The novel 'Appointment With Death' is quite a simple story and the solution is not (IMO) one of Christie's best. Where this book scores is in its picturesque setting (the rose red city of Petra) and in the character of the victim, Mrs Emily Boynton - an extraordinary creation who remains in the imagination long after the book is over.
This film is the second adaptation of the book. Neither it nor its predecessor (with Peter Ustinov) managed to get to Petra but in this Suchet version, the archaeological dig setting works almost as well - so scenically we are well served! Neither film version quite manages to nail the character of Mrs Boynton. Arguably Piper Laurie is marginally more successful in the Ustinov version but I think this is simply because we get to see more of her. Cheryl Campbell just doesn't get very much to do and, more fatally the character becomes a rather more ordinary monster whose motivations are never satisfactorily explained. Sarah King's role in the book is to establish an uneasy relationship with the Boynton family and therefore uncover much of the background of the victim and why she is what she is. This doesn't happen here and Lady Boynton (as she is here) becomes a much less interesting person as a result.
This film is stuffed full of incident and subplots (that don't exist in the book) and as a result several new characters are introduced including a Polish nun and a batty nanny, neither of whom add very much to anything. A couple of old Christie themes are added in (ambiguous Christian names, last minute double murder/suicide, dual identities) but again they don't really improve the plot in any way. There are also substantial changes to the motive and method of the principal murder as well as the identity of the murderer(s). Thanks to some of the acting, the damage done as a result of these changes really isn't too bad. A further thought - why are all these people visiting (and staying over) at Lord Boynton's dig? One can understand his family being there but who invited Poirot, Dr Gerard, Mr Cope, Dr King and the Polish nun? It's not as if its a tourist attraction and Lord B doesn't seem to know any of them - apart from maybe Poirot himself.
Very few of the performances here really stand out but Elizabeth McGovern manages to do something special with the role of Celia Westholme (now a travel writer as opposed to a semi-comic American member of the British parliament) and both Boynton daughters are well done. IMO John Hannah overdoes it a bit in the role of Dr Gerard and the other men are a bit dull.
Altogether, this is not bad as a standalone murder mystery but as an adaptation of the Christie novel it falls a little short and, for me is the weakest if the latest season.
This film is the second adaptation of the book. Neither it nor its predecessor (with Peter Ustinov) managed to get to Petra but in this Suchet version, the archaeological dig setting works almost as well - so scenically we are well served! Neither film version quite manages to nail the character of Mrs Boynton. Arguably Piper Laurie is marginally more successful in the Ustinov version but I think this is simply because we get to see more of her. Cheryl Campbell just doesn't get very much to do and, more fatally the character becomes a rather more ordinary monster whose motivations are never satisfactorily explained. Sarah King's role in the book is to establish an uneasy relationship with the Boynton family and therefore uncover much of the background of the victim and why she is what she is. This doesn't happen here and Lady Boynton (as she is here) becomes a much less interesting person as a result.
This film is stuffed full of incident and subplots (that don't exist in the book) and as a result several new characters are introduced including a Polish nun and a batty nanny, neither of whom add very much to anything. A couple of old Christie themes are added in (ambiguous Christian names, last minute double murder/suicide, dual identities) but again they don't really improve the plot in any way. There are also substantial changes to the motive and method of the principal murder as well as the identity of the murderer(s). Thanks to some of the acting, the damage done as a result of these changes really isn't too bad. A further thought - why are all these people visiting (and staying over) at Lord Boynton's dig? One can understand his family being there but who invited Poirot, Dr Gerard, Mr Cope, Dr King and the Polish nun? It's not as if its a tourist attraction and Lord B doesn't seem to know any of them - apart from maybe Poirot himself.
Very few of the performances here really stand out but Elizabeth McGovern manages to do something special with the role of Celia Westholme (now a travel writer as opposed to a semi-comic American member of the British parliament) and both Boynton daughters are well done. IMO John Hannah overdoes it a bit in the role of Dr Gerard and the other men are a bit dull.
Altogether, this is not bad as a standalone murder mystery but as an adaptation of the Christie novel it falls a little short and, for me is the weakest if the latest season.