I once had a review of this title up under an old account, which I have since replaced. My feelings aren't quite as they were then but I still rather like this installment. As full disclosure, I've read a few of Christie's novels but this isn't one of them.
I do understand, from the debate online a few years ago and from research, that the plot is quite dramatically altered. But I think what we're presented with ends up working quite well on its own terms. There is a strong central drama and themes playing out through the episode. It's dark but a powerful human tale. The adaptation is bursting with red herrings, perhaps a bit too much for its own good.
The problem with subplots, really, is not that they exist, but when they feel forced within the story structure. When I first viewed the episode, I felt this was a problem, but returning to it subsequently, it is less cluttered and/or awkward than I remembered. If anything, I don't find the John the Baptist's skull deception subplot all that convincing, even with Mark Gatiss's earnest performance as Tim Curry's son. The most effective one is that of the rejected adoptive child, who didn't' want to kill the victim but instead to make her suffer while she lived. The business involving the nun and slavery trade is a bit out of left field, but carried off nicely and gets points for originality.
Besides the story, the film really is a delight in other ways, with beautiful camera work showing the appealing locales and color pallet of the setting. Music and atmosphere are developed throughout and there's plenty of fine acting. David Suchet never disappoints as Poirot. Cheryl Campbell, even though she doesn't have much time or opportunity to flesh out her character, she makes a powerful impression. Her husband is played by Tim Curry, whose performance really engages the viewer's sympathy and in fact managed to convince me that he genuinely cares for this unpleasant woman. Also excellent is Zoe Boyle as Ginny.
Of the characters, the only possible dud may be the nanny (Angela Pleasance). She plays an important part in the story, but doesn't get that much to do. The character has been described as pantomime and is certainly underdeveloped, mostly relegated to distant gazes and a genera listless affect that makes you wonder why she was considered worth killing. I did also think one final twist involving the killers' response to the intervention of justice was a bit extreme and implausible, but also in the spirit of previous Christie narratives.
If you are adamant about the adaptations remaining faithful to the source, this one will not be anywhere near a favorite. On its own merits, though, I think it's a pretty effective film with a good central story. Even if you dislike the adaptation, the other aspects of the filmmaking are clearly of high quality and good taste. Much like Murder on the Orient Express--a highly memorable film I would rate more highly than this one.
Lastly, a brief word on Poirot's religious convictions in these later installments. Some of the response to this has been excessive. Although not a particularly religious individual myself, I don't feel that the character's faith is given heavy-handed treatment and these are by no means religious films. It remains particularly unobtrusive here, taking backseat to a much more compelling story about families and in particular the relationships between parents and children-- just how profoundly the one impacts the other, how much it means to be responsible for the nurture and well-being of another person.
I do understand, from the debate online a few years ago and from research, that the plot is quite dramatically altered. But I think what we're presented with ends up working quite well on its own terms. There is a strong central drama and themes playing out through the episode. It's dark but a powerful human tale. The adaptation is bursting with red herrings, perhaps a bit too much for its own good.
The problem with subplots, really, is not that they exist, but when they feel forced within the story structure. When I first viewed the episode, I felt this was a problem, but returning to it subsequently, it is less cluttered and/or awkward than I remembered. If anything, I don't find the John the Baptist's skull deception subplot all that convincing, even with Mark Gatiss's earnest performance as Tim Curry's son. The most effective one is that of the rejected adoptive child, who didn't' want to kill the victim but instead to make her suffer while she lived. The business involving the nun and slavery trade is a bit out of left field, but carried off nicely and gets points for originality.
Besides the story, the film really is a delight in other ways, with beautiful camera work showing the appealing locales and color pallet of the setting. Music and atmosphere are developed throughout and there's plenty of fine acting. David Suchet never disappoints as Poirot. Cheryl Campbell, even though she doesn't have much time or opportunity to flesh out her character, she makes a powerful impression. Her husband is played by Tim Curry, whose performance really engages the viewer's sympathy and in fact managed to convince me that he genuinely cares for this unpleasant woman. Also excellent is Zoe Boyle as Ginny.
Of the characters, the only possible dud may be the nanny (Angela Pleasance). She plays an important part in the story, but doesn't get that much to do. The character has been described as pantomime and is certainly underdeveloped, mostly relegated to distant gazes and a genera listless affect that makes you wonder why she was considered worth killing. I did also think one final twist involving the killers' response to the intervention of justice was a bit extreme and implausible, but also in the spirit of previous Christie narratives.
If you are adamant about the adaptations remaining faithful to the source, this one will not be anywhere near a favorite. On its own merits, though, I think it's a pretty effective film with a good central story. Even if you dislike the adaptation, the other aspects of the filmmaking are clearly of high quality and good taste. Much like Murder on the Orient Express--a highly memorable film I would rate more highly than this one.
Lastly, a brief word on Poirot's religious convictions in these later installments. Some of the response to this has been excessive. Although not a particularly religious individual myself, I don't feel that the character's faith is given heavy-handed treatment and these are by no means religious films. It remains particularly unobtrusive here, taking backseat to a much more compelling story about families and in particular the relationships between parents and children-- just how profoundly the one impacts the other, how much it means to be responsible for the nurture and well-being of another person.