The BBC have just shown their latest Agatha Christie adaptation. I tuned in with low expectations. I always do. It is safer that way. And my low expectations were justified. I watched the first episode, switched off and fumed.
It was the usual. Glamorous house, beautifully furnished, high production values, gloss everywhere, pouting female characters, sexy secretary, portentous looks from each member of the household in close up with threatening music, shots of dripping blood (in slo mo natch) and with the dramatic pace of a slow sloth. It was pretty awful.
Last year the Beeb produced a version of And then there Were None. Again it was beautifully done, with lots of period settings, gay young things in tea frocks and pouting lips and this time set in a huge expensive house on an island which was cut off from the mainland by the tide. One by one the visitors who have all been invited there start being murdered. Now when I first read this book I found it terrifying and scary and though I obviously knew who had done it when I watched this BBC version, it lacked any sort of tension and the acting was poor and, once again, the pace was soporific. At the time it was shown the craze for Poldark was at its height and Aiden Turner from said show, was in it and spent an inordinate amount of time running around in nothing but a towel and showing off his manly chest. I gave up on that one too,
And then the BBC, never slow to realise what they think the public want, did Witness for the Prosecution shown over three nights. I did not even bother to watch this, Why make myself irritated thinks I? But bear in mind this is a short story. Yes a short story, one of Christie's best, incisive and a diabolical twist at the end. It is probably about thirty pages long. So once again the pace was funereal.
Much against my better judgement I watched the first episode of Ordeal by Innocence. This was a serious mistake as by the end I was 
frothing at the mouth. Dame Agatha was a master plotter and a brilliant writer. Her stories are incredibly filmic as are her characters so why, for god's sake why do the powers that be at the BBC (oh and elsewhere) think that they can improve on perfection? Characters are changed completely in this version.
A stranger shatters the peace of the Argyll household still recovering from the murder of Mrs Argyll by one of her adopted children, Jacko, who was always a problem and a devious piece of work. He always swore he had an alibi at the time of the murder when he was given a lift by a passer by. This passer by was never found. Jacko died in prison and now Dr Calgary turns up to say that Jacko was telling the truth. He had given him a lift. Dr Calgary had been involved in an accident and then went off to the Antarctic on an expedition and had no idea what had happened.
Now in the original story Dr Calgary is a sane man in his late thirties with a strong sense of justice and wanting to right a wrong. In the BBC version he is young, obviously mentally unstable and has spent time in an institution. WHY?
Leo Argyll the widower is on the verge of marrying his secretary. In the book Leo is a quiet intellectual man rather sidelined by his wife and his secretary was a quiet woman totally devoted to him. In the TV version Leo is played by Bill Nighy who, wonderful though he is, has an air of permanent cynicism about him and a wry amusement that is totally at odds with the character of Leo. And the quiet secretary is now a sub Marilyn Monroe type with blonde curls and a habit of gazing at herself in the mirror and yanking her boobs up to show a bit more cleavage. Wrong on all accounts.
Oh and for some reason which escapes me the BBC changed the name of Argyll to Argyle. Essential to the plot obviously…
This cover shows the tie in with the BBC adaptation. It should be sued under the Trades Description Act. If you have watched the BBC and have yet to read the book then thinking you are going to find the same story within its pages, well you will be in for a shock that is all I can say.
I could go on and on an on. But the final insult was still to come.THEY CHANGED THE IDENTITY OF THE MURDERER. Yes they did. FFS Why? and how arrogant of the producer to do this. Apparently, she wanted to bring the story 'up to date'. Dame Agatha's grandson who manages the Christie estate and who should know better, said he pondered long and deeply before agreeing with this change. Not long or deeply enough in my opinion. No doubt the cheque helped….
Poor Dame Agatha. If she could see what they are doing to her stories she would turn in her grave. We have had Miss Marple shoehorned into stories in which she never appeared, an appalling adaptation of the Tommy and Tuppence stories (the BBC again) which fortunately sunk without trace after the first series, a version of The Body in the Library with the McEwan Marple changing a heterosexual pair of lovers into a lesbian couple (presumably so we could see them exchange a passionate kiss on the beach – which we did), Cards on the Table, a Poirot story with David Suchet changing the identity of the murderer, the Poirot Suchet version of Appointment with Death changing the character of the victim to a ludicrous degree and also included a mad nun (who never appeared in the book) and the Julia McKenzie Miss Marple version of A Caribbean Mystery had a sex mad young priest wrestling with his conscience as he lusted after one of the waitresses (in the book he is an elderly English canon).
You are thinking oh gawd Elaine is off again and you are right. I am. But I simply cannot understand why these changes are made. Of course there are times when things have to be changed for reasons of dramatic drive, but all of these mentioned above do not make the story any better. So why do it? In the latest version of Death on the Orient Express directed by Branagh, an extra character was added, Pilar Estravados who is,in fact, a character in Hercule Poirot's Christmas. Again, why?
And the less said about Branagh as Poirot the better. I lasted half an hour before giving up on it.
Right after that rant I am now off to make myself a nice cup of tea. I had better make sure the strychine is at the back of the cupboard and I do not mix it up with the sugar….
Leave a Reply to Christine HardingCancel reply