Air date: 19/02/2000
Published: 1933
After the strange setting of the previous production we returned to more familiar ground with the next episode in Agatha Christie's Poirot.
Lord Edgware Dies is, I found, an enjoyable read. At one and the same time, it is both simple and complex. Simple in that it is built upon what I might call the rare 'double bluff' of whodunnit plots: where the most obvious suspect is, for once, the murderer! And yet, there is a lot of detail to hold on to as the story unfolds.
Poirot and Hastings are attending a theatrical show given by the American impressionist Carlotta Adams. Among her 'victims' is actress Jane Wilkinson, who later approaches Poirot to act as go-between in her attempt to get a divorce from her husband, Lord Edgware. He, apparently, refuses to accede to her request. She is not averse to stating, rather theatrically, that she could well go and bump him off!
When he is later found stabbed in the neck at his home, she is, therefore, the obvious suspect. However - and much to the frustration of Inspector Japp - she appears to have a watertight alibi: on the evening in question she was dining at someone's house. During the evening she mysteriously took a phone call from someone who quickly hung up. Carlotta Adams is later found dead, from an overdose of veronal. Still later another dinner party guest, aspiring writer Donald Ross, is also killed (the death-toll begins to look like a plot of Midsomer Murders!).
Characters intended to lead us off the scent include actor Bryan Martin, a one-time love interest of Jane Wilkinson, Miss Carroll, Lord Edgware's secretary, Jenny Driver (a friend of Carlotta Adams), Edgware's daughter Geraldine, who admits she hated him, and Ronald Marsh, his nephew, who becomes the new Lord Edgware.
The essence of the plot is that Wilkinson had persuaded Carlotta Adams, as part of a 'friendly hoax', to impersonate her and attend the dinner party. This allowed Wilkinson to go and murder her husband. The phone call was made by her, to double-check that Adams had not been rumbled. Adams, of course, then had to be murdered before she found out the purpose for which she had been involved. Ross is killed because during a subsequent lunch conversation Wilkinson shows little understanding of the role of Paris in ancient Greek mythology - whereas the 'other Jane Wilkinson' had done so at the original supper party.
There are, for me, two things to note about the TV adaptation. First, the changes and simplifications to the plotline. In the original Bryan Martin had intercepted a letter from Lord Edgware to his wife granting a divorce; for TV Wilkinson herself has done this. The reason? The man she wants to marry, The Duke of Merton, is a Catholic. While marrying a widow would be no problem; marrying a divorcee would. In the original it is Carlotta Adams who books into a hotel as the mysterious Miss Van Dusen (where she and Wilkinson twice exchange clothes during the fateful evening); for TV Wilkinson, an actress herself, of course, is the one to do this.
In the original Wilkinson is absent when Poirot does his usual grand summing-up. Later Hastings, our narrator, records a letter she subsequently wrote to Poirot. For TV she is present for Poirot's theatrical denouement. In both, though, she offers the line about possibly earning a place in Madame Tussard's for her crime.
Jenny Driver has, for some reason, become Penny Driver. Ronald Marsh is, in addition to being the hard-up heir to the title of Lord Edgware, now a theatrical producer. Ironically, more is made for TV of butler Alton. In the original it is not clear why, at one point, he does a runner. On TV he has stolen money from Edgware's safe (having discovered the dead body). He later dies, falling through a roof at an airport while trying to evade the police.
The second thing to note concerns the chronology of Poirot - something I have touched upon several times during this 'journey'.
In The Murder of Roger Ackroyd Poirot (already an oldish man when Christie first created him) had retired to the village of King's Abbot to grow marrows. Nothing is said at the end of the book to suggest what might happen to him in the future. In terms of the original publications that book was followed by The Big Four - something of a mess of a story, being an amalgem of several short stories, and produced at a difficult time in Agatha Christie's personal life. The Mystery of the Blue Train and Peril at End House would follow before Lord Edgware Dies was published. By then, presumably, many fans will have lost interest in issues of chronology, the age of Poirot, or whether or not he continued living in King's Abbot.
It's interesting to note that the TV producers were, to an extent, aware of these issues. At the end of the adaptation of The Murder of Roger Ackroyd Poirot comments on not being able to run away from the evils of human nature. In Lord Edgware Dies we are clearly meant to assume he took the decision to return to London and his private detective practice. Miss Lemon is seen administering the unpacking of files; she and Poirot go to welcome Hastings home from Argentina; and at a supper party that evening Inspector Japp announces that it is just like 'old times', with the four team members back together: all that's missing, he muses, is a body!
Sunday, 22 January 2017
Tuesday, 10 January 2017
46. The Murder of Roger Ackroyd
Air date: 02/01/2000
Published: 1926
Sunday, January 2nd, 2000. The froth on the big new year's celebrations had gone. The so-called millennium bug had not, it seemed, wiped out our computers. Many people were, no doubt, contemplating a return to work the next morning after an extended Christmas break.
And this was the night Agatha Christie's Poirot returned to our screens after a four year gap. It seems strange looking back on that time now, although I'll say more when I get to David Suchet's reflections.
The series returned with an adaptation of the book often acclaimed as the masterpiece which really established Christie's reputation: The Murder of Roger Ackroyd.
When I embarked on this project of comparing the written word with the TV adaptations I had to consider the inevitable revealing of plot lines - 'spoilers', as they are called in the entertainment industry. I consoled myself with the likelihood that the only people who would be interested in my analytical musings would be fans; those who had already seen the TV productions, or read the books - or both.
The Murder of Roger Ackroyd is the first story where I have had qualms about revealing all. So (and this is probably the only time I will write this) if you don't know the story, you might care to skip this chapter until you do.
Published: 1926
Sunday, January 2nd, 2000. The froth on the big new year's celebrations had gone. The so-called millennium bug had not, it seemed, wiped out our computers. Many people were, no doubt, contemplating a return to work the next morning after an extended Christmas break.
And this was the night Agatha Christie's Poirot returned to our screens after a four year gap. It seems strange looking back on that time now, although I'll say more when I get to David Suchet's reflections.
The series returned with an adaptation of the book often acclaimed as the masterpiece which really established Christie's reputation: The Murder of Roger Ackroyd.
When I embarked on this project of comparing the written word with the TV adaptations I had to consider the inevitable revealing of plot lines - 'spoilers', as they are called in the entertainment industry. I consoled myself with the likelihood that the only people who would be interested in my analytical musings would be fans; those who had already seen the TV productions, or read the books - or both.
The Murder of Roger Ackroyd is the first story where I have had qualms about revealing all. So (and this is probably the only time I will write this) if you don't know the story, you might care to skip this chapter until you do.
* * *
The Murder of Roger Ackroyd was the third novel to feature Hercule Poirot. It was also preceded by the publication of the first collection of eleven short stories, Poirot Investigates.Those who had already become fans were, therefore, by now familiar with Christie's use of the 'character-narrator' technique; where someone within the story tells the story. That character had been Poirot's trusty sidekick Captain Arthur Hastings.
Now we meet a new character-narrator, village GP Dr James Sheppard. Poirot, already aged when readers first met him in The Mysterious Affair at Styles, had retired to the village of King's Abbot to grow marrows!
The big surprise Christie pulls in this book (and I can only imagine the initial impact it had when first published) is that the narrator turns out to be the murderer!
The story begins with the announcement that a Mrs Ferrars had died. She had overdosed, apparently, on veronol, a year after the death of her husband. Sheppard tells us about wealthy Roger Ackroyd and the various members of his family and staff. When he and his sister Caroline first meet their neighbour Poirot they assume he is a retired hairdresser!
Ackroyd invites the doctor to dinner and later reveals that Mrs Ferrars, with whom he had developed a romantic attachment, had confessed to having murdered her husband. Someone else knew about this and was blackmailing her. That very evening a letter arrives from Mrs Ferrars (written before she committed suicide) in which she will, it seems, reveal the name of the blackmailer.
The doctor leaves. At home he apparently receives a phone call from servant Parker saying Ackroyd has been murdered, but on returning to Ackroyd's home Parker knows nothing of this! On entering the study the pair discover Ackroyd has, in fact, been stabbed to death.
Suspicion eventually falls on Ackroyd's step-son Roger Paton, who has disappeared. Flora Ackroyd, daughter of Ackroyd's widowed sister-in-law (who is engaged to Paton), persuades Poirot to become involved in the investigations.
As in a number of Christie's stories everything revolves around timings. Ackroyd is heard talking in his study sometime after the doctor had left. Personal assistant Geoffrey Raymond was playing billiards with another guest, Hector Blunt. The doctor passed a mysterious visitor on his way home. The study window was open. Parker recognised a chair had been moved when he and the doctor entered the study. And someone had a rendevous in the garden summer house.
Poirot manages to navigate his way through all these distractions to work out that the doctor was the blackmailer and he killed Ackroyd to prevent this becoming known. He had used a dictaphone, hidden behind the chair, to make it sound as though Ackroyd was alive later than he was. For those with keen observation skills - or, in my case, for those who know the story in advance - there are a couple of clear clues in the doctor's narration of events to suggest he was the killer.
We eventually find out that Paton has already secretly married the parlourmaid, Ursula Bourne. Another red herring concerns the drug-taking son of one of the staff.
So how would the scriptwriters handle this plot for TV? The adaptation begins when it is all over, and Poirot is reading the journal written by the murderer. Poirot's reading is cleverly interspersed throughout.
The doctor already knows Poirot as a retired detective. His sister appears less of a nosey gossip-monger than in the original. The adaptation is very faithful to the main key elements of the plot, with a few inevitable simplifications for TV. Some of the characters, like Hector Blunt and some of the servants, are omitted, along with some sub-plots - notably the drug-taking Charles Kent. Our old friend Chief Inspector Japp replaces Inspector Raglan, and his first meeting with Poirot is something of a touching reunion between two old comrades.
One surprise is an additional murder! Parker is run over on his way home from an evening drinking at the local pub. Clearly he was killed for being too observant about details (like the chair that was moved).
It is, however, the finale that provides the biggest difference. In the original Poirot confronts the doctor with the true sequence of events. The doctor departs and the last, sombre chapter sees him writing immediately before, apparently, taking his own life.
For TV his sister finds the journal in the glove compartment of the doctor's car, along with a gun (which, apparently, he had originally taken with him to kill Ackroyd with, before deciding to take advantage of an ornamental daggar already in the house). She joins the denouement conversation and allows Sheppard to grab the gun and attempt an escape. However, he does eventually take his own life - with the final bullet in the revolver.
The dramatic chase through Ackroyd's factory seemed somewhat out of keeping with the plot, and with the character of the doctor himself.
At one point Poirot and Japp visit London, and take the opportunity to look round Poirot's old flat. There he talks of ghosts from the past. At the end of the episode he confesses that he could not escape human nature by simply retiring to the country - paving the way, we assume, for normality to be resumed in the next episode!
Wednesday, 21 December 2016
Interlude: "Poirot and Me"
Suchet's role in stage-play Oleanna was the cause of production on episodes of Agatha Christie's Poirot being postponed for a year. He clearly enjoyed what was a challenging and demanding role, and was rewarded with some excellent reviews.
Four episodes of Poirot were filmed in 1994, two of which were broadcast the following year, and the other two in 1996.
The first of these was Hercule Poirot's Christmas, which I have already referred to as one of my favourite episodes, and one that I enjoy watching every year in the week leading up to Christmas. Suchet comments on how much Philip Jackson enjoyed the episode, as it gave him the opportunity to flesh out the character of Japp somewhat - away from his usual London setting.
Suchet describes the story as "not in the slightest bit 'Christmassy'", which I would disagree with. To some extent, of course, it depends what you mean by 'Christmassy', but I thought the production was full of touches that made it the perfect Christmas murder mystery: the thick snow, Christmas carols, a large old country manor, and a musical score that, in between scenes, added a Christmas feel to the Poirot theme music.
The last of the four episodes filmed that year, Dumb Witness, was one Suchet clearly enjoyed immensely, partly for the storyline and partly for the Lake District location given to the adaptation.
That year he also appeared in a stage production called What a Performance, about the post-war comedian Sid Field. The chapter ends with an ominous final sentence - presaging the longest-ever break in production of Poirot stories.
Four episodes of Poirot were filmed in 1994, two of which were broadcast the following year, and the other two in 1996.
The first of these was Hercule Poirot's Christmas, which I have already referred to as one of my favourite episodes, and one that I enjoy watching every year in the week leading up to Christmas. Suchet comments on how much Philip Jackson enjoyed the episode, as it gave him the opportunity to flesh out the character of Japp somewhat - away from his usual London setting.
Suchet describes the story as "not in the slightest bit 'Christmassy'", which I would disagree with. To some extent, of course, it depends what you mean by 'Christmassy', but I thought the production was full of touches that made it the perfect Christmas murder mystery: the thick snow, Christmas carols, a large old country manor, and a musical score that, in between scenes, added a Christmas feel to the Poirot theme music.
The last of the four episodes filmed that year, Dumb Witness, was one Suchet clearly enjoyed immensely, partly for the storyline and partly for the Lake District location given to the adaptation.
That year he also appeared in a stage production called What a Performance, about the post-war comedian Sid Field. The chapter ends with an ominous final sentence - presaging the longest-ever break in production of Poirot stories.
Friday, 19 August 2016
45. Dumb Witness
Air date: 16/03/1996
Published: 1937
Dumb Witness is one of those stories where my preferences lay decidedly with the TV adaptation.
The novel opens with the stark sentence, "Miss Arundell died on May 1st." It quickly becomes apparent that what follows is by way of flashback, as we are introduced to aging Miss Emily Arundell, her fussy companion, Miss Lawson, her nieces and nephews Theresa (engaged to a young doctor), the seemingly amoral Charles, and Bella (married to a Greek doctor). All three are keen to get their hands on some of Miss Arundell's considerable fortune.
There is an accident while all three are staying with their aunt. Miss Arundell falls down the stairs at night. Bob, her dog, is blamed for leaving his ball at the top of the stairs. Fortunately Miss Arundell is not seriously injured. While recovering she begins to have doubts about the cause of the incident, and writes to both her solicitor (to change her will) and to Poirot.
It is only when we get to chapter five, and Poirot is reading his mail, that we discover that the previous four chapters have been narrated by Captain Hastings. Although Miss Arundell wrote on April 28th it has taken some weeks for the letter to reach our Belgian detective.
Intrigued, the pair head off for the town of Market Basing. However, upon arrival, they discover that Miss Arundell died some weeks previously - apparently of liver failure. The change of will had seen her leave everything to Miss Lawson.
However, when Poirot discovers a nail in the landing skirting board he suspects that Miss Arundell's fall had been attempted murder. He begins to investigate further.
The middle part of the book is, to my mind, rather ponderous, as Poirot visits and interviews the various leading players and other locals. Eventually Miss Lawson remembers seeing someone kneeling on the landing on the night of the accident, wearing a brooch with the initials 'TA' on it. This obviously suggests Theresa Arundell had attempted to murder her aunt.
However, Poirot eventually realises that Miss Lawson was looking in a mirror at the time! 'TA' therefore becomes 'AT' - (Ara)bella Tanios. Bella had subsequently created the impression that she was terrified of her husband, Dr Tanios, and had left him, seeking sanctuary with Miss Lawson.
A rather unnecessary addition to the story is an interest in spiritualism. Two sisters, the Tripps, and Miss Lawson, show an enthusiasm for the practice, and claim that Miss Arundell was emanating a "luminous haze" at the time of her death.
Very late in the story Poirot introduces the element of phosphorous to account for this. Bella Tanios had poisoned her aunt. She hadn't realised that the will had been changed (although Charles was aware of this before his aunt's death). Motive? She disliked her husband and wanted to be rid of him and to make a life of her own. Poirot gives her a letter with his summary of events. She commits suicide before he gets to do his usual summing up.
Dumb Witness is one of Christie's longer Poirot novels. Considerable tightening up of the storyline takes place to bring it to the small screen.
The adaptation opens with Bob watching someone doing something nefarious on the landing. Miss Lawson hears Bob bark and sees the person in the mirror. We clearly see 'TA' (now on the breast pocket of a dressing gown, rather than on a brooch) - providing the initial clue much earlier.
A common feature in Agatha Christie's Poirot has been for Poirot to be present at the time of a murder, rather than hearing everything in flashback. So here he and Hastings arrive in the Lake District (a different setting to the novel) to see Charles (an old acquaintance of Hastings) attempt to beat the motorboat world speed record. Perhaps because of the link with Hastings Charles is far less criminally intentioned in the adaptation.
Bob's trick with the ball is now that he both bunts it down the stairs and runs after it to catch it (in the novel he bunts it down for others to retrieve). Afterwards he always returns it to his basket - which initially alerts Poirot to the unlikelihood of his ball being at the top of the stairs. The skirting board nail, covered in varnish, has become a screw eyelet, which later gets removed - confirming Poirot's suspicions. This is, I think, more plausible than the nail being left in the skirting board for weeks as in the original novel, and makes for a good clue to Poirot being on the right track.
Theresa's fiance, Dr Donaldson, is omitted altogether, as are several of the village characters that Poirot interviews in the novel. However, Miss Arundel's doctor, Dr Grainger, is retained. In fact, if anything, he has a bigger role in the adaptation. First, he has a romantic association with Miss Lawson (who is not quite so fussy as in the novel), and it is he who first suspects phosphorous when told of a green luminous haze on Miss Arundel's breath shortly before she died. He telephones Dr Tanios, but the call is taken by Bella. Shortly after, he is murdered. Big clue. A red herring is thrown in, however: we see Charles using a mixture containing phosphorous to polish his boat.
In his summing up Poirot refers to the mirror image of 'AT'. Bella, it now transpires, added phosphorous to her aunt's liver capsules, which gets round why she killed her even after the will had been changed: she had, in fact, added the substance to the capsule before the change of will, not knowing exactly when her aunt would take the capsule in question.
Dumb Witness marked the end of season six, which had been spread over 1995 and 1996. It would be four years before we would see Poirot on our TV screens again - the longest gap in the entire history of the programme.
Published: 1937
Dumb Witness is one of those stories where my preferences lay decidedly with the TV adaptation.
The novel opens with the stark sentence, "Miss Arundell died on May 1st." It quickly becomes apparent that what follows is by way of flashback, as we are introduced to aging Miss Emily Arundell, her fussy companion, Miss Lawson, her nieces and nephews Theresa (engaged to a young doctor), the seemingly amoral Charles, and Bella (married to a Greek doctor). All three are keen to get their hands on some of Miss Arundell's considerable fortune.
There is an accident while all three are staying with their aunt. Miss Arundell falls down the stairs at night. Bob, her dog, is blamed for leaving his ball at the top of the stairs. Fortunately Miss Arundell is not seriously injured. While recovering she begins to have doubts about the cause of the incident, and writes to both her solicitor (to change her will) and to Poirot.
It is only when we get to chapter five, and Poirot is reading his mail, that we discover that the previous four chapters have been narrated by Captain Hastings. Although Miss Arundell wrote on April 28th it has taken some weeks for the letter to reach our Belgian detective.
Intrigued, the pair head off for the town of Market Basing. However, upon arrival, they discover that Miss Arundell died some weeks previously - apparently of liver failure. The change of will had seen her leave everything to Miss Lawson.
However, when Poirot discovers a nail in the landing skirting board he suspects that Miss Arundell's fall had been attempted murder. He begins to investigate further.
The middle part of the book is, to my mind, rather ponderous, as Poirot visits and interviews the various leading players and other locals. Eventually Miss Lawson remembers seeing someone kneeling on the landing on the night of the accident, wearing a brooch with the initials 'TA' on it. This obviously suggests Theresa Arundell had attempted to murder her aunt.
However, Poirot eventually realises that Miss Lawson was looking in a mirror at the time! 'TA' therefore becomes 'AT' - (Ara)bella Tanios. Bella had subsequently created the impression that she was terrified of her husband, Dr Tanios, and had left him, seeking sanctuary with Miss Lawson.
A rather unnecessary addition to the story is an interest in spiritualism. Two sisters, the Tripps, and Miss Lawson, show an enthusiasm for the practice, and claim that Miss Arundell was emanating a "luminous haze" at the time of her death.
Very late in the story Poirot introduces the element of phosphorous to account for this. Bella Tanios had poisoned her aunt. She hadn't realised that the will had been changed (although Charles was aware of this before his aunt's death). Motive? She disliked her husband and wanted to be rid of him and to make a life of her own. Poirot gives her a letter with his summary of events. She commits suicide before he gets to do his usual summing up.
Dumb Witness is one of Christie's longer Poirot novels. Considerable tightening up of the storyline takes place to bring it to the small screen.
The adaptation opens with Bob watching someone doing something nefarious on the landing. Miss Lawson hears Bob bark and sees the person in the mirror. We clearly see 'TA' (now on the breast pocket of a dressing gown, rather than on a brooch) - providing the initial clue much earlier.
A common feature in Agatha Christie's Poirot has been for Poirot to be present at the time of a murder, rather than hearing everything in flashback. So here he and Hastings arrive in the Lake District (a different setting to the novel) to see Charles (an old acquaintance of Hastings) attempt to beat the motorboat world speed record. Perhaps because of the link with Hastings Charles is far less criminally intentioned in the adaptation.
Bob's trick with the ball is now that he both bunts it down the stairs and runs after it to catch it (in the novel he bunts it down for others to retrieve). Afterwards he always returns it to his basket - which initially alerts Poirot to the unlikelihood of his ball being at the top of the stairs. The skirting board nail, covered in varnish, has become a screw eyelet, which later gets removed - confirming Poirot's suspicions. This is, I think, more plausible than the nail being left in the skirting board for weeks as in the original novel, and makes for a good clue to Poirot being on the right track.
Theresa's fiance, Dr Donaldson, is omitted altogether, as are several of the village characters that Poirot interviews in the novel. However, Miss Arundel's doctor, Dr Grainger, is retained. In fact, if anything, he has a bigger role in the adaptation. First, he has a romantic association with Miss Lawson (who is not quite so fussy as in the novel), and it is he who first suspects phosphorous when told of a green luminous haze on Miss Arundel's breath shortly before she died. He telephones Dr Tanios, but the call is taken by Bella. Shortly after, he is murdered. Big clue. A red herring is thrown in, however: we see Charles using a mixture containing phosphorous to polish his boat.
In his summing up Poirot refers to the mirror image of 'AT'. Bella, it now transpires, added phosphorous to her aunt's liver capsules, which gets round why she killed her even after the will had been changed: she had, in fact, added the substance to the capsule before the change of will, not knowing exactly when her aunt would take the capsule in question.
Dumb Witness marked the end of season six, which had been spread over 1995 and 1996. It would be four years before we would see Poirot on our TV screens again - the longest gap in the entire history of the programme.
Friday, 5 February 2016
44. Murder on the Links
Air date: 11/02/1996
Published: 1923
From the first post-Second World War novel Agatha Christie's Poirot lurched back in time to the second-ever novel to feature the Belgian detective.
Murder on the Links, like its predecessor, The Mysterious Affair at Styles, has Captain Hastings narrating, and repeats some of the latter's description of Poirot himself.
The original plot is a clever one, although, in my opinion, drags somewhat towards the end, with possibly one or two twists too many.
It opens with Hastings meeting an unidentified young woman on a train from France. Poirot then receives a letter from a P.T Renauld in France asking for his assistance. However, when the couple arrive Monsieur Renauld has just been murdered! His body was found in a newly dug grave on the golf course adjacent to the family home. His wife, meanwhile, had been left bound and gagged in their bedroom. An Examining Magistrate, one M.Haulet, takes initial responsibility, and we are later introduced to Inspector Giraud from the Surete, who forms a dislike of Poirot.
Renauld was visited by a woman on the evening of the murder, possibly neighbour Madame Daubreuil, or possibly the mysterious Bella Duveen (a letter from her is found in the dead man's coat pocket). His son Jack, it seems, was on his way to South America that evening (dispatched by his father on some mysterious business matter). Jack is in a romantic relationship with Madame Daubreuil's daughter Marthe.
Hastings meets the mysterious woman he had met on the train again, and shows her the dead body (being kept by the police in a shed adjoining the house). The dagger later goes missing.
Then a second dead body turns up in another shed on the grounds. Initially it appears the stolen dagger was used, until the examining doctor declares this person had died earlier than Renauld! In fact, he had been stabbed after having died (probably of an epileptic fit).
A visit to Paris by Poirot uncovers a photograph showing that Madame Daubreuil was, in fact, the Madame Beroldy of a notorious murder case years earlier. The circumstances of that case had been similar (her husband had been murdered and she had been found bound and gagged). It was later claimed that she had been party to the murder and that it had been carried out by a friend of her husband's, Georges Conneau, who had subsequently disappeared.
To cut a convoluted story short, Poirot eventually reveals (quite a while before the end of the story) that Renauld was, in fact, Conneau. He had stage-managed his own (fake) death, because he was being blackmailed by Madame Daubreuil. His plan was to disappear, and for his wife to later join him. The death on his grounds of an argumentative tramp had given him the opportunity. However, while digging the grave near a planned golf course bunker (to put the tramp in, dressed in his clothes) he had himself been stabbed in the back. He and Jack had taken each other's overcoats, so the letter in the pocket was for Jack, not his father.
Evidence points to Bella Duveen as the most likely suspect, and Hastings resolves to protect her. The police, however, eventually arrest Renauld's son Jack. At the preliminary trial hearing Bella Duveen turns up dramatically to confess. However, she is not the Bella Hastings thinks is Bella! She is, in fact, her twin sister. Hastings' Bella is Dulcie. Confused?
As it turns out, it wasn't Jack. It wasn't Bella (they were protecting each other), it was Marthe. Renauld had disapproved of her relationship with his son. Poirot concocts a plan in which it seems Madame Renauld is going to disinherit her son with a newly written will, to flush out Marthe, who attempts to kill her before she can do so.
The story ends with Hastings and Dulcie together - it was Dulcie he had actually met on the train at the beginning.
The adaptation is, as has often been the case, very faithful to the essential elements of the plot, with some simplifications. It opens with a news footage report of the Beroldy case. Keen eyed viewers shouldn't have too much difficulty recognising, from the albeit grainy photos, that Conneau (or Connor as he is for TV) is Renauld.
Notably there is only one Duveen girl, Bella, who Hastings first sees singing at a club where he and Poirot are dining. She had been in a relationship with Jack Renauld. The chain of events on the night of the murder had led both to believe the other was the murderer.
An interesting, but rather irrelevant, backdrop to the story is the Deuville cycle race, which Jack is taking part in. It is at the conclusion to the race that Geraud has him arrested. Interestingly, Geraud's antipathy toward Poirot comes over even more strongly on TV. In the book the two have a £500 wager over solving the case - but this comes well into the story. For TV this comes much earlier, and is now a winner takes all, with Geraud agreeing to give up his famous pipe if he loses - provided Poirot agrees to shave off his mustache if he loses!
In the tender finale Poirot reunites Hastings with Bella Duveen. In the books Hastings would subsequently marry Dulcie and move to Argentina. His appearance in later novels being confined to occasions when he was visiting Poirot.
Published: 1923
From the first post-Second World War novel Agatha Christie's Poirot lurched back in time to the second-ever novel to feature the Belgian detective.
Murder on the Links, like its predecessor, The Mysterious Affair at Styles, has Captain Hastings narrating, and repeats some of the latter's description of Poirot himself.
The original plot is a clever one, although, in my opinion, drags somewhat towards the end, with possibly one or two twists too many.
It opens with Hastings meeting an unidentified young woman on a train from France. Poirot then receives a letter from a P.T Renauld in France asking for his assistance. However, when the couple arrive Monsieur Renauld has just been murdered! His body was found in a newly dug grave on the golf course adjacent to the family home. His wife, meanwhile, had been left bound and gagged in their bedroom. An Examining Magistrate, one M.Haulet, takes initial responsibility, and we are later introduced to Inspector Giraud from the Surete, who forms a dislike of Poirot.
Renauld was visited by a woman on the evening of the murder, possibly neighbour Madame Daubreuil, or possibly the mysterious Bella Duveen (a letter from her is found in the dead man's coat pocket). His son Jack, it seems, was on his way to South America that evening (dispatched by his father on some mysterious business matter). Jack is in a romantic relationship with Madame Daubreuil's daughter Marthe.
Hastings meets the mysterious woman he had met on the train again, and shows her the dead body (being kept by the police in a shed adjoining the house). The dagger later goes missing.
Then a second dead body turns up in another shed on the grounds. Initially it appears the stolen dagger was used, until the examining doctor declares this person had died earlier than Renauld! In fact, he had been stabbed after having died (probably of an epileptic fit).
A visit to Paris by Poirot uncovers a photograph showing that Madame Daubreuil was, in fact, the Madame Beroldy of a notorious murder case years earlier. The circumstances of that case had been similar (her husband had been murdered and she had been found bound and gagged). It was later claimed that she had been party to the murder and that it had been carried out by a friend of her husband's, Georges Conneau, who had subsequently disappeared.
To cut a convoluted story short, Poirot eventually reveals (quite a while before the end of the story) that Renauld was, in fact, Conneau. He had stage-managed his own (fake) death, because he was being blackmailed by Madame Daubreuil. His plan was to disappear, and for his wife to later join him. The death on his grounds of an argumentative tramp had given him the opportunity. However, while digging the grave near a planned golf course bunker (to put the tramp in, dressed in his clothes) he had himself been stabbed in the back. He and Jack had taken each other's overcoats, so the letter in the pocket was for Jack, not his father.
Evidence points to Bella Duveen as the most likely suspect, and Hastings resolves to protect her. The police, however, eventually arrest Renauld's son Jack. At the preliminary trial hearing Bella Duveen turns up dramatically to confess. However, she is not the Bella Hastings thinks is Bella! She is, in fact, her twin sister. Hastings' Bella is Dulcie. Confused?
As it turns out, it wasn't Jack. It wasn't Bella (they were protecting each other), it was Marthe. Renauld had disapproved of her relationship with his son. Poirot concocts a plan in which it seems Madame Renauld is going to disinherit her son with a newly written will, to flush out Marthe, who attempts to kill her before she can do so.
The story ends with Hastings and Dulcie together - it was Dulcie he had actually met on the train at the beginning.
The adaptation is, as has often been the case, very faithful to the essential elements of the plot, with some simplifications. It opens with a news footage report of the Beroldy case. Keen eyed viewers shouldn't have too much difficulty recognising, from the albeit grainy photos, that Conneau (or Connor as he is for TV) is Renauld.
Notably there is only one Duveen girl, Bella, who Hastings first sees singing at a club where he and Poirot are dining. She had been in a relationship with Jack Renauld. The chain of events on the night of the murder had led both to believe the other was the murderer.
An interesting, but rather irrelevant, backdrop to the story is the Deuville cycle race, which Jack is taking part in. It is at the conclusion to the race that Geraud has him arrested. Interestingly, Geraud's antipathy toward Poirot comes over even more strongly on TV. In the book the two have a £500 wager over solving the case - but this comes well into the story. For TV this comes much earlier, and is now a winner takes all, with Geraud agreeing to give up his famous pipe if he loses - provided Poirot agrees to shave off his mustache if he loses!
In the tender finale Poirot reunites Hastings with Bella Duveen. In the books Hastings would subsequently marry Dulcie and move to Argentina. His appearance in later novels being confined to occasions when he was visiting Poirot.
Thursday, 31 December 2015
43. Hickory Dickory Dock
Air date: 12/02/1995
Published: 1955
Hickory Dickory Dock had the distinction of being the first post-Second World War novel to be adapted for Agatha Christie's Poirot. Although not a huge factor for this particular story, it serves to remind us again of that intractable issue of chronology that would become more prevalent as later Poirot novels were filmed.
The story is set in a student hostel and concerns two issues: smuggling and murder.
The book opens with Poirot observing three mistakes in a letter typed by the normally super-efficient Miss Lemon. Hickory Dickory Dock was actually the first novel to feature the character; the others being Dead Man's Folly (1956), Third Girl (1966) and Elephants Can Remember (1972).
The reason, apparently, is her current concern for her widowed sister, Mrs Hubbard, who runs a student hostel - where random items have recently been stolen.
Poirot becomes involved, under the pretext of giving a lecture on crime at the hostel, and one student, Celia Austin, eventually confesses to (most of) the crimes. Kleptomania seems the cause - although she was possibly put up to it as a way of attracting the attentions of psychology student Colin McNabb. However, shortly after this Celia is found dead from a lethal dose of morphine. Two more people, hostel owner Mrs Nicoletis, and another student, Patricia Lane, are also murdered, presumably for what they knew.
Strangely, although he appears in the book's opening sentence, Poirot slips into the background for much of the investigation, carried out by one Inspector Sharpe. This, again, would be an observable trend in later Poirot novels.
Eventually we discover that the smuggling is being run by one of the hostel residents, Valerie Hobhouse. The murders, however, are the work of her accomplice, student Nigel Chapman. Early on we are told he was estranged from his father. However, it is only in the closing chapters that Poirot announces that, years earlier, Chapman's father had covered up the fact that Chapman had killed his own mother. At the time he had forced his son to write a confession, which he promised to keep secret - as long as his son was never involved in any sort of criminal activity again.
Although generally faithful to the main plot the adaptation is, I feel, a much more balanced tale, with far more intrigue. We are introduced to Chapman's father, Sir Arthur Stanley, much earlier (although we don't initially know the link with Chapman himself). Japp (who once again replaces the local investigating officer) knows Sir Stanley from the past and is wary of him (he later tells Poirot he believes Sir Stanley murdered his wife ten years earlier). Mrs Nicoletis has become the ringleader of the smuggling (which utilises student rucksacks to bring diamonds into the UK from the continent). A mysterious man is seen (on at least three occasions) observing the hostel: he is later revealed to be a Customs and Excise officer, and one of the students, American Sally Finch, is now working undercover for him. Celia's observing of someone hiding a rucksack in a back alley boiler room is a more prominent clue as to the reason for her murder. By the same token, when politics student Pat visits the ailing Sir Stanley in hospital she discovers photos in a family album - making the link with Chapman.
Poirot has a more theatrical summing up, and when a mouse startles Miss Lemon, Chapman does a runner, before being apprehended in the local underground station.
A historical background to the episode is the Jarrow Marches, which took place in October 1936, locating the adaptation in the customary 1930s era.
One regular feature of the adaptations was the slimming down of the cast. In the original Hickory Dickory Dock novel the hostel seems a larger establishment (two buildings combined into one) and there are significantly more students. Interestingly, those who are omitted for the adaptation are the foreign students. Christie's cast originally featured Indian, Dutch, French, Egyptian and West Indian students, alongside the British. Perhaps the TV producers felt this was far less likely to have been the case in the mid 1930s than in the post-war setting of the novel.
The customary humour comes from Japp staying at Poirot's flat (while Mrs Japp is on holiday). He doesn't take to his host's fancy food - or to the central heating! In the finale, Japp returns the compliment. Predictably, Poirot turns his nose up at Japp's offering of mash, mushy peas and faggots!
Published: 1955
Hickory Dickory Dock had the distinction of being the first post-Second World War novel to be adapted for Agatha Christie's Poirot. Although not a huge factor for this particular story, it serves to remind us again of that intractable issue of chronology that would become more prevalent as later Poirot novels were filmed.
The story is set in a student hostel and concerns two issues: smuggling and murder.
The book opens with Poirot observing three mistakes in a letter typed by the normally super-efficient Miss Lemon. Hickory Dickory Dock was actually the first novel to feature the character; the others being Dead Man's Folly (1956), Third Girl (1966) and Elephants Can Remember (1972).
The reason, apparently, is her current concern for her widowed sister, Mrs Hubbard, who runs a student hostel - where random items have recently been stolen.
Poirot becomes involved, under the pretext of giving a lecture on crime at the hostel, and one student, Celia Austin, eventually confesses to (most of) the crimes. Kleptomania seems the cause - although she was possibly put up to it as a way of attracting the attentions of psychology student Colin McNabb. However, shortly after this Celia is found dead from a lethal dose of morphine. Two more people, hostel owner Mrs Nicoletis, and another student, Patricia Lane, are also murdered, presumably for what they knew.
Strangely, although he appears in the book's opening sentence, Poirot slips into the background for much of the investigation, carried out by one Inspector Sharpe. This, again, would be an observable trend in later Poirot novels.
Eventually we discover that the smuggling is being run by one of the hostel residents, Valerie Hobhouse. The murders, however, are the work of her accomplice, student Nigel Chapman. Early on we are told he was estranged from his father. However, it is only in the closing chapters that Poirot announces that, years earlier, Chapman's father had covered up the fact that Chapman had killed his own mother. At the time he had forced his son to write a confession, which he promised to keep secret - as long as his son was never involved in any sort of criminal activity again.
Although generally faithful to the main plot the adaptation is, I feel, a much more balanced tale, with far more intrigue. We are introduced to Chapman's father, Sir Arthur Stanley, much earlier (although we don't initially know the link with Chapman himself). Japp (who once again replaces the local investigating officer) knows Sir Stanley from the past and is wary of him (he later tells Poirot he believes Sir Stanley murdered his wife ten years earlier). Mrs Nicoletis has become the ringleader of the smuggling (which utilises student rucksacks to bring diamonds into the UK from the continent). A mysterious man is seen (on at least three occasions) observing the hostel: he is later revealed to be a Customs and Excise officer, and one of the students, American Sally Finch, is now working undercover for him. Celia's observing of someone hiding a rucksack in a back alley boiler room is a more prominent clue as to the reason for her murder. By the same token, when politics student Pat visits the ailing Sir Stanley in hospital she discovers photos in a family album - making the link with Chapman.
Poirot has a more theatrical summing up, and when a mouse startles Miss Lemon, Chapman does a runner, before being apprehended in the local underground station.
A historical background to the episode is the Jarrow Marches, which took place in October 1936, locating the adaptation in the customary 1930s era.
One regular feature of the adaptations was the slimming down of the cast. In the original Hickory Dickory Dock novel the hostel seems a larger establishment (two buildings combined into one) and there are significantly more students. Interestingly, those who are omitted for the adaptation are the foreign students. Christie's cast originally featured Indian, Dutch, French, Egyptian and West Indian students, alongside the British. Perhaps the TV producers felt this was far less likely to have been the case in the mid 1930s than in the post-war setting of the novel.
The customary humour comes from Japp staying at Poirot's flat (while Mrs Japp is on holiday). He doesn't take to his host's fancy food - or to the central heating! In the finale, Japp returns the compliment. Predictably, Poirot turns his nose up at Japp's offering of mash, mushy peas and faggots!
Wednesday, 23 December 2015
42. Hercule Poirot's Christmas
Air date: 01/01/1995
Published: 1938
After a year's break (the first since its inception) Agatha Christie's Poirot returned with what has become one of my favourite episodes - Hercule Poirot's Christmas.
Indeed, since 2010 (thanks, initially, to ITV3, and, latterly, to the DVD collection I have amassed) it has become a family tradition to watch the festive murder of the aged Simeon Lee a few days before Christmas.
The original opens with Stephen Farr - son of an old mining colleague of Lee's - on a train from London to the Lee country home. On board he meets Pilar Estrevados, daughter of Lee's late daughter Jennifer, heading in the same direction.
Agatha Christie created chapter divisions corresponding to calendar dates, from December 22nd to 28th. The TV adaptation follows this (with a calendar appearing periodically on screen), although, for some reason, the dates are amended to 21st - 25th.
The opening chapter introduces the family members: stay-at-home Alfred Lee and wife Lydia; ambitious, penny-pinching George Lee (MP) and his young, glamourous wife Magdalene; and artistic runaway David Lee and his wife Hilda. We meet black-sheep of the family Harry Lee on 23rd.
Most of the action happens in the long chapter for Christmas Eve. Simeon Lee, who has made his money in mining, gathers his family, while pretending to phone his solicitor about changing his will. He accuses all of them of being "namby pamby weaklings". News that Pilar and Harry will be living in permanently also ruffles a few feathers. During dinner the family hear an awful commotion from Lee's room (he never comes downstairs). Breaking into his locked room, they find him on the floor, with his throat cut. Some uncut diamonds have disappeared from his safe. Supt Sugden, who had visited earlier to collect money for a police orphanage, is quickly on the scene to begin the investigation. We then cut to Poirot (who doesn't appear until page 100) dining with his friend Colonel Johnson, the county Chief Constable. Both are called in on the crime. The rest of the chapter sees the three men interviewing all the main suspects.
The diamonds are eventually discovered in one of Lydia Lee's miniature garden displays. Stephen Farr is not who he says he is; neither is Pilar, while George Lee and his wife both claim to have been on the phone at the (apparent) time of the murder.
Poirot eventually deduces that Supt Sugden had committed the murder earlier in the evening (when visiting to collect funds). He had piled up furniture in Lee's room and attached a cord around it, before dropping it out of the window. Later he had returned and pulled the cord to cause the furniture to collapse, creating the impression that Lee was murdered later in the evening than in fact he was. Motive? Sugden was one of those children Lee had boasted of having sired "on the wrong side of the blanket". On no less than four occasions in the early part of the book we are told that Lees don't forget things, and will often wait years to get revenge on someone. That is the biggest clue.
The TV adaptation is very faithful to the story - even including several speeches almost verbatim from the book. Such changes as are made, are I believe, an improvement on the original (for reasons I will explain).
It opens with an extended flashback to 1896. A young Simeon Lee kills his prospecting partner over some uncut diamonds. Injured, he is rescued by a South African woman with whom he stays for a while. However, he eventually runs out on her. A distinct birthmark on her face identifies her as the mysterious, elderly woman who turns up in the local village, staying at the pub, during the time of the murder. This becomes a major clue for the viewer. Although Lee had mined in South Africa, the original does not suggest Sugden's mother was South African.
We then see Poirot and Chief Insp Japp bidding each other a happy Christmas, before Poirot discovers the central heating in his flat has broken down. At that moment Simeon Lee phones him, inviting him to come and stay for Christmas. Lee is worried that his life is in danger. Thus, Poirot is present when the murder takes place. He subsequently 'rescues' Japp from his Welsh in-laws (Japp thus replaces Colonel Johnson). The events are more truncated for TV, the murder taking place on the evening of the 22nd.
Not for the first time in Agatha Christie's Poirot some characters are cut from the original; namely Stephen Farr and David (and Hilda) Lee. This, I think, greatly improves the flow. Farr doesn't really add much to the original, while David reads as something of a cross between the loyal Alfred and the renegade Harry. It is now Harry who meets Pilar on the train, and when it is discovered that she is not really Pilar (but Pilar's friend) it is Harry (no longer her uncle!) who forms the romantic attachment with her at the end (rather than Farr).
The producers went to town on the 'Christmas feel' for this story. Snow is thick on the ground. No snow is mentioned in the original; indeed, when Sudgen leaves after his initial visit, the original has him telling butler Tresillian: "I think we shall have a frost tonight. Good thing: the weather's been very unseasonable lately." For TV that becomes: "We'll been having more snow tonight, I shouldn't wonder." Carol singing appears and there is also a very 'Christmassy' twist on the Poirot theme score that recurs during quieter linking scenes.
The adaptation ends on the customary light-hearted note. Poirot and Japp exchange gifts. Japp is delighted with his cigars; Poirot, predictably, less enamoured with the gloves knitted for him by Mrs Japp! Wonderful!
Published: 1938
After a year's break (the first since its inception) Agatha Christie's Poirot returned with what has become one of my favourite episodes - Hercule Poirot's Christmas.
Indeed, since 2010 (thanks, initially, to ITV3, and, latterly, to the DVD collection I have amassed) it has become a family tradition to watch the festive murder of the aged Simeon Lee a few days before Christmas.
The original opens with Stephen Farr - son of an old mining colleague of Lee's - on a train from London to the Lee country home. On board he meets Pilar Estrevados, daughter of Lee's late daughter Jennifer, heading in the same direction.
Agatha Christie created chapter divisions corresponding to calendar dates, from December 22nd to 28th. The TV adaptation follows this (with a calendar appearing periodically on screen), although, for some reason, the dates are amended to 21st - 25th.
The opening chapter introduces the family members: stay-at-home Alfred Lee and wife Lydia; ambitious, penny-pinching George Lee (MP) and his young, glamourous wife Magdalene; and artistic runaway David Lee and his wife Hilda. We meet black-sheep of the family Harry Lee on 23rd.
Most of the action happens in the long chapter for Christmas Eve. Simeon Lee, who has made his money in mining, gathers his family, while pretending to phone his solicitor about changing his will. He accuses all of them of being "namby pamby weaklings". News that Pilar and Harry will be living in permanently also ruffles a few feathers. During dinner the family hear an awful commotion from Lee's room (he never comes downstairs). Breaking into his locked room, they find him on the floor, with his throat cut. Some uncut diamonds have disappeared from his safe. Supt Sugden, who had visited earlier to collect money for a police orphanage, is quickly on the scene to begin the investigation. We then cut to Poirot (who doesn't appear until page 100) dining with his friend Colonel Johnson, the county Chief Constable. Both are called in on the crime. The rest of the chapter sees the three men interviewing all the main suspects.
The diamonds are eventually discovered in one of Lydia Lee's miniature garden displays. Stephen Farr is not who he says he is; neither is Pilar, while George Lee and his wife both claim to have been on the phone at the (apparent) time of the murder.
Poirot eventually deduces that Supt Sugden had committed the murder earlier in the evening (when visiting to collect funds). He had piled up furniture in Lee's room and attached a cord around it, before dropping it out of the window. Later he had returned and pulled the cord to cause the furniture to collapse, creating the impression that Lee was murdered later in the evening than in fact he was. Motive? Sugden was one of those children Lee had boasted of having sired "on the wrong side of the blanket". On no less than four occasions in the early part of the book we are told that Lees don't forget things, and will often wait years to get revenge on someone. That is the biggest clue.
The TV adaptation is very faithful to the story - even including several speeches almost verbatim from the book. Such changes as are made, are I believe, an improvement on the original (for reasons I will explain).
It opens with an extended flashback to 1896. A young Simeon Lee kills his prospecting partner over some uncut diamonds. Injured, he is rescued by a South African woman with whom he stays for a while. However, he eventually runs out on her. A distinct birthmark on her face identifies her as the mysterious, elderly woman who turns up in the local village, staying at the pub, during the time of the murder. This becomes a major clue for the viewer. Although Lee had mined in South Africa, the original does not suggest Sugden's mother was South African.
We then see Poirot and Chief Insp Japp bidding each other a happy Christmas, before Poirot discovers the central heating in his flat has broken down. At that moment Simeon Lee phones him, inviting him to come and stay for Christmas. Lee is worried that his life is in danger. Thus, Poirot is present when the murder takes place. He subsequently 'rescues' Japp from his Welsh in-laws (Japp thus replaces Colonel Johnson). The events are more truncated for TV, the murder taking place on the evening of the 22nd.
Not for the first time in Agatha Christie's Poirot some characters are cut from the original; namely Stephen Farr and David (and Hilda) Lee. This, I think, greatly improves the flow. Farr doesn't really add much to the original, while David reads as something of a cross between the loyal Alfred and the renegade Harry. It is now Harry who meets Pilar on the train, and when it is discovered that she is not really Pilar (but Pilar's friend) it is Harry (no longer her uncle!) who forms the romantic attachment with her at the end (rather than Farr).
The producers went to town on the 'Christmas feel' for this story. Snow is thick on the ground. No snow is mentioned in the original; indeed, when Sudgen leaves after his initial visit, the original has him telling butler Tresillian: "I think we shall have a frost tonight. Good thing: the weather's been very unseasonable lately." For TV that becomes: "We'll been having more snow tonight, I shouldn't wonder." Carol singing appears and there is also a very 'Christmassy' twist on the Poirot theme score that recurs during quieter linking scenes.
The adaptation ends on the customary light-hearted note. Poirot and Japp exchange gifts. Japp is delighted with his cigars; Poirot, predictably, less enamoured with the gloves knitted for him by Mrs Japp! Wonderful!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)