Agatha Christie Ordeal by Innocence

[buddhasbelly]

Is it just me or is anyone else really excited to watch this tonight?

So glad they reshot this so we can enjoy it

Well, they managed to take a clever, easy novel and turn it into a tortured, confusing mess. The music was super annoying. Nice frocks though.

I thought that was rather over the top - I imagine it was based on this image of the three queens at George VI’s funeral in 1952, but that was a royal funeral, and the veils were more transparent than the ones shown last night. I don’t think it was usual at ordinary funerals.

Don't know Taytocrisps I recall my mum wearing a heavy black veil like that at a family funeral (her brother). Would have been around 1980. Couldn't see her face (I was young and it bothered me!!)

Can't tell you if it was normal then still, but my mother's a really stickler for doing what's 'correct' (generally invloved doing something the traditional from olden days!!)

The Three Queens in Mourning is such an iconic photograph but I agree the heavy veils , particularly inside the house, were OTT.

This is JFK's funeral in 1963.

The only time I've seen veils like that were in the photos of the King's funeral.

So sad that have changed Arthur Calgary so much. He is one of my favourite Christie 'heroes'

Yes, he bears no resemblance at all to Arthur C in the book. And they've changed the mother so much too. In the book the children are her world, she is possessing and adoring, and smothers them with her overpowering love. On screen she is portrayed as a cruel, harsh monster.

It actuallyreally annoyed me.

If you want Agatha Christie, stick to agatha christie

If you want a more modern, darker, psychological thriller write your own!!

Dont try and turn one into the other

Agreed @Mercison

I avoid all of the Miss Marple reboots because of this. As well as sticking Miss Marple into stories where she doesn't even feature in the books, they even pointlessly change minor characters names for some unknown reason Suspect the writers haven't read much Christie. I know the writer of this one hasn't, she said so in an interview.

It was also totally humourless

Always a vein of dark humour running through Christies books

AND...

I though Bill Nighy was terrible

literally reading the script off an autocue

The later ITV Poriot's were the same, deviationing from the source, luckily David Suchet prevented them getting into Miss Marple territory, main plots were usually intact.

So sad that have changed Arthur Calgary so much. He is one of my favourite Christie 'heroes'

I wonder if they will keep the ending? Presumably not - unless Arthur pulls himself together in parts 2 and 3.

I'm not impressed with it. It's not a Christie I'm familiar with, but I could tell from the tone how much they'd changed, it doesn't feel remotely like a Christie novel. Also I have read that they have changed who the murderer is . So now I am reading the actual book, safe that I won't 'spoil' the show, not that I'm sure I'll finish it.

It's a shame, I enjoyed the And Then There Were None adaptation as they largely stuck to the story, though they made it cruder than the original. Witness for the Prosecution started down this weird path though, and this one seems even worse. Why make an Agatha Christie film if you're not even going to keep the plot - because you think you can do it better? Grr.

Also I have read that they have changed who the murderer is

Ooh , I'm now trying to work out who they will pick.

You are kidding me! Changed the murderer?? As someone else said, this is just lazy scripting. Make your own flipping story up if you are going to deviate so much from the original. Aargh!

'Why make an Agatha Christie film if you're not even going to keep the plot - because you think you can do it better? Grr.'

This

Sarah Phelps also messed up Witness for the Prosecution and The Casual Vacancy. She doesn't care about what we think of her changes - in an interview in the Guardian she said “I don’t give a bollocks about people saying it has to be pure. No, it doesn’t. If you want a pure adaptation, go and get someone else to do it.”

Not linking to the interview as it's spoiler-y.

Yes, that was the interview I read, where I saw that the ending had been changed, and she said she didn't care about changing the plot

I don't mind people changing things as long as they can make it hang together feasibly. It's more fun if you don't know the murderer and every inch of character and dialogue already.

I agree about not changing the plots. Agatha Christie plotted her books well, especially the early ones and I have never seen one which has been 'improved' by a change. I can't say that I was taken by this adaptation, although I haven't read the book.

Well let's hope she doesn't get hold of any Jane Austen. The thought of Elizabeth marrying Mr Collins or Fanny Price marrying Henry Crawford. Ugh. You can change/enhance many things to put your own stamp on it but the main characteristics must surely stay the same. Shame on that woman!

Does the recent "and then there were none" miniseries have the original ending or the ending from the play?

Basically it was the original ending, a few minor changes, I think. Can’t imagine this particular adapter using the 1943 play ending, not ‘dark’ enough. (But there was a stage play in 2005 that used the original ending)

Thank you.