I’d also suggest Mrs. Hubbard/Linda Arden for the woman in the kimono. Being an actress, she could also change her gait to add to the disguise. And mother and daughter are more likely to share proportions than two unrelated women.
Mrs. Hubbard is a good choice for sure, being the countess's mother, it would make sense for her to handle her daughter's kimono. I think one point against her is that she spent the night screaming about the man in her compartment, although that was before the kimono incident.
Jerry 'being sent to the country for his piece of mind' makes it sound like he might have been suffering from PTSD. That would be consistent with having crashed his plane. And there were aerial battles over mainland Britain. So, I find Jerry's story believable. A sudden thought came to me, and you asked for further ideas, so here goes: Could Norton have influenced murders in other Christie novels? Could he have been a behind-the-scenes villain in a Miss Marple novel for example? Could this have been how Poirot found out about him? There is no proof of this, but it is something to consider (and apologies if this is something that's been brought up before) Next week sounds good. I have 'the Finishing Stroke' and really enjoyed it. So, looking forward to that.
I had not thought of Jerry having PTSD. He could have it but not from the war. The novel was published in 1942 but Christie definitely wrote it much earlier. At this point, she had several novels finished whose publication was spread out of years for tax purposes. Moving Finger was possibly written before the war began. But I love that idea of Norton influencing other murderers. I really like that. We are never told how Poirot got onto Norton's trail. Seems worthy of discussion.
Some food for thought: the All About Agatha podcast proposed the idea that Lucy Eyelesbarrow actually married Dermot Craddock! That said, he’s not married to her in The Mirror Crack’d, and in her notes, I believe Agatha herself said that she thought Lucy would marry Cedric.
I talked about this in a previous theory video. It's been a while but I think I said she winds up with Bryan Eastly. If I didn't say I Bryan, I said Cedric. I know I didn't say Craddock because he wasn't married in the Mirror Crack'd.
Regarding the Countess not leaving her room: I find it interesting that they made so many adaptations of Orient Express, yet there still isn't one with the book's exact solution, namely that out of the 13 passengers the Countess didn't do it. It actually takes away a bit of the characterisation of both the COunt and the Countess, that this gets ignored.
The Andrenyis tend to get the short stick in adaptations too. I feel like they often get overshadowed by the other characters. This is true even in the video game adaptations. I think its the Suchet adaptation that actually has Dr. Constantine in on it and I think that works quite well. Orient Express has been adapted so many times that I think changing the solution a little bit is almost necessary, especially since the ending to the novel is iconic and I think most people probably know it.
That's one to discuss too. I think it's probably MacQueen we're told he knows different languages. On the other hand, he claims not to be proficient in the languages he does speak. I actually had a theory in mind of whether or not I could figure out who delivered the fatal blow.
Oh that's cool. I'm very partial to the book covers I first read the books with. I still have all the first copies of the Christie novels I read, many of them in tatters.
I agree with your thoughts about Bunch; the point in favour of the theory to my mind though is that women tend to marry men who are like their fathers...
I’d also suggest Mrs. Hubbard/Linda Arden for the woman in the kimono. Being an actress, she could also change her gait to add to the disguise. And mother and daughter are more likely to share proportions than two unrelated women.
Mrs. Hubbard is a good choice for sure, being the countess's mother, it would make sense for her to handle her daughter's kimono. I think one point against her is that she spent the night screaming about the man in her compartment, although that was before the kimono incident.
Jerry 'being sent to the country for his piece of mind' makes it sound like he might have been suffering from PTSD. That would be consistent with having crashed his plane. And there were aerial battles over mainland Britain. So, I find Jerry's story believable.
A sudden thought came to me, and you asked for further ideas, so here goes: Could Norton have influenced murders in other Christie novels? Could he have been a behind-the-scenes villain in a Miss Marple novel for example? Could this have been how Poirot found out about him? There is no proof of this, but it is something to consider (and apologies if this is something that's been brought up before)
Next week sounds good. I have 'the Finishing Stroke' and really enjoyed it. So, looking forward to that.
I had not thought of Jerry having PTSD. He could have it but not from the war. The novel was published in 1942 but Christie definitely wrote it much earlier. At this point, she had several novels finished whose publication was spread out of years for tax purposes. Moving Finger was possibly written before the war began. But I love that idea of Norton influencing other murderers. I really like that. We are never told how Poirot got onto Norton's trail. Seems worthy of discussion.
Some food for thought: the All About Agatha podcast proposed the idea that Lucy Eyelesbarrow actually married Dermot Craddock! That said, he’s not married to her in The Mirror Crack’d, and in her notes, I believe Agatha herself said that she thought Lucy would marry Cedric.
I talked about this in a previous theory video. It's been a while but I think I said she winds up with Bryan Eastly. If I didn't say I Bryan, I said Cedric. I know I didn't say Craddock because he wasn't married in the Mirror Crack'd.
@@summationgathering I remembered you talking about it, but I didn't remember you mentioning either her notes or the possibility of it being Craddock.
@@AliceClow TBH, I don't really remember what I said either.
Regarding the Countess not leaving her room: I find it interesting that they made so many adaptations of Orient Express, yet there still isn't one with the book's exact solution, namely that out of the 13 passengers the Countess didn't do it. It actually takes away a bit of the characterisation of both the COunt and the Countess, that this gets ignored.
The Andrenyis tend to get the short stick in adaptations too. I feel like they often get overshadowed by the other characters. This is true even in the video game adaptations. I think its the Suchet adaptation that actually has Dr. Constantine in on it and I think that works quite well. Orient Express has been adapted so many times that I think changing the solution a little bit is almost necessary, especially since the ending to the novel is iconic and I think most people probably know it.
Speaking of questions and the Orient Express, here is another one: Who spoke French in Mr. Ratchett's compartment?
Probably his secretary or the train conductor. Both would be speaking it, given what we learn about them.
That's one to discuss too. I think it's probably MacQueen we're told he knows different languages. On the other hand, he claims not to be proficient in the languages he does speak. I actually had a theory in mind of whether or not I could figure out who delivered the fatal blow.
Y’know with these many conspiracies, I’m surprised Film Theory hasn’t talked about it
There's still time.
I also obsessed about the red kimono! Still kinda do.
Drives me crazy that we'll never know.
I actually ordered Murder on the Orient Express with the reproduced original cover
Oh that's cool. I'm very partial to the book covers I first read the books with. I still have all the first copies of the Christie novels I read, many of them in tatters.
I agree with your thoughts about Bunch; the point in favour of the theory to my mind though is that women tend to marry men who are like their fathers...
Yeah, that's definitely a point in favor of the theory.