tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post537615883463689798..comments2024-03-11T01:39:11.362-04:00Comments on At the Scene of the Crime: The Sequel to the Curious Case of the Unnecessary Butchering of Murder on the Orient ExpressPatrickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01844617192737950378noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-90942159495986442992016-03-16T00:03:33.134-04:002016-03-16T00:03:33.134-04:00["One of the problems with the more recent PO...["One of the problems with the more recent POIROT adaptions is that the makers don't actually trust the original material. They look at the other TV period detective stuff (like FOYLE'S WAR for instance)and decide that the Christie stories aren't 'serious' enough."]<br /><br /><br /><br />I cannot agree with this comment, because the "POIROT" producers were footlose and fancy free with the TV movie adaptations from the 1990s - the Hastings/Japp era.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-66498719343281759572016-03-16T00:00:42.865-04:002016-03-16T00:00:42.865-04:00I'm afraid I don't share your views of Tob...I'm afraid I don't share your views of Toby Jones' performance in this film. I thought it was a bit overdone. And the idea of a Chicago mobster pulling off a kidnapping/murder in New York and using that state's legal system is ludicrous beyond belief. The major New York mobs would not stand for it, considering that organized criminal organizations went out of their way to commit the kidnapping of wealthy personages.<br /><br />The filmmakers used the wrong cars to make up the Orient Express. They had the car attendant Pierre Michel serving breakfast to Poirot in the dining car.<br /><br />And that final scene inside the Pullman car with half of the cast (Suchet included) hamming it to the ninth degree was embarrassing to watch.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-72848243484221923972012-05-07T10:29:52.875-04:002012-05-07T10:29:52.875-04:00@Curt:
I honestly do not think previous adaptati...@Curt: <br /><br />I honestly do not think previous adaptations forced the makers of <i>Poirot</i> to do things differently. It has just become a product of its time. <br /><br />When the series began, they were focused on the short stories (light hearted and fun) and the more famous movies, starring Peter Ustinov and Albert Finney as Hercule Poirot, were only a little over a decade old and I think recreating the Orient Express or the Karnak would've been too expensive, back then, for such a series. <br /><br />Unfortunately, when the time finally came to film these masterpieces, drab "realism" has become all the rage with these writers (as well as with Christie's current publishers with their dark, brooding covers and blown-up letter sizes to bloat-up the books to match an Elizabeth George or Ruth Rendell novel), but had they been filmed during the early 90s the result would've been entirely different. <br /><br />On a final note, I would've forgiven this botch of a movie if it had included the scene Patrick dreamed up with Dr. Sigmund von Hornswiggle. <br /><br />Or even better yet... they should’ve kept Poirot off-screen until after the murder when they suddenly remember that there's a world famous detective among the passenger and immediately go to his compartment to request his help until the proper authorities can take over the case. When they walk into the dim, candlelit room, air is filled with the smell of incense, and there, on the floor, cross-legged (full-lotus), sits Hercule Poirot – head and face completely shaved and only a white bedspread covering his naked body. <br /><br />Who cares if a story is good or bad, when Buddhist Poirot is on the case!TomCathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03415176301265218101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-45854064733996238542012-05-06T14:43:18.405-04:002012-05-06T14:43:18.405-04:00I do think the filmmakers seem daunted when there ...I do think the filmmakers seem daunted when there are earlier film versions form the 1970s and 1980s. They feel the need to do something "different." They botched Appointment with Death too and Death on the Nile, both Ustinov films. Death on the Nile was so gay-campy in the most artificial Noel Coward sense it just was ridiculous, in my view. Murder on the Orient Express, on the other hand, distorted Poirot's character with all the Catholic angst stuff.<br /><br />Sometimes the serious approach works. It worked very well with some of the the very late thirties/forties books, like The Hollow, Sad Cypress and Five Little Pigs, because Christie herself made these more serious. Even Mrs. McGinty's Dead and After the Funeral, which ere less serious books, were entertaining (although a lot of the humor of McGinty was lost).<br /><br />But some of them have been disasters, I think, like Express, Nile, Appointment, Flood, Blue Train, Cards. Even Suchet can't save them.<br /><br />At least we still have Suchet. With the Marples in my view they still haven't solved the problem of how to replace Joan Hickson. Miss Marple Mach II was misconceived (Bohemian sprite) and Miss Marple Mach Two is just boring. I mean no aspersions on the actresses, who are good actresses. They just don't "get" Miss Marple like Hickson did.The Passing Tramphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09830680639601570152noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-39994702480674252552012-05-06T12:47:58.478-04:002012-05-06T12:47:58.478-04:00Fascinating. When I deigned to criticise the Suche...Fascinating. When I deigned to criticise the Suchet Poirot adaptations - and this is one of the ones that has constantly put me off them, I got it in the neck from some people. So glad I'm not alone. Like Curt, I couldn't make it past the first twenty minutes.<br /><br />Having said that, given the highly artificial set-up of the mystery - not one of my favourites by quite some distance - I'm not sure how one does a good film version of it.Puzzle Doctorhttp://classicmystery.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-69022487725646279822012-05-06T10:41:29.375-04:002012-05-06T10:41:29.375-04:00Mack: That's okay! If the students make the BB...Mack: That's okay! If the students make the BBC/ITV mistake, then I'm sure that a lot of British viewers don't really understand the difference between NBC/CBS/FOX/CABLE etc. In general, I've felt that Mark Gatiss is the best of the recent adaptors. He does make changes, but they tend to be in sympathy with the original stories. If they don't bring back someone like Anthony Horowitz to do CURTAIN, I hope that the job goes to Gatiss. What does everyone think?Sextonblakenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-38702004622062250282012-05-06T09:51:18.410-04:002012-05-06T09:51:18.410-04:00Actually, I knew that MOTOE wasn't a BBC produ...Actually, I knew that MOTOE wasn't a BBC production (Wikipedia told me) but when I wrote my comment I was thinking about what the students said and they have a tendency to associate all TV productions from the UK with the BBC and I slipped.Mackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05555318160638307655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-69179199158929862942012-05-06T08:24:58.915-04:002012-05-06T08:24:58.915-04:00Patrick, great to have you back bearing your teeth...Patrick, great to have you back bearing your teeth again - ROAR! And my goodness this lousy TV adaptation really deserve to get it in the neck (though as you say, Toby Jones is wonderful as the American - but then, he's fabulous in everything). I'm, on the whole, a big fan of the Poirot series made by ITV (not the BBC, as Sexton so rightly points out) starring David Suchet, but in fact there was a bit change in the making of the show circa 2003, which is when Japp, Hastings and Miss Lemon were removed, as was most of the production personnel that had been with the original show since 1989. These later movie-length adaptations are much more variable in terms of quality, much camper and theatrical and to my view a lot less successful, barring a few happy accidents.Sergio (Tipping My Fedora)https://www.blogger.com/profile/07760255627379603587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-50284935048255133832012-05-06T05:49:19.544-04:002012-05-06T05:49:19.544-04:00One of the big problems with this production is th...One of the big problems with this production is that it had enormous shoes to fill. Everyone seems to have seen the Finney version and, even if you're not that taken with his performance, it's a text-book example of how to adapt a Christie whodunnit to the screen. The makers of the TV show were stuck with the problem of how to make a version of the story that was true to the book without simply copying the movie, and in this case they failed lamentably. One of the problems with the more recent POIROT adaptions is that the makers don't actually trust the original material. They look at the other TV period detective stuff (like FOYLE'S WAR for instance)and decide that the Christie stories aren't 'serious' enough. They don't have obvious political or sociological sub-texts, and they feel that they need to put them in. This approach reached its nadir with CARDS ON THE TABLE a few years ago, where the plot was twisted around in order to allow the adaptor to create the story that he wanted to tell. In this case we had Poirot behaving completely out of character in order to allow the adaption to explore stuff about religion and the rule of law. I don't mind watching stuff where this is dealt with, but here it's just applied over the original material like a thick coat of paint. Some of the more recent stuff has been quite fun, and I just hope that the remaining stories are dealt with more delicately than this.<br /><br />Toby Jones is great, isn't he? I've seen him in quite a few things recently, and he always turns in good performance. Shame that they couldn't give him his own detective series (but which famous detective could he play?)<br /><br />Mack May: I don't suppose that it really matters, but the Suchet Poirot series is not made by the BBC. In the UK there are 5 channels (BBC/BBC2/ITV/CHANNEL4/CHANNEL5).The two BBC channels are funded by a compulsory tax. The remaining are commercial channels carrying advertisements (although there is some government funding of CHANNEL4). Poirot is made by ITV in association with other production companies. The Jeremy Brett/Sherlock Holmes series, the original UPSTAIRS DOWNSTAIRS, MIDSOMER MURDERS, FOYLE'S WAR are all ITV productions,whilst SHERLOCK, NEW TRICKS, DALZIEL AND PASCOE, DEATH IN PARADISE and many others are BBC. I have a number of American friends, and they all make the same assumption...if the actors have British accents, then it must be the BBC. It's good for the BBC, but it must annoy ITV an awful lot!Sextonblakenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-76284326402433101712012-05-06T05:32:07.758-04:002012-05-06T05:32:07.758-04:00This was truly an appalling adaptation. It's ...This was truly an appalling adaptation. It's astonishing that the two weakest adaptations by far are the two really famous novels: The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, which was so awful I can't bring myself to comment further; and this one, which you - Patrick - have demolished brilliantly. Perhaps the adapters were overwhelmed with their task. Makes you fear for Curtain.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-73823244610387825242012-05-06T04:17:29.391-04:002012-05-06T04:17:29.391-04:00Wow, that Greta Ohlsson line you quote is phenomen...Wow, that Greta Ohlsson line you quote is phenomenally stupid. That shows a total incomprehension of that sort of character. I can see that, and I'm not even a theist!<br /><br />I honestly couldn't take this episode after the opening sequence, where Poirot was behaving so absurdly. I think the filmmakers were so desperate to do somethign "different" with this famous story that they ended up making a total fiasco out of it.The Passing Tramphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09830680639601570152noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-67733563918104774632012-05-06T01:02:28.642-04:002012-05-06T01:02:28.642-04:00@Christopher
I'm afraid we'll have to disa...@Christopher<br />I'm afraid we'll have to disagree here. Poirot, the film incarnation, is not the exact same Poirot from the books. I can't remember his Catholicism playing much of a role in the Suchet series at any point in time, and there's only a handful of stories by Christie in which Poirot's Catholicism is important. But suddenly, he's not only a Catholic, he's nearly fanatic! The writers have completely retconned the Poirot who realizes with disgust that the murderer in FIVE LITTLE PIGS will never be brought to justice or the Poirot who decides to keep quiet about the true story at THE HOLLOW or the Poirot who decides not to pursue his case against the culprit in THE CHOCOLATE BOX. And what do we get from this? A badly-written Catholic who speaks entirely in cliches. It isn't well-written, and the effect the adaptation was going for is, as a result, more annoying than anything else. The idea behind the adaptation is interesting, but the execution is awful, from the writing to the acting.<br /><br />@Mack<br />I can't say I hated the scene, nor was I offended by it. It actually does a good job juxtaposing Poirot's and Ratchett's approach to faith-- one is devout (albeit badly written), and the other considers it merely an extra form of insurance. Watch how Toby Jones looks around him as he prays, and how Poirot is focused-- the two performances do a nice job complementing each other, and it's one of the best "religion scenes". (Much of the credit goes to Toby Jones who is the lone bright spot. Eileen Atkins might have been another one if we got to see more of her, but the filmmakers were so obsessed over the theme of "God! God! God!" that you'll miss her if you blink.) I was far more offended by how badly written Poirot-the-Catholic is, or how he's a bloody imbecile who suddenly gets amnesia about many of his previous cases where he bent the supposedly cast-iron "rule of law". It makes no sense whatsoever-- the Mad Hatter's tea party looks sane by comparison!Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01844617192737950378noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-86743054197868942362012-05-05T20:37:08.977-04:002012-05-05T20:37:08.977-04:00We had freshmen in a writing seminar read Murder o...We had freshmen in a writing seminar read Murder on the Orient Express and watch the David Souchet version. About 85% of the class (and this is consistent over several semesters) were offended by how Poirot is portrayed in the BBC version. They felt that the BBC version was not true to Poirot character. The really disliked the scene where Poirot and Ratchett are praying in a split screen scene. They didn't think that emphasizing religion added anything. We also had a student do a comparison of the BBC version and the film with the Albert Finney and everyone thought the film a better adaptation. I'd say you are spot on in your evaluation.Mackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05555318160638307655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-499247432649483938.post-5679838809773902662012-05-05T20:05:55.054-04:002012-05-05T20:05:55.054-04:00My dissenting opinion:
http://agathachristie.com/...My dissenting opinion:<br /><br />http://agathachristie.com/insight/papers/2011/02/10/one-train-two-very-different-journeys/#commentsChristopherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03343947041898057102noreply@blogger.com