Murder on the Orient Express (1974)

Best murder mystery film ever: the cast, the score, the costumes and Finney is the best Poirot. Better than the Branaugh abortion.

R1 I just watched the Branagh version. It was nice to look at and a few performances were great, but it doesn’t hold a candle to this version.

Touch nothing!

Love the costumes. The scene in the station is a high fashion catwalk show with the shots of the train leaving the station as the highlight. But Albert Finney looks like a corpse in his costume.

I adore Albert Finney - he could do no wrong in my book. And what a cast!

He hated the costumes so much that he never wanted to resume his role.

What does it mean to be an "actor's director?"

It's been years since I last watched it. I remember finding Finney and Bergman annoying as fuck back then. Might need to revisit it and find out whether I feel differently about their performances now. When I saw the movie as a kid I thought Vanessa Redgrave winking at Lauren Bacall as they clinked glasses was the most stylish creature ever.

The opening sequence with the Daisy Ashford kidnapping & murder is one of the most beautifully accomplished sequences in Hollywood history. That black & white photography of Colonel Ashford and his wife and their servants around the crime scene, the terrifying editing, and that thundering music.

The Wiz is a "masterpiece"?! LMAO!!!!!

Spoiler Alert....

...

...

...

....

...

The reveal of Linda Arden is a hoot when you think of how Arden was supposed to be a great Shakespearean actress. When you think about who played Arden and try to imagine her in Shakespearean drama, the mind boggles. Of course she didn't look very convincing in the other role she played in the movie either.

I must say in spite of its flaws and taking liberties both with Poirot's characterisation and the story, the Branagh version is much more exciting and entertaining than the old classic.

Albert Finney is dreadful in the role and Michelle Pfieffer is much better at conveying the glamour and eccentricities of Mrs Hubbard than the ever-limited Lauren Bacall who comes across a haughty and unsympathetic.

Also, what was so special about Ingrid Bergman's performance that she won an Oscar for it?

Who wrote that Viennese-schmaltzy musical score? A mighty, masculine steam engine roars across the screen to a accompaniment of syncopated, twiddly effeminate waltz?

I vastly preferred Evil Under the Sun. Ustinov didn't have prosthesis's all over his face which was good because one could believe he would have been just as smart as Poirot in real life. Also fantastic visuals (Not a train carriage for the whole movie), top cast, script and score by....everyone should know.

Were Bergman and Ball scratching each others' eyes out? After all, both claimed a special relationship with Bogart.

[quote] What does it mean to be an "actor's director?"

R6 It means he hired quality actors— lots of British actors.

This film needs actors with star power to keep the audience's interest because we're trapped inside train carriages for almost 2 hours.

Of course, there were some superb performers (like Bergman and Redgrave) wasted in roles they could have performed in their sleep.

Good film and I was surprised when I looked it up on IMDB that it wasn't Best Picture nominee. The Academy actually nominated the dreadful-but- profitable The Towering Inferno instead of MOTOE!

Lumet had a remarkable and varied career: 12 Angry Men, Dog Day Afternoon, Prince of the City, The Hill , Fail Safe, The Verdict. Network, , The Group, Serpico, The Pawnbroker, , Running on Empty. The Morning After, Garbo Talks,, Lovin' Molly and a surprising number of stage adaptations: Child's Play, Deathtrap, Long Days Journey Into Night, The Wiz, Equus, A View from the Bridge, The Seal Gull, The Fugitive Kind and The Last of the Mobile Hotshots from Williams "The Seven Descents of Myrtle"

Bisset looks gorgeous in this.

R11 The Oscar was given to Ingrid because she's Ingrid and perfectly good in the film, but it's hardly my idea of an Oscar worthy performance.

Diane Ladd at R18, I was the one who got truly screwed over. By the way can someone explain how the film I appeared in and my performance in it got nominated in two different years? Ingrid herself said that she thought I deserved the Oscar.

Gorgeous film and I love it. I watch it at least once a year. i thought it was a great Agatha Christie adaptation. Albert Finney seems to get a lot of criticism for his portrayal as Hercule Poirot, but I thought he was brilliant. Jacqueline Bisset is incredibly gorgeous in this. Sean Connery and Vanessa Redgrave are an interesting pairing as a clandestine couple. Love this movie.

The 1974 version is a bazillion times better that the new one, better performances, story taken more seriously, much better handling of the finale. Fucking Branagh wanted to turn it into a personal triumph for Poirot, and the ending that Christie wrote is better and more surprising.

Bacall made the most of her role, IMHO, by the end, she's probably winning the grand acting tournament going on with all the big names.

Ingrid's Oscar win, where she gave a gracious speech, noting that Valentina Cortese's performance was, basically, better than hers, and that she was sorry that she won, and not Valentina.

The Wiz was Lumet vomiting up on the screen. He took a joyful stage musical and made it dark and shitty

The intro sequence is indeed brilliant and spooky, and sets the mood for the whole film. Despite the clothes and distractions you keep remembering a child’s horrible death is at the center of the movie.

The recent version loses that completely, trying for laughs and action sequences, all due to Kenneth Blargh’s fault (and vanity). Michelle Pfeiffer is great in this (much better than Bacall) but the movie does not allow her to shine.

Bergman’s interrogation scene is clever and very well acted. But the best thing about it is it caused one of the greatest, more generous acceptance speeches ever.

[quote] Were Bergman and Ball scratching each others' eyes out? After all, both claimed a special relationship with Bogart.

Ball would have been a very different Mrs Hubbard. Probably a lot more convincing than Bacall as that type of character, but likely not as who Mrs Hubbard really was.

R10 I am a big Shakespeare fan. I watched the RSC version of Macbeth with Ian McKellen and Judi Dench this last week (It is free on Youtube).

I loved how Poirot figured out who was Arden and the Macbeth hints throughout, "thank you for playing your role," "why did you bring these daggers from the place?!" Little things like this is what the Branagh version lacked.

The Branagh version seemed to rush the ending and the denouement was lackluster and overdramatic.

I loved the scenes with Princess Dragomiroff and her butch German maid.

I named my yorkie Princess Dragomiroff.

It's always nice to win an Oscar.

What about Tony Perkins, serving Norman Bates realness?

I can't even imagine the wonderfulness of watching this film if I hadn't read the book years before and knew the ending.

It really is Christie's cleverest mystery.

cunt's, all of them

Things I love about Lumet’s version: Gielgud’s pronunciation of “fracas”; Roberts’ “Natalya, mein Herr”; the interrogation scenes; Redgrave’s sly smile throughout, where you can see that she thinks it’s all a high camp hoot; Bennett’s amazing score (almost as good as “Nicholas & Alexandra”); the look of sadness on Bacall’s face when she’s not being a loudmouth; Finney’s remarkable characterization which only seems over the top when compared to later iterations but at the time matched many viewers’ mental image of Poirot; George Coulouris still being cast; Jean-Pierre Cassel’s language skills and (upon recently watching for the 50th time) his truly affecting performance.

Branagh’s murder scene reenactment was beautifully filmed and scored.

“ Were Bergman and Ball scratching each others' eyes out?”

R14, I talked her out of that role

Produced by John Brabourne, 7th Baron Brabourne, husband of Countess Mountbatten of Burma (Prince Philip’s cousin), son of Doreen who was killed in the bombing of Dickie Mountbatten’s boat.

I don't know OP, I could never watch it, and I'm a big AC fan. It's so stale and dusty, thay all look like madame tussaud's figures. I think the original Death on the Nile is 100000000000 X more entertaining

Hasn't this movie been cancelled yet?

R36 this movies were made at a time when it was admitted that some people were white, especially in the british upperclass of the early 20th century

Oh dearing meself so hard right now

Tony Walton (Production and Costume Designer of the film) told me they achieved the frosty winter air seen when characters looked out of the train windows by simply having a technician blow cigarette smoke into view.

[Quote] Jean-Pierre Cassel’s language skills and (upon recently watching for the 50th time) his truly affecting performance.

First time I saw it, I burst into tears when Cassel breaks down during the denouement. He brilliantly underplays until that moment and it's shattering.

Jessie wants to be lezzie / Lucy’s pussy is juicy

The costumes are just fantastic in the 1974 version, much less so in the lackluster remake. I mean, look at Bissett's outfit! It's to die for!

I read or heard an interview with the costume designer, who said that all the clothes were deliberately made slightly more fabulous than they would have been in real life - nothing is drab or worn, even though some of the characters weren't wealthy. The designer wanted to present a fantasy of 1930s fashion, one that was very period, but which didn't involve someone like the Perkins character wear a suit that was 5-10 years old, and which had been worn every working day. Men would have one good wood suit in those days and wear it continuously for years, but not in this movie.

What R9 said.

OP, if you believe that THE WIZ is good, let alone a masterpiece, it's time to seek medication.

[quote]R42 The costumes are just fantastic in the 1974 version... I mean, look at Bissett's outfit! It's to die for!

I read a long interview with Tony Walton in which he said the fabric for that particular dress never arrived. He had an assistant who knew how to stamp pattern on fabric (I seriously think it involved using a potato) and they adjusted a different fabric in a rush.

It doesn’t read in most pics, but there’s a subtle dotted illusion created in a cream color on the blue. It’s the kind of detail that creates texture in closer shots.

You can just barely see it here, in the shadow under her arm.

OP - I was 13 when Murder on the Orient Express came out - and I made my dad take me to see it (maybe a hint of a young gayling???) I have one of the original movie posters and I have the vinyl soundtrack (which I got for my birthday...) Jealous? :)

R19 You were in a foreign-language film.

As great as Tony Walton's costumes for ...Orient Express are, they don't hold a candle to Anthony Powell's for Death on the Nile and Evil Under the Sun.

Evil Under the Sun has 80s hairstyles and costuming. Not so glamorous.

r49, if you think Lauren Bacall's Orient hairdo is remotely 1934, you're very wrong.

Girls, [italic]girls,[/italic] [bold]GIRLS! [/bold]

You're letting your prissy pedantry regarding period costumes and hairstyles tear you apart!

And?

I think the last time an "And?" cowed me or anyone I know was all the way back in elementary school, r51.

Try a different tactic. Your prissy imperiousness is no more intimidating than your prissy pedantry.

R16 one of Lumet's best movies his the unfairly forgotten THAT KIND OF WOMAN with a magnificent Tab Hunter, shutting down all critics about his talent and an (as per usual) equally splendid Loren. Needs to be rediscovered and celebrated ASAP

Very funny scene: Poirot having a fit in a fine dining restaurant, ripping up the menu in front of the exasperated wait staff.

My favorite Sidney Lumet movie is The Fugitive Kind (1960) a wild Tennessee Williams melodrama co-starring Marlon Brando and Anna Magnani, also with Joanne Woodward and Maureen Stapleton. It's a campfest for the ages! I picked it up from a video store during the 20" snow storm in NYC in 1996.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED

I remember the elegant cafe orchestra of the train station playing "On the Good Ship Lollipop," firmly setting the period as 1934.

Do any such luxurious train lines still exist?

The Orient Express still exists, though I'm sure it's not what it used to be. Google it!

What is the other tune in that scene, r47? Poirot later hums the tune as he prepares his elaborate grooming ritual before bed.

My pedantry is not prissy!

My favorite is 2010 tv version with David Suchet.

"As great as Tony Walton's costumes for ...Orient Express are, they don't hold a candle to Anthony Powell's for Death on the Nile and Evil Under the Sun."

But "MotOE" came first! Which is actually a big deal, because sumptuous period costumes were far from common in 1974. Most period films had costumes that were more sixties or seventies than the period the film was supposed to be in, but this movie looked very 1934 and started a trend of more accurate costuming in movies.

I just want to give a little praise to Wendy Hiller's outfits, which look more 1910 than 1934, which is totally in character for a bereaved old lady who lives in the past.

^^ I am terrified the princess will become my avatar some day!

Wendy Hiller was lovely in Pygmalion. You just fall in love with her.

Wendy Hiller was also quite lovely as Burt Lancaster's sex-partner in that truly AWFUL Hollywood version of Terence Rattigan's 'Separate Tables'.

I love Hiller's facial expressions when Poirot rattles off her "lies and evasions."

Lumet originally offered Bergman the role of the Princess Dragomirov, but she asked for the part she eventually played. (Wendy Hiller is fabulous as the Princess, but it's fun to picture what the Bergman version might have been like.) The very memorable way in which it was shot surely helps account for her surprising Oscar win.

I normally loathe Bacall, but I think she's almost ideal here. "Mrs. Hubbard" is SUPPOSED to be loud and unsympathetic, and Bacall delivers that with gusto; once her true identity is revealed, there's not much screen time left (and almost no dialogue) for her, so she gets away with it (so to speak).

To me this is hands-down the best of the big-screen Christies -- particularly in its handling of what brings the others to a screeching halt, the inevitable very looooooong explanation by Poirot. Lumet's direction and Finney's performance far surpass the way this part of a Christie novel is handled in DEATH ON THE NILE and EVIL UNDER THE SUN.

Ball would have insisted her closeups be filmed through a snowbank.

R68 I still find DOTN lighter, funnier and more entertaining. And stunning to the eye and ear

[quote]cunt's, all of them

Oh, dear.

[quote]prosthesis's

I don't even know where to start with that one.

The opening sequence that describes the kidnapping, the arrival at the train station, and the ending when they can finally drop their masks and line up to meet the family…all such great scenes.

I’m not a fan of the Finney casting. Poirot may have been rotund but he was very light on his feet (he was vain about his small feet) whereas Finney lumbered around.

[quote] The very memorable way in which it was shot surely helps account for her surprising Oscar win.

R86 I'm not sure what you're suggesting here.

She was always shown sitting; the camera looked down upon her; she looked subservient as she mewled about her brown babies?

"I normally loathe Bacall, but I think she's almost ideal here. "Mrs. Hubbard" is SUPPOSED to be loud and unsympathetic, and Bacall delivers that with gusto; once her true identity is revealed, there's not much screen time left (and almost no dialogue) for her, so she gets away with it (so to speak)."

She was fabulous in the finale! Yes, she was supposed to be annoying and obnoxious for much of the film, but at the end, her true nature is revealed, and you see that she's so steely and determined that even Poirot backs down. And she gave hints earlier in the film, there's this moment at the train station where she stops and gives Poirot a strange, cold look... and the first time you see the film you think nothing of it. The second time, you realize that she's realizing that she has a problem, and is making up her mind regardless of opposition from the greatest detective in the world.

Yeah, she really aced the role.

I want to watch it now R75

I love Dame Wendy too. She was the third choice for the role, after Marlene Dietrich turned it down, and Ingrid Bergman said she would rather play the Swedish nurse than the princess.

R68 and R75 I believe Bacall in this movie more than I did Pfeiffer in the remake.

I believe Bacall could have been America’s greatest tragic actress, too. After she is revealed, she’s a different person.

oh but then if she was a famous actress, how come Poirot doesn't knoxw her when he sees her ?

Let’s just take a moment to appreciate Sir John Gielgud in this.

He doesn’t want to talk to the loud Italian and American. All he wants to do is read after a long day. Then he plunges that dagger super freaking hard into Rachett.

R79 Poirot DOES recognize her.

During lunch when Bianchi leaves she asks what’s wrong with him. Poirot replies “In the divine words of Greta Garbo ‘he just wants to be alone.’ “

After her interrogation, he thanks her for “playing her part.” You can see her face tighten, too.

When she brings the bloody knife to him, he asks “why did you bring the dagger from the place?” This is a Lady Macbeth quote. Poirot saw her twice as Lady Macbeth.

She's a different person, and one who comes across as so incredibly formidable, you can actually believe she did what the character's done!

That's the problem with the damn remake, Brannaugh wanted the finale to be a victory for Poirot, so he had the mastermind crumble before his eyes, and it just doesn't work. It's much more believable that someone who'd do all that would be terrifyingly unstoppable, years of scheming and masses of willpower have gone into the murder plot, this is someone who'd never stop no matter how many obstacles pop into the path of success, someone who'd fucking stare down Poirot during the denoument and know he was going to be the one to back down. She was well cast, very well cast.

My favorite Rachel Roberts moment in this movie (which is thus my favorite moment in the entire movie) is her contented smirk when Poirot asks if she is a good cook. "All my ladies haff said so!"

Wendy Hiller is beyond hilarious in this movie as the Princess Dragomiroff: "She vas the grrrrreatest trrrrrragic actrrrrress of herrrrr generrrrration!"

The divine designer Anthony Powell dressed Maggie Smith in Travels with My Aunt (1972), for which he won the Academy Award, and for years after Smith refused to be dressed by anyone else and made it part of her film contracts. That's how he came to design Death on the Nile and Evil Under the Sun and such later projects as Sunset Boulevard onstage.

I had forgotten that Julie Andrews' first lavender marriage partner Tony Walton had designed Express but he did a lot of film, theater and ballet work that played New York in the 1970s and was a huge favorite of mine too.

Who here has had Tony Walton?

[quote]Who here has had Tony Walton?

Count me in that club.

Maggie Smith did not insist that she be dressed by Anthony Powell and Anthony Powell only after Travels with My Aunt, [R84]. I am certain Anthony Powell would be quite surprised to learn he was the costume designer on Clash of the Titans or California Suite or Murder by Death, because he wasn't. In fact, the only other times he designed costumes for Maggie Smith after Travels with My Aunt were the two Agatha Christie adaptations -- and Maggie Smith played a frump in both.

[quote] Tony Walton

I love this picture of the earnest bride and groom.

So Powell never dressed Smith again? Not in film nor onstage? Not in Private Lives in London nor in New York?

But, yes, I surrender. I overstated my case. I apologize.

That's priceless, r88. They both look like they're trying to maintain their dignity while on their way to a death squad. Thanks.

[quote] I had forgotten that Julie Andrews' first lavender marriage partner Tony Walton had designed Express

Wait a minute, what? TW is gay?

Yes, R91, and I know DL elders have had him!!! Spill it, guys!

Oh, that's actually sweet r88. He looks like he's leaning in on her and holding her hand tight to help and support her. I always heard they were great friends both before and after the marriage.

Red Sails In The Sunset

R26, I used to show that version of "Macbeth" when I taught.

I am a major AC fan since 1957 and "Witness For the Prosecution." Have seen the London "The Mousetrap." I've always placed "MotOE" among Christie's Top 10.

But I was never interested in seeing any movie version.

However, the reviews here plus the mentioned allusions to "Macbeth" have motivated me to watch the Finney version.

I think I'm the only person on DL who liked Lauren Bacall?

I liked listening to Bacall's interviews, R96. Her gorgeous (cultivated) voice, the affected speech and the persona were all manufactured but she always came off as bright, interesting, intelligent, sharp and articulate. When she wasn't talking about Bogie the woman could be a good storyteller. I enjoyed reading her memoirs. Her raging cuntiness notwithstanding I thought she would have been more fun to talk to than her friend Kate Hepburn.

i loved her voice too

I had never seen the movie, but this thread enticed me to watch the 1974 and THEN the 2017 version. The old one was great for the most part if a bit campy but that's what makes these Christie movies fun.

The 2017 managed to completely nullify all the glamour the 1974 version oozed out. Yes it had beautiful panoramic vistas of old cities and nature alike but you can have that in any movie. Someone mentioned upthread how the beginning of the movie was a "catwalk" of 1930's fashion introducing each character. They totally removed that this time around so now there's no spotlight on the characters or the clothes! A missed opportunity to really showcase the glamour and opulence of the period.

I also usually like Michelle Pfeiffer but the original actress played the role better. I mean, none of actors who played Americans could even bother with a mid-atlantic aristocratic accent that would have totally fit into the period. They sound like they're speaking from 2021. The newer film just seems too modern.

Kenneth Branagh betrays no understanding whatsoever of what makes Christie's writing popular.

[quote]Do any such luxurious train lines still exist?

Check out this one, R58.

I hate this new one. The old Christie films are actually filmed in such a way that it feels like a puzzle the audience can try to piece together. The new one feels way too linear.

You also only get to see a thin veneer of all the other characters where in the old one they were at least given a personality and some idiosyncrasies.

Why did they add a racism component to the new one? That wasn't in the old one at all that I recall.

[quote] The divine designer Anthony Powell dressed Maggie Smith in Travels with My Aunt (1972), for which he won the Academy Award, and for years after Smith refused to be dressed by anyone else

ISTHIS THE GAYEST THING EVER WRITTEN ANYWHERE ANYTIME IN THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF GAY ?

R103, because a person of color (read, Black) character needs to be shoehorned into every movie these days and we then need to be lectured about the terrible discrimination they faces at the time. Never mind the big hole in the logic of the plot when we are shown black doctors, aristocrats, businesspeople and fashionable socialites in the Europe of that period and also told that the racism and discrimination of the period kept them in grinding poverty.

cue screams of SJWs and white resident fraus R105

I remember 30years ago, (I was a teenager) seeing a production of HAMLET in Paris, directed by PETER BROOK who's an obscure culty english director ,whose claim to fame is the illl fated production of Macbeth with Vivien Leigh and her then husband in Stratford in 1955. His daughter married the then french gay minister of culture's son or something, so he was given a life pension and a theatre in Paris or something like that. He was considered very "avant garde" . Hamlet was black of course. There was not castle, nothing, no set, no prop, just a big carpet figuring Elsinore. The black prince of Denmark went on and on about his ancestors as I , and a few others, where walking along the alleys, heading for the exit. I know it's ART , and I felt sorry for the guy, but it didn't provoke thoughts, just immense boredom = imagination killer

[quote] Why did they add a racism component to the new one?

Because vile Branagh was quoted as saying he wanted a "Badass Agatha Christie"— which is a vile oxymoron.

I didn't see the entire piece of shit, but I lost any kind of respect I still had for Branagh (= he's aging well, I'd hit that) when I watched the ending. They told me Michelle was oscar great (wasn't...again). I couldn't believe how bad and out of character B. was. Did he even READ 1 POIROT? and he started SHOUTING. WTF?

acting IS shouting

Yes, ya gotta SHOUT to act!

I don't understand how Rachel Roberts could actually learn her lines and hit her marks... the human body is incredibly resilient

Is it DL day in the retirement home today, Mee Maw Roberts at R110? Maybe you misunderstood what the maid told you, Mee Maw Julia. She told you to go to Dat Lounge, not post on DL.

R113 I know, Agatha Christie usually attracts younger crowds

R60 -- It's "Red Sails in the Sunset." I recognized the tune but wouldn't have known the title but the closed captioning was on and it had it. Confirmed on the IMDB site.

Tab Hunter's hit "red sails in the sunset " ?

R100, That's how I regard both the David Walliam and the Francesca Annis versions of the Tommy and Tuppence stories. Very disappointing tones of silliness and farce.

it's similar thing with the ITV/Granada productions of the Miss Marple stories (and to a lesser extent with some of the later Poirots), they have a ridiculous cartoonish vibe and look - I remember the BBC versions of the stories with Joan Hickson being so much more subtle, grounded, and therefore affecting.

108, I loathe how the word "badass" has entered common usage in relation to female characters (and now writers), so patronising, and usually a good clue to how insipid the material is going to be.

The only thing that could have made Murder on the Orient Express 1974 more perfect would have been Peter Ustinov in the Poirot role. I agree that Finney was fine, but Ustinov embodied the character the way nobody did until David Suchet came along. That said, Suchet's MotOE is unbearably grim. I prefer the slight campiness of the 74 version.

Have any of you Agatha Christie fans seen Agatha (1979)? I saw it when it first came out and thought it was pretty good - it's based on her disappearance in 1926, with Vanessa Redgrave as AC. Timothy Dalton as her husband and Dustin Hoffman as an American journalist on Christie's trail.

Hoffman brought the project to the First Artists company in which he was a partner with Paul Newman, Sidney Poitier, Barbra Streisand, and Steve McQueen for a while. Agatha, and the other one, Straight Time (1978), were two of Hoffman's best performances, well acted without the usual ham.

I loved the way they played up the height differential, r121.

R107, Orson Welles had staged an all-black cast of Macbeth decades earlier. Peter Brook's Hamlet with Adrian Lester was in 2001; by then, the avant garde part of the play you were seeing would have been the lack of sets that Brook was by then well known for, and the severe editing Brook had made to the play, not the color of the skin of the actors. Lester was widely regarded as a fine Hamlet and the problems with the production had nothing to do with him or with black actors in general.

But since your post was about hijacking this thread and turning into a bunch of racist crap, I guess it doesn't matter whether what you said actually made sense or not.

The costumes of the 1974 version, while evoking the period, had none of the authenticity seen in those of THE LEOPARD by Danilo Donati and all of Shirley Russell's films for her husband such as WOMEN IN LOVE, THE MUSIC LOVERS and THE BOYFRIEND. All of these films preceded MotOE by a few years.

Know your costume film history.

I make no claims to being a costume/fashion expert but I'll say the the 1974 version does evoke the idea of the 1930s when I see them. Like that one glittery garb Hubbard wears for the second half of the movie that has the sharp angles really reminds me of art deco.

The 2017 version has clothing that looks too much like modern clothing. If this was set in modern times with the same clothing, I could believe it. There's even a scene where Pfeiffer's character is sitting at the swanky bar on the train with sneakers? I mean really? Would a woman of her stature in that time period wear sneakers in that setting?

R96, I love Bacall, although she seems like she was a nightmare offstage.

The best deductive moment in the film comes where Bacall's Mrs. Hubbard dumps a whole bunch of crap onto the table out of her pocketbook - basically a ton of make-up. Poirot looks horrified and it reads as a gag about how men can't believe how much stuff women lug around.

Here's the thing - the only woman who would have had that much make-up in her possession back then would have been a call girl - or an actress. Mrs. Hubbard is obviously not a call girl - so this is the final tip to Finney that Bacall doesn't just greatly resemble a famous actress - she IS the famous actress.

The look she gives Pierre at the the very end as he stumbles weeping to his seat is remarkable - it conveys a depth of sympathy you'd think a second's glance simply couldn't hold.

Love Michele but Bacall's Mrs. Hubbard would have broken Michelle's weepy bitch in half, chucked the pieces overboard and forgotten she'd done so by martini #5.

A friend of mine once performed a gag skit where he, as Poirot, and another chap as his companion on the train are show walking towards the camera down the railroad tracks. As they get nearer, it is obvious they have both been badly beaten. The companion turns to Poirot and mumbles "The next time you find out that everyone on a train is a killer except for you and me, wait until we are at a station to tell them you know this."

For a movie that is causing so much comment and fond memories, it's a bit stunning to realize that Bisset, Redgrave, and York are the last three of the 20 actors still alive.

Not if you consider the film was shot in 1974, r127.

Really happy to see this thread--I love, love, LOVE the 1974 version and watch it once a year. I'm an actor, and whenever I feel discouraged and want to quit, I watch Finney's performance and it gives me a lift. It's a heroic performance in my opinion. He was in his 30s at the time! Incredible transformation--vocal work, physical work, so forth.

There was a featurette on the original DVD and I recall Lumet saying he had fun mixing great stage actors with great film actors. I think that tension is present throughout and it does throw me at times; Perkins is the weakest of the bunch, doing warmed-over Norman Bates. Others are sort of doing caricatures of themselves (Bacall, Gielgud), but then you get Connery, Hiller, Roberts, Cassel, all of whom are really magnificent.

Bergman is really great in a small role. Not sure it deserved an Oscar, but that's neither here nor there. Notice in the Bergman interrogation scene there is NO CUT and only ONE camera movement, so highly impactful. Lumet was so fucking great--he knew just what to do and when to do it. And I love how Finney is with Bergman in that scene, he's just right with her, very gentle, supportive. What a great scene partner he was to her.

And I agree that opening montage is unbelievably good. When I was a boy and saw it for the first time, that sequence scared the hell out of me.

I also like that opening Istanbul sequence--kind of forgotten in the other more flashy scenes, but it's really cool. Amazingly photographed.

Agree that Widmark is weak, dumb, cartoony.

Ooooh miss embroidered asshole is having a meltdown @ R123 ! how virtuous of you, precious pearlina, to signal that I didn't aknowledge the right White Savior, in his superior understanding of humanity arts and politics . Orson Welles saved the black people, not Peter Brook, by casting Black people as medieval european aristocrats. Don't clutch your pearls too hard because of me, please dear miss pisspot R123. I thought that Peter brook had at least one original idea. I am so sorry I " hijacked this thread and turned into a bunch of racist crap,". Can you still shit through that tiny golden asshole of yours ? it's not like there were 20 posts already mocking the like of you, Oh sorry, don't cry please. You're not the most ridiculous stuck-from-the-ass poster of the day, I'm sure miss. Do you want me to stick that laced parasol out of your precious shithole (no I didn't mean your mouth) so that you can fart ? you'll be more comfortable

Anthony Perkins could only do Norman Bates, even IRL

R74, watch Bergman's Big Scene again. First of all, it's shot in 1 unbroken take. Second, the gradual motion of the camera and the eventual movement of Poirot create a subtle, wonderful claustrophobic effect around Bergman's character. None of the other interrogations is shot in this manner.

I should've won that fucking Oscar!

[quote]There's even a scene where Pfeiffer's character is sitting at the swanky bar on the train with sneakers?

Are you sure that wasn't an editing error? Or maybe they just looked like sneakers but were boat shoes or something similar?

The designer talks about how they "cheated" on shoes because in 80% of the scenes they wouldn't even show, so they used less expensive shoes to stretch the budget.

[quote]Ooooh miss embroidered asshole is having a meltdown

You're the one who had a literal meltdown on here when no one else had. You've been on Datalounge 24/7 for a week or two, posting crap like this under multiple accounts, feigning outrage at things you very obviously don't care about. At first I thought you were unaware that your meth-addled spelling, random capitalizations and weird spaces around your punctuation made you stand out as much as you do, but it's becoming clear that this is on purpose.

I can't prove Tony Walton isn't gay but he's been happily married to his second wife Gen LeRoy for several decades now. I believe she's the daughter of Hollywood producer/director Mervyn LeRoy. I'm a Broadway professional who's known Tony since the late 1970s and I've never heard any gossip about his sexuality.

R134 I can't find an image of it but the link below is the scene right after everyone is startled by the avalanche of snow blocking the train and they meet in the bar. Pfeiffer says she's going to be late to London or wherever she's going. As the camera is showing different viewpoints, there's a shot of her entire body sitting on the bar stool with the shoes visible.

Again the link doesn't show the shoes, it just occurs around this time in the movie. Not only did it stand out me because of the shoes, but because of the atrocious, brown, frumpy outfit they put Pfeiffer in.

She's wearing brown boots, r137. I checked later scenes and she's still wearing those boots. I just fast forwarded to her parts, so maybe there's something I missed somewhere, but as far as I can tell she's wearing boots with her sporting outfit.

Hmmm maybe I caught them at a weird angle then where they looked like sneakers, my mistake. I could have sworn they looked like sneakers.

Was Miss Pfeiffer doing some mountain-hiking in the snowy Austrian Alps?

I didn't mean to harp on the sneakers thing, I've just always been fascinated with mistakes in movies and thought you caught one. I can definitely see where the laces showing at certain angles might look like tennis shoes.

It's campy, star studded fun with gorgeous design elements but Finney's Poirot is so loud and creepy.

The flashback stuff to the Daisy murder is all really well done though.

Of the three versions I prefer the ITV one with Suchet who is the BEST Poirot of all. It needed a bigger budget and a slightly longer running time but it's the only version that actually feels like it could actually be real. Suchet's anger at the stupidity of their plot is quite believable.

There is one very brief instant in The Wizard of Oz while they are dancing down the Yellow Brick Road singing We're Off to Meet the Wizard when the camera pans down enough to see Judy is wearing her brown/black rehearsal shoes instead of the Ruby Slippers. It's a famous Movie Goof.

Suchet added a religious element to the plot that simply didn't fit.

The guys earlier complaining about the "race element" in the Branaugh version didn't take into account that, as has been the case for decades, directors wanted a certain actor regardless of race, and made plot changes to accommodate that. I'm not sure it was done that well in Branaugh's version but at least there was a reason.

Suchet only demanded the religious element because he personally was religious, and it wasn't done well at all.

[quote] "race element" … religious element

Was Suchet's religious element as utterly jarring and anachronistic as Branagh's 'badass' race element?

R49 All historical designs reflect the era in which they were designed to a certain degree but if you think the designs of Evil Under The Sun are egregiously 1980s, you're an idiot.

[quote] I'm not sure it was done that well in Branaugh's version but at least there was a reason.

R144 What was Branagh's reason? Did he want big box-office in Chicago and Alabama?

With Evil Under the Sun, you had designs that were period appropriate but were also making a comeback in 1980s fashion. Every girl I went to high school with had a late-30s/early-40s "My Girl Friday" style two-piece dress in polka dots with a faux flower pin.

Also complicating things was that no one was going to get a 1941 era permanent wave, so they got 1980s hot curlers or perms instead, which didn't quite look the same.

Ultimately though I thought the Evil Under the Sun costumes were perfectly fine. Not as sumptuous as Murder on the Orient Express or Death on the Nile, but very good.

I didn't see it as harping R141, I'm actually impressed you were able to find that screenshot and post it!

In any case, would a lady like her in that era have been walking around a luxury train in what amount to Timberlands? Not an expert on this stuff, I just think the director or costume designer missed an opportunity to showcase the time period better and make it more glamorous.

Who cares about fucking costumes?!

I found Evil Under the Sun far too campy. Orient Express had a lethal crime frighteningly laid out at the beginning and feeling that the people on board the train were convincingly sinister.

[quote] fucking There was none of that in this film.

R160 The costumes gave us something extra to gaze upon because we're trapped inside train carriages for almost two hours.

I swear to God, my mom used to dress like Myra Gardner in the 80's and 90's when we would go on vacation. It was weird when I first saw her on screen.

I too thought I remembered their dancing down the Yellow Brick Road and Judy raises her foot to show a dark colored rehearsal oxford but when I googled it I found two youtube clips from the scene where they are pelted with apples by the apple trees and Judy is wearing her rehearsal shoes. Maybe it happens more than once in the film.

The designer did say they "cheated" on shoes in the Branaugh movie and I agree, they did. Her boots don't look accurate at all, as you said, they look like Timberlands. The best I can tell, you only saw those big clunky shoes when skiing or maybe hunting. Most examples of vintage 1930s women's boots that I found were tall lace-up in thin leather, not mid-calf chunky boots.

Just watched the Finney film. Of course a big deal is made of the number 12. 12 wounds. 12 letters in each of the anonymous notes. 12 on a jury. And 12 passengers in the sleeping car (excluding Poirot and the victim.) But the train porter was in on the killing, so that’s 13, no? Oliver York and Jacqueline Bisset stabbed together, so that explains the stab wounds, but not the letters or the jury metaphor. And there are 14 letters in DAISY ARMSTRONG.

Tsk tsk.

How about some nice GAYTEES?

Perhaps they were going for something like this but to your point, didn't want to spend the money. Although I find that kind of ridiculous with a $55 million budget.

How much does it cost to make a customer pair of leather boots? $10?

or perhaps they are just tasteless and cheap and too stupid to have any real regard for detail.

No, I agree, I feel like they could have bought an actual pair of 1930s leather boots on Etsy and then had someone mock up a couple of pairs in Pfeiffer's size for a few hundred bucks. Those boots show up a lot in the movie, it's not like most of the other shoes that are barely visible.

They need to remake the remake so Pfeiffer can have better shoes.

Add the shoes, drop the Branaugh.

[quote] drop the Branaugh

I agree. Branagh should be dropped, boxed, sent back to Belfast and never be allowed to direct a film again

Oh, hun, I dropped Kevin decades ago.

The credits and the kidnapping montage were both done by the brilliant Richard Williams.

I do remember liking Vanessa Redgrave in this, as her character’s about the only one who ever smiles. Practically everyone else is so dour, she’s refreshing!

I know they’re all there to commit a murder, but still…

We were having a nice discussion until r146 and r150 showed up.

Filthy loathsome trolls.

R135 are you CRYING ?

Rachel Roberts (Hildegard) was a dead ringer for Eddie Izzard.

Yes, R132! Yes!

Perkins in this is not weak, but his characterization is odd. I did like how he was the district attorney in the remake though. Perkins motive to kill was weaker than Linda Ardens or Princess Dragomirroff's, but nevertheless a fun movie.

What was wrong with the Perkins character is the need to jibe him with Norman Bates - a heap of mommy issues. That starts with the script. It's the one jarringly tacky moment.

I'd be curious to see how the Perkins character is written by Christie in the book. I'm not so sure that Perkins wasn't cast because of the quirks of the written character rather than Perkins being asked to bring a particular Norman Batesness to his performance.

R8 r129, I agree, the opening flashback of the kidnapping is terrifying. I saw this in the theater at age 4 & was spellbound, terrified, crying. Seeing this scene as an adult brings back all the feels, hell, even READING about the scene gives me goosebumps. The movie is superlative & started me on a murder mystery addiction. The book & ‘74 version are tops; Branagh’s version was abysmal but worth seeing, if only to appreciate the ‘74 version that much more.

"What was wrong with the Perkins character is the need to jibe him with Norman Bates"

Presumably the director asked him to!

But seriously, the reason Perkins is weird and twitchy is the same reason that the Ingrid Bergman character is fluttery and squeaking with terror... they're the ones who are having the most trouble with it all. Some of the characters are firm of purpose or have no problem with getting rough, but McQueen doesn't have the nerve to hold steady through the extended charade, and Greta is terrified of eternal hellfire. Of course the Jackie Bissett character is also a mess, but it's not clear if her problems are due to past trauma or current stressors.

R175 She also took a lot of drugs, remember. Her husband was really in charge. McQueen was a freaking Pisces and couldn't handle the pressure lol

I remember watching the film when it was first released. During the opening credits, the music swells when Richard Widmark’s name is shown. I thought at the time that it was a clue to who done it…..little did I know it was a clue to who was done in.

R128, you can also read the first part of the sentence. Obviously, many of the established stars would be dead in the 47 years since its release, and so that was not my point. But not many 47 year old movies elicit the amount of commentary and affection that MoTOE has.

It’s DL catnip.

It's still hard to believe that they got actors like Sean Connery and Vanessa Redgrave to play small, unimportant, supporting roles.

Yeah, I still think that Perkins gets some of the blame here, like when Poirot asks how many letters Ratchet had received and Perkins twitches his head and says, "twelve! twelve! twelve!" It's just kinda dumb. But I love the film and of course I love Anthony Perkins. And you all might be right--they might have asked him to do that kind of thing.

I don't agree with R180 that they have small, unimportant roles. Any of the main 12 are great parts. Famous book, great cast, very famous director. And Connery had worked with Lumet before, and adored him.

[quote]Perkins in this is not weak, but his characterization is odd. I did like how he was the district attorney in the remake though.

I don't understand this sentence. Perkins certainly wasn't in the remake.

r182, maybe he means the character, not Perkins.

No love for the Alfred Molina version? With DL fave Meredith Baxter as Mrs. Hubbard!

Or the Japanese version?

I thought Bergman was just okay in her role. She always came off as Bergman playing a mousy Swedish missionary rather than an actual mousy Swedish missionary.

I was impressed by Connery, who actually did make a real character out of his stalwart British military man.

If ever oh ever the Academy gave an Oscar for best ensemble- which they should- this is the standard by which all should be judged.

The identity of the "murderer" is a cop-out.

Why do you think that, r188?

They ALL did it? It just sounds wussy. I like when a list of potentials killers is narrowed down.

Like "every child who participated gets a prize"!

I never quite understood why - if they all did it - they didn't just whack the Belgian and his pal and pretend they fell out the window or whatever.

Would you really want to go up against a dozen killers, three of whom are Vivian Rutledge, Norman Bates and James Bond?

The original plan was clever: The train was only supposed to hold the murderers and their victim. Everyone, even Pierre the conductor, was in on it. It was supposed to look like a random assassin snuck on the train, committed the murder, and then slipped out at the next station. Poirot's presence and getting stuck in the snow changed everything.

Of course, the really clever thing would have been to have Anthony Perkins' PA character slip some poison in Ratchet's drink at any time during his employment, but whatever.

They didn’t just want him dead. They wanted to kill him themselves.

Why does the Japanese version seem like a slapstick comedy? It's cartoonish.

^^ OMG, I want to see that!

^^ Oops… r185 Japanese version

Miss Redgrave looks like a Valkyrie in her scenes, so tall and cool.

Films like this used to be available on Netflix, Hulu or prime. Now they want paying members to pay MORE than the monthly fee to see classic films.

I thought it was interesting that they represented three generations of amazingly beautiful women - Bacall as the older woman; Redgrave as the middle-aged woman; Bissett as the young woman.

They all looked fabulous but Redgrave was shockingly beautiful and her amused response to Poirot is brilliantly done.

I really wish there had been an Academy Award for ensemble. This would have been a cinch to win, even with The Godfather Part II out the same year.

Oh, r178, I was just joshin' you.

R43 here: another wonderful memory I have of see MOTOE was Michael York. SWOON! Even at 13, I knew he was handsome and he made me tingle "down there." After seeing MOTOE, I got on an Agatha Christie kick and probably read 30 or 40 of her mysteries. I was living in London at the time and my parents used to love to go to the antique markets and while they were looking to antiques, I was looking for used Agatha Christie paperbacks - which I still have (I'm kind of a hoarder...) The link is the poster I have - but mine still has its color...

thank you r201 for introducing me to that site!

"I never quite understood why - if they all did it - they didn't just whack the Belgian and his pal and pretend they fell out the window or whatever."

They were right to leave Poirot alive, the murder of a Famous Detective would generate massive suspicion and put pressure on the police to take the case seriously, but if a known criminal gets murdered by an unknown assassin who vanished into the countryside... then the police do a bit of searching and then declare the case "cold".

Bacall put that into her performance, she showed that her character knew exactly who and what Poirot was, but she decided to go ahead with the plan anyway - if she didn't think she'd fool him then she thought she'd face him down.

I thought it would have been great if the so-called killer was not the real killer at all, and everyone killed an innocent man. And Poirot told them so the'd have to live with themselves with that fact.

Did Poirot actually have evidence? The way he put it all together was brilliant. But I can't remember if he had actual evidence - besides the fact that everybody was somewhat related to the baby.

I would've given the Oscar to Bacall. The look she gives the steward as he breaks down was better than Bergman's scene.

[quote] better than Bergman's scene.

Everyone agrees she was sleeping through her scenes. She and husband Lars were busy planning a new expensive production in London so she took the easy option by swapping with Wendy.

I love both Ingrid and Wendy but I do feel short-changed. Ingrid would have been stunning as the dragon-like Dragomiroff in those fabulous costumes..

Ingrid knows how to spit fire when she played the villainous 'Hedda Gabler' and this evil millionairess—

R180 Sean Connery played in ‘the small supporting role’ because he was loyal to Sidney Lumet, the so-called ‘actors director’.

Connery was desperate to break away from the Bond franchise in 1965 so he made some bad movies (such as ‘A Fine Madness' all about wife abuse with Joanne Woodward).

He made ‘The Hill’ for Lumet in 1965. It’s a strange, incomprehensible movie about soldiers (it also co-stars homosexuals Harry Andrews and Michael Redgrave and quasi-homophobe Ian Bannen).

Anyway, as I said, I found it incomprehensible but Connery did for four more movies for Lumet including another bleak dreary movie called 'The Offence' in 1973.

Finney was excellent in another Lumet movie, "Before the Devil Knows You're Dead".

A few weeks after the film’s release Bisset was on the cover of Vogue, promoting the film.

Terrible pic, r210 curious that photo was chose for the cover. Bisset almost looks ordinary.

You like her 1976 cover better?

A better 1976 cover.

No - the American covers are much, much better. Cleaner, with more impact.

Am I the only one who thinks Bisset & Lisa Vanderpump look an awful lot alike?

Some people photograph much better in still photographs, or on moving film.

Apparently Jacqueline Bisset is one of them.

[quote] I would've given the Oscar to Bacall. The look she gives the steward as he breaks down was better than Bergman's scene.

Diane Bitch Ladd cunting about a BSA win for the cunt supreme "Miss Bacall to you" would have been a favorite topic on DL, if Bacall had been nominated and then won.

Wow! I thought Star Wars fan boys were over the top but they're nothin' compared to a bunch of queens swooning over a campy old movie....which is a lot of fun but to suggest Lauren Bacall should have won an Oscar for THAT performance or that the cast deserved some special ensemble Oscar over The Godfather Part 2 is ludicrous.

It's campy, over the top fluff!

There's some old Marys on here almost beside themselves with queenish glee.

Aw, r218 needs attention. Poor thing.

Seriously, r218, you were calling people idiots for not appreciating "the designs of Evil Under The Sun" but now you're throwing out homophobic insults left and right at people for just participating in this thread.

I wish people like you would stop treating DL like their emotional toilet. I'm sorry you're already having a bad day, but Miss, that ain't our problem.

R219 Bitch, please. I like the damn silly movie. It's on regular repeat along with all the other campy ass Christie films. It's silly fun and much of the fun is in the ham handed performances.

Even Ingrid Bergman was classy enough to be appalled they gave her an Oscar for that ridiculous "leetle brown babies" performance.

The point seems to be that this thread is ALSO silly fun, r220, so people are wondering why you've gone out of your way to try to ruin it, and make the kind of harsh insults usually reserved for times when an actual fight is going on.

[quote] campy ass Christie

Now, Edith, what is this man talking about? Is he talking about donkeys?

Well, Agatha, you don't need to worry about these Americans and their bizarre customs. There are lots of cowboys in America with a great fondness for their donkeys and asses.

I wonder if Bacall was passed over for an Oscar nomination because she might have been considered Lead and not Supporting?

r207 Bergman had plenty of practice being a dragon lady/uberbitch in 1964's "The Visit," co-starring Anthony Quinn. I never knew she could be so full-on threatening and manipulative. I wonder if she enjoyed that part, being SO cast against type? Had Bergman played the princess, she would've had to tone it down, but the steely reserve and determination for the Madame Zachanassian role would've been a plus. I can recommend the film.

R208 my Movaries /male ovaries exploded when I saw Sean with a crew cut. Thanks

Bacall = great beauty. Redgrave= beautiful. Bisset= pretty IMO. She's the very pretty girl in high school, not the Hollywood beauty like Bergen, or even Farro...sorry, like Bergen. (almost forgot this was DL)

Bacall was never so much beautiful as striking. Very photogenic, the camera found her deeply interesting at every age, but her face is almost manly, too much so to be beautiful.

Bissett was lovely, but maybe she was more attractive than beautiful. Lovely face, very nice figure, extremely appealing personality, the sort of woman that both men and women find appealing on every level.

I think young Bacall was a nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnockout! she was DASHIT! Redgrave is sublime because she has a glow that no one else has. My gawd, is she sublime. I watched Elizabeth and Mary stuart or whatever the other day. No one can hold a candle to her. She played the Mary as an airhead, vain, shallow , silly and sensual woman without judging her for one second, and her performance was just gripping. Shame she's such a crazy cunt. But she's handsome, not beautiful IMO

Haven't seen the film in a long time but isn't the Swedish governess a much larger/better role with that fabulous monologue about the "little brown babies" than the Princess Dragomiroff, who basically just harummphs her reactions to Poirot's questions? And I think Bergman was years younger than Hiller who was a more appropriate age for the elderly Princess.

The Princess' fabulous veiled costume is based on Queen Mary at the funeral for her son. Please google it.

[quote] I can't prove Tony Walton isn't gay but he's been happily married to his second wife Gen LeRoy for several decades now. I believe she's the daughter of Hollywood producer/director Mervyn LeRoy.

Tony Walton is NOT a fag, and I'm the dame who can prove it!

I don't like Bergman. She's a fucking Viking frau! so boring and humourless. She was pretty in intermezzo, but the nose on her face soon turned into a trunk to go with her elephant hips and legs

[quote] Who cares about fucking costumes?!

Only the gay men on this forum, brainiac.

R223 , no she was because nobody voted for her

R225 Me too.

That still from that Youtube video shows that Sean was a lush hottie.

r234 there is NO WAY that man was a complete stranger for homosex

[quote] Haven't seen the film in a long time but isn't the Swedish governess a much larger/better role with that fabulous monologue about the "little brown babies" than the Princess Dragomiroff, who basically just harummphs her reactions to Poirot's questions? And I think Bergman was years younger than Hiller who was a more appropriate age for the elderly Princess.

It has more lines, and more opportunity for drama; but it's not the better role. Had anyone but Ingrid Bergman played it it would not nearly be so memorable, and even still Hiller's performance as the Princess Dragomiroff is the most memorale thing in the movie (other than the "walking the catwalk" display of the fabulous 30s outfits in the Istanbul train station).

Bergman was just beloved by the Greatest Generation, and everyone still felt guilty (even after she had won the Oscar for "Anastasia") that she had been blacklisted for a while because of leaving Dr. Peter Lindstrom for Roberto Rosselini. Even though it was generally recognized Bergman is a fine actress, her Swedish accent always bothered some people, and this was one of the few movies she made for Hollywood where the accent genuinely made sense. Moreover, she is really moving in the role, and the "born backvards / Minne-OPP-oh-loos / leetle brown babies" scene is superbly done.

But not even that can compare to the fabulousness of Wendy Hiller in that ridiculous hat and veil announcing, "She marrrrried a Turrrk! As such, ve neverrr spoke of it!"

Is that crew cut Sean sports in The Hill a toupee? If so, it's fabulous and so much better than the ones he wore as 007.

"It has more lines, and more opportunity for drama. But it's not the better role."

OK, that makes no sense.

R235 Didn't that big American homosexual Joshua Logan personally audition all those muscle-boys showing off their biceps and low slung shorts doing the shimmy for the London production of 'South Pacific'?

sEAN WAS IN SOUTH PACIFIC ,?

The scene of the passengers arriving at the train, and then the train taking off is wonderful. This isn't my favourite of the Christie films (that would be Death on the Nile), but that scene is so well done.

[quote]R227 Bissett was lovely, but maybe she was more attractive than beautiful.

Oh?

[quote] The scene of the passengers arriving at the train, and then the train taking off is wonderful.

But everything after that induces claustrophobia.

R242 well she's not very beautiful. big face. big nose, small eyes. she's charming. It's ok to be charming. One has to see her in two for the road , to see how beautiful Audrey looks (and Audrey is not one of my favorite beauties) and how far Jacqueline falls short of her

IMHO the Princess Dragomiroff is a much better role than that of the missionary. The missionary is all anxiety and fear of hellfire, while the Princess is actively engaging in a duel of wits with Poirot, doing her best to help the plot along by mixing useful bits of misinformation in with her admissions of truth. And Hiller gives the Princess a sense of an indomitable will and formidable intelligence, inside a body that's falling to bits, she's the one character who lets Poirot know he's met his match *before* the finale.

And silly me, I always thought that Hiller was very old and had been genuinely disabled by a stroke before taking the role, but I was wrong (I must have mixed her up with someone else). In fact, Hiller was 62 and in good health when she made the film, you'd swear she was 80+ and had a real facial droop! Damn, all these big-name actors made the most of small roles...

[quote] Hiller was very old

She was just 3 years older than Ingrid but she had an odd, impertinent face.

She only got lead roles three times; the lead role in 'The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp' was written for her but she retired for marital duties. She retired for seven years and for some unknown reason only took supporting roles after that.

I too assumed Hiller was already ancient.

I've never heard of anyone who didn't LOVE Wendy Hiller

We appreciate Wendy because she so often got the sympathetic supporting roles.

She was the abused ex-mistress to Burt Lancaster, the wife to the intransigent martyr Thomas More and the long-suffering sister to the insane monomaniac Geraldine Page.

Why can't Sean and the others pull an Aldo Ray and just say "yep , I let any guy who could give me a part or raise my profile suck my dick and it didn't compromise me in the least " ? whay are they such cowards?

[quote] suck my dick

I'm sure it happened

Where is the love for Martin Balsam in this?

This thread motivated me to torrent the movie. I will watch it tonight!

mee too R253

R252 Martin Balsam is the poor man's Eli Wallach. He specialised in playing nobodies.

R252 I had to google "martin balsam" . I thought he might be the real estate agent in rosemary's babay

is it only me, or anyone else loses it at the opening shot of DOTN, when the camera lusciously follows the horse accross Linette's gorgeous lawn and somptuous house, and the horse take dump after dump ? It never gets old. How could they keep that take ?

12 Angry Men, Psycho, Cape Fear, Breakfast at Tiffany's, Catch-22, Tora! Tora! Tora!, Taking the Pelham 1,2,3, Murder on the Orient Express, All The President's Men, and St. Elmo's Fire are all great movies. He disappears into ensembles so elegantly you forget him.

Martin Balsam got good billing because of his position in the alphabet.

Ok I have a problem . you had won me over. I am 8 minutes into the movie . 8 fucking minutes. And I'm bored out of my mind. It's creepy AF and Finney is immediately campy and insincere as Poirot

Balsam and Bergman look better in the poster than they do in the movie.

R14 Were Bergman and Ball scratching each others' eyes out? After all, both claimed a special relationship with Bogart.

So those two have a link.

Balsam and Perkins both appeared in Psycho. Widmark and Bacall appeared together in The Cobweb .

Redgrave and Gielgud appeared in The Charge of the Light Brigade, that TV movie about Richard Wagner and that sad remake of ‘A Man for All Seasons’.

I wonder if there are other links?

Don't understand a 50 yo film is not free to watch on Hulu and Netflix!

Ok Wendy Hiller is hilarious in her entrance and has lifted my mood. Bacall is superb. The frenchman Is terrific. Sean is virile and very good. all the others are pretty hammy. What does Finney think he's doing ????? he's not even in the same movie. Poirot isn't some special needs /torticollis afflicted wampire. WTF is that ? I am not amused

It's free on OK.ru as I'm watching it NOW silly, several people told you already

It's on HBO max.

"Martin Balsam got good billing because of his position in the alphabet."

And Bacall got top billing because of the alphabetical order, I wonder if that's why she chose her stage name? Yeah, I watched it again on Vudu last night, even bought a copy and I only buy a few streaming films. I'm sick of buying media only to have it go obsolete, VHS to DVD to streaming fuck it. I only buy things I know I'll watch many times, and not many of those!

As for these hypothetical Oscars, everyone but Finney was a supporting player.

Anthony Perkins is so faggoty. And why was he even a star in 1974 ?

Don't like Norman Bates in this, he is way too twitchy

R262 Bergman and perkins were in french film AIMEZ VOUS bRAHMS ?

R269 his shtick is so tiresome

Perkins played neurotics from 1956 with 'Fear Strikes Out'.

R272 don't even go there. if he weren't dead i could kill him for that

I saw this in the movies as a kid, on a Saturday night, packed house, and the audience really loved Bergman. She was hilarious. Lumey wanted her to play the countess but she asked to play this other part.

*Lumet

She always does that; she's such a cunt. she asked to play the prostatute in dr jekyll and mr hyde instead of the good girl. What if Lana really wanted to play the prostatute ? What if someone else was cast as the countess and really wanted to play the part ? you're a cunt, Ingrid, I hate your guts

why is no one asking me if I want to play the countess ???

R274 See R207

Yes, Ingrid was naughty and selfish and, as I said earlier, I feel very short-changed.

She and John Gielgud were worrying about this instead—

I was getting Ingrid to sign my program after a performance and I congratulated her on her nomination, r274. She was very humble about it.

She had every reason to be humble.

"Ingrid is very expensive, when I asked her to play Hedda Gabler, she told me for Tea and Symphony she got 25% of the gross. So I paid her that, and she got really quite rich. Then one day I saw the Tea and Symphony books and found out that she had actually got only 20% of the net. It was too late. I had already paid her."

she took Betty's triumph turn in cactus flower to the screen. Bitch just stole Betty's part. I can't ,CUNT

Regardless, r280, she was. She was also lovely and had great skin.

R283 that's from all the blood she was sucking

This is an all star cast so I don't understand why Rachel Roberts, whose only claim to fame is to have swallowed a bottle of ammonia before walking throug a glass wall in her house is in the movie ?

Dear R285, you should look at Google before shaming yourself here.

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeh R286 I have and I still don't see no casablanca and no to have and have not in her credits

OK I get points for trying, but I have to stop watching that movie, it's too boring. sorry guys, Give me DOTN any day instead of this shit

[quote] Suchet only demanded the religious element because he personally was religious, and it wasn't done well at all.

I love Suchet's Poirot. Suchet has talked about his Catholicism. IIRC, he became Catholic later in life. IMO, Suchet pings.

The ending of "Orient Express" is a let-down, IMO. "They all did it" is an unsatisfying way to end a murder mystery.

Kids these days have no attention spans to appreciate art.

Rachel Roberts was a highly respected, Oscar nominated actress. Hell, the same year as Orient Express, she was nominated for the Tony for playing the Bergman role in The Visit!

The classic Doctors' Wives...

On IMDB's "Murder on the Orient Express" trivia page, Gielgud is quoted as saying, "Ingrid speaks five languages, and can't act in any of them." He actually admired her, as a person and an actress, and narrated the posthumous documentary, "Ingrid". His actual quote (in the NYT) was:

"Everybody adored her,' Mr. Gielgud said the other day, reminiscing over the telephone from his home in Buckinghamshire, England. 'She was without conceit. She acted in about five languages and didn't really know any of them. She would make the oddest and most marvelous mistakes."

Johnny directed Ingrid in that Maugham play at R278 and co-starred in the New York production.

Someone above repeated the old canard about Joshua Logan casting Sean Connery in the original London cast of South Pacific. Connery was indeed an amateur bodybuilder, which lead to his being cast in South Pacific, his first professional job. But it was a regional production in Manchester or Liverpool, I forget which. He was never in the original production. He was also rumored to be an extra in A Night to Remember but there are no records to support that and he's never been spotted in the finished film.

[quote] It really is Christie's cleverest mystery.

No, The Murder of Roger Ackroyd is. Impossible to film, which makes it even cleverer.

Connery

r297 They did a TV version of it (as a Poirot) but it was nothing compared to the book, which is brilliant.

[quote]Don't understand a 50 yo film is not free to watch on Hulu and Netflix!

Because we're still talking about it and there's a demand to watch it, so they can monetize it.

r276=Brandon Cody

R276 I suppose that champagne bottle is supposed to represent a male orgasm. Dr Jekkyll has to masturbate and release his unconscious animal desires before leaving the house for sex.

Why did MGM hire a lame non-actor like Spencer Tracy for that film. He is too incompetent to play one character let alone two.

Just re-watched the film, hadn't seen it in decades. Boy, it's hammy though still lots of fun.

Not quite as opulent and sweeping as I remembered. The scene at the train station that introduces the characters has no underscoring of music at all with very little dialogue.

But when the music starts, r303...

R239, R297 When will some man do a proper scholarly account of that difficult man who I think of the THIRD most successful gay director in Hollywood.

His memoir was explicit about his mental breakdowns, his bad marriage and his casting of hunky men but skirts around the big issues.

[quote] What does it mean to be an "actor's director?"

It means to be an actor especially favored by the gaffers and the key grips, Rose.

[quote] What does it mean to be an "actor's director?"

I think it means to be a director who knows where the actor is coming from. E.g., a director who has at least a little bit of acting experience.

[quote] What does it mean to be an "actor's director?"

Sidney Lumet and John Frankenheimer both hired British actors who are theatre-trained and, therefore, better actors.

Lumet previously hired Vanessa for this movie which was all talk and no action and, therefore, unseen by the masses.

[quote] acting IS shouting

On the contrary, Miss R110.

Stage actress, Eileen Atkins was working on a production with Alec Guinness.

She noticed he was underplaying (which he did a lot). But she also assumed he would be barely audible and hardly varied his vocal volume.

Guinness replied that it was the director and the sound staff's job to worry about all that. There was a Foley Artists Department.

I never saw Gielgud on stage but every single performance he gave on film/TV was essentially the same...dry, waspy, old snob who looked vaguely Mandarin but had a lot of opinions about other actor's performances.

Well, R310, I hope you weren't personally offended by his opinions.

We're expressing ours on Datalounge all the time.

R311 Didn't say I was...I was basically expressing my opinion that an old queen like Gielgud had some nerve to be overly critical over other's performances when he was such a Johnny One Note himself.

Which makes Gielgud the ultimate Data Lounger...practically a patron saint.

In the early 50s Gielgud was caught in the act of sucking cock in a London men's room. It was well covered in the press. He cancelled all his appearances and intended to retire. His friends begged him to reconsider and after a year, he finally accepted another role onstage. He was terrified to make his first entrance, thinking he would be booed offstage. Instead he received a prolonged standing ovation.

R298 true story of my life : I was a fairly horny, quite normal teen, wanking to my dad's "penthouse" playmates centrefolds and such, big tits and so on, fantasizing about hot chicks, until I saw these pictures of Sean. That was it for me. Even though I have to say that, had I seen the last one, (his flat ass) I might still be straight today

"Caught sucking cock in a London men's room."

Lumet talks at length about Murder on the Orient Express in his book ´Making Movies´.

When Jacqueline Bisset is revealed to be the daughter of Lauren Bacall (and the aunt of Daisy Armstrong), I'm surprised Bisset doesn't have a big dramatic moment of speaking with an American accent instead of the "Russian" accent we've heard earlier. We just hear her approach Bacall and say: "Mama." In actuality, we barely hear her speak throughout the entire film. I wonder if Lumet was protecting her as a limited young actress who couldn't believably make the transition?

I also don't really get how Bisset and Michael York as this fabulous royal couple who seemed to be photographed everywhere in the press as celebrities could expect to keep the secret from Poirot of her notorious American origins. Am I missing something?

R317 She was supposed not to talk much because her mother feared she collapsed under stress. The famous couple didn't expect Poirot on the train. Bissett wasn't a limited young actress. She had supporting roles in more than fifteen films before MOTOE: the better known are The Detective (1968) , Bullitt (1968), Airport (1970) and La nuit américaine (1973).

Well, r318, Bisset and York were never really given the big "reveal" scene most of the other characters had for whatever reason. They both just sit there as Finney rails at them.

I love Bisset in "Day for Night" (1973), perhaps my favorite film about the making of a movie.

[quote] I never saw Gielgud on stage but every single performance he gave on film/TV was essentially the same...dry, waspy, old snob who looked vaguely Mandarin but had a lot of opinions about other actor's performances.

I find this to be the case with a lot of older British actors who are revered in their country and by Anglophile snobs in the rest of the world. They deliver the same performance over and over in every role but get lauded anyway because their accents and voice modulation are automatically assumed to be indicative of great acting.

R317, Bisset can barely act, and Michael york not at all. he was like a joke in the 70's, he was in every single movie, wasn't acting, and didn't even seem to be an actor. he was so see-through, so bland, he just seemed to be passing by the set and somebody dressed him in period clothes and pushed him on the set as a recurrent joke. I could swear he looks into the camera every time he's finished reciting his line

I thought York was very good in Cabaret.

R323 are you serious ? York was in Cabaret ???

He was the male lead, R324.

York was also on Knots Landing.

R325 I honestly don't remember that AT ALL; FOR REAL

shout out to all the marvelous and spooky bass clarinet licks in the score

Martin Balsam used to be George Clooney's father-in-law. And Joyce Van Patten was his mother-in-law.

I did not know Clooney used to be married to Talia Balsam!

[quote]r322 Bisset can barely act

Well, she’s no powerhouse, but especially in that era Hollywood needed starlets on hand who had SOME personality… but weren’t going to upstage Steve McQueen, Frank Sinatra, etc. too badly.

She was primarily decorous, though not inept or anything. That lezzie lou Edith Head, who saw everyone naked, said Bisset had one of the great bodies of all time. (Irene Shariff’s choice for perfect proportions was the obscure Marisa Mell.)

While she's not an Oscar-caliber actress, I think Bisset is quite good in Airport, Orient Express, and Rich & Famous.

Bisset was good in Nip/Tuck (which is on hulu).

Bisset was pretty, bland and harmless, not working much = always available to replace a star at short notice

After reading all this I will take another look at the movie tonight.

I was going to re-watch MotOE too but ow all this talk of Jacqueline Bisset makes me want to re-watch Rich & Famous.

Bisset is good in the film "Latter Days" (2003), now on Tubi. Hot gay scenes!

R321 Do you want to name names?

The Bisset character in MotOE is supposed to be born and bred in America, yes?

Not sure about that, R339. Her mother was American but when Poirot saw her perform, I assume it was in London. So Linda Arden may have lived in the UK or Europe for a good chunk of her adult life, which seems likely since one of her daughters married a Hungarian and the other married a Brit, so there's a chance the girls were raised outside the US.

Either way, the Countess is faking her Hungarian accent.

Op is gray. Why?

[quote] Yeah, I watched it again on Vudu last night, even bought a copy and I only buy a few streaming films. I'm sick of buying media only to have it go obsolete, VHS to DVD to streaming fuck it. I only buy things I know I'll watch many times, and not many of those!

Thanks for all the details.

We were all SO curious!

[quote] Op is gray. Why?

Its the angry Froy fans jealous that the eldergays are having too much fun.

They closed down that other eldergays thread entitled 'Sad, last days on Datalounge'.

Is Froy iin the Brannagh remake?

Jacqueline Bisset was nearly 30 when she did Orient Express and it was something like her 20th film which by that point included leading roles in Airport and in Truffaut's highly acclaimed Day for Night.

She wasn't a brilliant actress but she was sexy and gorgeous and certainly one of the more talented sexy actresses out there.

And, the Count and Countess have very insignificant roles...they don't have much to do. I mean, it's an ensemble piece with 17 characters in it. Some of them aren't going to get much to do and for the name stars, the Andrenyis have the least to do. Even Rachel Roberts as Hildegard has a juicier role. Bisset and York are just here to look pretty and glamorous.

"A mighty, masculine steam engine roars across the screen to a accompaniment of syncopated, twiddly effeminate waltz?'

"It's a DEATH TRAIN!"---Bernard Herrmann

"And I'm bored out of my mind. This from somebody who probably grew up on Saw and Hostel...

"It's creepy AF" It's called 'atmosphere,' essential to a murder mystery.

"that truly AWFUL Hollywood version of Terence Rattigan's 'Separate Tables'."

So AWFUL it boasts spectacular performances by Hiller, Kerr and Niven, as well as the entire British supporting cast. "It makes me sick, Mummy. It makes me sick, it makes me sick, IT MAKES ME SICK!!!"

Michael York is the very spine of CABARET, like Mason in A STAR IS BORN. Without them, the films would not have been half as good.

MOTOE is a devastating novel/film when you carefully examine its plot. The lives of 12 people have been destroyed by the evil machinations of a gangster. Finney's summary of the tragedy is brilliantly rendered. The evil that men do... A statement like "They all did it" is an unsatisfying way to end a murder mystery" has no grasp of storytelling, theme, plot or metaphor.

R334 Bisset is still working and has 2 2021 films completed and 2 more in post production. Back in the day she was in Bullit, The Detective, Airport, The Mephisto Waltz, Day for Night, The Deep, Rich and Famous, Class, Under the Volcano with Albert Finney who she appeared with in 1967s Two for the Road.

Yes, R346, Bernard Hermann agreed with me!

And I'm sorry to say that David Lean allowed an equally sugary score in that other train movie (Passage To India) as well as his big failure (Ryan's daughter)

R347 Vy she vorking ? she poor ?

Bernard Herrmann was a fantastic composer, but even genius artists can be wrong. Richard Rodney Bennett's score for Orient Express is exquisite, matching the mood and texture of the film perfectly. Try to imagine the score for Psycho or Obsession laid over Orient Express -- it would be absurd.

Someone aways back in the thread complained about Gielgud's and other 20th century English actors' performances in late 20th century films. They gave the performances they were hired to do. Hollywood then, as now, was about stereotypes.

Go back and read their reviews from decades earlier. They were stunning and daring actors in their primes. Read the reviews for Gielgud's Broadway Hamlet with Lillian Gish as his Ophelia.

R350, I agree that Richard Rodney Bennett's work on MOTOE is superb. But your comment about overlaying Herrmann scores onto Lumet's film strikes me as nonsensical. Those scores were crafted for those specific films. Do you feel that all Herrmann scores sound the same?

No, r352, but Herrmann's comment that it's a "train of death" leads me to believe that's how he'd approach it. If he approached it in a lighter vein -- say, The Ghost and Mrs. Muir -- it could work.

Albert Finney is very good (as a gay guy) in 1994's A Man of No Importance (free on Tubi).

One thing tat always bothered me about the original story and the film, as well. The kidnapping, as it was somewhat based on the Lindbergh baby case, has always seemed a classic American story, based on a great American myth. The Armstrong family lived in America.

But very few of the characters who interacted with the victims and committed murder on their behalf were Americans. And they didn't live with the Armstrong family in America. So I find it odd and disingenuous that they could be so emotionally overwrought about the murders.

Am I making sense? Does the original novel make more sense of the relationships?

Too bad Agatha wasn't around to write a novelization of the JonBenet story.

r355: after Daisy Armstrong was kidnapped and murdered, Mrs. Armstrong died in childbirth (and the child died as well), then Colonel Armstrong committed suicide, as did Paulette Michel, the French maid who came under suspicion. The connections:

Mrs. Hubbard - American mother of Mrs. Armstrong, grandmother of Daisy

Countess Helena Andrenyi - American sister of Mrs. Armstrong, aunt of Daisy

Count Andrenyi - Hungarian husband of Helena, brother-in-law of Mrs. Armstrong, uncle of Daisy

Mary Debenham - English secretary to Mrs. Armstrong

Colonel Arbuthnot - friend of Colonel Armstrong (who is English, not American)

Princess Dragomiroff - Russian godmother of Mrs. Armstrong

Hector McQueen - American son of the DA prosecuting the Armstrong case

Cyrus Hardman - American detective who had fallen in love with Paulette

Antonio Foscarelli - Italian chauffeur for the Armstrong family

Greta Ohlsson - Swedish nurse for Daisy

Hildegarde Schmidt - German cook for the Armstrongs

Masterman - English valet for Colonel Armstrong

Pierre Paul Michel - French father of Paulette

I was typing out a similar post, R357. Thanks for saving me doing the rest of it.

Note also that Hector McQueen was in love with Sonia Armstrong; otherwise, his connection to the case is rather tenuous.

The international flavor of the Armstrong household is excellent misdirection early on. Thirteen people from such varied backgrounds don't seem to have anything in common at first, but once you realize they are all related to, worked for, or were friends with the Armstrongs, it makes perfect sense.

It makes sense on the surface, but the net is cast VERY wide. For so many people even mildly associated with the Armstrong family to have a shared identical thirst for vengeance is too pat.

And Daisy is a cipher. Though the characters have a theoretical emotional connection to her, the audience does not,.

I'd agree that ALL of the servants feeling murderous is a bit of a stretch, but not close friends and family members.

I believe that in the book, the Armstrongs are British, and Linda Arden may be as well. Yes, the Lindberg Baby story happened in the US, but if I'm right and Christie moved it to the UK and changed some of the details... well that was gracious, considering that the Lindbergs were both still alive when the book came out, and didn't need to be reading about their fictional dopplegangers dying of a broken heart and suicide (respectively).

As for the idea that all the servants would want to join in a revenge plot, well, that certainly wouldn't be true of everyone who employed servants! Ya think the servant of the Trumps or the Kardashians would kill to avenge them or their innocent children? But that's what makes the whole Armstrong story more tragic, the love that is shown these characters is highly unusual, it makes the audience think that the tragedy is far larger than the death of an innocent child, that two genuinely lovely and innocent adults died as well - same for Paulette the deceased maid. Christie knew her stuff.

I watched it again last night because of this thread. Michael York in that ridiculous hairdo is so queeny in it it's almost hard to believe. Bacall, whose typical cuntiness I despise, is surprisingly touching at the end. But Finney, what a performance. Absolutely flawless.

I kept wondering what it must have been to be there like during the shooting of the lengthy reveal sequence. It is truly an astounding moment in cinema in terms of the casting of all those enormous stars on the same set at the same time for what must have been days of filming. I can't think of any other film that come close to this in that respect.

In terms of all the men's hairstyles, remember that the film was shot in 1973/74, a low point in the ugliness of men's hairstyling.

In spite of the attempt at veracity to the period, hair is always the giveaway to the aesthetic of the period in which a film is designed. Some of the men look good - Sean Connery in his toupee, in particular, and Tony Perkins' trimmed look is not bad though he has almost a crew cut. But Finney's hair (his own, dyed black) is way too long at the nape.

The women's hair is more authentic to the period than the men's, which is unusual, particularly as they were only a few years away from the years in which all women in all historical films were given bouffants.

Redgrave and Bergman have perfect early 1930s cuts and look just fab in them, Bacall's look is more 1940s. But pity the poor hairdresser who tried to get Lauren Bacall to either shorten her hair, or put it in a bun.

Atrocious women's hair and make up is the Ascot Scene from My Fair Lady. It wasn't like that at all onstage.

R355 I'm surprised the Lindbergh family didn't sue Christie in 1934 for the unnecessary pain of using their 1932 kidnapping trauma for her little story.

The story is different enough that I doubt they could sue: She changed the country to England, Col. Armstrong wasn't a famous pilot, and the Armstrongs both died while the Lindberghs survived.

[quote] the Armstrongs both died

That would annoy me even more.

[quote] Redgrave and Bergman have perfect early 1930s cuts and look just fab in them

R365 I've just spent 5 minutes on Google and now I know the difference between a Bob, a Marcel, and a Shingle.

R14, R262, R270 I have discovered another link in this movie cast with old pals.

This play in 1977 and '78 was Ingrid's last. I couldn't find an attractive picture of the cast because they were all unflattering.

It was a talkfest by Norman Charles Hunter (who I assume was homosexual).

The Bennett score for MotOE is superb. The studio heads did not want the entire score to be dark and doomy: they already had the great opening sequence to establish that (and Bennett's music for that sequence is brilliantly dissonant and terrifyingly atmospheric).

They wanted to attract people to the theaters to see this by evoking the glamour and elegance of a luxury train for wealthy cosmopolitan travelers in the 1930s, and to reflect the special glamour of their all-star cosmopolitan cast. and that's exactly what they got from Bennett.

I love Bernard Herrmann, but he is not some sort of infallible oracle.

I adore Bernard Herrmann's music but a steam engine does NOT move in waltz time which is 28 to 30 bars per minute.

Agreed, r373. Strange choice.

Richard Rodney Bennett's friend (and fellow composer) Daryl Rusnwick wrote this perceptive appreciation when Bennett died in 2012:

Richard Rodney Bennett could hardly have designed his career better to alienate critics in every one of the fields he was so talented in. Classical critics disdained him as a jumped-up film composer, jazzers – players and critics alike – wrote him off as a cabaret artist, and film producers only turned to him when they wanted something self-consciously "highbrow". His jazz was indeed very old-fashioned: he fell in love with the hybrid Basie/Mel Tormé style of the 1950s when he was young, and took no account of later developments. But in everything he did he was a consummate craftsman and within the styles he espoused his works have enormous content and emotional punch.

He was a cultured gay man and every aspect of his creativity was defined by elegance. He would not go for strong avant-garde statements in any genre – it was contrary to his very core. He wanted, and achieved, a refined style in both his music and his life: that is why he went to New York, and was so happy there.

The Christie story must also locate the Armstrong family as living in America because Mary Debenham, British secretary to young Mrs. Armstrong (Vanessa Redgrave), is exposed by Poirot as someone who's spent a lot of time in America and uses the term "long distance" instead of "trunk call."

It's a big plot point.

Christie borrowed another well-known tragedy for another mystery:

In June 1943, while pregnant with her first child, actress Gene Tierney came down with German measles, contracted during her only appearance at the Hollywood Canteen. Congenital rubella syndrome was passed on to the baby. Little Daria was born prematurely, weighing only 3 pounds, 2 ounces, and requiring a total blood transfusion. The infant was deaf, partially blind with cataracts, and severely developmentally disabled. The child ultimately was institutionalised in a psychiatric hospital.

About two years after the child was born, Tierney was approached by a female fan for an autograph at a garden party. The fan revealed that during World War II, she had sneaked out of quarantine while sick with German measles to visit the Hollywood Canteen and meet Tierney. This incident, as well as the circumstances under which the information was imparted to the actress, is similar to the background to character of film star Marina Gregg and starting point of The Mirror Crack'd.

How could Ratchett / Cassetti be oblivious of the imminent threat? The Armstrong story was probably the greatest story of the year. So many relatives of Daisy Armstrong were celebrities, the count and countess, the princess, the actress. Ratchett must have known and recognized at least some of these faces on the train.

Did Gene Tierney coming down with German measles lead to her mental breakdown?

Excellent point, r378!

For that matter, Poirot would have recognized many of them and knew something of their true history (I'm looking at you Michael York and Jackie Bisset!).

I't's discussed on the DVD extras, r350, as to why they chose sweeping and romantic over a more typical suspense score.

[quote]r367 I'm surprised the Lindbergh family didn't sue Christie in 1934 for the unnecessary pain of using their 1932 kidnapping trauma for her little story.

Weren't they busy collecting the Iron Cross from Hitler at the time?

Lindbergh had a very active life after1932.

He was involved almost everywhere— including ideas like making America great again.

... fathering seven children from three women in Germany among others. Two of the women were sisters. But that's more a Jackie Collins novel than Agatha Christie.

"Getting Lucky on the Orient Express"

R383 I don't know how Billy Wilder could expect that fresh-faced young man at R383 to be portrayed by that old dog Jimmy Stewart.

[quote]r383 Lindbergh had a very active life after1932. He was involved almost everywhere— including ideas like making America great again.

Yeah - his idea of making America great was keeping us out of WWII and letting poor, raped Europe fend for itself.

SUCH a hero!

^ Just like Woodrow Wilson.

How did long distance trains like this work back then as far as restrooms and showers and water usage? The first class cabins look like they have a small sink in them but I can't imagine a train could carry that much water as water is quite heavy to transport.

There also don't seem to be that many passenger cars on that train. The exterior shots have the locomotive, the fuel/coal car, and what look like maybe 3 passenger cars. That's not a lot of space considering one of those cars has to have room for a bar, restaurant and then luggage/cargo space at the back of train I assume.

The modern luxury trains have WAAAAY more cars.

A few awkward moments as the staff are trying to do their job but are blocked by the camera and woman asking questions but some nice views!

[quote] How could Ratchett / Cassetti be oblivious of the imminent threat? The Armstrong story was probably the greatest story of the year. So many relatives of Daisy Armstrong were celebrities, the count and countess, the princess, the actress. Ratchett must have known and recognized at least some of these faces on the train.

Hungarian counts and countesses are rarely celebrities; nor were elderly minor Russian princesses.

The actress was the only real celebrity: but she was a theater celebrity, and it's unlikely Ratchett / Cassetti would have been much of a theater fan: "Wait! I recognize that woman in the car! She was simply divine as Shakespeare's Rosalind!"

"Ratchett must have known and recognized at least some of these faces on the train."

Well, the whole plot is goofy if you think about it. How to get that many people from that many nations to one spot on the globe on short notice, when most of them have jobs and international travel took weeks? Sure, they had a spy in the enemy's camp who could tell them where Ratchett would be and when, but how to get 12 people into one train car on short notice... particularly as there was a whole world of other people who wanted to travel on that train? No, having a conductor in on it wouldn't be enough, they'd need to suborn the reservations office as well!

As for Ratchett recognizing his enemies, there was a decent chance he recognized the Countess, who was known to be Mrs. Armstrong's sister-in-law, but she was no threat and her husband was obviously an idiot, and neither gave any sign of being onto him. And well, that vulgar Mrs. Hubbard may have looked a bit like some stage actress he'd seen once, but Linda Arden was a glamorous invalid and nothing like this flyover vulgarian. As for the rest... how the hell would he recognize a collection of ex-servants or their relatives, friends who weren't public figures, and neighbors? Of course Poirot knew that the Princess and the actress were best pals, but Poirot was the kind of eldergay who'd be up on all the theater gossip, and Ratchett wasn't.

Did Tony Perkins make a pass at York, Connery, Finney or any of the other male members of the cast? Excluding the clucking fossil Gielgud, of course.

Richard Rodney Bennett's score was a pastiche of commercial salon music which was perfect for the period and the characters. It had a last revival in the 70s when the film was made. I suppose only us eldergays get it. It's perfect and wonderful in context. Who today gets the context of a 70s film set in the 30s?

[quote]Ratchett must have known and recognized at least some of these faces on the train.

He did, which is why he tried to hire Poirot to protect him. It's heavily implied that the death threats Ratchett mentioned were only part of his concern, and that he recognized some people on the train. That's most clear in the Suchet version I believe. It's been so long since I read the book that I can't remember how clear it is in the novel or not.

Luxury trains during that time period would have had shared toilets and showers. I believe the book mentions an unknown woman in a dragon-printed dressing gown making her way down the hall to the bathroom. It's a false clue for Poirot.

These days, the most luxurious train cars have en suite bathrooms, but that was an unheard-of luxury in the 30s. Even the very wealthy would have shared unless they were SO wealthy they could afford their own private train car, but that would have been rare.

It's quite possible that a very old woman like Princess Dragomiroff would have used a chamber pot that her maid would have emptied down the hall in the loo. Her maid might even give her a sponge bath so that she didn't have to share bathing facilities. People bathed less then, anyway.

I agree that there were plot holes, but the book mentions that all the berths on the train car had been sold out weeks in advance: Mrs. Hubbard probably booked them. This was unusual enough that it's commented on by Poirot's train executive friend, as there were usually plenty of berths on that particular route.

Pierre, as a Wagon Lit conductor, would also have been useful at keeping strangers off the train. There is even a fake booking to take up the last empty berth. When that person doesn't arrive because he doesn't exist, Poirot's executive friend insists that Pierre give Poirot the berth. Pierre is clearly put out by this but has to do as he is told. That and the unexpected snowbank which stops the train is what fucks up the plan. Otherwise, it was reasonably well-thought-out.

Presumably, Mrs. Hubbard saw to it that everyone could travel internationally and be on that train car on time. She probably booked the fares and bought the tickets. That, to me, is the most silly part of the whole plot: It would have been cheaper, easier, and safer to simply hire an assassin to shoot Ratchett in the head some years ago.

People wouldn't have expected or taken full baths/showers when traveling on a train in the 1930s. The would have taken bird baths at the sink and still considered it luxurious.

It would have been much less satisfying to them without the ceremonial aspect, r398.

What would have happened after they all went their separate ways eventually? Were all twelve of them going to keep such a big secret for the rest of their lives? What if Greta had been overcome by guilt and confessed to someone? What if Hildegarde had tried to blackmail the Princess or Linda Arden? There should have been a sequel with Linda plotting how to eliminate everyone else apart from her daughter.

Agree with R400. It was an exorcism.

Ken Ludwig wrote a stage adaptation of MotOE -- I saw it once at a regional theater. It was OK, but definitely not as good as the movie versions. It eliminates several characters (the Princess's maid, Foscaraelli, the Count, the detective) and streamlines some plot points. And of course if you have already seen the movie or read the book, there's not much suspense.

[quote]That, to me, is the most silly part of the whole plot: It would have been cheaper, easier, and safer to simply hire an assassin to shoot Ratchett in the head some years ago.

Again, as people keep saying, they wanted to kill him themselves. They wanted to see him dead, mutilated in a ceremonial assassination, with the added benefit of being absolutely sure he was dead and not wondering the rest of their lives if the hit man really did his job or not.

Good thing that Pierre was employed by the train company and assigned to the Orient Express when Ratchett was booking passage. Gotta hand it to the master mind: This execution was plotted very well.

Also remember, Linda Arden was a big Drama Queen.

And Ken Ludwig is a big hack! I can't believe the Christie estate was so careless as to entrust the rights to a stage adaptation.

r406, Murder on the Orient Express entered the public domain in 1996, so they didn't have any say.

I'll make it a musical: you know what I can do with express trains!

R397 a chamber pot in a tightly enclosed small cabin?! I hope they would at least open a window. And then maid has to carry it down the hall to a bathroom. Ugh!

Well, that's why ladies traveled with maids--so they wouldn't have to empty their own chamber pots.

Down the hall to the bathroom? What do you think windows are for?

I was watching a documentary on the history of the home, and the episode on bathrooms said that many older women preferred chamberpots and a wash table even after indoor plumbing was available in their homes (this would have been the late 19th or very early 20th century). Early plumbed bathrooms were very clinical-looking, they were usually unheated, and en suite bathrooms were unheard of, so they weren't private. Ladies preferred the comfort of their cozy bedrooms with big fireplaces--they could even bathe in them once the maid brought up enough hot water and filled a tub in front of the fire. The maid also got to empty the chamberpot and washbasin, of course.

Many aristocratic homes of the early 20th Century still didn't have central plumbing: Who needed it when you had all those servants to carry water and clean pots? They only gave in after WWI, when servants became in short supply. Chamber pots didn't entirely go away until the middle of the 20th Century: My great-grandmother lived in the countryside and the bathroom was a privy out back. She had a chamberpot to use at night, as the old lady didn't want to go downstairs and outside in the dark.

To sum up: Princess Dragomiroff, who was supposed to be in her 80s in the early 30s, would have no problem using a chamberpot on a train and would prefer it to sharing a toilet with the rest of the first-class passengers. Her loyal maidservant would have been quite used to taking care of her mistress's bodily functions. That was her job.

I'm just trying to picture the Princess Dragomiroff crouching over a chamber pot as she scrapes up all those layers of petticoats, skirts, veils and black lace. And then she'd still have to unbutton and unhook her pantelets and wriggle them down to her knees. And what of her stocking suspenders??

Was she handed scented papier toilette by the German lady? Did she swipe forward or backward?

I'm trying not to picture that, R413, but you do you.

In the book, Mrs. Hubbard mentions her sponge bag on a couple of occasions. That was a toiletry bag holding soap, shampoo, etc. that you took with you to a shared bathroom--kind of like the shower caddies college students living in dorms use. That indicates the Orient Express had shared toilets and showers. Makes the whole thing a little less romantic now, huh?

Presumably the women traveling without maids -- everyone other than the old princess -- either used the shared bathroom or just shat their undergarments and just sprayed themselves with lots of perfume to mask the smell.

Did the countess travel without her maid?

Only on DL would a thread about a film turn into a discussion about women pooping and peeing and taking sponge baths - or not...

It does make you think about how uncomfortable life would have been back then. We take for granted conveniences even the wealthy didn't enjoy, like en suite bathrooms.

R417, Frances McDormand and Viola Davis for a remake of Orient Express. They will both be willing to film scenes showing them taking a dump, peeing, cleaning themselves and even make it look sexual (well, at least St Viola would).

People back then didn't care so much about peeing and pooping.

Were Arbuthnot and Debenham fucking on the train? Or was Debenham a chaste spinster who would not give it up until the ring was on her finger?

The way Vanessa Redgrave played the character, R421, they were definitely already fucking.

Yeah, she and Connery played those roles like two people desperately hot for each other.

R14, R262, R270, R371 Another link--

It doesn't matter how luxurious these trains were, I wouldn't want to be on one and have irritable bowel syndrome or some such malady.

Where would you prefer your irritable bowel to flare up, r425?

I learned about Murder on the Orient Express from this thread and I'll finish it tonight. I have downloaded Evil under the Sun for comparison.

Evil Under the Sun is played pretty much for humor, r427.

Expect Evil Under the Sun to be much more campier and bitchy than MotOE. I loved it!

Greenlighting this movie - without today's hindsight - was quite remarkable considering the previous movies of Christie's material. Christie movies were not exactly audience magnets before 1974. The last movies before, in the 60s, were rather low budget. There were the great-in-their-own-way but not serious Rutherford movies, a sorry attempt of a Poirot movie with Tony Randall (!), a handful Indian Agatha Christie movies, then nothing. And then MotOE. It must have taken a lot of guts to greenlight a high budget all-stars-ensemble movie that plays almost entirely on a train.

"That, to me, is the most silly part of the whole plot: It would have been cheaper, easier, and safer to simply hire an assassin to shoot Ratchett in the head some years ago."

Yeah, it would have been far easier for Linda Arden and her son-in-law to shoot the fucker a few times, after McQueen opened the back door of a rented house somewhere. They'd have no trouble pulling the triggers, and leaving behind some appropriate clues for the police!

But that would have left out a lot of people who also wanted revenge and who would have been happy to pull the trigger, half of them had police or military experience and knew how to handle a gun. And it wouldn't have been as dramatic as pulling in twelve accomplices, even if they had to take the risk of including the totally unreliable Greta. You just can't trust a religious fanatic with a guilty conscience.

[quote] Rachel Roberts, whose only claim to fame is to have swallowed a bottle of ammonia …walking throug a glass wall…

Dear R285, an American might say that.

And while I'm no particular fan of hers I recognise she was part of the so-called 'British New Wave'/'Angry Young Men'/Kitchen Sink Drama/Raw Sex Scene which swept through British films and theatre at the beginning of the 60s.

She was performing 'Raw Sex' with Albert Finney in 'Saturday Night and Sunday Morning' in 1960 and with Richard Harris in 'This Sporting Life' in 1963.

This 'British New Wave'/'Angry Young Men'/Kitchen Sink Drama/Raw Sex Scene killed the careers of many traditional theatre performers and homosexuals like Coward, Rattigan, Novello and Binkie Beaumont etc.

R34 This film's producer was VERY well-connected (the queen was a bridesmaid at his wedding).

I bet he was glad he married Lord Mountbatten's eldest daughter instead of his VERY formidable second daughter!

I wonder if he initiated this English-based project and hired a similarly well-connected American director? Or vice-versa?

Only an Englishwoman raised in luxury would be arrogant, entitled and clueless enough to write a story in which servants and secretaries are happy to remain servile, faithful lapdogs, commit murder for their employers and feel no need whatsoever to carry on with their lives.

What do you mean, R434?

They were happy to commit murder but not happy to carry on with their servile lapdog lives?

R435, those people didn't want to get on with their lives and instead chose to join Arden in some harebrained, delusional scheme to commit murder just out of some sense of loyalty even after all those years? The subtext is clearly that these maids, cooks and secretaries were happy to "stay in their station" and remain faithful lapdogs instead of thinking about their own happiness.

R434 You need to look this other thread if you want detective stories designed for people who can't imagine life outside their own 21st century, snowflake bubble.

So anyone who thinks that the writing and the plot of this novel is ludicrous, illogical and implausible is automatically a 21st century snowflake living in a bubble?

I love Christie but some of the mechanics of her murders do not bear much scrutiny as they usually involve multiple uncontrollable variants. No one in their right mind would plot MOTOE, expect everybody to agree, keep silent and stay in their roles. But at least here there were people involved on the train. In Death in the Nile (which i love) the truly complicated murder involves satying in certain cabins, in certain parts of the boat, etc. and is highly likely that the murderer is seen. But she is so good that the murderers are indeed seen, twice.

As for Jacqueline Bisset, she does have not much of a part but contributes to the movie in giving it star power and beuty (much needed considering the rest of the cast). And those saying she is a bad actress should see La Ceremonie.

Evil Under the Sun has a huge plot hole, too. Patrick Redfern's alibi is established by Myra, who is with him on the boat when Arlena's "body" is discovered, thus changing the time of death and giving both of the Redferns an alibi. However, MYRA is the one who, on the spur of the moment, asked Patrick if she could go on the boat ride with him. If she hadn't asked, Patrick would have no alibi.

To be fair, in DOTN, the murderer IS seen and has to commit another murder to shut up the witness.

In the TV/Poirot version of "Evil Under the Sun," DL fave Russell Tovey plays a male version of Linda (the annoying stepdaughter.)

Did Arlena Mitchell ever cross paths with Valentine Chantry?

Someone once wrote that that the real power of Bacall's presence in the film was less the performance per se and the idea that Lauren Bacall could (1.) orchestrate this foolishness and (2) coerce everyone into doing so.

Well, she had that partly Jane Fonda, partly Jane Austen vibe, r444.

The real mystery to me is why it took 40 years for a film of MOTOE to be made.

Just think what an all-star MGM cast directed by George Cukor in the mid-1930s could have made of it. Seriously, would the censorship of the times have not allowed a murder in which the criminals went free? Why did the Hollywood studios not film any of her best sellers until the 70s?

Let the casting begin!

It is true that by the Hays Code established in the 30s, murderers always had to be punished. The Code began to disintegrate in the 50s as competition from TV and foreign films began to threaten profit margins, though it was still followed overall. It became impossible to maintain by the late 60s, and that's when the rating system came in.

Since it would have been impossible to have all 13 murderers punished for killing Ratchet, making MOTOE before the 60s would have been difficult if not impossible.

If it HAD been possible to make MOTOE in the 30s, who would be cast in the parts?

I vote for Vivien Leigh as Miss Debenham. They could have cast Larry Olivier as Col. Arbuthnot.

Ethel Barrymore for Princess Dragomiroff.

C. Aubrey Smith as Masterman.

He was a hottie when young and looks like he had a huge cock.

Gloria Swanson could have owned Mrs. Hubbard.

John Gielgud as Poirot, May Whitty as Princess, Bette Davis as Hildegarde, Peter Lorre as McQueen, Leslie Howard as the Count, Vivien Leigh as the Countess, Margaret Lockwood as Debenham and Errol Flynn as Arbuthnot

Norma Shearer as Mrs. Hubbard except her daughter (The Countess) would have had to be 11 years old.

The Love Boat would've made a great setting for a mystery.

I'm surprised they never did one, r454.

Congratulations op and all, great thread and you made me what the movie again. Some thoughts:

The entrance of the characters in the platform is great, with Lauren Bacall and Jacqueline Bisset, mother and daughter, both in white furs;

Some division of screen time must have existed, Vanessa Redgrave and Sean Connery had the first scene in the boat so they don’t make an entrance to the train like the others;

Vanessa proves herself how great an actress she is by twinkling throughout her part, which is the opposite of the mood of the movie, it works; also lover her look when Poirot passes her in the-hall;

Lauren Bacall dresses and looks much too glamorous for her role as Mrs Hubbard, a supposedly loud rich American tourist; they never cast this role tight;

For those who spoke about humble servants, don’t forget those servants were assaulted, tied up and hit, which can be an additional reason for revenge;

I understand this could be catnip for most actors, as all of them are playing a part, which actually works better in the movie than in the book; it is very meta, it makes for multiple viewings and contributed for Bergman’s Oscar, there is a battle of wits and lots of misinterpreted looks;

Finally (sorry for going-so long but i could write a book about this), Bacall, Bergman and Redgrave at the same table.

Cherrz

In the pre-code LETTY LYNTON, Joan Crawford gets away with murder. .

"She calls Jerry to change their departure to the next day, then goes to Emile's hotel, taking a bottle of poison with her. She arrives, first trying to ask for a chance at happiness explaining how it is her one shot at real love, but Emile will have none of it denying she can ever be anyone's but his. Letty then begs for her letters, but he refuses and tells her that their affair will only be over when he says so. While Emile answers a knock at the door and talks to a waiter, Letty puts the poison in her champagne glass, planning to drink it herself choosing death over Emile.

When Emile returns, however, he strikes her then picks up her glass drinking the poison, as a shocked Letty mutely watches.[5] He then grabs up Letty and he carries her to the bedroom, attempting sex, when the poison starts to take effect. As he dies, she screams hysterically that she's glad he's dying, even if she hangs for doing it. She then cleans up fingerprints in the room and leaves.

The next day, soon after Letty and Jerry have arrived at the home of his parents, a police detective from New York arrives looking for Letty and requests that she come with him. Jerry and Letty, along with Mrs. Lynton and Letty's maid, go with him to see District Attorney John J. Haney. He begins questioning everyone and accuses Letty of murder, confronting her with the letters.

Letty admits that she went to see Emile, but Jerry interrupts by saying that he and Letty spent the night together at his apartment after she left Emile's, and that he knew all about the letters. Mrs. Lynton corroborates Jerry's story by saying that she followed Letty to Jerry's apartment. She also says that she overheard Emile say he would kill himself if Letty did not return to him. Letty's maid, Miranda, also corroborates the story, after which Haney says that the case is closed and Letty is free to go."

Censorship or not, it seems very peculiar to me that Hollywood didn't come knocking at Agatha Christie's doors throughout the first 3 or 4 decades of her writing career. There were certainly hundreds of novels of British literature that were adapted into very successful Hollywood films. I wonder if Hitchcock or Selznick ever considered making an adaptation of one of the books. Or the British producers.....did Alexander Korda ever connect with Christie?

I worked with C. Aubrey Smith. And many others.

[quote] it seems very peculiar to me that Hollywood didn't come knocking at Agatha Christie's doors throughout the first 3 or 4 decades of her writing career

The IMDB page lists about 50 movies made in the first 40 years. No big producers made a big Christie film until Dietrich suggested it to Billy Wilder in 1957.

Alexander Korda tended to go for bigger, more important stories (and he had a financially-tenuous time himself).

The characters of Poirot and Marple are both too ugly and semi-comical for a star to play.

And there was (and is) a snobbery against her over-intricately contrived plots with weak psychological consistency.

And people such as the awful Ken Branagh say she is "insufficiently bad-ass" for movies.

R460, Christie psychological consistency is actually surprising for a woman of her time (and education), i find her constantly underrated. But her books and detectives are not, with known exceptions, Hollywood fare.

That IMDB page R460 says Ben Affleck will star in a new Agatha Christie.

I wonder if it will be "bad-ass" with Ethnicity-Blind Casting, car chases and gunplay?

I just re-watched the movie again, and based on a poster's advice upthread I paid closer attention to the one-shot scene with Ingrid Bergman. It was very impressive. I can see why she was called out for her acting in this movie. That scene did not necessarily ask for much range. Bergman could have just phoned it in playing fearful from beginning to end. Instead she added so many emotions and nuances. Just wow!

R457, you could argue that Letty didn't intentionally murder him. She meant the poison for herself. Just enough deniability that the Hays Code might have let it go even if the film were made later.

Speaking of Letty...

Letty or lotty,🎂

So far I prefer Evil under the Sun. I'm slightly too young for all the actors in Murder on the Orient Express to have any real meaning. Evil under the Sun is more fun to watch.

"Christie psychological consistency is actually surprising for a woman of her time (and education), i find her constantly underrated."

Some people think Christie is twee or "cozy" because she sets her stories among genteel people, but she really has a very cynical view of humanity and her stories are psychologically complex. Her well-mannered middle and upper-class characters are all on the verge of killing each other, and it's always a question of which dark-hearted lady or gentleman actually did it. The characters who didn't actually kill anyone are all cheating on their spouses, bankrupt, sociopaths, committing or preparing to commit some crime for financial gain, etc. There's generally one decent supporting character per book, occasionally two if she's feeling generous.

Hell, she even had a sociopathic child commit a murder in one book, how "cozy" is that.

My only problem with Evil Under the Sun is the killer's identity because of the actor who played him. By the middle of the movie I had forgotten the character existed. I enjoy whodunits a lot more when the killer is a star.

R469, are you sure that you're gay? Hard to imagine that any gay man could watch EVIL UNDER THE SUN and not fixate on the eventual killer.

Particularly since they had many long, lingering scenes of him in his black skintight swim trunks., R470.

[quote]Just think what an all-star MGM cast directed by George Cukor in the mid-1930s could have made of it.

Yuck. He was too stagey and demanded stylized, mid-Atlantic performances from his actors. He'd have cast Katharine Hepburn and Joan Crawford in the wrong parts, had Cary Grant doing standing flips, added a fashion show, and cast one overweight comedic actor/actress shrieking their lines.

Cukor was very good at what he did, when he did it. His style would not have translated to Agatha Christie. The camp of the 1970s was perfect for Christie adaptations, during a time when retro 1930s and 1940s styles were coming back in fashion, but in the ACTUAL 1930s or 1940s? No.

Christie's stories require an ensemble cast with each of them getting equal screen time. And US stars didn't like being in an ensemble cast unless it was something for the war effort (such as 'Stage Door Canteen' or 'Forever and a Day').

The first US Christie had an ensemble of B-Listers and supporting actors.

[quote] Hell, she even had a sociopathic child commit a murder in one book, how "cozy" is that.

Is that the book with the opening line "Someday I'm going to be Queen Charlotte. Poor, poor George!"?

And his porno trunks, r470

[quote] but she really has a very cynical view of humanity

Miss Marple exemplifies this very well, maybe more so than Poirot. It's easy to portrait her as a cutesy granny. But she is not. She is always very analytical in identifying other people's shortcomings. Hickson showed this best, but even the all-too whimsical McEwan Marple did not have a very positive view on people. I am not sure Miss Marple is cynical herself, but she certainly assumes easily that others are. I guess that makes her a cynic too?

Poirot is never surprised by peoples' lower motives either, but in contrast to Miss Marple he solves his cases more by analyzing scenarios and event. Miss Marple solves a lot by more analyzing people's behavior and motivation (she always draws analogies to characters she knows from St Mary's Mead).

r4567: True. But they never would have allowed her to celebrate her would-be rapists death by rushing to her boyfriends apartment to fuck all night.

"And US stars didn't like being in an ensemble cast...."

The casts of the huge hits GRAND HOTEL, DINNER AT EIGHT and LITTLE WOMEN, all from 1932-33) would disagree, the last two directed by George Cukor.

Hitchcock would have been the obvious director for a 1930s or 40s version of MOTOE.

Hitch didn't like whodunnits, he preferred something that was a psychological thriller or that could be turned into a psychological thriller. An ensemble cast wasn't really his bag, either. He liked a few big stars mixed with a solid group of supporting actors.

Indeed Hitchcock is quite the opposite of Agatha Christie, he prefers the long suspense of letting you know who the killer is and who is he going to kill and if he is getting caught to some minutes of surprise. He gave a bomb explosion as an example. If you don’t know about it, you have some seconds of shock, if you know previous about the bomb, the suspense is much longer.

R472: Cukor hated the doing the B&W fashion show sequence in The Women. He hated even more that after he left the production. different people came in to do the Technicolor version. Yes, the B&W and color versions are different and Cukor had nothing to do with the latter.

"So anyone who thinks that the writing and the plot of this novel is ludicrous, illogical and implausible is automatically a 21st century snowflake living in a bubble?"

Oh, my God--ABSOLUTELY!

"I'm slightly too young for all the actors in Murder on the Orient Express to have any real meaning"

Like this sentence. You have the "meaning" of some fantastic performances in a sumptuously produced vehicle. Surely you've heard of Bacall, Bergman, and Redgrave at the very least. What more "meaning" is there to be gleaned?

"And Then There Were None" is the currently authorized title for Christie's 1030 novel. It was changed from "Ten Little Indians" which had been changed from the original title. The first edition below.

^ 1939, obviously.

[quote] The casts of the huge hits GRAND HOTEL, DINNER AT EIGHT and LITTLE WOMEN, all from 1932-33) would disagree

I might agree that may have been 'huge hits', R478, but I can't agree they were stars sharing screen time in an ensemble production.

'Grand Hotel' only had 3 stars, 'Dinner at Eight' had 4 and 'Little Women' had only 2 stars who were supported by the studios's regular collection of B-grade supporting contract players

'Forever and a Day' had about 7 stars who shared equal screen time. 'The Magic Box' in 1951 had about 12 stars who shared equally small roles. 'Around The World in Eighty Days' had about 9 stars in equally brief appearances.

I think Sidney Lumet's 'Murder on the Orient Express' had 4 current stars, 5 vintage stars with 5 supporting players.

We'd really know who were the stars in Murder on the Orient Express' by looking at their pay cheque.

[quote] Bergman and Redgrave at the same table.

R456 I wish we could have seen these two genuine stars together in a vehicle to justify their talent.

R473, no, we wouldn't:

"The cast were all such huge stars, yet somehow the film cost only $4.5m. Were there any divas? No, they were well behaved, although Lauren Bacall insisted on having her shoes made in Paris, Albert Finney got paid more because his Hercule Poirot had most of the lines, and Sean Connery got a percentage because he was such a big star. The rest all got paid the same: $100,000 each."

Shit, r482, now I wanna see the black and white version!

R488 That's interesting.

I guess that's another reason Ingrid went slumming by taking the easy role. She spent less time in make-up to get the same fee as Wendy.

George Cukor also, of course, directed The Women with an all-star ensemble cast if there ever was one.

I don't get this "American stars didn't like being in ensemble casts' notion. That's hardly a reason Hollywood wasn't making Christie adaptations in the 1930s.

Oh, R491 That's one of three reasons why Hollywood wasn't making Christie adaptations in the 1930s.

I watched Murder on the Orient Express and Evil under the Sun after reading this thread. Of the three Poirots, including David Suchet, I like Peter Ustinov the best. I giggled when he unrobed at the beach and was wearing his bathing costume. He is jolly and I like that.

One of the reasons why Hollywood didn't do a Christie adaptation of Miss Marple in the 1930s is that they would have had to cast the difficult Mrs Patrick Campbell.

There was some drama behind the scenes:

1) "In her 1991 autobiography, Vanessa Redgrave described her outrage when Sidney Lumet suggested to the cast that they cut the lunch break to half an hour. She contacted Equity, the actors' union, who sent their film organizer who explained at a meeting that it was up to them if they accepted the half-hour break or not. 'I said it was not only ourselves we were deciding for. I spoke of the economic crisis, the continuous attack on the unions, and the fact that Elstree Studios would soon be closed. I said that if we, who no doubt had the power to refuse, said that we could manage without a full lunch-break, others would soon be forced to accept it, and we could have opened a door for all employers to increase the workload and thereby cut pay throughout the industry'. The cast considered the arguments but finally voted to accept the half-hour. Details of the incident were leaked to the Press with a view to discrediting the actress, and the source was eventually traced to the Equity office, rather than anybody on set."

2) "Co-producer Richard Goodwin said that Vanessa Redgrave 'would spend all of her lunchtimes converting the workers (to Communism), making speeches about politics in the canteen, while the rest of the actors would sit and listen to Sir John Gielgud telling his amazing stories. Eventually, the guys in the canteen asked if we could get Vanessa to go and talk to someone else.'"

Watching the film, the sexual chemistry between Vanessa Redgrave and Sean Connery is palpable, even with the merest romantic scene. Despite her political shenanigans on the set, I can't imagine they didn't fuck.

She was a lovely woman but sounds like a total pill to be around.

is my alternative recast!

Vanessa Redgrave almost hit me with her Suburban driving up La Cienega toward West Hollywood from LAX 20 years ago or so. In a way, I wished she had, the story would have been a lot more interesting.

[quote]driving up La Cienega toward West Hollywood from LAX 20 years ago or so.

Where exactly along La Cienega did this happen? That's a long stretch of road you've mentioned -- somewhere between LAX and West Hollywood.

[quote] Vanessa Redgrave almost hit me

Poor Vanessa is as blind as a bat. Was she wearing her thick pebble glasses?

It was somewhere near the Fairfax intersection. She wasn't wearing any glasses and she had a male companion in the passenger seat. I honked at her and she ignored me but I still love her.

I really enjoyed Evil under the Sun and next I'm watching Death on the Nile. Are the other Poirot movies with Peter Ustinov any good?

Peter Ustinov had the advantage over Finney in playing Poirot. He didn't need to wear a fat suit and heavy make-up. And he was good at foreign accents.

Ustinov did have integrity back in the 50s and early 60s but he made some bad choices in the late 60s— choosing wives and appearing in Disney rubbish.

John Brabourne may have considered him but I suspect he went for Albert Finney because he was younger and might have appealed to a younger audience for this geriatric film.

Ustinov made three movies as Poirot (Death on the Nile, Evil Under the Sun and Appointment with Death) between 1978 and 1988. And then three cheap and nasty made-for-TV films (Thirteen at Dinner, Dead Man's Folly and Murder in Three Acts) in the mid-1980s.

Was Poirot ever described by Agatha Christie as fat? I don't believe so. I think the padding on Finney was done to give the 38 year old actor a more aged appearance.

Thirteen at Dinner and Dead Man's Folly are trash but I rather adore them. Good rainy Sunday afternoon flicks.

For me, the very best Christie adaptation is A MURDER IS ANNOUNCED with Joan Hickson as Miss Jane Marple, filmed for the BBC in the late 1980s. The story as written is rather ordinary and highly contrived but the direction, brilliant ensemble cast and period details are wonderfully engaging, witty as well as poignant. A perfect English village/closed room mystery.

My favorite is Evil Under the Sun for its humor and stylishness, closely followed by Death on the Nile for its cinematography and music. Murder on the Orient Express comes in a respectable third for its wonderful cast and epic score.

The Anthony Shaffer scripts for Death on the Nile and Evil Under the Sun are dripping with great dialogue.

I don't think that Poirot's shape was ever described in terms of weight. I would think that being overweight would have been against Poirot's urge to always maintain best appearance.

The first description of Poirot was by Hastings in The Mysterious Affair at Styles who said, "He was hardly more than five feet four inches but carried himself with great dignity. His head was exactly the shape of an egg, and he always perched it a little on one side…The neatness of his attire was almost incredible; I believe a speck of dust would have caused him more pain than a bullet wound."

For general body type, Poirot is written as a “small, compact figure” (The Labours of Hercules), “delicately plump” (The Big Four), with “a certain protuberance around his middle” (Evil Under the Sun). Although vain about his brainwork and meticulous about appearing neat, he has no illusions about being attractive to the opposite sex, and in physical appearance is only proud of his moustaches. Other physical descriptions of Poirot from Christie include “expressive eyebrows,” “tiny, fastidiously-groomed hands,” and “short, stubby fingers.”

R509, they do say that water finds its own level.

So Christie fairly obviously coded him as a fussy little gay man.

[quote] a fussy little gay man

That's why Hollywood avoided Poirot.

R262 Other link is Albert Finney and Vanessa on stage back in June 1959 at Stratford-upon-Avon

Yes, Poirot was fussy and feminine, the kind of man who'd have made someone a lovely housebottom if he'd lived in a more accepting era. But since he didn't live in an accepting era, he was someone who'd basically shut off his sexual feelings, and lived the life of the mind in his own way. It would be tragic, except that he seemed to like himself the way he was, maybe he genuinely believed that being smarter than everyone else was all a person could ask of life.

The last Poirot book ("Curtain") was published in 1975, so if Poirot were real, he'd have lived to see the Stonewall Riots and the start of the Gay Rights movement. He probably would have thought it was all very vulgar...

If I liked Evil under the Sun and Death on the Nile, what should I watch next? I liked Murder on the Orient Express ok but not as much as the other two.

The other film made in that series, r517, is 'Appointment with Death," again with Peter Ustinov as Poirot. it's the weakest since it has the exotic foreign setting (this time, the Middle east) and the all-star cast (tis time including Carrie Fisher) but almost no glamour, which is what both "Death on the Nile" and "Evil Under the Sun" had in spades.

However, there is a camp moment to die for, when someone gives their testimony to Poirot and reports that when they came to see the murder victim just before she was killed, she grunted at them--and, in flashback, we see Piper Laurie in a pith helmet grunting, "UNHH!" quite loudly.

lol r518, I will watch that next. It's a shame Peter Ustinov wasn't around for Downton Abbey. He could have played an eccentric uncle or suitor to Edith.

There's not much else cinematically for Christie, except The Mirror Crack'd (1980) with Angela Lansbury as Miss Marple, plus Elizabeth Taylor and Kim Novak reading each other to filth.

Beyond that is all the Poirot tv episodes with David Suchet, which are good for what they are but lack the wit and camp of Nile and Evil or the epicness of Orient Express.

Go for the Joan Hickson Marples!

Will do, r521! I am also the OP who started the thread about movies before 1960. I really appreciate that I can learn about old movies on DL.

[quote] Poirot was fussy and feminine

Yes, and pedantic and prissy.

I watch the Suchet show n TV and I can't believe that a Belgian who derives his income from English people over decades is still so snobby towards them and their culture.

I can believe he's still snobby, people who become immigrants or expats as adults frequently keep the mindset and prejudices of their original culture.

Especially if their immigration wasn't entirely voluntary, and Poirot was introduced as a WW1 refugee who was temporarily staying at a country house where a genteel sort of murder occurred. Who knows why he decided to settle in the UK rather than going home, perhaps in Christie's world, there were more murders among the upper classes in England than in Belgium. .

This autistic person claims Poirot from Branagh's self-claimed 'Bad-arse' version is autistic.

[quote] Hercule Poirot from Murder on the Orient Express (2017) is autistic. He has specific ways he likes things to always be done, he's blunt and he says that he likes to be by himself. He also seems to have a strong sense of what he feels is right and wrong.

That's not autistic. That's a standard Datalounge poster.

IMDB shows three other Ustinov films not yet mentioned:

Thirteen for Dinner - 1985

Murder in Three Acts - 1986

Dead Man's Folly - 1986

R527 there is a reason they weren't mentioned.

Such a good film!

The ultimate Hercule Poirot

[quote] Such a good film!

It's not cinematic or a moving picture. It could be a stage work or a 'tableau vivant'. It's all talk and little action.

^ The awful Ken Branagh agreed 'It's not cinematic or a moving picture'. That's why he changed the plot for his "Bad-Ass" version.

R531 has a pretty limited view of "cinematic." Lumet's film is shot very imaginatively and (yes) cinematically. Don't forget that the man's celebrated first film, TWELVE ANGRY MEN, famously made tremendous *advantage* of its claustrophobic single setting.

In the case of MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS, the individual interrogations are subtly differentiated in specific cinematic terms. Not only does each have its own visual character, but when Poirot recalls them in his long final monologue, Lumet regularly shows us the original dialogue shot differently from the way we first saw it -- a smart way to spice up the lengthy sequence. (The comparable portions of DEATH ON THE NILE and EVIL UNDER THE SUN, for example, get pretty logy.)

Charmingly, our final glimpse of the murderers is very deliberately "staged" to evoke a curtain call, with Bacall and Bisset creating a proscenium arch into which each of their collaborators steps for one last appearance. It's a delicious, loving wink at the old-fashioned/melodramatic/"theatrical" feel of the basic material, ironically presented in a cinematic way.

You may have missed these things, or they may not have appealed to you. But they are specific directorial choices to realize the material in specifically cinematic terms.

Thank you for your detailed response, R533.

Is that typo in the last word in your second paragraph?

But I will rewatch the film with your ideas in mind.

No, R534.

logy [ loh-gee ] adjective, lo·gi·er, lo·gi·est. lacking physical or mental energy or vitality; sluggish; dull; lethargic.

r532: How was the pilot changed? They all killed the wrong guy? That would have been DELICIOUS.

No, R536, Brannaugh tried to change the claustrophobic atmosphere of the original and better film, by getting Poirot and the suspects out of the train. There were outdoor walks, teas, and the finale was staged at an outdoor table, and Brannaugh never once realized that the claustrophobia of the original setting was one of the things that had made the original film work. AND he's never tried to walk on deep fresh powder, or he'd know that if deep snow falls the night before it's too soft to walk or set furniture on.

And yeah, that's the one underlying flaw of MOTOE, the fact that we have no idea if this guy was really responsible for Daisy Armstrong. Imagine if he was innocent, and you know who had to try to get the gang together again!

[quote] Brannaugh

No, R82, R537, Branagh.