I am the biggest Clue fan this side of Neil Patrick Harris, but even I never knew there was a fourth ending to the epic tale UNTIL NOW!
There were of course three ending to the mystery. In the theaters, each reel had only one (marketing idea gone bad), but all three were compiled for the video release.
According to Baddass Digest there was a fourth! Here’s what WOULD have happened::
Wadsworth begins his explanation by telling everyone that Professor Plum is the murderer, and just as in Ending 3 he explains that Professor Plum knew Mr. Boddy was still alive.
Except that Professor Plum couldn’t have killed the cook, so of course he was working with Mrs. Peacock the entire time. Case closed!
But not so fast! Professor Plum demands his own chance to speak up, and points out that Wadsworth has done all of the talking so far. “He knew where the secret passages were!” he explains to the other guests. “And now the gun’s missing, right? Everyone, empty out your pockets and purses. Whoever has the gun shot the singing telegram girl.” Wadsworth pulls the gun out of his own pocket, and begins to confess to all of the murders after all. In this version he’s not Mr. Boddy, just the butler, so why did he do it?
Because all his life he wanted to be perfect. He wanted to be the perfect husband, but his wife killed herself. He wanted to be the perfect butler, but then he was driven to killing his boss… so then he decided that he would at least commit the perfect murder, but that it wouldn’t be fun without an audience.
I know. It doesn’t really add up. But it keeps going:
Someone points out that he didn’t commit the perfect murder, because he left six witnesses, and that’s when Wadsworth reveals that they won’t be alive long enough to rat on him because the drinks he served them all earlier were poisoned, and everyone is going to die in three hours unless they get the antidote. Of course, the cops aren’t coming in this ending, because once again no one has called them, so it seems as if the guests are all screwed.
Wadsworth goes around the house ripping out the phones and saying that he’s going to lock them all in the house to die, but then there’s a knock at the door, and it’s the elderly salesman again. This time he’s the FBI agent or something, and he lunges for the gun and wrestles Wadsworth to the ground while a bunch of other police come in, as before.
The police ask who’s responsible for all the murders, and the guests all point at Wadsworth. “It’s true,” he confesses, and then starts telling the whole story again. The police get mesmerized by the confession, and when Wadsworth gets to the part where he’s talking about Colonel Mustard being at the door… he walks out and locks them all in the house to die after all.
The guests and the police wind up escaping the house through the conservatory, and Wadsworth steals one of the police cars and starts to drive away, making the perfect getaway.
Until he hears the growl of the policeman’s Doberman from earlier in the back seat, and he is presumably attacked.
Glad they left it out, but in reading the whole article it occurred to me that people who saw the film in the theater for the first time (and ONLY time for Ryan) are probably less likely to enjoy the film than those of us who found it on home media. Ryan saw ONE ending and hasn’t seen it since. There is a 2/3 chance that he has never even SEEN Madeline Khan’s FLAMES ad lib. Rewatch time for the 30th Anniversary? Oh yeah!