Poor T&T The recent films can't seem to get it right

mstrsims2mstrsims2 Massachusetts, United States
In the Marple series, they made Tuppence into a lush.   In the 2015 Partners in Crime series they made Tommy into a boob.
Poor T&T.
I will have to watch the French film (Mon petit doigt m'a dit) and see if they fared any better !


  • edited January 2017
    I prefer the 1980's T&T with James Warwick & Francesca Annis. The portrayals are more faithful to Christie's characters and they're about the best you're going to get. I wish they would return and film the last of the three stories -- N or M?; By The Pricking Of My Thumbs, and Postern of Fate. The actors are certainly the right age. 
  • sheilapmsheilapm Alabama, United States
    I agree...James Warwick and Francesca Annis are the best I've seen. Would love to see them as the "more mature" T&T.
  • GKCfanGKCfan Wisconsin, United States
    What qualities do you think that actors who play T&T should incorporate into their performances?
  • edited June 2017
    GKCfan said:
    What qualities do you think that actors who play T&T should incorporate into their performances?
    Well, in regards to Tommy, David Walliams played him all wrong. Tommy is not this weak, bumbling idiot who acts more a like child Tuppence has to babysit rather than acting as a husband to her. Though Agatha Christie often writes strong women characters, in contrast, she doesn't make the man the kind that David Walliams portrayed in the role of Tommy. The Thomas Beresford of the books fought in the Great War. Walliams doesn't convince me that his Tommy would ever fight in the Great War . . . .or ANY war for that matter! He doesn't sell it. I know the Tommy of the books has r"ed hair, is freckled, and pleasantly ugly " and neither James Warwick or Walliams bears any semblance but it's more in the personalities that I look for more than merely the "look". It's his banter and repartee with Tuppence that is one aspect of his character. Walliams doesn't banter with Jessica Raines. There's no playfulness, no sparkling dialogue, no humor. It's like the production team was trying too hard to make Tommy the humorous one, the laughing stock on the screen. The personality is what sells me and Warwick is more convincing. Walliams plays a Tommy that portrays how men are often perceived today in the media --weak and can't be taken too seriously. Tommy & Tuppence has their strengths but in the new adaptations, this Tommy doesn't seem to have any strengths -- not even one!

    This is what Walliams said of Tommy and how he relates to Tuppence: 

    "Tuppence is definitely more forthright. She’s braver than Tommy, he’s more on the back-foot, but he means well.

    "Tommy is a bit more of a klutz than Tuppence and is sometimes more of a burden.

    This is NOT the Tommy that Christie wrote. 

    I'll end this post from an article that beautifully summarizes in a nutshell everything that I described: 

    With the Tuppence Beresford, however, Christie wrote a strong female character who still managed to have fun. Tommy was occasionally surprised by Tuppence’s inventiveness and quick mind but he was never her hapless stooge. In the Beresford novels, Christie gave readers a strong fun-loving relationship where a woman doesn’t need to be shrill and bossy to be strong, and a man doesn’t have to be useless and idiotic to love her. Instead of embracing this dynamic, however, Partners in Crime adds a tired 21st Century cynicism to the Beresfords’ relationship and removes all the fun in the process.

  • Tommy_A_JonesTommy_A_Jones Gloucestershire, United Kingdom
    David Walliams should have played Carter if he had to play anyone but the man who did play him was fine, Albert should have been the same status as he was in the Warwick and Annis version.
Sign In or Register to comment.