|
|
Post by Jan on Apr 8, 2022 14:49:41 GMT
The CGI bit I liked was the CGI-enhanced Young Branagh at the start, I remember that's what he actually looked like at that age. However that whole WW-I scene was absolutely self-indulgent and entirely pointless in the context of the film.
|
|
1,483 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Apr 8, 2022 17:37:43 GMT
Have to agree with some of the above. One thing that puzzles me: why does the spurned lover follow them around etc. surely if they had planned to bump off the heiress then they could have waited til they had settled into their country estate and she could have choked on a bone, fell off a cliff, had accident rising, been cut with a kitchen appliance etc etc. I’m just not into the plot. And the Suchet makes it much clearer how it was done. The paint thing doesn’t wash ( see what I did there?) In the Suchet we have nail polish, referred to in this one, pointlessly. If it wasn’t for Poirot’s skill they would have staged a murder for which they both had water tight alibis. And choking on a bone doesn’t make a great film! |
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Apr 8, 2022 17:46:33 GMT
The CGI bit I liked was the CGI-enhanced Young Branagh at the start, I remember that's what he actually looked like at that age. However that whole WW-I scene was absolutely self-indulgent and entirely pointless in the context of the film. A WW1 scene?! Don't remember that from the book. Is this more random invented things from the past to explain why Poirot acts like he does now? |
|
90 posts
|
Post by confessor on Apr 9, 2022 9:00:26 GMT
The CGI bit I liked was the CGI-enhanced Young Branagh at the start, I remember that's what he actually looked like at that age. However that whole WW-I scene was absolutely self-indulgent and entirely pointless in the context of the film. A WW1 scene?! Don't remember that from the book. Is this more random invented things from the past to explain why Poirot acts like he does now? Yes! A completely pointless addition before the actual story starts, which basically serves as a moustache origin story, and makes zero sense unless they're saying that it's a false moustache. The more I think about this film, the more I hate it. |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Apr 9, 2022 9:15:28 GMT
A WW1 scene?! Don't remember that from the book. Is this more random invented things from the past to explain why Poirot acts like he does now? Yes! A completely pointless addition before the actual story starts, which basically serves as a moustache origin story, and makes zero sense unless they're saying that it's a false moustache. The more I think about this film, the more I hate it. Like that Sarah Phelps BBC adaptation where they inserted scenes revealing that Poirot had been a priest in Belgium. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2022 9:28:06 GMT
It's like branagh wants to make poirot an action man. Like the ridiculous chase on the bridge in the first movie.
The tv series is about as close to Christies vision as you will likely get.
I don't know why writers constantly think they can better Christie. The odd tweak or embellishment for tv or film is one thing, but changing plots or characters just seems pointless and never seems to be an improvement. She was a genius of the genre.
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Apr 9, 2022 11:31:58 GMT
She certainly was; the Ustinov film was close to the book and all the better for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by jojo on Apr 9, 2022 11:46:42 GMT
I don't mind some changes, especially if it's to remove some of the archaic (racist) language and the usual sorts of changes that make sense for a screen adaptation of a book. Adding a bit of Poirot back story is less of an issue when it's a series, but in a film that's already got a lot of characters and is on the long side, then that time would have been better spent learning more of the back story to the suspects.
There was also a contrast in the style of filming. Poirot's pre-current-plot back-story was given a lot of time to say not very much, but the introduction to most of the main characters was written very slickly, with tight editing to take up as little time as possible.
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Apr 9, 2022 17:40:14 GMT
'A moustache origin story', surely one of the oddest phrases ever!
I'm notoriously bad at watching books adapted into tv/film, I have somewhat mellowed with age and can appreciate change/additions if they still feel in keeping with the book/characters but fume when extra stuff gets added that minimises what actually was in the book in the first place. Haven't seen the film but i'm struggling to imagine any relevance for a moustache adding to it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Apr 9, 2022 20:53:47 GMT
'A moustache origin story', surely one of the oddest phrases ever! I'm notoriously bad at watching books adapted into tv/film, I have somewhat mellowed with age and can appreciate change/additions if they still feel in keeping with the book/characters but fume when extra stuff gets added that minimises what actually was in the book in the first place. Haven't seen the film but i'm struggling to imagine any relevance for a moustache adding to it? Yeah, it’s sort of woven into the plot about Poirot’s love interest. Fuming even more ? |
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Apr 9, 2022 21:10:11 GMT
'A moustache origin story', surely one of the oddest phrases ever! I'm notoriously bad at watching books adapted into tv/film, I have somewhat mellowed with age and can appreciate change/additions if they still feel in keeping with the book/characters but fume when extra stuff gets added that minimises what actually was in the book in the first place. Haven't seen the film but i'm struggling to imagine any relevance for a moustache adding to it? Yeah, it’s sort of woven into the plot about Poirot’s love interest. Fuming even more ? Right, well I have been warned and have no excuses if I ever chose to watch this film do I. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Apr 10, 2022 7:25:28 GMT
To be fair the moustache element is at least an interesting ‘reason’ for doing it. But its ten minutes that needn’t be there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Apr 10, 2022 9:52:18 GMT
To be fair the moustache element is at least an interesting ‘reason’ for doing it. But its ten minutes that needn’t be there. Agree on timing, the film needed at least 30 minutes cut and those 10 minutes were obvious candidates. The main issue I have with the WW-I stuff is it doesn't explain anything at all about the main plot, it's just added on at the beginning so it can explain another entirely fabricated 5 minutes at the end. Michael Billington in his regular whines about Trevor Nunn always used to accuse him of editorialising Shakespeare's text, that is adding in extra bits and pieces of his own devising to explain things in the text. I actually like that a lot. One example was in his Timon of Athens with (coincidentally) Suchet. There's a bit in the text at the end where Timon entirely unexpectedly and randomly finds some buried treasure. In Nunn's production he started with a scene of a full-on bank raid where the the thieves buried their haul afterwards thus providing a reason for it to be there later, plus it told you something about the state of Athens. What Branagh has done in this film is the bank raid but with no buried treasure afterwards. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Apr 10, 2022 12:17:12 GMT
At least Shakespeare can be impenetrable to some, so a bit of additional help is welcome. It just felt self indulgent from Branagh.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Apr 10, 2022 19:25:16 GMT
At least Shakespeare can be impenetrable to sum, so a bit of additional help is welcome. It just felt self indulgent from Branagh. Nunn’s best intervention was in Othello. That handkerchief, if it was so important how come Desdemona forgot it ? Nunn had a bit of business to explain that which was one of the greatest theatrical moments I’ve ever seen, genuinely breathtaking. |
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Apr 10, 2022 19:31:50 GMT
At least Shakespeare can be impenetrable to sum, so a bit of additional help is welcome. It just felt self indulgent from Branagh. Nunn’s best intervention was in Othello. That handkerchief, if it was so important how come Desdemona forgot it ? Nunn had a bit of business to explain that which was one of the greatest theatrical moments I’ve ever seen, genuinely breathtaking. I often wonder about that. Can you share @jan what he did? |
|
|
|
Post by vickyg on Apr 10, 2022 19:52:09 GMT
At least Shakespeare can be impenetrable to sum, so a bit of additional help is welcome. It just felt self indulgent from Branagh. Self indulgent? Kenneth Branagh? That's basically his middle name at this point isn't it?! |
|
|
|
Post by d'James on Apr 10, 2022 19:59:26 GMT
At least Shakespeare can be impenetrable to sum, so a bit of additional help is welcome. It just felt self indulgent from Branagh. Self indulgent? Kenneth Branagh? That's basically his middle name at this point isn't it?! Yeah. I thought he was acting as Gilderoy Lockhart, but this film showed it to be more than that. |
|
19,778 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Apr 14, 2022 20:30:15 GMT
Two thirds of the way through it.
Dreadful.
I’m biased because I love the 1978 version but Jesus Christ this is turgid to say the least.
I hear the comments about Russel Brand and I agree but Dawn French cannot act for toffee either. Embarrassingly bad! And they never changed that “Dawn Hair” was it in her contract or something?
Total yawn fest. Please do not let Ken loose on any more Agatha’s.
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Apr 17, 2022 4:32:21 GMT
Oh I’m quite sure he’s eyeing up ‘Evil Under The Sun’ just to complete his trio of pointless remakes. Perhaps he’s going to drag up as Miss Marple next and ruin them?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 6, 2023 7:18:25 GMT
Oh I’m quite sure he’s eyeing up ‘Evil Under The Sun’ just to complete his trio of pointless remakes. Perhaps he’s going to drag up as Miss Marple next and ruin them? So now we know. A Haunting in Venice which is an adaptation of Hallowe'en Party. At least it's not one that has been adapted for film before. On the other hand it looks like this time he's filmed most of it in near-darkness. I wonder why he's so keen on playing Poirot, a role he's entirely unsuited to ? |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Sept 6, 2023 7:57:03 GMT
Just to completely side step this, Bristol Hippodrome are teasing ‘A Poirot’ as a star of their Peter Pan this Christmas!
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 6, 2023 8:06:33 GMT
Just to completely side step this, Bristol Hippodrome are teasing ‘A Poirot’ as a star of their Peter Pan this Christmas! |
|
