it’s likely that she was looking for her employer, Miss Scarlet, since she went to the ground floor, where Scarlet was searching with Mustard.) But then she creeps into a dark room and is TOTALLY UNSURPRISED to hear a voice talking to her. But then why does it sound like Yvette and the murderer are resuming a conversation that they’ve previously started? “They must have, and not just my face.”? Seriously? What does that even mean? Also, Yvette, what happened to your French accent? Apparently you were faking it, but why? If people recognized you (and it seems clear that at least three guests knew Yvette prior to this evening), why did they not call you out on your ridiculous new accent when they first walked in the door? WHY IS EVERYONE PRETENDING TO NOT KNOW EACH OTHER.

Also, three murders happen in like the space of a minute, and nobody sees anyone else in the hallway. The cop dies even though him getting hit over the head is never actually shown, just the menacing lead pipe.


“Dada da da da da! I, am, your singing telegram!” *gunshot* *door slam*. That sequence CRACKED ME UP when I was a pre-teen. I may or may not have been a slightly demented child.



Oh, Wadsworth in the shower. Heeheehee. I enjoy that little sequence too.

So, Wadsworth runs downstairs and turns on the lights, and the characters all reassemble in the hall. We can take a moment to tell where they’re coming from: Wadsworth is standing in the cellar door, where the circuit box is. Mrs. White and Mr. Green are coming downstairs (Mr. Green coming from the attic, Mrs. White apparently having booked it back upstairs after killing Yvette.) Miss Scarlet is at the far end of the hall where the bathroom and the kitchen are. Col. Mustard comes out of the door at the foot of the stairs, which I think is the dining room. Professor Plum and Mrs. Peacock both emerge from the cellar. They find the bodies of the cop and Yvette.

Mr. Green: Two murders.
Prof. Plum: Neither of them shot. I thought I heard a gun.
Everyone: So did I.
Scarlet: I thought I heard the front door slam.
Mustard: Oh God. The murderer must have run out.


So they open the front door, and find the singing telegram girl.

Wadsworth: Three murders.
Mr. Green: Six, altogether.
Wadsworth: This is getting serious.

Aaaaand they just close the front door, leaving the dead girl on the porch. Hilarious.

Wadsworth: Very well, I know who did it.
Everyone: YOU DO?!
Wadsworth: And furthermore, I will tell you how it was all done.

And now we’re to the best part of the movie. THE BEST PART. I seriously love Tim Curry so fucking much because most of the remaining half hour is Tim Curry monologuing/reenacting the entire preceding hour at top speed. Which I won’t try to summarize or quote because it wouldn’t translate. And the three endings. “That’s how it could have happened. But how about this?” Lulz.

Aaaaaaand then there’s this:


He explains that none of the random arrivals at the door were random, that all the murder victims were accomplices in Mr. Boddy’s blackmail. “It wasn’t luck [that the Motorist arrived]. I invited him!” “You did?!” YOU DID?!? WHY DID YOU PRETEND TO BE SURPRISED? WHY DID HE PRETEND TO BE STRANDED? WHAT WAS THE PLAN THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN?!?!

Also I do not notice Professor Plum taking off his bow tie. When did that happen?

Wadsworth’s friends own this house? This is one class-transcending butler. Except he’s not actually the butler, I keep forgetting. But he was willing to stack the bodies in the cellar? How is that a good method of body disposal?

“Why should the police come? Nobody’s called them.” Wait, what? You lied about that? Why? Why did you tell everyone the cops were coming when they aren’t? What were you hoping would happen? Did you really hope that everyone would just kill each other if you got them all in the same house and set them on a time limit? I DO NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT LYING ABOUT THE POLICE. I feel like the whole movie is a plot of Wadsworth’s that got derailed, and part of that plan was lying about the police, but I don’t understand what lying about the police (but yet gathering evidence for them, as the tape recording of the conversation shows) was supposed to get him. And why would people start killing other people if they think the cops are on the way?

In the “Wadsworth is the evil genius” ending, everything goes exactly according to his plan, I think. Somehow the ideas of “everything going according to plan” and “everything in the master plan going horribly awry” peacefully co-exist in this movie.

Luckily, the actual, third ending makes the most sense.  Mr. Green turning out to be an FBI agent is genuinely surprising and satisfying, except for the whole “That phone call from J. Edgar Hoover was for me” line. Seriously? Again, J. Edgar Hoover, why are you TRYING to blow your operative’s cover? “I’m going to go home and sleep with my wife!” Wink wink.

By all standards, Clue should not work as a movie. There’s plot holes galore. It’s based on a board game. It’s silly and ridiculous. It’s a comedy about murder, and it’s not even a dark comedy. But…it works. All the actors play their parts with such earnestness–and the comedic timing is down to a fine art–that you never stop to think to yourself, “What is this shittery?” Which is the mark of a good story, really.  The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.

14 thoughts on “The Problem(s) With Clue

  1. ‘Clue’ is one of my all time favorite movies, and no matter how many times I watch it I fall apart laughing. To me the plot holes make the movie great, it may not be intentionally but they almost make the movie even more hilarious. Great post though. I loved seeing another’s view on this great film.

  2. I started following your blog because you have managed to eloquently describe many of my own thoughts and feelings. I had put this down to shared experiences of depression and similar. But I was wrong! It is all down to ‘Clue’. My brother and I have been watching this repeatedly since we were about 5 years old (over 20 years!) and we both quote lines to one another (which is great because we know what we are talking about) and to other poor random innocent people (not so great). Our most common quotes (not our favs, just the ones we use the most) have to be:
    ‘Too late!’ (after someone has foolishly fed us the line ‘…to cut a long story short…’
    ‘Flames, flames, on the side of my face.. breathing breathless, heaving breaths… heaving’ which is handier than you might think in everyday conversation.
    ”no’ meaning ‘yes”
    The shouting one that you mentioned 😉
    ‘Two bodies, everything’s fine’
    ‘I’ll eat anything’ whenever someone is being a bit pompous and quoting poetry to look intelligent

    There are so many others and I have coursework to do so I won’t go through them all.

    I have yet to meet a ‘Clue’ fan in real life. I think I might faint if someone actually gets one of my ‘Clue’ quotes. Most people just treat me a bit like Sayers ‘Wimsey’ character – they just ignore he bits they don’t get and just respond to the overall gist. Which is just as well.

    • My brother is the one who first introduced me to Clue (he’s four years older, I watched all sorts of movies that were slightly inappropriate for my age level). It doesn’t seem to have stuck around in his speech patterns as it has in mine, though.

      Welcome! And happy new year and I hope your coursework goes well. Hopefully for me today, updating will happen…

  3. This is my all-time favorite movie, almost to the point of obsessiveness (I’ve watch it nearly 40 times). But I still can’t stand that damned final scene with Yvette. Great article, great plot holes.

    (Also, the pots on the kitchen stove get rearranged without any living person in there to rearrange them. Another interesting tidbit along the lines of Professor Plum’s bow tie.)

  4. Oh god its great to know im not alone when it comes to being in love with this movie! Watched it a billion times and the jokes never get old…. ‘Are you trying to make me lool stupid in front of the other guests? Dont need any hellp from me. Thats right’ lol!!

    ‘This is war Peacock!’
    ‘Well that would have been quite an achievement since you told us that she’s dead already’ Lmao!

    Ok besides the quotws, I completely agree I also have so many questions left unanswered about the movie. The main one about the whole Mr Boddy and Wadsworth swap lol

  5. Here’s the one plot “hole” that drives me batty. When the cop shows up, Wadsworth is on the phone with J. Edgar Hoover, Mr. Green is showing the cop around, Miss Scarlet and Prof. Plum are in the lounge with the motorist, Col. Mustard, Mrs. Peacock, and Mrs. White are in the study with Mr. Boddy and the cook………where the hell does Yvette wander off to?

    The only thing I’ve managed to come up with is that she was disposing of the glass and pieces from the fallen chandelier.


  6. My biggest question is this.
    How did Mr. Green not set off mental alarms in Wadsworth / Mr. Boddy if he wasn’t actually gay and had no ties with any of these informants and therefore not being blackmailed at all?

    • Sorry it took me so long to get you out of comment limbo! I never even thought of this. Maybe there was a gay state department employee being blackmailed, and Mr Green took his place, and Mr Boddy…didnt know what his victim looked like?

  7. you are correct in many of these plot holes, but the reason why many of the guests don’t react to people they recognize (like Yvette) is because they’re under specific instructions to use their aliases in order to protect their identities. it’s clear that some characters know each other, and it’s also clear that other characters are aware these characters know each other. but without proper identities, this doesn’t really add up to much.

  8. You’re basing most of your analysis on the third ending being the “real” ending. However, that ending is the LEAST plausible of them all.
    For one thing, if Wadsworth was the blackmailer, why would he have left written instructions to HIMSELF on the envelope with the evidence against the guests that he ALREADY HAD? Also, if the phone call form J. Edgar Hoover really had been for Mr. Green, Wadsworth was still the one who answered it. In the third ending, Mr. Green said he was going to expose Wadsworth, but Wadsworth said he already knew that. This likely means the phone call clued him in that the FBI was on its way, and he would have tried to escape rather than stay to be caught. Either way, that was a huge mistake on Mr. Hoover’s part. Lastly, for the third ending to work, Col. Mustard would’ve killed the motorist, and to do that, he would have had to know about the secret passage from the conservatory to the lounge. But at no point in the movie did he previously go to the conservatory (before splitting up to search the house) to discover the secret passage or go back later with the wrench to kill the motorist and return to Miss Scarlet before she found out. The only time he was unaccounted for was when he left Miss Scarlet in the ballroom to search the kitchen. Even if he had lied and gone to the conservatory AND found the secret passage, he wouldn’t have known where it led until he went through it, so he wouldn’t have had the wrench with him. Had he gone back for the wrench and gone through the passage again, the fireplace in the lounge would have already been “opened”, because if he had tried to shut it, the motorist would’ve heard it shut, as it makes a loud click when it shuts. He also couldn’t have had someone tell him about the passage prior. The only person he knew before that night that already knew about the passages was Yvette, and they were never alone together for her to tell him, nor did she have a reason to do so.
    The second ending is a little more believable, but it would’ve been difficult based on how the scenes were placed. For the second ending to work, Mrs. Peacock killed everyone, so she had to have gone upstairs from the cellar (without Prof. Plumb noticing) to switch off the electricity. However, mere seconds after the lights went out, she was shown back in the cellar, punishing a pipe for daring to touch the wife of a senator by repeatedly slapping it with her purse. So this ending maybe could have worked, but it’s a long shot.
    The first ending had the fewest and most inconsequential plot holes/inconsistencies (that I could come up with). For the first ending to work, Miss Scarlet was giving orders to Yvette, which makes sense because she already worked for Miss Scarlet. The only issue is at the end, when Miss Scarlet is explaining her business of secrets. She Mrs. White’s husband’s work is valuable information. Problem is, of course, he’s dead. However, this doesn’t make the first ending any less possible, as Miss Scarlet could have just assumed Mrs. White still knew some information about her late husband’s work. And even if she didn’t, everyone else’s secrets were still ample motivation for her to carry out her plan.
    So my personal, logical consensus is that the first ending makes the most sense.

  9. Amazing write-up. Clue is my favorite film of all time without question. Amazing atmosphere, mystery and laughs. Been a favorite since I was a young kid. Every single plot hole you’ve outlined here has always bugged me…but not to the point of not absolutely loving the film. Definitely the biggest issue is what you outlined about the accomplices/butler….how on Earth did Mr Boddy (“Wadsworth”) convince them to show up, and play his game? What did THEY think the endgame was? Somehow these questions add more mystery to the film and add to its uniqueness.

  10. For what it’s worth, the “I’m a butler. I buttle” joke was possibly borrowed from Joseph and The Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat (although the pun has probably existed longer than that).

  11. I never look at the movie as a “Plot” or a “mystery”. It’s brilliance lies in how well it represents THE GAME it’s supposed to (and remember it is the FIRST movie ever to be based on a board game). Excuses are found for their ridiculous names, the weapons, and the process of the suspects themselves running around trying to eliminate the various room, dragging one another around with suspicions, dropping weapons in rooms, etc. Do you how hard it is to write a set up where you know the victim is dead but you can’t tell how, where, or by whom? And the only investigators are all suspects? Then the wrote one ending where EACH ONE KILLS SOMEONE USING A DIFFERENT WEAPON IN A DIFFERENT ROOM?! A more fuller expression of THE GAME cannot be imagined.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s