Miss Marple vs. the '80s - Ordeal by Innocence
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 жов 2024
- A comparison of Agatha Christie's 1958 novel Ordeal by Innocence to two of its adaptations: one from 1984 and one from 2007, which added Miss Marple.
This video contains footage from The Royal Tenenbaums (2001).
I was thinking just the other day that it had been too long since we'd heard from you 🥰
Loving the footage of the play
Hope it all went well
I saw the Marple version (awesome cast) before reading the book
And I kinda love the fact that there are enough changes so that the book was still new to me but without ruining the theme or parable (for example, what they did with Sittaford)
Are you getting the outstanding reviews you deserve? Thanks for another insightful and entertaining analysis.
Donald Sutherland AND Christopher Plummer?! Bless my little Canadian heart XD
Also, I'm pretty sure two of the actors in the Marple version played Murderers in separate Suchet Poirot movies.
He didn't even mention Faye Dunaway (not Canadian, but still, it's Faye Dunaway).
@@karlkarlos3545 Sorry!
Christie shows a bias against adoption in many of her books, suggesting that there are no loving adoptive parents and even if there are, the child will always feel less than, that kind of bothers me.
I had forgotten Gugu Mbatha-Raw was in the Marple version of this. One of Christie's rare non-white characters and treated sympathetically in the book, even getting her happy ending. Mbatha-Raw is set to be one of the cast of the upcoming _Doctor Who_ spinoff, _The War Between Land and Sea._ This may be a bit outside your purview, but it might be interesting for you to take a look at _Doctor Who's_ Agatha Christie episode, "The Unicorn and the Wasp."
I enjoyed the video, as always.
I really like the Marple version but it's so sad that I can't watch it more than once in a blue moon. I enjoyed your comparison of the two though. Well done!
I couldn’t enjoy the Marple version because I felt so sorry for Glenda(?). To finally find love and then be rejected was heartbreaking. I felt that the Ordeal was hers not the family’s. Only reading the book did I see that I’d misidentified the ‘innocent’.
I've been binge-watching these for the past few days, you've got an easy to listen to voice n a good way of summing these up :>
Note: The phrase 'confined to a wheelchair' is a bit outdated, the preferred one is 'wheelchair user'
Good to know, thank you for telling me!
For me, Margaret Rutherford will always be the Miss Marple.
Fantastic review. I recently saw the Sutherland version- it was after he died. Got to watch the miss marple version.
I still think of Juliet Stevenson's Gwenda. The tragedy was poignant.
She broke my heart. I haven’t been able to watch it again. Like the adaptation of ‘Chimneys’, this version put me off so much, I put off reading the book for years. It’s hard to
I never thought Gwenda's death in the Marple version was kosher. Now, it turns out she died in another character's place!
Singer Lisa Stansfield played Mary in the Miss Marple's version - one of her first and few roles. She has only a small part, a few lines and some minutes with the protagonist, but I think she did a decent job here.
I'm happy with changes in the story as long as the story still works and is well writen. I saw the Miss Maple version and enjoyed it, but the book version is also very good.
Excellent as usual. I've never seen the Donald Sutherland version, but I have seen the Miss Marple version. It's well made but once again, she is forced into a mystery, she shouldn't be in and the story is distorted as a consequence. Makes it strictly average in my eyes.
Yeah like when they put her in "Why Didn't They Ask Evans?"
Re "the character of the victim"... consider that Jacko, not Rachel, is "the victim" and it is his character that we need to consider. Now the statement works.
I like the newest version that was made. I didn't like the ending change but the cast was great!
I remember reading the book and being confused how/why Jacko ends up being found with Rachel's money. I get that he needed to pay off gambling debts or whatnot (I'm assuming Kirsten delivers the money to him, or a nearby drop-off point, right after the murder, which is why she is seen crossing the moat (right?)) ... but does Jacko actually **intend** to be found with (some of) the money?
If it wasn't part of the plan, then he of course screwed up BIG time (either the police caught and interrogated him before he had a chance to dispose of it, which seems unlikely, or he kept some bills on his person out of sheer idiocy)... Or, if it WAS part of the plan, then he effectively incriminated himself for no reason, no? (Sure, his alibi for murder might be water-tight, but having the money means he was at least involved.)
At least involved in stealing money -- unless his contention is that Rachel softened enough to lend him some. I don't recall. He really messed up trusting that this alibi would work. He should have gone to somewhere very public and been seen by several people, even ones who knew him, perhaps.
I gave up expecting a good Christie adaptation a long time ago. It seems the temptation to change things is simply too great. Agatha got her fictional self Mrs Oliver to complain about this, so we know she felt the same. Since her death things have only got worse.
Oh, and I hoped that you would solve the mystery of BOBBY! I don't get why he was there, and everyone totally forgot about his death the moment he died.
My best guess is that his death was needed as incentive to convince Kirsten to confess, so he was created to be kill-offable.
Any chance you'll do Witness for the Prosecution at some point?
Definitely! :)
@@MysteryMiles I love the Marlene Dietrich movie
@@shanigribben9158 Me, too! I recently found out there's also a version with Diana Rigg, so I'm going to check that out.
@@MysteryMiles Ooh that sounds interesting, I loved her in Evil Under the Sun. BTW I don't know if you've seen the film, See How They Run? It's not a Christie adaptation per se, but it's a murder mystery centered on a staging of The Mousetrap and feature Christie as a character. It's a lot of fun and certainly fits the Christie style better than Branagh's films
@@shanigribben9158 Yes, someone recommended that to me! I'll be sure to check that one out, too.
I agree the Marple version is just so heavy and cruel. None of the characters end up being likable. I always skip it if I’m doing a rewatch
A lot of people in their Christie novels/adaptations seem to drown. Do British people not learn how to swim?
We are usually taught in primary school. You've got me intrigued - the only drowning I can remember offhand is in 'Hallowe'en Party', where swimming wouldn't have helped the victim anyway! Do remind me of some more?
The Sutherland version is weirdly iconic. Even the soundtrack - which is objectively awful.
It was rough to watch