<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Fingerprints? No? Wouldn&#x27;t that be standard procedure in a murder case?]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><em>Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Match Point</em></p>
<hr />
<p dir="auto"><strong>c-delapointe</strong> — <em>10 years ago(July 03, 2015 06:52 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">I've read some of the posts here regarding how inept the police is [portrayed], and that a main underlying theme is luck, which indeed is alluded to everywhere in the movie, but I need a movie to be believable to accept. In this case, the ending is very unsatisfactory not because the soulless Chris gets away with it, but rather that it's very unlikely he would given the ring fell back in his 'court' and not into the river. See, in a murder case, it's very likely the ring would have been checked for fingerprints, and Chris threw it without gloves! Aren't we're already led to believe that another killer somehow got his hands on the ring - ??? - and no one checks the ring for prints? Woody Allen knows how to create a mood within an interesting paradigm, but he should take courses in logic: All he had to do is have Chris wear gloves when he was throwing away the jewelry.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/240306/fingerprints-no-wouldn-t-that-be-standard-procedure-in-a-murder-case</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 May 2026 09:28:36 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/240306.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2026 13:34:27 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Fingerprints? No? Wouldn&#x27;t that be standard procedure in a murder case? on Mon, 04 May 2026 13:34:31 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>stevenackerman69</strong> — <em>10 years ago(August 10, 2015 01:14 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Well, maybe the ring by the time the other guy got his hand on it no longer had Chris' prints on it, due to the other guy's prints covering it up?</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/2012102</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/2012102</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2026 13:34:31 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Fingerprints? No? Wouldn&#x27;t that be standard procedure in a murder case? on Mon, 04 May 2026 13:34:29 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>Scarlett_Butler</strong> — <em>10 years ago(July 14, 2015 08:08 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Chris gets away with it, but rather that it's very unlikely he would given the ring fell back in his 'court' and not into the river<br />
The whole point of the movie is that luck was so on Chris's side that the unlikeliest thing (a thief found the ring that he tried to throw away) actually happened and saved him.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/2012101</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/2012101</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2026 13:34:29 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Fingerprints? No? Wouldn&#x27;t that be standard procedure in a murder case? on Mon, 04 May 2026 13:34:28 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>snelling</strong> — <em>10 years ago(July 05, 2015 08:17 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">When someone else handles the ring, all the previous prints are obliterated.<br />
"I will not go down in history as the greatest mass-murderer since Adolf Hitler!" - Merkin Muffley</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/2012100</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/2012100</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2026 13:34:28 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>