Have Your Say

Television and Film

Talk about Christie TV and Film here

Review: Suchet's MOTOE

(Contains spoilers!)

go_leafs_nation 25 Oct 10 at 4:30 p.m. GMT

This contains spoiler information. Show

I wrote this review of Suchet's MOTOE over the weekend, but the site was down then. Here it is now (enjoy, and feel free to disagree).

Murder on the Orient Express has been an episode looked forward to by Poirot fans for a very long time. About the first 18 minutes are as close as you can get to a total mess. The movie begins with an uninspired and boring case to account for Poirot’s presence in Istanbul, which is extremely repetitive in insisting the perpetrator lied (how mean). All Poirot does is shout. It gets very boring, followed by the man’s suicide, which finally gets Poirot to shut up and look shocked for a few seconds.

What annoys me is that Poirot did a complete about-face in character with no warning. This is not the same man who showed great compassion to one of the suspects in The Hollow. This is not the same man who shared a touching scene with a woman whose dreams had been shattered in After the Funeral. He has suddenly turned into a religious fanatic—I mean, for crying out loud, how many references were there to his being a Catholic before this episode? Now, he does nothing but shout or deliver lengthy speeches on God’s justice, and even though I’m Catholic myself, it annoyed me intensely. And this character of his is very inconsistent—he showed absolutely no human emotions after witnessing a stoning on the streets—although he says later that he was upset by it, he chuckles while saying this. (One other thing— if Poirot’s religion is so important to him, why in heaven’s name does he smoke while praying the Rosary?)

But to get back to the disaster the film’s opening was. I mentioned I hated the credits. If you watch them, you’ll see that the film cannot decide which direction to take the music in. It starts with a solo vocalist singing random, mindless sounds, before fading out in favour of the music. None of this feels like it belongs together. It’s simply awful, and the music that plays is loud, mechanical, and heavy-handed. It’s a very ugly way to open the movie, and the general atmosphere of ugliness continues for a good 18 minutes.

The first bit of praise I have is with acting, and I give Toby Jones full marks here. He is perfectly convincing as the Mafioso who commits a heinous crime, and now that his life is in danger, he suddenly begins to believe in God (which he thinks of as extra protection). The man is a full-out hypocrite—you can believe it when Masterman says he was no gentleman but a sewer rat with plenty of money. He’s intensely dislikeable, and this is very good when the nature of his (truly appalling) crime is revealed.

Generally speaking, the acting is good, except for two people whose acting was poor or very mediocre. These are Samuel West (Dr. Constantine) and Denis Menochet (Pierre Michel). Constantine, although being Greek, has no accent, which I discovered to my surprise when watching the same segment for the second time. For some reason I thought he had a bad one. But no, I was very much mistaken. His acting is just bad overall. This adaptation of MOTOE changes several things, among them deleting the ‘private eye’ Hardman, and replacing his role with Constantine’s. Unfortunately, this was very poorly done. Was it the script or just West’s acting? I’m not sure. Anyways, Dr. Constantine gives the entire game away. He’s a dreadful doctor who can’t even count the number of stab wounds correctly, resulting in Poirot’s giving him a lecture on what the corpse really reveals (which actually isn’t too bad of a scene). He’s basically the Hastings of the adaptation, only more idiotic, and whose act of innocence wouldn’t have deceived a six year old. His guilt is obvious from the start, as he keeps trying to throw Poirot off track and making it apparent to anyone. His performance is the worst of the entire episode. Menochet, on the other hand, is very mediocre as Pierre Michel. It’s the accent, basically. It’s obviously fake, and he keeps slipping away from it. Also, despite his clumsy use of English, he uses a lot of American slang in his dialogue, which may have been intended as a clue (though I doubt it), but it just ends up sounding silly. [EDIT: Turns out Menochet is French. I could've sworn his accent sounded fake, with a very different voice breaking through far too often!]

To get back to the film, things pick up as soon as Samuel Ratchett approaches Poirot and hires him for a job, automatically assuming Poirot will do it. Their confrontation is excellent and sets the tone for his murder wonderfully. Well, we go through the night of the murder, and the corpse is discovered. Poirot gives the idiot doctor a lesson in basic medical knowledge (and I still refuse to believe that he couldn’t count to 12 stab wounds), and he goes through a surprisingly good scene where he re-enacts the murder.

We blaze through the interviews and Poirot reveals the solution for a half hour.

OK, this was the adaptation’s worst problem. I thought the Albert Finney film drew things out too much, trying to give all its stars equal amounts of screen time. Here, Poirot barely even interviews the suspects. It’s entertaining viewing, but highly, highly rushed, so we can get to the half-hour drama where Poirot (who suddenly believes the law is flawless in all aspects) must decide whether or not to give away the killers. Here is what an interview of his might sound like:

Poirot: “Where, if you please, were you at the time of the murder?” Dr. Sigmund von Hornswiggle: “I was admiring the landscape from the window in Mr. Ratchett’s compartment. It was the best compartment for doing so.” P: “Ah, but did you not run into the murderer?” S: “I’m afraid not.”

P: “Well, I apologise for bothering you, monsieur. Do you believe in God?”

Poirot rushes through the interviews so he can get to the final half hour of drama, and the mystery suffers highly from it. But even worse is what happens during the final scene. All Poirot does is yell at how evil the culprits have been and how God should have been allowed to administer justice and bla bla bla bla bla. It’s very routine, boring stuff, and despite all of Poirot’s yelling, is relatively lifeless. The screenwriter, Stewart Harcourt, showed much more imagination in his script for “The Clocks”.

The final half hour gets very tedious. It’s basically (a) Poirot shouting (b) Poirot praying or (c) Poirot contemplating. It’s far too long, and it may have been better to simply chop ten minutes of that out and use those minutes to question the suspects more thoroughly.

Greta Ohlsson, one of the suspects, declares to Poirot that “Jesus said ‘Let those without sin cast the first stone’... Well I was without sin!!!” Now that is just horrendous dialogue, only serving to hit you over the head with the God element again. Other bad dialogue appears as well, such as when Mrs. Hubbard declares she wants to “kick someone up the ass” because the passengers are stranded on the train.

Now, I’m going to question the wisdom of the adaptation on a point. It emphasizes the whole theme of injustice of the original novel. Unfortunately, I think the novel had a better way of approaching injustice, as Samuel Ratchett is let off on a technicality. Perhaps the DA’s search warrant hurt his feelings. This seemed to be a clear comment from AC that “the law is an ass”. How could the law allow some really monstrous people to go free because of a minor detail that may not have been carried out to the letter? Well, the adaptation goes another way—Ratchett gets off because the DA is corrupt. I personally think AC’s way of commenting on the flaws of a justice system is far more effective.

There is a very effective final scene in the snow, in which the music finally redeems itself for its atrocious start, with some very nice notes to emphasize the situation. It’s also a good way to end it all.

My overall verdict: Murder on the Orient Express proved to be quite disappointing. Its start is atrocious, its characterization of Poirot is inconsistent at best, and the screenwriter shows a distinct lack of inspiration. The whole thing plows through the suspect interviews at record speed so it can get to rather tedious and far-too-drawn-out drama. In addition, Poirot does practically nothing but yell when he confronts the culprits. Toby Jones is excellent as Samuel Ratchett, and is easily the brightest spot of the film. It’s entertaining enough for a viewing, but fails to deliver what I’d hoped. In a series of excellent adaptation, MOTOE is easily the worst.

**/4 stars

Login or register to add posts and reply

15 replies

Reverse order

MissQuin 01 Nov 10 at 4:02 p.m. GMT

I fear Go Leafs won't want his excellent review turned into a "hot actors" topic! So shall we continue it elsewhere Knotty?

knottyceltic 31 Oct 10 at 11:09 p.m. GMT

LOL Miss Quin  ;o)  I had to look it up online in a dictionary what "totty" is for sure.  I was pretty sure it is like our "hottie" but wanted to be sure.  I think in the Totty category I would also put the actor who was Patrick Redfern in Suchet's "Evil Under the Sun".

MissQuin 31 Oct 10 at 10:17 a.m. GMT

If you feel that way that's ok Knotty. I just personally found JJ Field very convincing. Ive seen in quite a few films/programmes and he's always been excellent.

Totty is nice more than now and again!!

knottyceltic 30 Oct 10 at 2:51 p.m. GMT

I disagree on one point- JJ Feild is a very good actor, he doesn't need to pull faces he really expresses his feelings well. Same with The Pale horse.

No no, I don't mean "pull faces", I meant at least one actual tear rolling down his face would have made the expression more realistic.  I just don't "get" dry-weeping.  It's like when small children give you crocadile tears.

But yes indeedy, I do enjoy a good "totty" now and again  ;o)

MissQuin 30 Oct 10 at 10:17 a.m. GMT

So Knotty likes totty!  Well there's plenty of those topics on here, fave actors etc, to keep us getting distracted on other posts.

http://www.agathachristie.com/forum/have-your-say/miscellaneous/fave-actors/

I disagree on one point- JJ Feild is a very good actor, he doesn't need to pull faces he really expresses his feelings well. Same with The Pale horse.

knottyceltic 29 Oct 10 at 6:13 p.m. GMT

Oh yes, easily 50x, maybe more.  I can't even say how many times I've fallen asleep to PSYCHO lol!  Usually the violin/string instruments lull me to sleep before all the screaming begins and once asleep I can sleep through anything!  ;o)

Good point about JJ Feild/Simon Doyle.  He's is completely SCRUMPTIOUS...perfectly cast as "boyishly good looking" to say the LEAST  :o)  He could do with some lessons on crying though...the dry eyed weeping was a little too much.  ;o)

MissQuin 29 Oct 10 at 2:47 p.m. GMT

50 times? really?!

I could never fall asleep with JJ Feild (Simon Doyle) on screen. Though Tim Allerton could easily give me nightmares.

knottyceltic 28 Oct 10 at 5:41 p.m. GMT

I love watching the adaptations over and over.  I think my most watched ones are "Death on the Nile" and "Evil Under the Sun" (both Suchet).  I've probably watched DotN over 50x but don't ask how many times I fall asleep before it ends  ;o)  that's a different story entirely.  *sigh*

MissQuin 28 Oct 10 at 3:33 p.m. GMT

I like reading most of the comments on here! A few exceptions, mainly spam trying to sell DVDS.

Four times now McGinty? That makes me think, what the most times everyones watched an Agatha Chrisite adapt? Mine would be quite low, Ive seen my Death On The Nile DVD 3 times. I may have rewound some of the good bits too.

McGinty 27 Oct 10 at 8:55 a.m. GMT

I'm glad we have a forum like this, it's good to read other people's views. Personally, first time I watched OE I was disappointed - I thought it was rushed. Second time I watched it I understood it better, and now, after watching it four times I think it one of the best episodes ever. I appreciate the religious theme - not that I'm religious myself. I think it helps show exactly what is going on in the minds not just of Poirot, but in the minds of the murderers too. Orient Express is one of the first Poirot episodes I have seen where 'murder' is taken seriously and the subject is not treated like a barn dance. Just my opinion !

go_leafs_nation 27 Oct 10 at 2:55 a.m. GMT

Everyone will have different tastes, I expect. But for me, the show had a severe lack of inspiration behind it, tried cramming religious themes down the audience's throat far too much, and it was generally not very coherent, rushing through its most vital parts so you could reach a sappy and overly long drama.

That being said, I was expecting a heck of a lot after the first three episodes of the series all turned out brilliant. This fell way short of that mark.

MissQuin 26 Oct 10 at 3:52 p.m. GMT

Ive looked up reviews and it's certainly a mixed bag of comments. i will watch it when it's on to make my own mind up. McGnty has pointed out some good points about the adapt, which would appeal to me.

MissQuin 25 Oct 10 at 5:52 p.m. GMT

I confess- Ive not seen a sinlge version of Orient Express. I have seen a bit of Death On The Nile, I'd say I like Suchet better

BUT.. recently, instead of being egotistical but oddly loveable, he's just been a sanctimonaious Belguim, who looks like he needs a good course antidepressants.

 Halloween party is at last, on here in England. So Ive heard it's a good un. It might be the saving grace of recent episodes.

Mrs Hubbard- I always picture Angela Landsbury in my mind, I can't help it!

go_leafs_nation 25 Oct 10 at 5:40 p.m. GMT

You're perfectly right: Hubbard's bossiness is a brilliant layer of parody at stereotypical American characters, ranking right up there with Hardman (something of a parody on the hardboiled 'private eye'), Ariadne Oliver (practically AC's fictional counterpart) and Charles Osbourne of The Pale Horse (whose complex theories on how a paralytic is not really a paralytic are hilarious, and who begins stalking his favourite suspect).

Sadly, Poirot must contemplate on Themes That Are Still Relevant Today, and so this layer of parody is reduced to mere vulgarity on her part. I didn't really like her very much. Give me Lauren Bacall any day of the week.

MissQuin 25 Oct 10 at 4:45 p.m. GMT

This reply contains spoiler information. Show reply

Very descriptive, concise and thought provoking review Go Leaf. Pat on the back!

Not seen Murder On The Orient Express yet, as it's not been on ITV yet. I expect it'll be on sometime -circa 2020.

I have to agree that the explicit use of Religious imagery is really, well it's hard to descibe. But certainly deviating from the storytelling. Religion is not just an add on, it's forced down the viewers throats.

One thing I love very much about MOTOE book is Mrs Hubbard. She appears to be a sterotypical American Grandmother on holiday. She forces people to look at photos of granchildren. She makes inane remarks about family members and bores people around her.

Then at the end, she reveals her true identiy and her true self. The exact opposite of the character she portayed herself as. Yet what she didn't hide as Mrs Hubbard was love for her family. This is what drives her into an atonishing crime.

In fact pretty much most the characters are sterotypes, almost comical at times. The staid stuffy passionless Englishman. The loud, money loving Italian. The brash American detective. Yet each one playing their part and turn out to be something entirely different. The end just stunned me when I read the book and if the end isn't pulled off in the adapt, then I'll feel it's a failure.

We never read of what Poirot's inner thoughts are. He's always so engimatic and it sounds like this adaptation may have taken that away from him. He sounds quite self righteous actually.

How to smoke whilst holding rosary beads?? mmm