Columbo himself claimed that he was never as smart as the other detectives, so he worked harder and thought more in order to make up for it.
this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2026
5 points (100.0% liked)
Columbo
79 readers
61 users here now
A lemmy community for all things Columbo
founded 4 days ago
MODERATORS
Both. It’s both. Also, it’s fictional 😄
Have you watched it? Reasonably obvious that the idea is that he's holding back to trip people into talking themselves in a story. Far, far too consistent and low key to even wonder if he's just accidentally blurring out random thoughts on a 'double back' that just happen to be lucky guess.
I've seen it and always felt that there were circumstantial things that happened to him during the episode that contributed heavily into him catching the perp. The one I remember was one involving him going to the dentist by happenstance, that got him to finally get the killer.
I haven't watched Columbo since I was in high school, so maybe I didn't see the rest of his clever maneuvering, but that's how I interpreted the show... either he was genius, or constantly surrounded by happenstance.
https://columbophile.com/2020/10/18/episode-review-columbo-uneasy-lies-the-crown/
A trip to his own dentist provides Columbo with food for thought when he subsequently bites and gashes the inside of his cheek before the novocaine injection wears off. The wound is a match for the one found on the inside of Evans’ cheek.
Seeking further inspiration, Columbo enlists Horace to help unravel how Corman could have poisoned Evans at a secret dental appointment. They can’t figure it out until a chance discussion about the dissolving coating of pills sets off a light bulb in the Lieutenant’s head. That’s how Corman killed Evans – he coated the digitalis, hid it in a cavity, and the coating wore away hours later when Evans was lying in sin with Lydia.
Right, but that is kind of the way almost all the 'brilliant but quirky' detective style characters almost have to be played. If it was bumbling it would be like someone leaving their plan written down in a sock drawer and for some reason he's looking for socks because he spilled something on his... Something dumb and he stumbles on it.
House, Sherlock, Brooklyn 99 (/s), pretty much every good detective story will use the fact that the smart guy finds pieces of the puzzle that others might notice but ignore, and joins them up into a plausible chain and then tests the theory against the evidence. The good ones show this play out with good theories that they have to discard before putting things together correctly. The bumbling ones need the evidence dropped in their lap, or they solve the case and don't even realize it until someone gives them credit and they struggle to understand it until sometime congratulates them. Columbia was definitely written with the former in mind.