One of the great moments in all the Poirot stories comes in The Capture of Cerberus when, having been told by the countess he can find her in Hell, he cannot deduce her meaning. Poirot does the logical thing and consults Miss Lemon. He covers up that the invitation came from a woman and is shocked when she calmly replies that it would be advisable to ring up for a table. Another comes at the end, when Poirot confirms the accuracy of an extravagant florist's bill and mutters that he might even "marry and range myself" which shocks Miss Lemon into forgetting about her filing system.
I really enjoy the videos analysing the TV/film adaptations, I've often watched the videos more than once, and it's prompted me into a mini revisit of Agatha Christie's novels. I've never tried the Labours of Hercules as I struggle with short stories in general but after watching this video, I'd like to give the connection a go.
Incredible videos! I really love Agatha Christie's books and comparing them to the adaptations. Mainly my beloved Poirot series with David Suchet and Agatha Christie's Marple (mostly). Never give up and keep going!!! I wish the videos were longer & in-depth not shorter. As a sidenote, I think you should consider other unfaithful or controversial Poirot episodes like Murder on the Orient Express or Appointment with Death, and with Marple too. You could also do at least the first episode (The ABC Murders) of the french loose adaptation series Les Petits Meurtres d'Agatha Chrstie. It's very different from the original, but it's always interesting for me to notice how they try to keep the basic plot with adding some extravagant changes like changing the library to a brothel in the adaptation of The Body in the Library
There are two shots when they first arrive at the hotel that look like it could be from The Grand Budapest Hotel, the 2014 Wes Anderson film. Made me want a Wes Anderson adaptation of a Poirot story. I think it would work! Thanks for doing these! I'm excited when each one comes out.
I really LOVE Vera here. You're right about the cast acting the hell of this episode. Would love to here you're thoughts about the adaptation of Curtain.
I just want to say, that you are very entertaining. Please not stop doing these Videos. 👍👌 And it would be pretty cool to know where to find the mysteries, you wrote 😀😄
Thank you for asking! Sadly I haven't been able to find a publisher or an agent, although you can listen to one of my novels here, as a podcast: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/jackoburn-manor/id1478545318. In my UA-cam channel, you can find one of the murder mystery dessert theatre plays I did in California (though I might be taking it down soon). I'm also working on a bigger project about which I'll be doing an announcement video, possibly later this year.
I'm still kind of miffed that the Labours of Hercules weren't made into a season long arc. Granted, I realy like the change to Marrascaud from just an expert thief/killer to, effectively, Poirot's Moriarty. A master criminal who manages to best in some ways but is ultimately outsmarted. If we could have had a 40-60 minute episode for each of the stories all leading up to the reveal that would have been phenomenal.
I was disappointed that they left out my two favorite short stories, The Nemean Lion and The Flock of Geryon. Miss Caranby is one of the best characters in the canon. I think combing those two stories would have made a compelling film.
I love Miss Carnaby too! I’m glad she was in at least two stories in the book. I wish Agatha Christie had made her a recurring character, like Mrs Oliver. Or even given her some more stories in her own right.
Great analysis! I like the overall athmosphere of the adaptation and the feeling that different stories have met at a semi isolated mountain resort for a creepy retreat. That being said, i agree that the motivation behind Alice/Marrascaud's actions are unclear. Also, personally i would have liked the relationship between Poirot and the Countess to be less comical at times. Looking forward to the next one!
13:08 Okay I agree with pretty much all your criticisms of this film, but not this one. A mother will be desperate to save her child, or at least that is a perfectly ordinary reaction. This is not rational, logical, reasoned out. That she sought to win Poirot over, begged for his help, could not forgive his refusal to do so--that all makes perfect sense to me. That she did not spend more time trying, indicates to me she she realized in her heart of hearts she would never succeed. But the attempt? Absolutely. That make all the sense in the world, but she isn't playing a game or trying to solve a logical problem. She's trying to save her child. There is an excellent Netflix series and I watched a very good reaction video to it. The reactor seemed shocked a father sacrificed himself for his children. Me, I would have been astounded if he had not--by that time it was crystal clear he'd've sawed off his own head to save even one of this children. Countess Rosakhov (sp?) struck me as exactly the kind of passionate person likely to at least try to save someone she genuinely loved, even if she knew better than to love them (this is foreshadowed in the young man so still totally mesmerized by the sisters). LIfe is not a card game. Nor a chess match.
I felt the same way: the motivation seemed sound. She knows it's wrong to ask, she knows Alice deserves to be locked away, bur regardless... a parent will attempt to move mountains for their child.
The motivation may seem sound to you, but the vapid attempt of the countess to shame Poirot into believing he is now missing out on the love of his life (our love could have burnt down a city) because he won't let a serial killer go free is over-the-top and too far fetched. "Please let mass murdering daughter go free, because our love could have burnt down a a city and of course it's ok to let a terrible murderer go." The countess wasn't that kind of person in the book, nor should she have been in the adaptation. It is ham fisted for her to throw their "love" at Poirot like a punishment, even though she knows he's doing the right thing.
To those of you wondering, I just saw the trailer for A Haunting in Venice (thank you for the heads-up, MarionParoo Too). I'm intrigued in that it seems to have little to nothing at all to do with Hallowe'en Party, as I thought it was supposed to, but it seems to derive from two other Agatha Christie stories, neither of them Poirots: "The Last Séance" and (slightly) "Motive vs. Opportunity." EDIT: I've looked at the cast list and the characters are indeed all from Hallowe'en Party, but my brain is stuck on Tina Fey as Ariadne Oliver.
Great stuff. Look forward to your critique(s) of Ustinov films. Btw, I did see a bit of derivation in “The Big Four” from Conan Doyle’s “Sign of four” and the finale of “Labors” from Conan Doyle’s “The Final Problem” where Moriarty jumps to his death from Reichenbach falls.
THEY JUST DROPPED THE TRAILER FOR HAUNTING IN VENICE! Have you seen it yet Miles? It's look really good, though more horror than mystery, and also like it has very little to do with the book it's based on. I'm not sure how to feel about that lol.
Hi great videos! I've been wondering about the count of the short stories and how all of them, except the few you mentioned, were considered canon and adapter by Suchet - there is a story i really liked years ago - the second gong. As far as i can see, it hasn't been adapted - do you have aby idea why?
I can't WAIT for you to do a Ustinov review video! He's the man who brought me into the world of Poirot and Agatha Christie. While his adaptations weren't always accurate, and neither were anyone else's adaptations, I always love his sense of fun and humor. He made Poirot into a character than anyone would enjoy sitting with and sharing stories.
I really liked this adaptation and Suchet was awesome as Poirot yet again but it seemed the story had a bit of a depressing ending because of the Poirot/ Vera relationship breaking apart and although he caught the killer it was Vera’s daughter which made it really awkward and chilling. The acting was brilliant but it’s not one of those that you come away from with a good feeling even though good wins over evil it feels like a hollow victory somehow 🤔
I definitely wouldn’t encourage anyone who loved the book to watch this complete mess they made of it. It was truly awful. I preferred all the stories to be separate, not intertwined. You know. Just how Christie wrote them.
I am a fan of the original myth of Hercules, and also of Poirot. I already knew the original labors when I read the book as a teenager, and I loved it. I liked the episode, but it's clearly inferior to the book.
I really enjoyed reading The Labours of Hercules, but I found the adaptation lacking. It was difficult to admit, because I love this Suchet series so much. Your analysis brings out the good points that escaped me-Alice being used in this way was really good. The Nemean Lion is still my favorite.
In assesing the quality of the plot of a detective story, I think two questions are expository: 1. Were the conclusions reasonably derived or inferred from the evidence? 2. Was the reasoning sufficient to establish guilt in a court of law without the guilty party confessing? At least for the TV and film adaptations of Agatha Christie's stories, the answers are always the same for both: _Absolutely not._ The plots are convoluted, not smart. The rationale is stupendously flawed, not insightful.
I could understand the Countess' deviation of character in the following way: having a child changes everything; affects you at your core. Perhaps, in her desperation, she would make such an illogical request to Poirot? I wouldn't blame you if you think it's too flimsy of an excuse for her, but it's an explanation nonetheless. Ah yes, finally our Appointment shall be met! I eagerly await your analysis of the star-studded Ustinov version, but I hope you will compare it alongside the Suchet one. To me, the two are two sides of the same faulty coin. The former keeps the essence of the story, but fails at creating a sensible tone. The latter creates a master-crafted atmosphere of intrigue, but jettisons some of the most compelling details of the mystery. Neither is perfect, but both are interesting especially when compared with one another. Also... Tim Curry, nuff said.
You're kinder than I am. I call it an unmitigated mess. I don't know why they couldn't have expanded each short story into its own episode like they did with the earlier short story adaptations.
I WAS WONDERING WHAT THE HELL WAS UP WITH IS FREAKIN EPISODE. This thing was a MESS, and now I finally know why. This probably comes the closest to actually pulling off the equivalent of transcribing an entire TV season onto a single movie but this still didn't WORK. It never does. Look at Galaxy Express 999 or GOD HELP YOU The Last Airbender. Appointment with Death! Very Cool. Second Poirot adaptation i ever saw behing Orient (74). Probably Ustinov's best flick!
It was meant to make us feel sorry for Poirot because he is "soooo lonely" and gave up a family for his career--what a hard working and kind man to sacrifice soooo much for the world, even sacrificing his "true love" in order to arrest a terrible murderer and bring her to justice. It's an atrocious plot device.
I've always wondered what it would have been like if they had made Labors of Hercules a season-long arc of hour-long episodes.
Now, that is an idea. !🤩
@@sealfan1000 It is! I want it!!!
@@alicewilloughby4318 Me,too!
Please do more videos! You’re very entertaining!
One of the great moments in all the Poirot stories comes in The Capture of Cerberus when, having been told by the countess he can find her in Hell, he cannot deduce her meaning. Poirot does the logical thing and consults Miss Lemon. He covers up that the invitation came from a woman and is shocked when she calmly replies that it would be advisable to ring up for a table. Another comes at the end, when Poirot confirms the accuracy of an extravagant florist's bill and mutters that he might even "marry and range myself" which shocks Miss Lemon into forgetting about her filing system.
I really enjoy the videos analysing the TV/film adaptations, I've often watched the videos more than once, and it's prompted me into a mini revisit of Agatha Christie's novels. I've never tried the Labours of Hercules as I struggle with short stories in general but after watching this video, I'd like to give the connection a go.
Incredible videos! I really love Agatha Christie's books and comparing them to the adaptations. Mainly my beloved Poirot series with David Suchet and Agatha Christie's Marple (mostly). Never give up and keep going!!! I wish the videos were longer & in-depth not shorter. As a sidenote, I think you should consider other unfaithful or controversial Poirot episodes like Murder on the Orient Express or Appointment with Death, and with Marple too. You could also do at least the first episode (The ABC Murders) of the french loose adaptation series Les Petits Meurtres d'Agatha Chrstie. It's very different from the original, but it's always interesting for me to notice how they try to keep the basic plot with adding some extravagant changes like changing the library to a brothel in the adaptation of The Body in the Library
I have worried from time to time that the videos are too long, so thank you for that note!
There are two shots when they first arrive at the hotel that look like it could be from The Grand Budapest Hotel, the 2014 Wes Anderson film. Made me want a Wes Anderson adaptation of a Poirot story. I think it would work!
Thanks for doing these! I'm excited when each one comes out.
I'd be interested to see a Wes Anderson version of Death Comes as the End.
Early!
Keep doing what you're doing, Miles
Have you heard that Branagh’s finally making another Poirot movie in September, I want my David Suchet back 😭
I really LOVE Vera here. You're right about the cast acting the hell of this episode. Would love to here you're thoughts about the adaptation of Curtain.
Oof. I'm going to have to do a lot more of these before I work up the confidence to cover Curtain.
@@MysteryMiles fair enough lol. That's a big one to cover.
I just want to say, that you are very entertaining. Please not stop doing these Videos. 👍👌
And it would be pretty cool to know where to find the mysteries, you wrote 😀😄
Thank you for asking! Sadly I haven't been able to find a publisher or an agent, although you can listen to one of my novels here, as a podcast: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/jackoburn-manor/id1478545318. In my UA-cam channel, you can find one of the murder mystery dessert theatre plays I did in California (though I might be taking it down soon). I'm also working on a bigger project about which I'll be doing an announcement video, possibly later this year.
LOVE these videos. Keep 'em coming!!
I'm still kind of miffed that the Labours of Hercules weren't made into a season long arc. Granted, I realy like the change to Marrascaud from just an expert thief/killer to, effectively, Poirot's Moriarty. A master criminal who manages to best in some ways but is ultimately outsmarted.
If we could have had a 40-60 minute episode for each of the stories all leading up to the reveal that would have been phenomenal.
I was disappointed that they left out my two favorite short stories, The Nemean Lion and The Flock of Geryon. Miss Caranby is one of the best characters in the canon. I think combing those two stories would have made a compelling film.
I love Miss Carnaby too! I’m glad she was in at least two stories in the book. I wish Agatha Christie had made her a recurring character, like Mrs Oliver. Or even given her some more stories in her own right.
Great analysis! I like the overall athmosphere of the adaptation and the feeling that different stories have met at a semi isolated mountain resort for a creepy retreat. That being said, i agree that the motivation behind Alice/Marrascaud's actions are unclear. Also, personally i would have liked the relationship between Poirot and the Countess to be less comical at times.
Looking forward to the next one!
13:08 Okay I agree with pretty much all your criticisms of this film, but not this one. A mother will be desperate to save her child, or at least that is a perfectly ordinary reaction. This is not rational, logical, reasoned out. That she sought to win Poirot over, begged for his help, could not forgive his refusal to do so--that all makes perfect sense to me. That she did not spend more time trying, indicates to me she she realized in her heart of hearts she would never succeed. But the attempt? Absolutely. That make all the sense in the world, but she isn't playing a game or trying to solve a logical problem. She's trying to save her child.
There is an excellent Netflix series and I watched a very good reaction video to it. The reactor seemed shocked a father sacrificed himself for his children. Me, I would have been astounded if he had not--by that time it was crystal clear he'd've sawed off his own head to save even one of this children. Countess Rosakhov (sp?) struck me as exactly the kind of passionate person likely to at least try to save someone she genuinely loved, even if she knew better than to love them (this is foreshadowed in the young man so still totally mesmerized by the sisters).
LIfe is not a card game. Nor a chess match.
I felt the same way: the motivation seemed sound. She knows it's wrong to ask, she knows Alice deserves to be locked away, bur regardless... a parent will attempt to move mountains for their child.
The motivation may seem sound to you, but the vapid attempt of the countess to shame Poirot into believing he is now missing out on the love of his life (our love could have burnt down a city) because he won't let a serial killer go free is over-the-top and too far fetched. "Please let mass murdering daughter go free, because our love could have burnt down a a city and of course it's ok to let a terrible murderer go." The countess wasn't that kind of person in the book, nor should she have been in the adaptation. It is ham fisted for her to throw their "love" at Poirot like a punishment, even though she knows he's doing the right thing.
To those of you wondering, I just saw the trailer for A Haunting in Venice (thank you for the heads-up, MarionParoo Too). I'm intrigued in that it seems to have little to nothing at all to do with Hallowe'en Party, as I thought it was supposed to, but it seems to derive from two other Agatha Christie stories, neither of them Poirots: "The Last Séance" and (slightly) "Motive vs. Opportunity."
EDIT: I've looked at the cast list and the characters are indeed all from Hallowe'en Party, but my brain is stuck on Tina Fey as Ariadne Oliver.
Great stuff. Look forward to your critique(s) of Ustinov films. Btw, I did see a bit of derivation in “The Big Four” from Conan Doyle’s “Sign of four” and the finale of “Labors” from Conan Doyle’s “The Final Problem” where Moriarty jumps to his death from Reichenbach falls.
THEY JUST DROPPED THE TRAILER FOR HAUNTING IN VENICE!
Have you seen it yet Miles? It's look really good, though more horror than mystery, and also like it has very little to do with the book it's based on. I'm not sure how to feel about that lol.
Hi great videos! I've been wondering about the count of the short stories and how all of them, except the few you mentioned, were considered canon and adapter by Suchet - there is a story i really liked years ago - the second gong. As far as i can see, it hasn't been adapted - do you have aby idea why?
"The Second Gong" was expanded into "Dead Man's Mirror." :)
I can't WAIT for you to do a Ustinov review video! He's the man who brought me into the world of Poirot and Agatha Christie. While his adaptations weren't always accurate, and neither were anyone else's adaptations, I always love his sense of fun and humor. He made Poirot into a character than anyone would enjoy sitting with and sharing stories.
I really liked this adaptation and Suchet was awesome as Poirot yet again but it seemed the story had a bit of a depressing ending because of the Poirot/ Vera relationship breaking apart and although he caught the killer it was Vera’s daughter which made it really awkward and chilling. The acting was brilliant but it’s not one of those that you come away from with a good feeling even though good wins over evil it feels like a hollow victory somehow 🤔
Oh yes...... Mr. Ustinov. Until David Suchet came along, my favorite Poirot.
I definitely wouldn’t encourage anyone who loved the book to watch this complete mess they made of it. It was truly awful. I preferred all the stories to be separate, not intertwined. You know. Just how Christie wrote them.
I am a fan of the original myth of Hercules, and also of Poirot. I already knew the original labors when I read the book as a teenager, and I loved it. I liked the episode, but it's clearly inferior to the book.
Stand alone this is good adaptation.
I really enjoyed reading The Labours of Hercules, but I found the adaptation lacking. It was difficult to admit, because I love this Suchet series so much. Your analysis brings out the good points that escaped me-Alice being used in this way was really good. The Nemean Lion is still my favorite.
In assesing the quality of the plot of a detective story, I think two questions are expository:
1. Were the conclusions reasonably derived or inferred from the evidence?
2. Was the reasoning sufficient to establish guilt in a court of law without the guilty party confessing?
At least for the TV and film adaptations of Agatha Christie's stories, the answers are always the same for both:
_Absolutely not._
The plots are convoluted, not smart. The rationale is stupendously flawed, not insightful.
I could understand the Countess' deviation of character in the following way: having a child changes everything; affects you at your core. Perhaps, in her desperation, she would make such an illogical request to Poirot? I wouldn't blame you if you think it's too flimsy of an excuse for her, but it's an explanation nonetheless.
Ah yes, finally our Appointment shall be met! I eagerly await your analysis of the star-studded Ustinov version, but I hope you will compare it alongside the Suchet one. To me, the two are two sides of the same faulty coin. The former keeps the essence of the story, but fails at creating a sensible tone. The latter creates a master-crafted atmosphere of intrigue, but jettisons some of the most compelling details of the mystery. Neither is perfect, but both are interesting especially when compared with one another. Also... Tim Curry, nuff said.
I will be comparing both films. :)
@@MysteryMiles Fantastic! Looking forward to it!
This is a great video covering a terrible adaptation. I hope to see more videos from you!
Pinky is a boring name, they should have kept Doodoo. Or however that's spelled.
Yeah, considering how incredible the cast is, I was really disappointed by this one
You're kinder than I am. I call it an unmitigated mess. I don't know why they couldn't have expanded each short story into its own episode like they did with the earlier short story adaptations.
I WAS WONDERING WHAT THE HELL WAS UP WITH IS FREAKIN EPISODE.
This thing was a MESS, and now I finally know why. This probably comes the closest to actually pulling off the equivalent of transcribing an entire TV season onto a single movie but this still didn't WORK. It never does. Look at Galaxy Express 999 or GOD HELP YOU The Last Airbender.
Appointment with Death! Very Cool. Second Poirot adaptation i ever saw behing Orient (74). Probably Ustinov's best flick!
The ending with Poirot and Vera us typical of the late dreck: pointlessly dark, cynical, ugly, and mean.
It was meant to make us feel sorry for Poirot because he is "soooo lonely" and gave up a family for his career--what a hard working and kind man to sacrifice soooo much for the world, even sacrificing his "true love" in order to arrest a terrible murderer and bring her to justice. It's an atrocious plot device.
I can only conclude that both the stories and the adaptation(s) were equally forgettable.