The Hardest Agatha Christie Film to Cast - Hercule Poirot's Christmas
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 гру 2023
- A comparison of the Agatha Christie novel Hercule Poirot's Christmas to its adaptation starring David Suchet. Happy holidays!
Contain footage from:
Five Little Pigs
Mrs. McGinty's Dead
Knives Out
Avengers: Infinity War
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
Murder on the Orient Express (1974)
Doctor Who: The Curse of Fatal Death - Розваги
Vernon Dobtcheff who played Simeon has been in 375 movies and plays and is 90 next year. I travelled with him to London years ago and he is such a wonderful, funny man, it was a joy to spend time with him.
This is one of my favorite Suchet as Poirot adaptations as well! I agree, I didn't understand that "strong resemblence" among the actors but understand how that could give things away too early. I think the producers tried though, with the high hairline. Something else to note is that when they go to see the South African lady, it's interesting that the valet is there too, presumably because he had driven them all, but he's also in the room as a red herring, and he too has a high hairline.
The addition of Japp in this is brilliant entirely due to Philip Jackson. Some of my favorite moments in all the Poirot adaptations is of Japp sitting in the corner looking bored as all his in-laws are having a blast singing at the piano. Then when he's in the the car with Poirot on his way across the border from Wales to the Lee mansion, Jackson does this thing where Japp smiles to himself, so relieved to be away from all the festivities and getting to work on a murder.
Another memorable moment for me is the scene on the train where Poirot is on his way to see Simeon. He's sitting in the dining car and asks, "What is this Brown Windsor Soup?" The waiter replies with hesitation, "Well, it's soup, sir. From Windsor." Then when the waiter serves it, he tells him, "It doesn't look very delicieux." The waiter counters with, "Well sir, it IS Brown Windsor Soup." It always reminds me of Rumpole looking forward to BWS when riding the GWR and being disappointed with the suspension of food service on the trip.
Young Simeon being played by the same actor as Sugden would be to much of a giveaway.
True, but it's discribed exactly like that in the book. That's what I kinda disliked about it as well. The family resemblance is apparently so unkenny, but even Poirot needs ages to get to the truth, because the guy has a mustache.
@@notdeadjustyet8136 Yeah, they are described as looking alike in the book. But the books still hides it well and does it subtly. Casting the same actor for young Simeon and Sugden wouldn't be subtle at all but instead a big neon sign.
@@Sebastian-lw5qb I agree. The written format simply fits this story much better. The book never states it directly,but there were many smaller hints from the start & I was able to guess the killer mostly bcs of them, so they definitely weren't too subtle, but It was done cleverly & I admire Agatha's daring originality. My problem with the book is that, whilst the hints weren't too obvious for the reader, if the cop looked so much like his dead dad & bros, someone as perceptive as Poirot should've been able to see it at once & at least one of the brothers should've considered the visible possibility of Sugden & Steven being their father's sons, especially as they were anxious to pin the murder on an outsider.
(mild😇) SPOILERS FOR The Murder of Roger Ackroyd and the Crooked House :
These books play with our expectations & trick us into thinking the murderer is off limits. Once we accept that ANYONE could be guilty, clues are everywhere from the beginning.
Oh, I love the twist in “An Unexpected Guest”! The novelisation and play were wonderful!
As a book fan, I agree on your thinking, it's perfect for a new adaption, they should be listening to this for it!
“I bet there’s a deleted scene where Lydia speaks Hilda’s line”
My brain: *I’m going to spend hours looking for that scene now, aren’t I?*
It’s amazing, how you named every single thinking I had while watching this for the First time. 😂❤
I also love this one. But I also see a familial resemblance. The overall face shape, the nose shape and length, the eyebrows--amidst differences such as weight, hair style, wardrobe, etc. And it was all nicely set up when we saw both the young and old Simeon Lee. Your casting choices, I'm sorry, would absolutely give away the solution. All the actors in this version look as if they might easily be brothers. In fact it is so ubiquitous it is almost invisible.
This is such a delightful adaptation in so many ways. Must say I also think the changes made for a simpler narrative.
Why is no one talking about Wanda , vision & Knives out cameo , so perfectly done❤ The actor playing Vision too has that similarity which is at the heart of this story ❤
It's funny, I just finished re-reading this book, I always read it this time of year. I agree with a lot you said, but like you, I love the TV show. The actor who played Tressilian, was excellent and you really felt for the poor man. I can always suspend believe when the cast and script is this good, so the fact that casting had trouble finding three actors who look alike didn't bother me. Thank you, this was fun. Happy Holidays to you and your family.
I can see Hercule Poirot’s Christmas being the main inspiration:
We have a rich elderly patriarch who is about to change his will getting his throat slit in a manor house,
All the prime suspects are his family,
Cue the funny and over the top detective
And the clues are all there
I love this Poirot adaptation, but I forgot the title and couldn't find it to share with others. Thank you for this thoughtful and entertaining walk through this excellent mystery!
Once again, I really like how you handled the format of the review. Here, bookending it with discussions on adaptation casting was clever. A nice little separate mystery to intrigue us while watching the main one we came for. This is a charming adaptation of a really enjoyable Agatha Christie story. I really liked the actors chosen to bring it to life.
I'm curious who you'd choose to play Simeon Lee? Charles Dance was my first thought, as he can play an excellent curmudgeon. Then again, he was already in the "And Then There Were None" miniseries, so I doubt he'd feel like repeating himself with more Christie. Congratulations on your new project in 2024, Miles! May you have a great experience and much success. Enjoy your holiday, we'll all be eagerly awaiting your return whenever you're ready to pick these up again.
Agree Charles Dance would have made a fearsome Simeon!
I read the book last Christmas and just recently rewatched the Suchet episode. Both are so, so good. Loved your video, too, perhaps unsurprisingly. Wishing you happy holidays. 🎄
I think that casting sibling actors would hint too much to the conclusion. Anyway - thank you for this episode. It's perfect too get in christmas mood. Happy holidays! 🙂
Yeah, it's a tough call. You can look online and fine plenty of listicles about two actors who're practical lookalikes (Jesse Eisenberg and Michael Cera, Mark Wahlberg and Matt Damon, Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes, Joe Keery and Ben Schwartz, etc.), but the trick is finding a third actor to make the pair of doppelgangers a trio of them.
It might be worth the risk to choose a family of actors since filmgoers might not be as familiar with this mystery. It's a Christie story that hasn't been adapted repeatedly like Orient Express, Nile, or And Then There Were None.
I was thinking, why not make Stephen Farr mixed race?
He'd need to have a similar silhouette and maybe a jawline to match but it'd excuse a lot of dissimilarities
Once again, very well done! I like this film too and think the additional scenes, including the opening and the charming inclusion of Japp are great but agree that sometimes they forget some very important clues that make you think you may have missed something.
I really need to give the adaptation another chance: I keep resenting the family changes from the book, which was my very first Christie. My parents bought it for me when we were visiting family in Spain. I was seven years old, didn't know the language yet and was feeling lonely. So, since they knew so well, they gave me a book for company. It was the start of a lifelong affection for Christie and Poirot. So this story, for me, is extremely special, and there seems to be a bone-deep sense of protection toward anything that doesn't fit the exact puzzle that Christie put together for us. But rationally I know this is wrong. I should and will give this adaptation another chance. Thanks for helping to open the possibility for me!
I`m not sure if I`ve ever read the book, though I`ve probably read all Poirots and Marples. So I only know the TV version.
I absolutely love your videos!
Enjoyed your work, but, confused by use of Chris Evans as Stephen.
I love this one and I watch it every Christmas. I think I love mansions even if I couldn't cope with one. A great story well acted.
Awesome. My favourite film too. The atmosphere, music, pacing. 😊
I loved this version. I watched it a few times.
This was brilliant and most enjoyable. Thank you. I hadn't known about your series. I think it was suggested because I had looked at another Agatha Christie mystery the other day. What a pleasure to watch actual clips from the Simeon video. I found watching the clips and listening to your insightful narration, very satisfying. From the time it wss first shown, his mystery became my favorite Poirot Christmas. I look forward to finding others you have done in the Agatha Christie Mystery series. For now though, I wish you good luck on your scheduled plans. Happy New Year!
Happy Holidays! Terrific video as always- please don't forget about us :)
I've just finished the book and watched the adaptation. And it felt like a mix of The Mysterious affair at styles and The murder of Rodger ackroyed. I mean... The plot twist at the end, though I suspected it right from the beginning. Definetly in my top 10.
BTW this is a proof that the adaptations are even better when they don't change that much in the plot. This one has some changes, but it was way more faithful to the original story than some other episodes of Poirot or Miss Marple
This was lovely! I'm obsessed with Agatha Christie and I love the Suchet adaptations (some more than others), and I recently watched this for Christmas! I'm shocked that I haven't seen your channel before but you have a new subscriber :) My sister and I have said the exact same thing after Suchet has the striking resemblance line and the camera pans around at all the very different looking men, haha. Happy Holidays!
This is such a fun video! Thank you!
(BTW, I played Laura in a high school production of "The Unexpected Guest". It's such a great play. 😊)
There is no Stephen in the film, he is only in the book.
When my brother and I watched Poirot adaptations in the old days, this was our favourite episode. There's so many great comic moments. I think the book is, frankly, an example of Christie overreach. I would say this storyline was always more suited to a TV show than a novel. In my opinion there is no way on God's green earth that anyone could "notice" from Christie's prose that the Lee family members have mannerisms and appearance similar to Superintendent Sugden.
I noticed it.
I haven't read the novel in a long time, but I recall the jawline of the offspring to be the give-away, not that the offspring closely resembled each other. That's why the butler with the bad eyesight mistook them for each other, as he couldn't make out their facial features but he could recognize the shape of their faces. I'm not sure anyone could cast this properly without the use of prosthetics. Even if you had 6 brothers playing the parts, the fact that they're brothers would be a huge clue.
I agree with those who say using the same actor playing Lee in the prologue and as a character later on would have been a mistake.
Really great Christie and adaptation. The South Africa flashback really has stuck with me, for some reason, even as the rest of the adaptation blurred after not seeing it for years. I love both book and adaptation Pilar. Sugden DOES look like a young Simeon... but a young actor who played old Simeon rather than the actor who played young Simeon. If that makes any sense. (Heh.) Not really much else to say about this one.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, Miles! And good luck with the directing!
Fabulous ❤❤
Thank you!
Haha, yeah, no one resembles each other in the tv adaptation, not in the slightest! Still highly entertaining, even if I thought everyone were mean spirited, as I recall. I love all Japps scenes.
Merry Christmas and all the best!
LOL, I started rereading this last night
Wow, Rowan Atkinson's Doctor is a deep-cut
I know it's Christie's explanation but two blue-eyed parents can have a brown-eyed child, so I find it hilarious that 'Pilar' admits everything when Poirot confronts her on that.
Best of luck with the directing!
And the compliments of the season to you and yours.
Two blue eyed parents can only have blue eyed children.😊
If any of them had a brown gene, then their eyes would be brown.
Hence, blue eyed people do not have any brown genes, and can not pass on any brown genes to their offspring.
Brown eyed people can have kids with any eye colour. And, if you wonder exactly what colour are blue eyes. The answer is, that anything that is not blue, is considered brown when it comes to eye genetics. IE, light grey, green and so on, are all brown.
I know it's only 2 actors and not three but Donald and Kiefer Sutherland look very similar, though Kiefer would have to play Harry or Steven since he's too obvious as Sugdeon.
You do know that Donald is the father of Kiefer, right? Also, the massive age difference would make it utterly impossible for Donald to play anyone other than Simeon Lee, so no matter who Kiefer plays, you'd still have to find 2 additional lookalike actors for the other roles.
@@Unownshipper yes and that's the point. That's why I thought it would be too obvious if Kiefer was Sudgeon
They are too old now but when reading the book I always imagine the Balwin brothers
Merry Christmas! May the new year bring much happiness, peace and good health to you!
We watch this every year, but start with the Christmas scene. Also, Poirot discovers Pilar is an imposter by peeking at her passport.
What the heck is going on here. You have cast members that don't exist in this film. Where did you get the hunky young man from. He's not in the film that I've seen about 20 times.. Either you have a version that's not shown on Britbox or you've added actors to make some kind of point I'm not understanding. Weird.
Your comment is confusing 🫠
Edit: Now I see what you mean 😁
It's a quirk of the channel. When Ledoux is describing the plot of the book and there's a character that was dropped from the film/tv adaptation, he'll put in footage from some other show. He frequently uses Chris Evans for young male characters dropped from the adaptations.
I really don't understand why this detail has confused SO many people in this comments section. Are y'all new? Have you not seen other reviews miles has done where he included characters from Murder She Wrote, Community, and other unrelated properties? Truly baffling why everyone is so uptight about this all of the sudden.
@@Unownshipper You’ve answered your own questions. Yes, those of us who are confused are new to the channel. At some point, we are all new to every channel, right? And honestly, this strikes me as not only a strange quirk, but strangely executed. I’ve never seen another reviewer do it, and if you are going to do it, I think it’s wise to announce it in those episodes. Otherwise, new viewers (you know, people you hope will like, share, subscribe) are going to be lost, disoriented, distracted… as clearly many of us were. We’re not “uptight” because we’re asking for clarification in the comments section (that’s what it’s there for) or wondering if there’s another version out there. Phew! I think you need a hug, man. It’s ok. We all need hugs. 😊
@@janetaylorparris "I’ve never seen another reviewer do it, and if you are going to do it, I think it’s wise to announce it in those episodes" Really? 🤨
Oh no, something new that other reviewers aren't doing! Ahhhhh! Miles made a joke and plenty of people who watch his other episodes seem to enjoy it just fine, but it really sounds like you're saying he should post a trigger warning in advance of it for new people. It's fine if you don't get the joke or didn't find it amusing, but really now...
I think *you* might need a glass of water after that paragraph.
Happy holidays!
It is an excellent book.
Good discussion of a very well-made film. You are right about the actors not looking sufficiently alike. I agree that the Harry actor was way off, but the Sugden and Stephen actors were similar enough in dim light. A lot could have been done with makeup and prostheses. Also, I always wondered why they cast a hook-nosed woman for Stella, because her son should have then been more hook-nosed than anyone else.
Suggestion for a future video: Ordeal By Innocence adaptations.
I worry that sometimes having an actor play a younger version of another character while also playing a separate character in present day would give away the twist too early.
Why is there a cut from Chris Evans in Knives Out?
And a cut of Paul Bethany (as "David") and Elizabeth Olsen from "Wandavision"
The brothers certainly weren't as alike as they could be, but I think they did OK giving them a certain resemblance around the eyebrows, at least. Also, I always read Poirot as hating the gloves at first, and then overcompensating once he learned they were hand-knitted - he assumed Japp had just bought them, and was thinking about how much more he'd spent on his gift. Once he knew they were homemade, they leapt up in his estimation and became his new favourite gloves - too nice to actually wear!
If you wanted a more british example, perhaps the McGann brothers? They are definitely similar but different, and with 5, 4 of them actors and 1 I believe director, there should be something to choose from even back in the day. Lovely comparison, thank you very much
Omg yes!!
That's the trouble when a story mentions family resemblances -- although a couple of them look somewhat alike, I wouldn't guess any of them were related. Maybe it works better as a stage play, when you can't look too closely.
THE synopsis is good but why do you keep showing Chris Evans in clips of Knives Out?
I used Chris Evans as a stand-in for the character Stephen Farr, who was left out of the adaptation, just as Wanda and Vision are stand-ins for Hilda and David Lee.
Too bad for moi. Without Captain Hastings and Miss Felicity Lemon the little grey cells, they are not engaged.
Hey, just found the channel. Good work-I look forward to watching your other videos! Unfortunately, I’m not a big fan of this adaptation: For me, the changes (the flashback, Stella, especially Japp’s presence) and some of the line readings (Tressilian’s déjà vu line, a lovely and subtle clue in Christie’s book) make the killer’s identity obvious.
I read the book first, so my judgment may be off, but I watched the adaptation with some family members who’d never read the book, and they figured out whodunit pretty quickly.
More than that, I find much of the acting unconvincing and the tension notably lacking. “Knives Out,” which as you note was likely inspired by this book, does a much better job than the Suchet adaptation, in my opinion. The adapter, Clive Exton (who wrote a bunch of the Suchet Poirots), made the right choice to cut down Christie’s many subplots, though.
Like you, I hope the book gets adapted again. It’s one of Christie’s strongest plots.
Agree on the difficulty of finding actors with the correct look. What I always like best about the book is Poirot's observation that Christmas is a ripe time for a murder. In the adaptation, I did enjoy Stella and the music-crazy in-laws. On the debit side, David and Hilda were my favourite characters in the book. I can also imagine a cut scene or two with Lydia getting Hilda's lines; Lydia came across as the least-well-done-by character. George and Magdalen were practically letter-perfect; Pilar was disappointing in some unnamable way.
👍👍
Did you happen to film the play you directed? And is it viewable?
Is this all that we will see? This guy telling us what's going on?
I don't know if anyone else has mentioned this, if so, my apologies, but... have you The Play What Goes Wrong's Peter Pan? David Suchet is the narrator and it's very, very funny. There's this one scene... won't spoil it.
Yes. I know what you mean. :) :)
I’ve seen this several times and don’t remember a “Steven” character. I wonder if the version I watched was edited?
Stephen was a character in the book. They left him out of the film.
What was wrong with the womans face? Was it a birthmark or was it makeup?
Why the Chris Evans picture ?
Too obvious having a brother playing sugdon
This is a mélange of films. This is wong.
You are as brilliant as, Agatha!
Yeah, Pillar is most definitely the inspiration for the character in Knives Out, since when the familly ofers to give her her share of the money from their own pockets she straight out refuses. She might have been a pretender, but she had huge scruples, specially to do that while under investigation.
Also, she was latina.
Why you keep inserting clips from Knives Out that doesn't have anything to do with Poirot movie?
So stupid, unnecessary and annoying !!
Why don't you take a chill pill, and then take that stick out of your ass? Miles often uses characters from other properties as stand-ins for "book only" characters to give them a visual representation during these reviews. One can reasonably assume he's using clips of people he thought of while reading the novels.
Subbing Ransom Drysdale for Stephen Grant works for multiple reasons. Firstly because both characters form a close relationship with a woman of Spanish extraction while the film plays out. Secondly, (and spoiler alert!) because both characters have a dramatic secret to hide. Thirdly, he mentioned he believed the reading of the will inspired the similar scene in Knives Out much later, so using a character from that film was a set up for that observation.
He's gone to all the trouble of making these videos and sharing them for free, he's allowed to have a little fun with them. You meanwhile have no right to be so demanding; and right before the holidays too.
This episode of Poirot was an absolute disgrace. There was no reason to change the story. What kind of arrogance drives someone to take a story by Agatha Christie and take a hacking saw to it??? The original story is a masterpiece. This episode was pathetic.
Suchet made a "fortune" in British standards playing Poirot with a Peter Sellers accent and never thought to grow a moustache. Brits love tacky amateurism
THUMBS DOWN! Most of this, over 14 minutes, is just a re-hash of the book/movie. Apparently, he believes we are all idiots and none of us know anything about the book. That's the only reason he feels justified in an overly tiresome review. Another guy that getting to the point is very difficult for him.
When I realized he's in love with his own voice or just wanted to show-off his knowledge of the story; I skipped ahead. I found his condescending narrative..... boring. Not worth watching. Nothing enlightening. A waste of 15 minutes.