advertisement


The ABC Murders

Spike

Spike

pfm Member
Well after all the criticism form Daily Mail etc I give it ago. Not expecting much. However, I thoroughly enjoyed it, despite the accent on one or two occasions.
It was different and introduced a new twist with regards to Poirots backstory, which could be developed to fit with canon.
Anyone else give it ago?
 
I normally avoid TV like the plague but in an effort to spend time with the woman I love I decided to watch it with her.

I got tired with the pace of it, the programme felt like it was 1.5 hours stretched into 3 hours. High production values. I was a bit bored.

Also, my wife likes Agatha Christie books, I do not. This did not help matters.
 
Spike said:
Well after all the criticism form Daily Mail etc I give it ago. Not expecting much. However, I thoroughly enjoyed it, despite the accent on one or two occasions.
It was different and introduced a new twist with regards to Poirots backstory, which could be developed to fit with canon.
Anyone else give it ago?
Click to expand...

Agreed. I enjoyed it, well shot and decently atmospheric too.
 
I watched all three episodes last night. I thought it was good. Nicely bleak and very atmospheric. Malkovitch was well cast and I didn't have a problem with the accent. He certainly made a change from the likes of David Suchet. I'm not too sure about the reworking of Poirot's back story though. It just seemed pointless to me.
 
Overstretched 2hr film, too much time on flashbacks on a pointless backstory, nice atmosphere but not enough time on plot development. Decent cast and well made but why bother doing a Poirot story, much better to pick something different where you are not fighting the definitive version.
 
We watched all three episodes last night after getting bored with it after half an hour the night before. Still not sure whether it was three hours of wasted time or three hours of mildly interesting entertainment. I haven't read any of the books but I would imagine some of the seedier moments were not as explicit.
 
OK - Deep breath ...

It was fine apart from ...

MalKovich missed everything that was interesting about Poirot. He's fastidious, OCD and solves crimes using psychology. MalKovich's Poirot was none of these things—he wasn't even a detective ffs!

They killed off an important popular character, he didn't have his 'Watson' who he can preen to and make feel inferior—part of his personality—but who gives him the views of the 'common man' which often leads to the unravelling of the puzzle.

Phelps didn't change the murderer this time, as she did in Ordeal by Innocence—but all the characters were virtually unrecognisable from the novel.

And why add Nazis. prostitution, S&M and an extra murder that killed the plot stone dead?

Christie has sold billions of books. Phelps wrote for Eastenders.

An appalling mess. I thought ITVs Marple was bad, but this makes them seem canon.

Next year they are doing a less well-known Christie. Phelps won't be adapting it, but has threatened to do more. God help us.


Stephen
 
I found the first episode over-dramatised and over-produced and slow. Left with the feeling that it was more about the producer and writing showing off than telling the story. Not surprised to learn that it was from the same people who did the "Murder by Innocence".
 
Bob McC said:
Blimey.

I’m expecting the critics on here to start complaining about the lack of songs in last night’s The Glums any minute soon.
Click to expand...

There are always people who know in advance they are not going to enjoy something but they have to watch just so they have something to moan about. I feel sorry for them!
 
Coincidentally or perhaps deliberately, ITV3 screened the David Suchet version of this story immediately prior to the BBC's Christmas offering which may have led to a reduction in viewing numbers for the revamp. I watched briefly but much preferred the 'original' tale which was more pacy and believable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top