There's a short story by Daphne du Maurier, "The Blue Lenses," where a woman has eye surgery, and afterwards she sees everybody's head as the animal they most resemble– decent but unperceptive people are sheep and cows, and greedy and sneaky people have the heads of vultures and snakes.
I'm expecting something at least sober and thoughtful from Kenneth Branagh. I can't imagine he'll make a complete mess up of it; although, there is a danger that any director might be a bit obscure, or try something clever which doesn't come off.
I'm excited about seeing another version of Orient Express. It's one of my favorite books, and I don't mind seeing a different spin on it as long as it is not totally unrecognizable. I enjoyed the Suchet version in spite of the changes, and I am for the most part critical of the later Suchet works. The book is still available for all of us purists, and the last time I read my copy of Orient Express, all the pages were still there. Suchet and Finney can't change that. I feel betrayed more as an Agatha Christie fan by the estate and publishers who run this site and the Facebook page, who seem to take loyal fans for granted and not treat the endeavors as a two-way street. We are expected to be excited about the new productions, many of which are flawed, yet our expectations for a well run discussion group with informative means of enrichment are not met and we must wait for the cows to come home before getting replies. In my eyes, this negligence is much worse than some artistic endeavors to reinterpret the books. The filmed adaptations are not the books, and it's unrealistic to expect them to live up. How could they? I share your expectations about Branagh's version and hope that his production is good enough to influence viewers to buy the book and support Agatha Christie sales. Hopefully they will then come here to this website and by then, it might be worth the time and effort to do so. What we have been trying to tell the admins is that this site and the FB page are an embarrassment to Agatha Christie's legacy, yet we are ignored and given the brush off, not even receiving a reply to direct questions...such as...who are all the moderators? And why is the spam allowed to sit there for over two weeks?
@Madame_Doyle, hi! I am one of the moderators here. I try to oversee all of the discussions, but sometimes I miss a question or am unsure if it is directed to me. Please contact me directly or tag me with a "@" if you would like my attention. As for the spam, I've been flagging and deleting all the spam I find, however I've heard reports of spam threads that I can't see on my computer. I'm not sure what's happening with that. Please ask me if you have any specific questions or concerns that you'd like me to address. Thank you!
@GCKFan, I appreciate your input enormously. There are different perspectives, and I guess it is about the moderators seeing what the forum seems like to fans.
The following is just my personal view.
What I can see happening, is that the discussion sort of tails off, because we have all said what we think, and there isn't a lot else to do. And when discussion isn't acknowledged, for me, it begs the question, why are you saying you want to know what forum members think about why The Murder of Roger Ackroyd is still being read? It is like saying to a child, "Throw this hoop in the air; do a cartwheel; put those shapes in the right slots; build a tower with fifteen bricks." The child would soon get bored. You need engagement too - that is, with the moderator. We respect and enjoy each other's views, and we don't want to be combative over the relative strengths of different novels, because in writing it can't come across as fun ribbing and banter, as it would if you were smiling and doing it face to face. What I mean is, it isn't parliament, or The Oxford Debating Society: we are not going to reply to a poster by saying, ' You're view is completely misguided, you have not considered Christie's need to keep the plot moving.' It is all about celebrating and sharing enjoyment, in my humble opinion, so you moderators need to capture that fun and feed it back or distill it, and grab something from 2011, and say 'Someone said this about it then.', or add their own opinion.
One of our fellow fans is skilled, I think, at promoting real engagement and prompting fans to describe what the novels mean to them. He recently asked us to describe a time, a strong memory, of reading an AC novel and being really happy. Couldn't you and Tuppence, and all of your fellow moderators have contributed your memory and anecdote too? Apologies if I have a missed a moderator doing this. Radio shows have slots which run for years, where fans describe a memory (such as, of first love, for instance) and fans enjoy hearing other stories, but it takes a bit mediation to get that going.
These are just some thoughts, GCKFan, but I feel that you yourself are engaging with forum members, so it is about, for me, asking all of you moderators to take a fresh look at the member perspective - and, truly, there most probably are different views, and those who are very happy with little moderator involvement. All the above is just my humble opinion.
Why not all the moderators tell us who they are? You have done this GCKFan, and made a link to your articles, which is nice.
@Madame Doyle, You see things presciently and clearly, and, furthermore, you know how other websites are run, and you see with compelling insight that Agatha Christie's legacy will be damaged if it is not looked after. It was yourself who articulated and made me aware of the dimension of legacy. For me, what is needed is to have an academic team to research and present commentary on Christie's work in an academic and analytical format, and for some of this work to be channelled via the website.
But I have stopped in my mind holding the moderators responsible for the website, and, on a greater level, Agatha Christie's legacy. They have a limited brief, I feel sure (because of various clues which suggest this), and they can only do what they can do. We don't know what are their directions.
I don't think that revenue is an issue to the AC Estate. Wasn't she very successful: didn't one article say her estate was worth millions even in the 1970s? I don't think there is a need for the estate to sell more books - the website is probably there for interest. I don't feel or suppose those in charge have considered on a bigger scale how the website could potentially be used, - so we must give time for the changes to take place, I guess, and give honest feedback to help, as we are doing.
If he intends on playing Poirot I can't see it being that good, last night I tried and failed to imagine him as Poirot, but I am willing to be convinced as Finney was only 3rd choice for playing Porot for MOTOE according to IMDB and the 1st and 2nd Choices weren't people I would think could have played Poirot, Does anyone know who else will be in it or have any suggestions for the other Parts?
@Griselda - thank you for your compliments! To be clear, I am strictly a fan of Agatha Christie and not employed to promote her work, but I wrote my comments about legacy because I have a friend who is interested in and involved with furthering the readership of Agatha Christie among younger audiences, such as getting her work incorporated into academic courses and promoting her longevity in the reading public in general (I personally have not taken up this crusade). I don't have facts or statistics about sales, but I know that the greatest possibilities of expanding the readership are in non-English speaking countries (books in translation) because the English-speaking markets are already saturated with Agatha Christie's work. I am American and can assert that copies of her books may be purchased for as little as ten cents to a quarter in various private sales, so why would anyone collecting the books buy them new from Amazon or elsewhere when assembling a collection may cost at tops less than $50? In the United States, which I can speak personally of, tracking her readership is just not possible by looking at official sales.
So the better opportunities are in non-English speaking countries and that is the reason why global forums such as Facebook and this site are so critical, because yes, yes, yes, sales are still important! Very much so, hence the new covers and editions to tempt us to revamp our collections. That the new covers are so ugly is unfortunate, and the crooked slant of the copy was an unwise decision.
As I said, I am American and am acquainted as a lifelong Agatha Christie reader with the American titles, such as Funerals are Fatal instead of After the Funeral. It's a challenge to me using the original British titles, but I support a standardized title catalog so that forums like this can work better. My field of study is American literature, specifically Twain studies, and so I understand how important legacy is and how the passion of the fans carries the interest further. That's why I wrote what I did, and I'm glad it inspired you to consider her legacy in a different way. She's more at risk of being lost to posterity than other major writers who can be included in academia. Writers such as Jane Austen and Shakespeare have been mentioned, but the reality is, that stature of author is not in danger. Christie is more at risk, so the question is, how much do we wish her to live on for future generations? Fans such as the friend I mention take it very seriously, and that's why the "official" representatives of this site, and I include the moderators, need to be held accountable.
I'm thinking about leaving the forum. At times I feel like I'm not adding anything to the discussions and at times it's pretty much dead around here. Before I even found this forum, I was looking around for a place where I can discuss A.C. and her books in a more in-depth fashion and somewhere along the way the discussions got fewer and many members fell by the wayside. Like I said, I feel like I'm not adding anything to the discussions. I wish this forum would come back to life again.
Hello– I am trying to improve my moderating skills, and I'm working on topics for furthering better discussions. I should point out that this is not a full-time job for me. I actually juggle eight part-time jobs plus family obligations, so I don't devote as much time as I'd like to this board. Honestly, if it were up to me I'd love to spend all day writing about Agatha Christie. I've been meaning to write on the "favorite memories" thread but I just haven't done it yet.
That's a great point about Christie's legacy. I have pointed out in the past that of the Golden Age mystery writers, only Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and Agatha Christie are still widely known and still sell well, with G.K. Chesterton and Dorothy L. Sayers still remembered but not nearly as prominent, and many other fine mystery writers have been forgotten. Fortunately, more academics are starting to study Agatha Christie.
Yes, please don't leave ChristieFanForLife!. Your posts are very informative and interesting. You contribute such a lot to our understanding and enjoyment. Perhaps, too, you are putting a marker against what needs to be investigated in future in order to begin to track what is Dame Agatha's legacy. I think your writing will guide future researchers as to how to consider her work. I don't think a huge amount of serious investigation has been done to date - but I suppose that is a hardened fan talking, because there have been a good few books written - just never enough for the fans!!. Just imagine, in a hundred years time fans will be saying that Agatha Christie married a third time, to a Mr Hannah, and updated her style of writing!! They probably won't know that someone had been asked to write in the style ofs!! because there may be a dearth of research.
@MadameDoyle, It is going to be important, as you say, to expand readership across the globe.Really, the website needs to be vibrant and well-directed. Something is awry in terms of what directions are being given to the moderators, but, hopefully it is going to be improving from now on, and shaping up. I'm sure we have all wondered, is there another real Agatha Christie site: or is it really the case that this is the main official site?
I am sure, based on contemporaneous comments which I have read, that at one time Jane Austen was not treated as such a serious writer as she went on to be considered. The turning point needs to come for Dame Agatha - and very soon.
GCKFan and Tuppence, can you please write, or commission, an article for the website about what is happening in terms of academics starting to study Dame Agatha.It shouldn't take long to do, as it's a round up of what is out there, rather than an evaluative commission.
@Griselda - I would love to know what the academic approaches to her work are looking like and hoping for some actual literary criticism of her work by postcolonial scholars or those in a position to comment on her impact other than within the crime fiction genre, although that sort of structuralist criticism is usually interesting (but we've heard it already and generally have expressed enough of it on this forum). I'm glad you requested this!
We can confirm that pre-production on Murder on
the Orient Express is underway and we will be announcing cast here and
across all our social media platforms once they
are officially confirmed.
Interesting, I have seen Murder on the Orient Express, and I have read the book a lot of times. I am excited on what Angeline Jolie, will bring to the table. Who will she be representing knowing that she is a very good acto and considering the number of films she has starred in. Whether will she bring the quality level of acting I hope so. Even if it isn't a major role, but I do imagine her to be Princess Dragomiroff.
@ChristieFanForLife, but I think she can pull it off. If looks were the question, I won't contest it. Yes, her face doesn't reflect her age I admit to it she is to young for her age but I don't think she can be suitable as Countess Andrenyi. In my opinion, let's see what the scriptwriters plan to do.
@Linnet Ridgeway, I would like to hear your assessment as to why you think Jolie wouldn't be suitable as the Countess. You're right, let's see what the scriptwriters plan to do. I hope they do a good job but with the crop of adaptations made over the years, I've seen more misses than hits, more disappointments. I said this countless times and I'm sure some in the forum are sick and tired of me banging on the same drum but I hate the fact of modernizing Christie's stories just for the sake of modernizing and that's what the production team are doing to her adaptations today. I hate using the term "modernize" for an Agatha Christie adaptation. I don't mind necessary changes made when transferring a scene from print to screen but to include unnecessary scenes that doesn't add to, enhance, or improve upon the story then there shouldn't be any made.
The countess Dragomiroff in the book is ugly as a toad - but fascinating! I think, with some careful makeup, Angelina Jolie can look old and wrinkled, and keep her vitality, so she could really get into the part. Countess Andreyeni, on the other hand, is not only young but innocent, and I don't think the sexy Angelina Jolie could bank down her sexiness. An interesting point - in ancient Greece, where actors wore masks, and it was considered immodest to act with bare faces, young actors could only do young roles which were usually less important, while old, experienced actors could do all kind of roles - young men, old men, women, gods and goddesses. Nowadays, it is the reverse - young actors get all the best roles (except that teenaged roles are often given to "babyfaced" actors in their twenties), while older actors are barely offered supporting roles of characters older than themselves.
I love Wendy Hillard's performance of Princess Dragomiroff--she had the look of an ugly toad and pulled the role off perfectly. But then again, she wasn't young like Angelina Jolie. Makeup can do wonders but there are times it just doesn't work so it depends. It's either a hit or miss. I didn't think about Countess Andreyeni's innocence. Good point! Since you mentioned that I recall that she didn't play a role in the actual stabbing.
Angelina Jolie might play Miss Debenham. As this character is the lynchpin of the plot, in fact she hatched it, the role could be beefed up impressively for her. ChristieFanForLife, I think you have to say exactly what you think about what has been done with adaptations. That is what makes the forum good: posters being authentic. Could Angelina Jolie be Linda Arden?
What a shame because now when I think about it, I think she would have been great in it. I remember she played in a film that was set in the late 20's called "The Changeling" back in 2008 and from what I saw from the previews she seems to be really good in it as well as looking like an actual women from that time period:
@ChristieFanForLife Yes, your right modernizing it would loose the the whole essence. There will be possible changes , I will not agree on and especially to the fans watching. Those who are completely aware of the supposed story follow. It's is really outrageous, and a bit disagreeable if something like that happens. About the Angelina Jolie, being countess Andrenyi, I imagine her to be younger. For me, in the Murder of the Orient Express, I think it would be more suitable for her to take an older role.
I heard she was going to play Harriet Hubbard--it would've been a great role for her. I hope they can still get great actors/actresses as suddenly new interest has spiked in Agatha Christie. And Then There Were None is now a required read where I live, even.
Comments
–GKCfan
The following is just my personal view.
What I can see happening, is that the discussion sort of tails off, because we have all said what we think, and there isn't a lot else to do. And when discussion isn't acknowledged, for me, it begs the question, why are you saying you want to know what forum members think about why The Murder of Roger Ackroyd is still being read? It is like saying to a child, "Throw this hoop in the air; do a cartwheel; put those shapes in the right slots; build a tower with fifteen bricks." The child would soon get bored. You need engagement too - that is, with the moderator. We respect and enjoy each other's views, and we don't want to be combative over the relative strengths of different novels, because in writing it can't come across as fun ribbing and banter, as it would if you were smiling and doing it face to face. What I mean is, it isn't parliament, or The Oxford Debating Society: we are not going to reply to a poster by saying, ' You're view is completely misguided, you have not considered Christie's need to keep the plot moving.' It is all about celebrating and sharing enjoyment, in my humble opinion, so you moderators need to capture that fun and feed it back or distill it, and grab something from 2011, and say 'Someone said this about it then.', or add their own opinion.
One of our fellow fans is skilled, I think, at promoting real engagement and prompting fans to describe what the novels mean to them. He recently asked us to describe a time, a strong memory, of reading an AC novel and being really happy. Couldn't you and Tuppence, and all of your fellow moderators have contributed your memory and anecdote too? Apologies if I have a missed a moderator doing this. Radio shows have slots which run for years, where fans describe a memory (such as, of first love, for instance) and fans enjoy hearing other stories, but it takes a bit mediation to get that going.
These are just some thoughts, GCKFan, but I feel that you yourself are engaging with forum members, so it is about, for me, asking all of you moderators to take a fresh look at the member perspective - and, truly, there most probably are different views, and those who are very happy with little moderator involvement. All the above is just my humble opinion.
Why not all the moderators tell us who they are? You have done this GCKFan, and made a link to your articles, which is nice.
But I have stopped in my mind holding the moderators responsible for the website, and, on a greater level, Agatha Christie's legacy. They have a limited brief, I feel sure (because of various clues which suggest this), and they can only do what they can do. We don't know what are their directions.
I don't think that revenue is an issue to the AC Estate. Wasn't she very successful: didn't one article say her estate was worth millions even in the 1970s? I don't think there is a need for the estate to sell more books - the website is probably there for interest. I don't feel or suppose those in charge have considered on a bigger scale how the website could potentially be used, - so we must give time for the changes to take place, I guess, and give honest feedback to help, as we are doing.
So the better opportunities are in non-English speaking countries and that is the reason why global forums such as Facebook and this site are so critical, because yes, yes, yes, sales are still important! Very much so, hence the new covers and editions to tempt us to revamp our collections. That the new covers are so ugly is unfortunate, and the crooked slant of the copy was an unwise decision.
As I said, I am American and am acquainted as a lifelong Agatha Christie reader with the American titles, such as Funerals are Fatal instead of After the Funeral. It's a challenge to me using the original British titles, but I support a standardized title catalog so that forums like this can work better. My field of study is American literature, specifically Twain studies, and so I understand how important legacy is and how the passion of the fans carries the interest further. That's why I wrote what I did, and I'm glad it inspired you to consider her legacy in a different way. She's more at risk of being lost to posterity than other major writers who can be included in academia. Writers such as Jane Austen and Shakespeare have been mentioned, but the reality is, that stature of author is not in danger. Christie is more at risk, so the question is, how much do we wish her to live on for future generations? Fans such as the friend I mention take it very seriously, and that's why the "official" representatives of this site, and I include the moderators, need to be held accountable.
That's a great point about Christie's legacy. I have pointed out in the past that of the Golden Age mystery writers, only Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and Agatha Christie are still widely known and still sell well, with G.K. Chesterton and Dorothy L. Sayers still remembered but not nearly as prominent, and many other fine mystery writers have been forgotten. Fortunately, more academics are starting to study Agatha Christie.
I am sure, based on contemporaneous comments which I have read, that at one time Jane Austen was not treated as such a serious writer as she went on to be considered. The turning point needs to come for Dame Agatha - and very soon.
You may have seen this article http://variety.com/2016/film/news/angelina-jolie-murder-on-the-orient-express-2-1201830713/
We can confirm that pre-production on Murder on the Orient Express is underway and we will be announcing cast here and across all our social media platforms once they are officially confirmed.
https://www.facebook.com/OfficialAgathaChristie
https://twitter.com/agathachristie
https://www.instagram.com/officialagathachristie/