Have Your Say

Television and Film

Talk about Christie TV and Film here

Appropriate story line changes

Bundle_ 27 Aug 09 at 7:13 p.m. GMT

Go leafs and I were having a discussion in the Poirot and Marple in the US thread, and I would just like to know from everyone: When do you think it is appropriate in an adaptation for a screen writer to modify a plot significantly?

For example: is it okay to do this if the book is boring?

(Sorry for posting this twice but I had to edit it).

Login or register to add posts and reply

41 replies

Reverse order

Lil_Bit 23 Jul 10 at 3:33 a.m. GMT

AndThenThereWasTim

Question: Do you think that taking the Allertons out of the Ustinov Death on the Nile was justified?

I have no problem with it. Honestly, I didn't think they were very interesting characters, and it gave Bette Davis a chance to be sleazy. If the Allertons had been in the Ustinov version, Davis would have just been playing a domineering, miserable old woman.

Given how many characters there were in the novel, I think it was necessary to omit some of the characters just to make the story fit into a 90-120 minute time frame. DOTN is one of Christie's longer books, which makes it difficult to film.

MissQuin 01 Jul 10 at 3 p.m. GMT

This reply contains spoiler information. Show reply

For once, I'm in  comeplete agreement with you lonewolf!! Tim in the Suchet version was awful. he was so lsimy and his voice sounded false and effected. The way he slobbered over his mother's hands too, urgh. I couldn't help wish he would be the next victim.

Lone_Wolf 30 Jun 10 at 5:36 p.m. GMT

I disliked the way they interpreted Tim Allerton in the Suchet version, though it has more to do with the way that added a "sleazy" flavour to the character.

MissQuin 30 Jun 10 at 4:07 p.m. GMT

Ive not seen the Ustinov version of Death In Nile. But I have to say, taking them out of it's a shame. I rather missed Angela Sutcliffe in the suchet Three Act Tradgey.

But on the other hand, the Suchet version had the Allertons, but added a werid plot involving either Tim's gay (he wasn't) or having incest realtions with his mother!! No I don't think that can possibly justified as an "appropriate" storyline. Inappropriate, yes! Same goes for Taken at the flood. "Lets add incest to make things exciting!" No thank you. The olny time that was even part of a Chrisite plot was one book.

I don't mind them showing Hinch and Amy and Mr Pye homosexual, because frankly, they might be.

But giving Miss Marple an affair with a married man? Not really. She did have romances in her youth. But it's never mentioned she had an affair. She always strikes me as moral and doens't really approve of affairs. They can say that "it pads out the character" and such, but really it's just annoying. They could also say Poirot fathered 12 illiegitmate children too, just to "add some more background to the character"!! Where will it end?

AndThenThereWasTim 28 Jun 10 at 4:35 p.m. GMT

I agree with Wolf. I liked Cat Among the Pigeons when the woman was murdered with a Javalin instead of being shot like the book. It does not neccessary have to be so black and white though. THe book and the Adapt can be good even if they are not the same.

Question: Do you think that taking the Allertons out of the Ustinov Death on the Nile was justified?

Lone_Wolf 28 Jun 10 at 6:49 a.m. GMT

Argument from popularity. Just because she is a best-seller doesn't mean she is perfect. And sometimes, stuff that works well in the book doesn't work well on screen.

applechristie 27 Jun 10 at 4:50 p.m. GMT

I've never seen a change to one of Christie's plots that made the movie better than the book. How can the best selling author of all time be wrong about her own books?

AndThenThereWasTim 27 Jun 10 at 4:39 p.m. GMT

I Liked Chimneys.. Then again I never read the book LOL

Number3 27 Jun 10 at 2:42 p.m. GMT

I just saw the adaptation of "Chimneys."   It made me scream and throw things at the tube, which I don't usually do.  I'm not going to spoil it for those who haven't seen it.  If this is one of your favourite stories be pepared .

AndThenThereWasTim 26 Jun 10 at 4 p.m. GMT

Nah.. Im one of them

Proud Resident of the most Republican County in California

McGinty 26 Jun 10 at 10:40 a.m. GMT

AndThenThereWasTim

  But then again im from a much more Conservative area.

Perhaps you should move !

AndThenThereWasTim 24 Jun 10 at 7:24 p.m. GMT

In books sometimes there are what I would call dead scenes (CS Lewis's Prince Caspian has the scene with the Kids in the boat) that have to be deleted because they are long and somewhat dry when put to film.

Cards on the Table was by far the worst purpitrator of Story line changes. They completely altered the story for no apparent reason into this horrible nonsensical show.

I have equal problems with story line changes to add sex scenes and gay couples. (Body in the Library (McEwan) Most of the time they are simply to add sensationalism.  But then again im from a much more Conservative area.

MissQuin 17 Jun 10 at 2:32 p.m. GMT

Yes, but as that was Agatha Chrisite making the decision to change her own story. She had the right to and the writing ability. She loved Miss Marple but probably wouldn't have put her into her non serires adapts.

The main problem for me is that when Marple is added, the orignal sleuth becomes an uninteresting spare part.

The Pricking of my thumbs-Tuppence a drunk and embarrasment.

Ordeal by innocence-the doctor/original sleuth a bumbling idiot.

Murder is Easy- Luke Fitwilliam aimless slightly gormless and not needed.

The Sittaford mystery- well I hated Chalres and Emily anyway, but that wa altered too.

Towards Zero- Battle replaced with another detecive, whose overbearing, clueless and bullying towards old ladies! Very bad casting actually as well.

It does make me wonder about adapts that are lined up. Will The Pale Horse's Mark Easterbrook become another spare part? I hope not, as I find him someone appealing.

Lil_Bit 17 Jun 10 at 5:37 a.m. GMT

A lot of people seem to be upset about the changing of detectives (particularly the new Marple films), but I'm really not convinced that it's such a serious offense. Even Christie did so--she replaced Poirot with Race when she expanded "Yellow Iris" into Sparkling Cyanide, and Death on the Nile was originally intended to be a Marple novel.

MissQuin 19 Apr 10 at 5:49 p.m. GMT

That's a really touching comment McGinty. I wish I could changes some peoples opinons, but sadly I can't. I'm hetrosexual, but I'm upset by of people's bigortry of any kind.  If it's because of peoples's sexuality, gender, race or religion.

On a lighter note fo AC fans: if a characater is described as plain in the book, but in an adapt, the actor/acctress that plays them is really attractive, then is this ok? I can think of a fair few examples. The upcoming one with JJ Feild as Mr Osborne springs to mind, but I won't pass any judgement on that until it's aired. I know this is somewhat shallow of me, but I had no objection whatsoever to Nigel Chapman's character, who was described as plain, being played by the drop dead gorgous Jonathan Firth!

But in some cases I think that it hasn't worked.

McGinty 19 Apr 10 at 9:17 a.m. GMT

MissQuin

More people complained about a devoted same sex couple holding hands, than a full on sexual scene between a man and woman. That's surely not ok?

No, it's not ok. But then some people have 'issues' that blind them to reality. Sadly neither you nor I will ever change that, bigotry will be around forever, but this is the 21st century and fortunately it is becoming slightly better for people to live their lives without interference from those who seem unable to grow up.

MissQuin 18 Apr 10 at 5:26 p.m. GMT

Like Lonewolf I found the Five Little Pigs episode, so convincingly acted by Toby Stephens that I can completely forgive the producers for that too. It wasn't done a sleazy, gratuitous way.

I just think people can be unfair in internet reviews complaining about the couple in Murder Is Announced and others. I mean it's the plotlines that are the most important thing and there's been worse changes like in Nazis every corner. More people complained about a devoted same sex couple holding hands, than a full on sexual scene between a man and woman. That's surely not ok?

Lone_Wolf 18 Apr 10 at 5:19 p.m. GMT

"I am totally confused, Lone Wolf. What do you mean by 'Death of The Author and all that'?"

"Death of the Author" is a literary theory that states that the author's motivations and interpretations of his own work shouldn't hold more weight then interpretations of any other reader - that the author (figuratively) ceases to exist after writing the last word in his book. Under that theory, you may say that while AC may've not considered the ladies from Аnnounсеd as gay, it shouldn't have any bearing when talking about their sexuality.

That theory can lead to productive discussions, though I guess it's possible sometimes to go overboard with it.

I confess I actually liked the "gay change" in Fivе Littlе Рigs, but that's the only added gay storyline I liked. In majority of cases, all that changed sexuality stuff seems to be just added for cheap sensationalism.

MissQuin 18 Apr 10 at 5:10 p.m. GMT

No I'm not condoning producers to change the sexuality of characters. It's just certain ones that might be gay, I think it's acceptable that they could be portryed as so. I thought I'd just ask what others thought. A good old debate won't hurt (I hope). The producers surely don't read this forum? Or else they wouldn't have done what they did the the adapts. If lots of people say "I'm not watching Poirot again because of added gay characters" the story writers would realise ratings would drop.

Mr Pye is in The Moving Finger.

Mr Hardiman and Bernard Parker in the Poirot short story, The Double Clue.

I never would have thought about characters sexuality, as it's not part of AC plots. But when I looked up reviews for episodes, the point that seemed the sorest was any characters who are gay. I mean I liked Cards On The Table (I'll be condemeed now) but there was too many added storylines which weren't in with the time period. There was even a photographer who found Poirot handsome!!!!

Tommy_A_Jones 18 Apr 10 at 3:41 p.m. GMT

I am totally confused, Lone Wolf What do you mean by 'Death of The Author and all that'? and Miss Quin can you explain why Mr Hardiman is Mr Pye please and go_leafs what do you mean by 'Reading them in a modern context does the trick' and why is the sexuality of Characters so important anyway, the ACs are not soaps, debates like this can only encourage Producers to make silly changes IMHO