This French take on "Sparkling Cyanide" is like tasty French champagne. The mystery is engaging and keeps you guessing (if you don't know or don't remember the story - luckily, I didn't), the casting is good (complemented by several truly beautiful French women), Alice is allowed to be both funny and glamorous, and Laurence is offensive in an affectionate way (if that makes sense). One of the finest entries in this series, and recommended without hesitation to fans of the genre. *** out of 4.
Les petits meurtres d'Agatha Christie (TV Series)
Meurtre au Champagne (2013)
User Reviews
Review this title3 Reviews
Sparkling Cyanide
TheLittleSongbird12 April 2019
Am always up for something different, and 'Les Petits Meurtres D'Agatha Christie' is that, while using one of my all time favourite author Agatha Christie's work as a basic framework and putting a light comic twist blended with the mysteries it doesn't disgrace her. Have said more than once about not expecting one hundred percent fidelity, depending on the nature of the changes and how interesting the characters and story still are (as well as ideally being coherent and to some degree respectful).
The third adaptation of 'Sparkling Cyanide', the previous two being the decent on its own terms 1983 Anthony Andrews version and the other being the at best mediocre 2003 adaptation with Oliver Ford-Davies, "Meurtre Au Champagne" is a rare instance of an episode of this series being the best version of said story. To me, it is certainly the most enjoyable and most well made, while standing out among the other two. It is not a typically faithful adaptation as such but that wasn't an issue for me. Also consider it one of the best Laurence and Avril episodes of the series and an improvement over their introductory episode "Jeux De Glaces".
"Meurtre Au Champagne" has a lot right about it. It looks lovely as ever, the period detail and scenery are lavish but a great job is also done evoking a sinister enough atmosphere when necessary. The vibrant but never over-saturated or garish colours, that could be quite atmospheric, and stylish photography complement beautifully. The music matches the light-hearted and at times very atmospheric tone very well.
Writing is amusing and thought-provoking, and the story is compelling with it not feeling too safe or ordinary this time. It is neither over-simplified or convoluted, just right, while the denouement has the right amount of surprise. Love the character of Alice, who we also learn more about, and Blandine Bellavoir is a breath of fresh air, bringing a lot of charm, elegance and spirit that was much needed. The supporting cast do more than capably and Samuel Labarthe is a little more comfortable here.
Do still think though that Laurence is an unpleasant character and although it doesn't clash as much as in their first episode the chemistry between him and Alice has not near the same spark as with Larosiere and Lampion (the former a far more interesting character and the two gelling quite a lot faster).
In summary, very well done. 8/10
The third adaptation of 'Sparkling Cyanide', the previous two being the decent on its own terms 1983 Anthony Andrews version and the other being the at best mediocre 2003 adaptation with Oliver Ford-Davies, "Meurtre Au Champagne" is a rare instance of an episode of this series being the best version of said story. To me, it is certainly the most enjoyable and most well made, while standing out among the other two. It is not a typically faithful adaptation as such but that wasn't an issue for me. Also consider it one of the best Laurence and Avril episodes of the series and an improvement over their introductory episode "Jeux De Glaces".
"Meurtre Au Champagne" has a lot right about it. It looks lovely as ever, the period detail and scenery are lavish but a great job is also done evoking a sinister enough atmosphere when necessary. The vibrant but never over-saturated or garish colours, that could be quite atmospheric, and stylish photography complement beautifully. The music matches the light-hearted and at times very atmospheric tone very well.
Writing is amusing and thought-provoking, and the story is compelling with it not feeling too safe or ordinary this time. It is neither over-simplified or convoluted, just right, while the denouement has the right amount of surprise. Love the character of Alice, who we also learn more about, and Blandine Bellavoir is a breath of fresh air, bringing a lot of charm, elegance and spirit that was much needed. The supporting cast do more than capably and Samuel Labarthe is a little more comfortable here.
Do still think though that Laurence is an unpleasant character and although it doesn't clash as much as in their first episode the chemistry between him and Alice has not near the same spark as with Larosiere and Lampion (the former a far more interesting character and the two gelling quite a lot faster).
In summary, very well done. 8/10
A grotesque adaptation
SceneByScene16 January 2023
Warning: Spoilers
I first found out about this drama series when I saw it being broadcast online in late December 2022. Intrigued, as a fan of Agatha Christie's tales, I knew I had to try it out.
So I keenly started watching the first episode that was available to watch online - "Meurtre au Champagne" (S2 E2).
And . . . Within just 14 minutes I wanted to switch it off!!
WHY oh WHY do other 'writers' think they can steal Agatha Christie's plots - that are absolute gems - and render them into a mishmash of something completely different?! If a writer can't create a good story themselves, that doesn't give them the right to do a Frankenstein job (no pun intended!) on another author's works.
For years, here in the UK, we have (IMHO!) seen Sarah Phelps near destroy A. C.'s work, in Phelps' TV script adaptations. I haven't the heart to waste my time explaining why those versions of A. C.'s brilliant tales have all been so wrong.
Nor do I have much time to waste explaining why THIS horror of a drama is so bad. Except to say: it just feels so wrong! The concept is a disaster as a TV series, & shouldn't have been continued beyond the first draft.
There is no Poirot, Marple, nor any of A. C.'s chosen detectives, including the two leads from the original story of the novel 'Sparkling Cyanide'. Instead the current favourite character of choice in TV - the young, sassy, attractive but independent, female journalist - is summarily dumped into the story as one of the key detecting characters.
The scenes are carelessly put together, with no flow between them.
And the drama's overall feel is crude and coarse.
It's not so much a pastiche of the novel, as a caricature of the A. C. style & story! THIS story had practically nothing in common with the plot of 'Sparkling Cyanide'.
I have to say: this French drama series is not alone in missing the mark. Not all the film & TV versions of A. C. do justice to the author - and they often use very different styles to put across a story. Some adaptations work, some don't. The 1980s' US TV version of 'Sparkling Cyanide' was not worth the viewing. Nor was the UK TV version of the 2000s. But the book IS a good read. So why not make it into a good viewing experience, & transcribe it with style & flair?! A. C. Herself expanded the plot of a short story - 'The Yellow Iris' - into the full-length novel that she named 'Sparkling Cyanide'. If the short story was worth that development, then it should be transcribed with more dexterity still, for a screen adaptation.
The episode seems to be just an excuse to portray the lifestyle, fashions & furbelows of the 1950s. But with the usual (these days) TV modernisations of all the societal rules & regs that WERE standard in those days. Completely changing the moral code of a bygone era is NOT an acceptable alteration/update. And a viewing of the lovely fashions of the '50s does not a plot make! Much was the same in the TV series 'Ms Fisher's Modern Murder Mysteries' that was set in the 1960s. And the 1920s-set 'Frankie Drake Mysteries'. But THIS drama series of A. C.'s tales really took the biscuit! At least the other two series are not versions of a well-known work, and are not by one of the most published authors in the world - and this fame for good reason.
As if just showing the viewers what the lifestyle was in a past decade made up for a thin, overly stylized plot! A detective story should at least have a good crime storyline!
I don't like to critique something mid-sentence, as it were - it seems unfair; so I truly tried to watch this single episode further than the initial 14 minutes. But I found that I quite literally couldn't bear to watch this over-keyed tale. I kept wanting to get up and do something PRODUCTIVE with my evening! Anything would have been better than enduring this insult of a TV show! Then I realised my brain had auto-switched off from absorbing the pictures moving across the TV screen, and the script with it. This meant that my head gave itself the break it needed: the old grey matter no longer needed to process/absorb any more of the trashy adaptation. A complete recoil from viewing! What a relief! So - after a total of 40 minutes of watching - I switched off the viewing screen itself - and retired to recover, to get over my shock. Over a nice cup of tea, as well . . . How delightfully British, I'd like to think! ,-)
So I keenly started watching the first episode that was available to watch online - "Meurtre au Champagne" (S2 E2).
And . . . Within just 14 minutes I wanted to switch it off!!
WHY oh WHY do other 'writers' think they can steal Agatha Christie's plots - that are absolute gems - and render them into a mishmash of something completely different?! If a writer can't create a good story themselves, that doesn't give them the right to do a Frankenstein job (no pun intended!) on another author's works.
For years, here in the UK, we have (IMHO!) seen Sarah Phelps near destroy A. C.'s work, in Phelps' TV script adaptations. I haven't the heart to waste my time explaining why those versions of A. C.'s brilliant tales have all been so wrong.
Nor do I have much time to waste explaining why THIS horror of a drama is so bad. Except to say: it just feels so wrong! The concept is a disaster as a TV series, & shouldn't have been continued beyond the first draft.
There is no Poirot, Marple, nor any of A. C.'s chosen detectives, including the two leads from the original story of the novel 'Sparkling Cyanide'. Instead the current favourite character of choice in TV - the young, sassy, attractive but independent, female journalist - is summarily dumped into the story as one of the key detecting characters.
The scenes are carelessly put together, with no flow between them.
And the drama's overall feel is crude and coarse.
It's not so much a pastiche of the novel, as a caricature of the A. C. style & story! THIS story had practically nothing in common with the plot of 'Sparkling Cyanide'.
I have to say: this French drama series is not alone in missing the mark. Not all the film & TV versions of A. C. do justice to the author - and they often use very different styles to put across a story. Some adaptations work, some don't. The 1980s' US TV version of 'Sparkling Cyanide' was not worth the viewing. Nor was the UK TV version of the 2000s. But the book IS a good read. So why not make it into a good viewing experience, & transcribe it with style & flair?! A. C. Herself expanded the plot of a short story - 'The Yellow Iris' - into the full-length novel that she named 'Sparkling Cyanide'. If the short story was worth that development, then it should be transcribed with more dexterity still, for a screen adaptation.
The episode seems to be just an excuse to portray the lifestyle, fashions & furbelows of the 1950s. But with the usual (these days) TV modernisations of all the societal rules & regs that WERE standard in those days. Completely changing the moral code of a bygone era is NOT an acceptable alteration/update. And a viewing of the lovely fashions of the '50s does not a plot make! Much was the same in the TV series 'Ms Fisher's Modern Murder Mysteries' that was set in the 1960s. And the 1920s-set 'Frankie Drake Mysteries'. But THIS drama series of A. C.'s tales really took the biscuit! At least the other two series are not versions of a well-known work, and are not by one of the most published authors in the world - and this fame for good reason.
As if just showing the viewers what the lifestyle was in a past decade made up for a thin, overly stylized plot! A detective story should at least have a good crime storyline!
I don't like to critique something mid-sentence, as it were - it seems unfair; so I truly tried to watch this single episode further than the initial 14 minutes. But I found that I quite literally couldn't bear to watch this over-keyed tale. I kept wanting to get up and do something PRODUCTIVE with my evening! Anything would have been better than enduring this insult of a TV show! Then I realised my brain had auto-switched off from absorbing the pictures moving across the TV screen, and the script with it. This meant that my head gave itself the break it needed: the old grey matter no longer needed to process/absorb any more of the trashy adaptation. A complete recoil from viewing! What a relief! So - after a total of 40 minutes of watching - I switched off the viewing screen itself - and retired to recover, to get over my shock. Over a nice cup of tea, as well . . . How delightfully British, I'd like to think! ,-)
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
