There are more actors who have played Poirot running about than actors who have played James Bond.
John Malkovich is an inspired choice on paper. He is both an Anglophile and a Francophile. He is also an actor who makes others raise their game.
The bad news is I very much liked David Suchet's version of The ABC Murders. Sara Phelps left me underwhelmed with her adaptation of Witness for the Prosecution, so there were doubts if this three part story could succeed.
This Poirot is older and greyer, he dyes his beard black and it runs. Set in the 1930s there is a disliking of foreigners in Britain and this includes Poirot. No longer welcome in Scotland Yard like in the old days of Inspector Japp who has retired.
In fact this upstart Belgian has been investigated and been found wanting. Japp's replacement Inspector Crome wants Poirot to prove his existence like he was some sort of modern day Windrush immigrant who needs to find his papers from 60 years ago.
Gone is the art deco look of Suchet's Poirot. This is a grimy, dirty Britain of the 1930s. A landlady is pimping out her own daughter.
Poirot is receiving letters, Scotland Yard are not taking him seriously. When the murders start, it is Poirot who is accused of withholding evidence.
This is a curious and fascinating new take. Christie wrote about a Belgian who came to Britain as a refugee but never delved much on how difficult life would had been for him.
I liked it, maybe it was a bit slow to get going. There was never any doubt that Malkovich would rise to the challenge. A thoughtful, reflective, even a troubled man who had seen better days. Rupert Grint is unrecognisable as Crome.