The Only Rated-R Poirot Movie - The ABC Murders

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 ก.พ. 2025
  • A comparison of the Agatha Christie novel The ABC Murders to its 2018 TV mini-series adaptation. (Ok so technically it's not a movie, and therefore technically not rated R, but still.)

ความคิดเห็น • 136

  • @lukacunningham342
    @lukacunningham342 2 ปีที่แล้ว +40

    “He goes to Japp who gives him friendly advice then has a heart attack and dies”
    *the fact you said that with no hesitation makes me laugh so hard* 😂

    • @1234cheerful
      @1234cheerful หลายเดือนก่อน

      it's all in the delivery!

  • @jucadvgv3449
    @jucadvgv3449 ปีที่แล้ว +10

    'the choxolate box' about poirot going back to belgium and interaction with others from his policeman days and other people he knew in his pre-ww1 days

  • @johnwhitehead7693
    @johnwhitehead7693 2 ปีที่แล้ว +42

    "Tragedy isn't as powerful if there are too many different kinds of it in one story." That is very well said. I am not thrilled by the penchant to make everything as dark and bleak as possible; Christie's stories have their own integrity, with the tragic elements having their proper place in the whole.

  • @vulpes82
    @vulpes82 2 ปีที่แล้ว +35

    Thank you for covering this one! My entire experience watching it was one long exclamation of "WHAT?!!!!" and "WHY?!!!!" from John Malkovich's casting to the priest backstory to Japp's death. It is, though, as you say, compelling. It's just an utterly bizarre adaptation.

    • @beckyspitzack4265
      @beckyspitzack4265 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Thanks....Christie's ABC Murders tight package........bizarre adaptation.

    • @scottrobertjr.9631
      @scottrobertjr.9631 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      “It makes no damn sense. Compels me, though.” -Benoit Blanc

    • @akshaytrayner1960
      @akshaytrayner1960 21 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      Oh boy this was an utter mess poirot backstory was so pointless suchet hinted at his cathlosim which I liked they hints to his story we didn't need it

    • @mqureshi79
      @mqureshi79 15 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Malkovich was just awful in this…

  • @michellew8639
    @michellew8639 2 ปีที่แล้ว +26

    thank you for this review! I will watch any and all Christie adaptations, but I couldn't get halfway through this one. I don't mind artistic license, reinterpretation, etc., but I, personally, have issue with undoing the 'canon' of a character and expecting us to 'un-know' what we already know about that character. Playing Poirot goofy or serious is fine, adding details not in the books is also fine, but making his whole career a lie, Poirot as a liar, well that's not fine.

    • @beckyspitzack4265
      @beckyspitzack4265 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      that is NOT fine.......thanks

    • @suzie_lovescats
      @suzie_lovescats ปีที่แล้ว +4

      Agreed, we all know he was a police man in the Belgian police force in Brussels which is explained in the episode The Chocolate Box.

    • @1234cheerful
      @1234cheerful หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @@suzie_lovescats His being from Belgium was even explained in The Mysterious Affair At Styles.

    • @suzie_lovescats
      @suzie_lovescats หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@1234cheerfulYes I know 😉

  • @philipmonihan8222
    @philipmonihan8222 2 ปีที่แล้ว +54

    Yeah, I remember when they were promoting this. It looked yucky. I wanted to show support to Rupert Grint but... you just don't kill Japp. You don't.

    • @92Mutu
      @92Mutu 2 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      I agree. The new adabtation looked different and I was ready to give it a change. Because who knows, maybe it could be good as a grimm tale. But then they killed Japp and I had to walk away from it. You just don't disrespect Japp like that!

    • @philipmonihan8222
      @philipmonihan8222 2 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      @@92Mutu Poirot's entire posse is very precious to my family

    • @1234cheerful
      @1234cheerful หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      In that case just put Grint in the role of Japp. It might be weird but not as weird as killing off the main police contact. Like killing off Watson! or even Hastings (who eventually was retired to Argentina, I believe).

    • @philipmonihan8222
      @philipmonihan8222 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@1234cheerful Exactly!

  • @Unownshipper
    @Unownshipper 2 ปีที่แล้ว +29

    This gives me a greater appreciation for the Suchet version of ABC. Overall, I think it's solid, one of the finest of that era, but there are some creative choices I dislike; namely, the closeups and whispering used to demonstrate Cust's anxiety. It's meant to be disorienting and spooky but (like the singing in Hickory Dickory Dock or Buckle My Shoe) comes off as goofy and childish. Still, I'll take that over needlessly added misery. I still like And Then There Were None, but it's feeling more like Sarah Phelps is missing the point.

    • @philipmonihan8222
      @philipmonihan8222 2 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      Suchet's ABC Murders is Agatha Christie comfort food. It's a superb production that's just really nice to have around. Everything the BBC has made has been needlessly depressing and yucky.

    • @Anita-pf1hy
      @Anita-pf1hy ปีที่แล้ว +6

      Which idiot thought it was a good idea to get rid of Japp….? He/she should be sacked….!!

    • @suzie_lovescats
      @suzie_lovescats ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@Anita-pf1hySomeone must name and shame this person!

    • @HuntingViolets
      @HuntingViolets 10 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Yea, why make them active murderers? That is missing the point.

  • @banannakis6723
    @banannakis6723 ปีที่แล้ว +19

    "My main takeaway is that although an adaptation doesn't have to be just like the book in order to be a good film. It's a shame whenever an adaptation throws away something of value." Louder for the people in the back. Too many adaptations of Christie or other books, seem to think that they need to change almost everything about a book to bring it to film. Which usually leads to the film being an empty shell that has only a flimsy foundation to stand on.

  • @maddyrosenberg6802
    @maddyrosenberg6802 13 วันที่ผ่านมา +6

    You put it perfectly. Phelps gives you unrelenting bleakness, Christie's underlying whimsy is what makes the darkness tolerable. Phelps doesn't get what makes these stories memorable to so many.

    • @HuntingViolets
      @HuntingViolets 10 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

      Phelps’ idea that she is freeing Christie from the constraints she wrote under is wild too.

    • @quantumvideoscz2052
      @quantumvideoscz2052 2 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @@HuntingViolets Major "fixed your art for you" vibes.

    • @HuntingViolets
      @HuntingViolets 2 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @ Sadly, yes.

  • @Natilra
    @Natilra 2 ปีที่แล้ว +17

    Yeah, I was totally flummoxed when this one came out.
    Could've knocked me down with a feather when they got to E
    What exactly does Poirot being a priest with a tragic backstory add to anything?
    I liked Cust's condition making him more likely to question his own innocence but WTF with the shoes?
    Have you seen Sewell's Pale Horse?
    Not sure if it's Phelps but felt very much in the same line as this one.

    • @Unownshipper
      @Unownshipper 2 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      I can kind of see what they're going for, but it sounds like a botched execution.
      One of the things I really admire about the Suchet version is the focus on Poirot's religion and how it impacts him. This is perhaps best showcased in the Suchet adaptation of Murder on the Orient Express. You get a perfect contrast between Poirot giving thanks to God for blessing him with the mind and talents to be a detective while another character prays for favors and protection. Then at the end, you see Poirot struggle to rationalize what is just with what is right.
      I recall an interview where Christie was asked about Poirot's spirituality and she gave kind of a mechanical response; something along the lines of "Well he's Belgian, so obviously he's a Catholic." As far as I remember, Christie just treated it as a matter of fact (the way one might say, "Well this character is from Texas, so obviously they wear boots.") and didn't dive very deeply into what it meant for Poirot to be a Catholic and how his faith might impact his life and work (which is understandable as she herself wouldn't know). It sounds a bit like the showrunners here were also trying to explore that aspect, but just didn't do a very convincing job.

  • @miriamportugal4703
    @miriamportugal4703 2 ปีที่แล้ว +14

    Excellent video! I think it's amazing to find someone who thinks as I do about Agatha Christie's novels! I remember reading this book as a teenager, before Anibal Lecter, Jack the Ripper was the only serial killer I had heard about. Agatha Christie invented a sub genre, in my little informed opinion. She fulled me yet again on this one. I loved the David Suchet version and I didn't like the John Malkovich one. Keneth Bragragh is a joke as Poirot, to say it bluntly. Again, congratulations on the video!

  • @CoffeesChypresBooks
    @CoffeesChypresBooks หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    I was fascinated by the Malkovitch Poirot, and even wrote him a a fan letter telling him so, but he was not AC’s Poirot. Ac’s Poirot is a Bon vivant and not given to denial. Loved the advice M’s Poirot gave Betty’s sister - he gave her the exact attention and words she needed to hear. That scene made my day.

  • @hlsilets7640
    @hlsilets7640 2 ปีที่แล้ว +17

    Totally agree, Miles!! Sir Kenneth is absolutely horrible. Blech! Who keeps giving him money to produce his awful adaptations?? That's a real mystery.

    • @ohsweetmystery
      @ohsweetmystery หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Branagh is a legend in his own mind.

  • @Nana-Sheri
    @Nana-Sheri ปีที่แล้ว +14

    Malkovich version was depressing, mocking Poirot, I'll never watch it again

  • @glendam1148
    @glendam1148 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Miles, you are one heck of a narrator! Such inflections! Such pauses! Such sighs!
    And - such insights!
    I just love listening/watching your videos. 😍👏⭐️

  • @MAB_Canada
    @MAB_Canada หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    Thank you for explaining why I really dislike the new adaptations of Agatha Christie works. I had thought it was just because they strayed so far from the original. Now I realize it’s also the dark slant that’s putting me off.

  • @micheldejong1813
    @micheldejong1813 ปีที่แล้ว +11

    The thing that bothered me the most about Phelps' adaptation is that she made it so political - it being developed in the midst of the nationwide debate about the Brexit. She played up the xenophobia in the UK during the 1930s, with everyone being a supporter of the British fascist movement - that in reality only ever won a small percentage (7-8% I believe). Thus making this adaptation a nasty bit of propaganda.

  • @sarahd7447
    @sarahd7447 12 วันที่ผ่านมา +4

    I think Christie chose the B to be Bexhill because when the book was written it was a popular south coast resort with a young fashionable crowd. The pavilion is very famous (it’s now a bit dominated by retirees!). So this is another clue that unfashionable and down at heel Cusk wouldn’t have thought to go there unless he was sent.

  • @arnesahlen2704
    @arnesahlen2704 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Branagh strikes me like a man who is the self-styled President of his own fan club.

  • @henrykujawa4427
    @henrykujawa4427 10 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    I agree, the Suchet version is one of the VERY BEST in the series.
    Crazy enough... THE ALPHABET MURDERS was my introduction to Agatha Christie. But I'd completely forgotten it by the time DEATH ON THE NILE came out in 1978! In the mid-80s, I taped it... and could not believe what the hell I was watching. The ONLY part I had any memory of at all, was when the clown went off the diving board at the beginning. The rest of the film, fits in that category of "completely-insane comedies" of the mid-late 60s, which I would include with HELP!, WHAT'S NEW PUSSYCAT, HEAD, THE MAGIC CHRISTIAN, THE BEST HOUSE IN LONDON, and others.
    My favorite moment is when Poirot crosses paths with Miss Marple & Mr. Stringer. Her words imply she's already figured it out, and her expression tells us she thinks Poirot is an IDIOT!
    The sub-plot about trying to safely get Poirot out of the country is too much like a later McCLOUD overseas episode, and makes no sense in the context of any Poirot story.
    When I got to the end, and found out it tied in DIRECTLY with the very first scene in the film, I was STUNNED. I yelled at my TV: "The writer was PAYING ATTENTION! I'd NEVER have guessed!!!" Turns out, director Frank Tashlin did several Jerry Lewis movies-- and BUGS BUNNY cartoons. I guess that explains something....... (Apparently, for awhile, Tony Randall was the go-to guy if Peter Sellers was out of your budget.)

  • @brianbommarito3376
    @brianbommarito3376 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Don’t forget that in this adaption Poirot’s neighbor has a pin that indicates she belongs to the British Union of Fascists (who were sympathizers with Mussolini and Hitler, from the group’s founding in 1931 until they were banned in the U.K. in 1940). But this doesn’t exist other than to let us know what is already clear. NEARLY EVERYONE hates Poirot in this film and is constantly reminding him of the fact.) Also, if any of Poirot’s mail was delivered to her address, her being a British Fascist, I have a feeling that it’s more believable that she would burn the letter rather than deliver it to him.

  • @firstchoice7761
    @firstchoice7761 2 ปีที่แล้ว +11

    I never finished watching this series. I tried to ignore the fact that Malkovich didn't even have a french accent, but I just couldn't.

  • @alantheinquirer7658
    @alantheinquirer7658 18 วันที่ผ่านมา +3

    I am no purist but I despise Phelps' so-called adaptations.
    It's one thing to try to put an individual stamp on a famous story, it's entirely another to change the tone, the protagonist's personality, and so on. Her works are 'in name only'. If I want to watch a dark (especially in her choice of lighting), gritty, violent and sexual thriller then I'd look anywhere other than to Christie. Even in interview, Phelps claims that she is only re-writing the story that Christie would've written had she been a modern author; ego too big to be silenced? Poirot was a policeman before evacuating to Britain at the outbreak of the Great War. This motivated his sense of justice and experience in crime detection. It's never EVER mentioned he was a priest DURING the war!
    I appreciate that we should watch any production on it's own merits. For instance, I'm a big Holmes fan and enjoyed the Robert Downey Jr. outings, the Benedict Cumberbatch series far less. But it appears that Phelps has only used the Christie estate to further her own personal creation rather than the original work.
    As an aside, as a young teen when I first read A.B.C. novel, the biggest clue to me was that every location used really existed ... apart from Churston. This in itself drew my attention to the circumstances of that crime.

  • @brianbommarito3376
    @brianbommarito3376 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    Here’s what I hate about Sarah Phelps’ writing. She deliberately writes in stuff that is darker than midnight on a new moon, stuff that is not really authentic Christie or even remotely close to it. Christie did have some dark things in her books, but there was also an illusory air of gentlemanly well-being that existed in her mysteries that made it more interesting to watch as the investigation slowly unraveled the character’s many dark secrets. Some fairly innocent, some very dark. In all of Phelps’ adaptions, things are dark pretty much out of the gate and will continue to be that way for almost the entire run. I actually enjoyed Malkovich as Poirot, but I think his origin story would be better suited with an original character. It’s totally misplaced as Poirot. The worst Sarah Phelps adaption, to my mind, was The Pale Horse.

    • @MysteryMiles
      @MysteryMiles  7 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      Interesting. I still have to watch Pale Horse.

    • @henrykujawa4427
      @henrykujawa4427 10 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      There've been several films of "classic" characters where screenwriters have infuriated me by slapping "origin" stories on them that are COMPLETELY wrong and violates any known history of the characters. This includes CONAN THE BARBARIAN (1982), THE SHADOW (1994) and THE SAINT (1997). I'm a huge fan of Leslie Charteris, so the latter really annoyed me... even more so when I eventually learned what they'd really done. The 1997 movie is actually an ADAPTATION of Louis Joseph Vance's 1914 novel THE LONE WOLF, about "Michael Lanyard" (NOT his real name!!), a professional thief, who's coerced into pulling a particular job, but reforms when he falls in love with a woman. Simon Templar was never a professional thief, he was a crusader for justice who came from a wealthy family, and, Simon Templar was his real name. There should have been a LAWSUIT over that thing.

  • @edwardlecore141
    @edwardlecore141 19 วันที่ผ่านมา +3

    So many issues in this adaptation give off a sense that the creatives behind it have a rather disturbing pathology. I am all for imagination, but when it keeps going to certain places unprompted...

  • @Nyder77
    @Nyder77 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    I try to avoid having preset notions of what Christie should be like, as I like seeing how others see tjr stories. So for me, the big problem with this isn't the off-the-shelf 'darkness', which gets tedious but is a valid stylistic choicr. I liked Malkovich in the role he plays, even if it's a divergent version of the character.
    But the change in motivation... for heaven's sake. ABC is one of the finest Christies because it's a psychological thriller that turns out to be something quite different (which I can't reveal because spoilers innit). With this, the twist is... it really was a game of cat and mouse.
    Why? Why would you change the most memorably brilliant element? It's like doing Orient Express with the killer being a guy who broke into the train from outside. What you're left with is the stuff Christie deliberately cast aside and, as you note, lightly mocked. It's such a perverse decision.

  • @bruh_hahaha
    @bruh_hahaha 2 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    The Malkovich version is a great adaptation, but the Suchet version will always be #1 for me. 🍿🍿🍿

  • @petiaivailova2563
    @petiaivailova2563 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    The terrible thing about this adaptation is that absolutely all the characters are presented as run-of-the-mill, pathetic people.
    Separately - everything looks dirty and ugly, including Poirot, who is a millionaire.
    I remember the explanation of the creators was that often in costume dramas things are idealized. What are they trying to say - that this is the world of ordinary people, presented realistically? I am an ordinary person and I am surrounded by ordinary people, and most of them are not nasty and disgusting (there are some, but they are a minority). So if the people who made this adaptation think this is the norm, they're probably disgusting themselves.

  • @reneevolak5266
    @reneevolak5266 2 ปีที่แล้ว +11

    I detested this version of the "The ABC Murders"! Sorry, it just didn't work for me. And I'm not strictly a Christie purest. YUCK!

  • @jimkoss3318
    @jimkoss3318 18 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    One thing I don’t understand is that every Poirot I’ve ever seen, from Tony Randall to David Suchet to John Malkovich is Bald. Poirot loved his great full head of hair to go along with his mustache. He even went so far to have a toupee made for himself in ‘Curtain’.

    • @HuntingViolets
      @HuntingViolets 10 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Yes, I think they get carried away with his “egg-shaped” head. He’s not supposed toe as bald as an egg; it’s just the shape. Peter Ustinov and Albert Finney’s Poirots we’re not balding, though. Also, you might want to edit Tony Curtis to Randall.

    • @jimkoss3318
      @jimkoss3318 10 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @ I IMDB’d Ustinov and Finney. I haven’t seen Ustinov’s version and completely forgot Finney’s. You’re correct, don’t remember if that was auto-correct or me. Fixing.

    • @HuntingViolets
      @HuntingViolets 10 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@jimkoss3318 Ustinov is fun (although not much like Poirot physically). I really enjoyed _Death on the Nile._

  • @sovietblobfish
    @sovietblobfish ปีที่แล้ว +5

    i was so disappoinetd with what this adaptation did to the killers motivation, much preferred christie's twist
    the darker tone was also not my speed, but that could have been tolerable if it maintained the motivation

  • @alidabaxter5849
    @alidabaxter5849 28 วันที่ผ่านมา +5

    The ABC Muurders has one of the best plots of any Agatha Christie book and the David Suchet version is perfect. I completely loathe the Malkovich version which makes everybody loathsome. Branagh as Poirot is simply intolerable.

  • @ThornOfSociety
    @ThornOfSociety 2 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Seems the consensus I have seen of the adaptations by this writer is people wondering why not just write your own characters and stories if you will change the existing ones so much. Brannagh by comparison seems to be more faithful if a bit over the top. I do wonder how this one would be received if it had been anyone other than Malkovich in the role or indeed with completely original characters and just taking inspiration from the original story.

    • @quantumvideoscz2052
      @quantumvideoscz2052 2 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Why don't they write their own characters? Because nobody would ever watch that. But by slapping a famous name on it, they can sell it, even if it's so bad it offends the very concept of quality.

  • @1234cheerful
    @1234cheerful หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Rupert Grint! I am always surprised when I see him in anything, considering what everyone said about his acting in the You Know Who series. I always enjoy seeing him though. He looks really good and in character here!

  • @catherineroberts9084
    @catherineroberts9084 4 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Sarah Phelps=Bad Christie

  • @bkatbamna
    @bkatbamna 16 วันที่ผ่านมา +3

    This was absolutely horrible. The Christie estate only approved them because they must have needed money.

  • @araneus1
    @araneus1 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    love your work

  • @kriitikko
    @kriitikko 2 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    I haven't really been much of a fan of these new, darker adaptations of Christie's works but I did enjoy this one and that is 100% because of John Malkovich. I wouldn't mind seeing him in the role again.

    • @philipmonihan8222
      @philipmonihan8222 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      They lost me after And Then There Were None. It just wasn't fun. I kept hearing about the weird changes they made and... the whole series just died for me.

    • @Unownshipper
      @Unownshipper 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@philipmonihan8222 I appreciate the miniseries version of And Then There Were None because it feels like the first version to take the source material seriously. The 40s version has this odd, almost comedic tone and the other versions deviated too far or focus too much on the manufactured romance.
      The novel is a grim story about justice and hypocrisy and though I feel like the Sarah Phelps version wallows in dark spectacle a bit too much to be called a 100% faithful adaptation, I appreciate that it goes in a direction the other English adaptations had not dared.

    • @philipmonihan8222
      @philipmonihan8222 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@Unownshipper I reckon that's a fair assessment.

    • @HuntingViolets
      @HuntingViolets 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      The 1940s version was based more on Christie’s stage play adaptation. I enjoyed it, but I also always wanted to do one with the novel’s ending. The Russian one is good. I didn’t like the change in the murders in the Phelps version, but it’s good enough.

    • @HuntingViolets
      @HuntingViolets 10 วันที่ผ่านมา

      The Russian version has a better take on using the novel’s ending, although it also has a couple of dark missteps.

  • @karlkarlos3545
    @karlkarlos3545 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Sorry but when John Malkovich pulls that French accent (Belgian!), all I can think of is his role in Johny English.

  • @judithmargret5972
    @judithmargret5972 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Loved David Suchet, hated Malkovitch's, I watched about 15 minutes, couldn't watch anymore.
    One of my favourites.

  • @moonie-zw5by
    @moonie-zw5by 22 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    The Malkovich version was under saturated. His Poriot was nothing like the original but still compelling. The only part that used the original and really had emotional punch was Lady Clarkes reactions to Thoras' manipulations.

  • @Ivan_King2.0
    @Ivan_King2.0 14 วันที่ผ่านมา

    7:37, the wrong man that was stabbed, is that the host of Grand Designs Kevin mcCloud??

  • @MadameChristie
    @MadameChristie 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Hey, I saw you just did a Marple, but I was kinda hoping you make space to talk about that show's adaptation of Pale Horse or Endless Night as those are are two non-Marple stories that I think they managed to fit Marple into and are overall good episodes.

    • @MysteryMiles
      @MysteryMiles  2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Thanks for the suggestions! Eventually I will cover both of those. I'm waiting till I see the new Pale Horse to decide whether to compare that one, the Miss Marple, or the 1997 version to the book. For Endless Night, I'll be comparing the Miss Marple, though fair warning, I'll probably have mixed things to say about it.

    • @MadameChristie
      @MadameChristie 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@MysteryMiles honestly? I think I like Marple Pale Horse better thwn the miniseries if only because the miniseries went way off the deep end in in the last chunk. The Marple episodes at least kept the basics in tact. And JJ Field was really good as Osbourne IMO.
      As for Endless Night? We can all agree to disagree. I'm sure there's stuff there that wasn't great. But to me at least they got the feel of the story right.

  • @firstchoice7761
    @firstchoice7761 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Why did I turn off Malkovich's Poirot Movie? He didn't have a French accent.

    • @volodymyrbilyk555
      @volodymyrbilyk555 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Yeah, he talks like some old Valmont

    • @HuntingViolets
      @HuntingViolets 10 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Or even Belgian.

  • @OffRampTourist
    @OffRampTourist 19 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

    Well done.

  • @chiccachannel
    @chiccachannel 17 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    Nope! For me David Suchet is THE Poirot as much as Joan Hickson is THE Miss Marple❤😊

  • @notdeadjustyet8136
    @notdeadjustyet8136 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I didn't want to watch it at first, I usually dislike inaccurate adaptations, but I quite liked it. it's a good series & even a decent adaptation, if one doesn't expect OUR regular Poirot. I enjoyed most characters, even the new Poirot, who works for the story. The show kept the key elements whilst feeling fresh & memorable. What I disliked the most was the rushed final reveal & the reason Poirot finds the killer (fingerprints?! 🤔 in Poirot, come on!). I didn't mind that Franklin was a bit unhinged in the end. Someone who invented a serial killer to mask the murder of his own brother must be antisocial & narcissistic anyway.
    I actually prefer ABC to And Then There Were None,which would've been perfect, had they not turned an indirect guilt into very direct murders. The genius and the philosophical question of the book lied it the fact that these ppl were a lot like us. It seems the writers missed the point & made it less uncomfortable bcs they wanted to do the opposite.

  • @jjmboston5832
    @jjmboston5832 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Hate the Tony Randall ALPHABET MURDERS. I own it on VHS and have only watched it once. I think he would have been a good Poirot with a better script. Strange enough Randall's version of THE MAN IN THE BROWN SUIT is pretty bad too, with him running around in drag. Hated the "surprise" ending about Poirot in this version. Overall did not like it.

  • @ap9970
    @ap9970 17 วันที่ผ่านมา

    My biggest problem with The Malkovich version was the location used for Andover.

  • @gregdeandrea1450
    @gregdeandrea1450 2 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    Hey. You watched this one so I don't have to. Gotta be honest, I watched the first few minutes and my eyes rolled so hard I started vomiting casino tokens. I'm a comic book fan, so I've seen FAAAAAAR too many overly dark adaptations of superheroes and these adaptations felt like much the same thing. It doesn't seem AS bad as what I was afraid of... But still not GOOD. Not what I feel anyone was asking for from a Christie adaptation.
    Say what you want about Brannaugh, and I can say plenty. He nailed the TONE. Which, as Margaret Rutherford can attest, is actually more important than book accuracy

    • @HuntingViolets
      @HuntingViolets 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Do you think he nailed the tone?

    • @gregdeandrea1450
      @gregdeandrea1450 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@HuntingViolets To a point... Yeah. Like everything Branaugh has ever touched it feels like a neon lit carnival of ornate, bizarrely rich, madness. It works for Christie in that regard.

  • @PassiveAgressive319
    @PassiveAgressive319 20 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Can you cover the reworking of witness for the prosecution? Is it Sarah Phelps too? I honestly found it was a bizarre interpretation

    • @MysteryMiles
      @MysteryMiles  20 วันที่ผ่านมา

      I agree, very bizarre. I'm currently scripting a video for WftP. I was planning to focus mainly on the 1957 film, but I'll see what I can work in about the Phelps.

    • @PassiveAgressive319
      @PassiveAgressive319 20 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @ Thanks!

  • @SMHH....
    @SMHH.... 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I tried to watch it, really I did. But finally switched channels after about 20 min.
    Won't ever bother finishing it. Malkovich seemed to be replaying his character from In the Line of Fire. Completely unlikable Poirot.

  • @lauraholmes2402
    @lauraholmes2402 18 วันที่ผ่านมา

    I’m kind of mixed on this adaptation. I’m not a Christie purest by any means, but I hesitate to call this an adaptation. But I actually really enjoyed Andrew Buchan’s performance, I generally find any performance of his worth a look.

  • @mchelvantx
    @mchelvantx 19 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

    I watched it and thought it was just horrible. Not Christie at all. Just using the names of the characters, not even th actual characters.

  • @EGChurchofChrist
    @EGChurchofChrist 24 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    Too ugly and violent. And then there were none is dark but it has great actors and a rare correct ending.

  • @CoffeesChypresBooks
    @CoffeesChypresBooks หลายเดือนก่อน

    Being a priest suited this Poirot, but not Agatha’s Poirot.

  • @floraposteschild4184
    @floraposteschild4184 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Phelps's adaptations always get eye rolls from me, and this one is a 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

  • @quantumvideoscz2052
    @quantumvideoscz2052 2 วันที่ผ่านมา

    This is essentially what happens when you let a modern writer touch a good story. An insult to the very idea of quality, unnecessary disgusting scenes (as you point out), just overall a crime against writing. A crime against the very concept of something being even somewhat ok, not to mention good.

  • @markw1331
    @markw1331 23 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    The Sarah Phelps adaptations have been mostly trash (the ending of Ordeal by Innocence was laugh out loud absurd and Witness for the Prosecution was a crime in itself). And Then There Were None was pretty decent. The ABC Murders was the next best. I was impressed with how well Cust was incorporated in to the plot though the more extreme aspects of his behaviour was off putting. I did not follow the motive for the main murder at all in the show, despite having read the novel several times. So 6-7/10 (I would give ATTWN 8/10, Ordeal 3/10 and Witness a negative score.)

    • @quantumvideoscz2052
      @quantumvideoscz2052 2 วันที่ผ่านมา

      7/10? Jesus, if this is a 7/10 then Brannaugh's Poirot films must be about a 999999999999999999/10 just for the quality gap to be sufficiently represented without being an offence to the films, which, let me say, are terrible in their own right.

  • @christophersmith3005
    @christophersmith3005 ปีที่แล้ว

    I enjoyed the mini-series, which I stumbled across while surfing Amazon Prime a few days ago. I'm not an Agatha Christie purist, so I had no knowledge of the changes in the adaptation from book to series. The last Agatha Christie novel that I read was _And Then There Were None_ which was an assignment for Jr. High School English class. I recently learned the original title of the novel...look it up.
    My main problem with the mini series was the flashbacks. They made the choice for John Malkovich to play the younger version of the main character, Hercule Poirot. To me, this was a bad choice and took me out of the flow of the story. Maybe it was vanity on Malkovich's part, but I always find it to be disorienting when a flashback requires the actor to be considerably younger. Cast a younger actor or de-age him with CGI.

    • @beckyspitzack4265
      @beckyspitzack4265 ปีที่แล้ว

      you have not advanced in your reading, I can tell.

  • @MrStGeorgeIllawarra
    @MrStGeorgeIllawarra 15 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

    I can't stand these Sarah Phelps let's be dark for the sake of being dark adaptations. I'd rather watch the awful ITV ones tbh.

  • @lorrainem.swartzentruber3077
    @lorrainem.swartzentruber3077 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The only Poirot I never watched.

  • @Jasper7182009
    @Jasper7182009 22 วันที่ผ่านมา

    I love the 1965 the alphabet murders with Tony Randall and Morley. I don’t find your snide comment amusing in anyway.

  • @looloo4029
    @looloo4029 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Another fun watch.😊 Thank you 🎉 PS….sorry, but I enjoy Kenneth Branagh’s adaptations, but then, I am a thoroughly devoted Christie fan, no matter who plays the lead. 😂😂😂

  • @DavidMacDowellBlue
    @DavidMacDowellBlue 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I believe Agatha Christie is under-rated for her deeply cutting criticism of the worst aspects of human behavior.
    I have written elsewhere that a really major change in an adaptation is fine so long as it is justified, and one way to do that is to create an alternate version just as compelling. Or close to. I believe this version did exactly that.
    Does strike me odd that you kinda/sorta missed the whole point of that final scene. First, it establishes the murderer's real motives, namely that his soul (as Poirot puts it) is a charnel house. Yeah he wanted the money and the title but it seemed obvious he's aching to kill somebody for a long, long, long time. He may try to blame Poirot for "lighting a match" in his mind, but Poirot knows better. Which brings up the fact that last scene is the final confrontation between murderer and detective, between someone who is literally the single worst person in that entire film and the hurting hero who defeated him, and continues to fend off this sociopath's excuses. Poirot is a man who does not flinch when he sees evil, and he sees it all the damn time. He is a man who holds the world to a high standard, the one he himself embodies. That is why he in the end is so admirable, so very much the hero we should admire so much in this all too often dark, all too often cruel, all too often desperate and stupid world.

  • @darins8756
    @darins8756 ปีที่แล้ว

    It's frustrating because Malkovich is a great actor, but so wrong for Poirot

  • @TullaRask
    @TullaRask ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Kenneth Branagh is horrible

    • @judithmargret5972
      @judithmargret5972 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      TullaRask,
      Except in Wallander, He is excellent.

    • @TullaRask
      @TullaRask 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@judithmargret5972 Maybe. I have developed a torn in my soul. It hurts when I see him somehow :).

    • @ohsweetmystery
      @ohsweetmystery หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@judithmargret5972Not nearly as great as the original series.

  • @Nana-Sheri
    @Nana-Sheri ปีที่แล้ว +1

    TV version Cusp is perfect

  • @Dianaemanuel
    @Dianaemanuel 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I think this adaptation was absolutely superb. Dark, menacing and fresh.

    • @beckyspitzack4265
      @beckyspitzack4265 ปีที่แล้ว

      You have a very low bar. This was pure trash

  • @jannetteberends8730
    @jannetteberends8730 2 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Wouldn’t it be nice if a Belgium actor played Poirot?

    • @gregdeandrea1450
      @gregdeandrea1450 2 ปีที่แล้ว +11

      I Googled "Well Known Belgian Actors" and the first result I got was Jean Claude Van Damme.
      Now I want to see that movie and ONLY that movie.

    • @philipmonihan8222
      @philipmonihan8222 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@gregdeandrea1450 You've made my day.

    • @HuntingViolets
      @HuntingViolets 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      It would be nice.

    • @suzie_lovescats
      @suzie_lovescats ปีที่แล้ว +4

      It would be nice yes. David Suchet is the only actor who even bothered to do a good accent whilst the rest of the actors who played Poirot their accents sounded fake and forced.

  • @grahambretman4010
    @grahambretman4010 19 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Never wanted to see the film as I heard it was awful, and seeing the clip here I will defintely avoid it. What accent is Malkovich even trying to do ?

  • @polemeros
    @polemeros 21 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Casting Malkovitch as Poirot made it unwatchable. All Malkovitch ever does is play Malkovitch. And he's boring.

  • @kathleenstrickland3433
    @kathleenstrickland3433 10 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I so enjoyed this movie. It was so interesting. I never guessed the ending.

  • @HokowhituESOL1
    @HokowhituESOL1 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I enjoyed the Malkovich one from the moment I decided it was not cannon. As a story, it was very moving.

  • @suzie_lovescats
    @suzie_lovescats ปีที่แล้ว +4

    After I finished watching this 💩 from the BBC (British Brainwashing Corporation) I thought to myself, thank God for David Suchet 😆

  • @valmarsiglia
    @valmarsiglia ปีที่แล้ว

    I love Malkovich but I just couldn't get past his terrible attempt at a Belgian accent.

  • @andrewinnj
    @andrewinnj 2 วันที่ผ่านมา

    John Malkovich is a terrible Poirot. He's as stiff and unnatural as an actor could ever be, with or without his comical accent.

  • @davidhardwick3816
    @davidhardwick3816 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Malkovich is the worst Poirot I've ever watched - he's truly awful and completely wrong for the part. This version of the ABC Murders is my absolute lest favorite, regardless of who is playing Poirot.

  • @atenajeretic8968
    @atenajeretic8968 12 วันที่ผ่านมา

    JM's portrayal has nothing to do with Agatha Christie's but who cares ppl will watch any thing nowadays and think it good