The ABC Murders

[Carlyrichards]

Anyone watching? I like Rupert Grint in this.

Why add yet another stuffy remake when you can do something interesting

Why not write your own original drama rather than piggybacking on to the existing audience for Agatha Christie by pinching her original idea and title and having the arrogance to think you can do better by trashing it?

I really dislike the misogyny in this. Phelps' treatment of all the female characters is disgraceful.

I hate it, whereas dh is loving it.

Even in the 1930's, Betty would have been socialised not to treat men like that. Being so openly mean is one dimensional.

Did we really need to see that fat man summoning Lily? Or his big fat boil, followed by Cust eating the fried egg?

I will watch episode 3 though.

And yes - it's too damn dark.

ABsolute Crap.

Dark, grim, yuck.

It's not my favourite Christie but I did expect better. Suxher is brilliant. Albert Finney is brilliant. But not this.

Three hours of this!

Suchet

Bbc period drama director "how can we make this more authentic?"
Reply "Switch the lights off. They didnt have electricity in the 1930s"

Yes, it's amazing that there needed to be a black out only 6 years later! Hardly any light at all!

On a positive note, it took me to almost the end of episode 1 to realise that the police guy was Ron Weasley.

How far his acting has come ...

In the brief time I spent with it, Ron was good.

He's far better as an actor than Daniel Radcliffe, who's ok but nothing out of the ordinary as an adult actor, and Emma Watson, who is as wooden as an oak sideboard.

I think it's good to shake up the adaptations, if they were always the same then they run out of steam.

I'm enjoying seeing a peek into the inner workings of Poirot. He's far more rounded as a character than Suchet portrays, less of a caricature.

And the criticit if JM's accent is misplaced as the man is a fluent French speaker.

I've given in and watched the first two. Am pretending it's not an AC so fairly watchable and as I can't remember the ins and outs of the book I'm not comparing and complaining too much.

Another female 'character' being reduced to a sexual sterotype. Fantastic.

It’s going on a bit, isn’t it?

Yup - happens a lot on TV these days. Material which would comfortably fit into 2 or even 1 episodes being dragged out to the point of tedium.

I love it .
There is a lot of green . Love JM.

I'm enjoying it- although watching all 3 in a onner.... The scenes in the Belgian church/fields are causing palpations for me!

It's seedy and misogynistic.

Hating it, miserable, poorly lit, not true to book, unnecessary dragging out/repetition. As op above said either do a decent adaptation or write your own. Trying to be too clever; such a shame. JM not suitable and not as Poirot is written.

MargueritaPink So agree "Why not write your own original drama rather than piggybacking on to the existing audience for Agatha Christie by pinching her original idea and title and having the arrogance to think you can do better by trashing it?

I really dislike the misogyny in this."

Yes, as frogintheTyne says "It's seedy and misogynistic."

I thought poor old Cust was going to get got by the train! Yrs, am watching to see how it all ends. True to the book or something else!

Tiny redeeming feature. The tragic backstory.

So it was Danny lattimers father after all

I agree, this could easily have been a two hour drama, not three.

Well I wasn't keen after the first two but by the end of tonight's I was beginning to quite like JM's portrayal. The priest twist was quite clever with the 'mes enfants' connection.

The last episode was great, really gripping.

I found the last episode an anti-climax. Not being familiar with the plot, when the solution was revealed, it didn't justify such a lengthy dramatic build up. It would have been fine if it had been half the length.

I will say this: John Malkovich is really very good at playing John Malkovich.