Have Your Say

Television and Film

Talk about Christie TV and Film here

How faithful are the Poirots?

hobbit 26 Jan 09 at 7:39 p.m. GMT

Having not seen very many of the Poirot (Suchet) adaptations myself (and having a very fuzzy memory of many of the books!!) I was just wondering - given the whole debate over the recent 'Marple' adapts - how closely they stick to the original novels.

Given that no 'definitive' (i.e. of the standard of the Joan Hickson adapts) Poirot adaptations really existed before Suchet, I wouldn't have thought they'd have much cause to tinker about with the plots. However a recent (heated) thread on Cards on the Table has given me cause to question this belief.

Can anyone help answer my question?

Login or register to add posts and reply

8 replies

Reverse order

Lil_Bit 21 Jul 11 at 9:14 p.m. GMT

This reply contains spoiler information. Show reply

Sorry to revive a long-dead thread, but I watched the Suchet adaptation of "The Missing Will" a few days ago, and I read the story last night. Other than a few characters' names, there was absolutely no resemblance between the two. The short story was a simple case of hide-and-seek, whereas the adaptation [spoilers ahead]

included a murder, an attempted murder, and a convoluted story of uncertain parentage.

Ordinarily I don't mind minor changes to the plot, but this was in no way the same story!

hobbit 28 Jan 09 at 4:29 p.m. GMT

Many thanks for all your replies, you have answered my question quite nicely. I agree with you that some changes are acceptable wheras others are not; like you said, ariadnepoirotmarple, it's the difference between 'modernising' a story and just re-writing it. However I must say I think it's very sad that the some of the Poirot novels will, even if Suchet near enough completes the canon, never be adapted definitively (least not, in all probability, during my lifetime). I am not by any means a 'purist' but I just can't see the point in significant re-writes at all! If something was successful in the first place there seems little point in robbing it of its essence.

Hobbit

Holly 27 Jan 09 at 4:20 p.m. GMT

In the book Evil Under The Sun, Kenneth Marshall had a daughter (Linda). However, the change to a son (Lionel) for the film version is not too drastic.

In The Hollow, they did indeed drop one of the men - David Angkatell, who stood to inherit Ainswick if Edward died without issue.

I agree that the earlier David Suchet adaptations of the Poirot books were pretty faithful, and more recently they have become much less so. Personally, I much prefer the faithful ones. I do not like the changes they have been making to the plots lately. I think it did begin with Murder On The Links, really. As far as I remember, the adaptations before that were all quite faithful. Mind you, The Hollow, Five Little Pigs and Sad Cypress were good too, and I believe they were made later than MOTL.

Tommy_A_Jones 27 Jan 09 at 3:29 p.m. GMT

Although I have read The Blue Train I don't remember it much so can't comment on changes, I loved the Adaptation of 'After The Funeral', I haven't been so shocked at the ending since the Tom Baker days of Doctor Who and I loved the set out of 'The Murder of Roger Ackroyd', When if you think about it it could only have been done that way, the only other Character change I remember are in Evil Under The Sun, (I can't remember wether Arlene really has a Ste-son or Step-Daughter) and in 'The Hollow' as I think one of the men was omitted

AndThenThereWasTim 27 Jan 09 at 1:42 a.m. GMT

I agree with GKCfan... I would also add though, completely altering the motive as well. I haven't seen many Suchets but from what I have heard they stay fairly close. Aside from the few (cough Cough "Cards on the Table") where they basicly make up their own books and use the same title. There are some books where changes made in the movie are neccesary to end monotomy and shorten legnth. Most recent movie I can remember was Prince Caspian. The basic story line was faithful but some of the plot had to be changed to stop some monotomy.. as well as making characters of lesser of no importance as we saw in the Ustinov DOTN where Tim Allerton and Mrs. Allerton were both deleted and sometimes Ive noticed they combine characters such as combining Linnet Doyles British laywer (cant remember his name) and Colonel Race.

GKCfan 26 Jan 09 at 9:46 p.m. GMT

Aside from the various changes added to the one-hour episodes in order to fill the allotted time, the first seventeen years of Poirots were pretty faithful, with a few exceptions. For me, the unforgivable changes are 1) changing the identity of the killer, 2) completely gutting the plot, 3) adding superfluous sex and violence. None of these occur in the early Poirots. Some (not all) of the following changes are understandable, even welcomed. •Hastings, Japp, and Miss Lemon were inserted into episodes where they weren't in the books (HP's Christmas, Evil Under the Sun, and more). Given the likability of these actors, I have no problem with this. •Some characters are dropped for the purposes of convenience and simplicity. This is dramatically understandable. •Also, some murder methods are altered (Hickory Dickory Dock). •Sometimes a murder is added or dropped (Dumb Witness). •"Murder on the Links" is one of the most dramatically changed of the early Poirots, with the identity and background of Hastings's love interest radically altered. •Many subplots are understandably dropped or abridged for the purposes of time. •Some changes are made to add another suspect (the daughter becomes a son in Evil Under the Sun to add a convincing potential strangler)

ariadnepoirotmarple 26 Jan 09 at 9:01 p.m. GMT

The 'old' Poirot adaptations were quite faithful and loyal to the books. However, some of the recent adaptations are quite ridiculous!! "Cards on the table" is the worst of them all. It's a completely disgusting and insulting thing. I can't really call it an "adaptation". Some others (The Mystery of The Blue Train, for example) are modernized versions of AC books. Overall, there are some adaptations quite faithful and others are quite disrespectful.

go_leafs_nation 26 Jan 09 at 8:50 p.m. GMT

Certainly. "Poirot" has been generally faithful until the 2006 series (Blue Train/ Cards on the Table/ Taken at the Flood/ After the Funeral), where 3 of the 4 episodes were vastly altered. The pattern continued in the most recent series. Until that point, only a few short stories (out of shortage of material for a 50 minute screen time), "The Murder of Roger Ackroyd" and "Hercule Poirot's Christmas" were of the unfaithful variety.