Mine was probably Witness for the Prosecution (I loved seeing the older version that I saw revived and re-adapted starring Andrea Riseborough, who made an excellent Romaine). Kim Cattrall, however, did not stay true to the original Agatha Christie short story and play, turning Miss French into Mrs French, a glamorous society dame. The nephew, much to my relief, was completely removed from the plot (he didn't really seem to fit in in the short story and play), and Janet MacKenzie was equipped with a preposterous little motive.
Mine was probably Witness for the Prosecution (I loved seeing the older version that I saw revived and re-adapted starring Andrea Riseborough, who made an excellent Romaine). Kim Cattrall, however, did not stay true to the original Agatha Christie short story and play, turning Miss French into Mrs French, a glamorous society dame. The nephew, much to my relief, was completely removed from the plot (he didn't really seem to fit in in the short story and play), and Janet MacKenzie was equipped with a preposterous little motive.
All in all, well played!
I didn't care much for the supposedly shocking "twist" that the film brought with Janet MacKenzie. I didn't find it much of a twist at all. I don't remember if either in the short story or the play if Janet was a suspect at one time or not but the crime wasn't pinned on her as Leonard and Romaine enjoy the money. I find Christie's twist in the short story and the play much more shocking. If you go by the short story alone where the new adaptation decided to adapt from, yes the murderer got away with it but that's how it ended. No ridiculous subplot with Janet. No, the murderer gets away with it and can never be tried again. Plain, simple . . . and shocking. And the way Christie pens that final line in the story is enough to make one shiver.
I completely agree! I found it a little ridiculous when one of the characters suggested that Miss French (Mrs French, rather) would "get bored" of Janet. I found it silly, for even if such an occasion arose, Miss/Mrs French was sure to provide her either with good references, since they had once been close, or a comfortable little pension. Also, in the short story, their relationship was portrayed as one similar to sisters, and I believe Agatha Christie would have found it ridiculous to make Miss French tire of Janet.
And then there were none (1974 version) saw it in the late 80s when I was 7 and was hooked on her novels ever since! A tradition in our family home now on Christams Eve is that we will watch Hercule Poirot's Christmas later on at night (before Father Christmas arrives) whilst eating festive treats and drinking egg nog by the fireside - this is even more fun than opening the Christmas presents on Christmas morning!
Does anyone remember when The Secret of Chimneys was shown on Television in The TV Times the Characters were made out to look like Cluedo Characters on the Cover, I had to go to bed before it was on but I do remember The Cluedo Pieces.
Agatha Christie's Murder Is Easy. I was about 4 and it starred Bill Bixby and it was during the time when it was both very good to be Bill Bixby and I think people were getting into Agatha Christie again. I only understood it all years later when I read the book.
I loved the bit where Luke puts the name of Suspects into a Computer and Bridget's name appears, I hadn't read the book then and wondered what happened in the Book, I thought it was a Great use of Technology.
I think it may have been the Partners in Crime from the 1980s. I remember liking it but not loving it, and thinking it was a bit silly...but yet going back each week to watch the next one (PBS Boston). I had been a Christie fan, since my teen years, from reading the books. Over time I have come to appreciate Partners series more--especially after seeing some of the 21st century adaptations.
Until it was released on DVD, I'd only seen one episode of "Partners in Crime." My local Blockbuster Video had one VHS copy of the episode "The Unbreakable Alibi," which I rented in the early 1990's.
I think it may have been the Partners in Crime from the 1980s. I remember liking it but not loving it, and thinking it was a bit silly...but yet going back each week to watch the next one (PBS Boston). I had been a Christie fan, since my teen years, from reading the books. Over time I have come to appreciate Partners series more--especially after seeing some of the 21st century adaptations.
The 21st century adaptations of The Secret Adversary and N or M were awful! The series was so bad that it was cancelled. They don't hold a candle to the feel of the 1980s Partners In Crime series. And I feel that it will be the best Tommy & Tuppence series that we're going to get in a very, very long time! When I first watched the 80s series, I had to get used to the look and feel of the series but overtime you get used to it, and like you said, after seeing the new T&T films and other recent Christie adaptations, you come to appreciate the older series. I said this many times before but I wish Francesca Annis and James Warwick would return to film the remaining stories: N or M?, By The Pricking Of My Thumbs, and Postern Of Fate It's time they come back. They are the right age and it's time to complete what they started all those years before.
Let me scan my brain vault, from what I remember the very first one would be, Mysterious Affair At Styles. I like how the story progressed and now I am hooked that Belgian man got me using my gray cells.
The first I remember was " Why didn't they ask Evans", must have been early '80's. Here in The Netherlands it was broadcasted in 3 or 4 episodes, and I remember discussing it with a girl in my class who was also a Christie-fan.
I have a lot of Christie movies on VHS. I never got DVD versions of most of them.
In most places, you can find a lab that will copy vhs's to dvd's. I actually have the equipment at home, but I live in Jerusalem, Israel... probably far away from you.
Patrick certainly tried to strangle Poirot in the Ustinov film! I remember the ending, where Irene Castle is ministering to him afterwards... I did like the bitchy Arlena in the Ustinov version (I didn't see the Suchet version) because her bitchiness made Linda's hatred more understandible and gave her a real motive. I missed the Rosemond character in the movie - I really liked her in the book. In the Ustinov movie, they gave her role as Linda's supporter and Marshal's old friend to hotel owner Irene Castle (played by Maggie Smith), who was wonderful, but different. (in the book, Mrs. Castle, the hotel owner, has a very minor role and no known first name, and Rosemond, a fashion designer, is Marshal's childhood friend and Linda's supporter). What I wasn't crazy about in the Ustinov film was the way they gave everyone a connection with Arlena and a motive - it made the plot tighter, but was a bit too much, I felt - especially the Gardiner connection fell flat for me. @CristieFanForLife - of course you can answer questions refered to me! First of all this is a public forum, and secondly - this way I get to see your viewpoint, which is more interesting for me than my own (which I know already)!
In the Ustinov film, was not her name Daphne Castle? I don't recall her being called Irene Castle. I remember Diana Rigg (Arlena Marshall) when first meeting her in the hotel, saying with vehemence "Hello DAPH-ne". I thought that the David Suchet version far superior to the Ustinov version and it was more faithful to the novel; of course, there were changes in that also but not as many
... I missed the Rosemond character in the movie - I really liked her in the book. In the Ustinov movie, they gave her role as Linda's supporter and Marshal's old friend to hotel owner Irene Castle (played by Maggie Smith), who was wonderful, but different. (in the book, Mrs. Castle, the hotel owner, has a very minor role and no known first name, and Rosemond, a fashion designer, is Marshal's childhood friend and Linda's supporter). ..
In the Ustinov film, was not her name Daphne Castle? I don't recall her being called Irene Castle. I remember Diana Rigg (Arlena Marshall) when first meeting her in the hotel, saying with vehemence "Hello DAPH-ne". I thought that the David Suchet version far superior to the Ustinov version and it was more faithful to the novel; of course, there were changes in that also but not as many
Absolutely correct - my mistake. Irene Castle was a ballroom dancer about a hundred years ago - don't know why her name stuck in my head. Daphne Castle is indeed the character in the Ustinov movie "Evil under the Sun".
My first Christie on screen was The Mirror Crack'd with the ensemble star cast of Liz Taylor and Rock Hudson with Angela Lansbury playing Miss Marple. TV adaptations include Murder is Easy (starring Olivia De Havilland), Witness for the Prosecution, The Agatha Christie Hour, The Seven Dials Mystery and many others. Unfortunately for me I also watched the Christopher Plummer starrer Ordeal by Innocence and decided once and for all that the books are good enough! I've watched a couple of episodes of the David Suchet series but apart from a few episodes and the hauntingly attractive title music, I didn't have the motivation to watch the series further. I've heard a lot about how Joan Hickson WAS Miss Marple and have also heard good things about how convincing Geraldine McEwans was but books are good enough for me. I LOVE to reread her books and short stories! :-)
@Mohan, the first Christie adaption that I saw on tv was this The Mirror Crack'd too. It was very well done. unfortunatly, it ruins the book to me, because I've already knew the murderer. and the motive. I also enjoyed the last one with Julie Mckenzie as Miss Marple. As you, I prefer to reread the books. They're much better and interesting. Although I enjoyed a few adaptions. But, in general, they're dreadful, you can barely recognize the story. What a pitty!
@tudes, with me I think it was an age thing. When I was a teen and in my 20s, I used to really look forward to screen and TV adaptations. I still haven't watched the then best acknowledged Orient Express adaptation with Ingrid Bergman, BTW. Unfortunately my opinion of adaptations plummeted BIG time with the Ordeal By Innocence one which honestly, was depicted like a fourth rate soft porn movie with the women going about topless galore. I've seen the Lord Edgware Dies adaptation titled 13 At Dinner and I wasn't impressed. Peter Ustinov wasn't convincing to me as Poirot and did they have to make Hastings look like such a nitwit? Faye Dunaway looked gorgeous but it wasn't enough. Much later I read posts by fellow fans in other forums where they lamented about how the stories were being changed beyond recognition for the screen and that was IT for me. No more adaptations! I am currently enjoying my 12th or the 13th read of Card on the Table - one of my staunch favourites! :-)
@Mohan, I agree. By the way, I think Cards on the Table'a adaptation is the worst one. If you don't watch it, please, never watch this one. I can't tell you how horrible it is. And I really like Suchet as Poirot.
@Mohan, I agree. By the way, I think Cards on the Table'a adaptation is the worst one. If you don't watch it, please, never watch this one. I can't tell you how horrible it is. And I really like Suchet as Poirot.
Actually, I quite enjoyed Suchet's "Cards on the Table" - though It bothered me that they changed the roles of the two girls SPOILER making Rhoda the killer and Miss Meredith the one to have a romance with Col. Despard. Especially since in "The pale horse" Rhoda is Mrs. Despard. But the movie was fun.
Comments
All in all, well played!
A tradition in our family home now on Christams Eve is that we will watch Hercule Poirot's Christmas later on at night (before Father Christmas arrives) whilst eating festive treats and drinking egg nog by the fireside - this is even more fun than opening the Christmas presents on Christmas morning!
Does anyone remember when The Secret of Chimneys was shown on Television in The TV Times the Characters were made out to look like Cluedo Characters on the Cover, I had to go to bed before it was on but I do remember The Cluedo Pieces.
Poirot ) whom was portrayed by David Suchet.
As you, I prefer to reread the books. They're much better and interesting. Although I enjoyed a few adaptions. But, in general, they're dreadful, you can barely recognize the story. What a pitty!