While I love the 2015 version, I absolutely hate that they took out the passive murders. The fact they all were involved with deaths that would he hard to punish them for is the entire point of the book. The style and actors chosen for the 2015 version were excellent
Traveling in Devon and the soldier boy staying there pertains to MacArthur because he understands that none of them will leave, and has an important exchange with Vera to that effect.
@@Natilra Agree, though I head canon that the killer did very thorough due diligence and research and may have come to the conclusion that MacArthur might crumble in something like this. It's in the book as well as this adaptation, so Christie's logic is the ultimate root here.
In finnish version the eight soldier boys are looking for good luck and one is left on that road. I did a quick search for Devon and good luck in 1940s and there was a racehorse with that name around that time... I think MacArthur was happy or felt luvky when he got reunited with his wife in death but otherwise I don't get the idea. either.
Strong work here. Thank you for this review! One quibble, though: Marston’s victims did not “change” to children in the 2015 version, in that his victims were also children in the book.
I read this book as a teenager, and I couldn't understand what it meant by "very modern" house. I kept imagining a super minimalist 1980s geometrical monstrosity of white stucco and chrome, which i knew couldn't be true, but I didnt understand what modern meant for the 1930s.
‘One said he’d stay there” was from the book. The General tells Vera they aren’t going anywhere, that it is the end. He’s resigned himself to his fate. He’s tired of all the guilt and paranoia he’s been carrying around since his murder. You should read the book. It’s great.
This is one of the strongest books, not only as a mystery, but as a psychological study & a moral debate. None of the adaptations I've seen really get it, imo. Turning indirect, moral guilt, into actual murders undermines the entire idea & makes it less thought-provoking. Just like turning some of the characters into good guys & letting them survive.
The other thing that frustrated me in the 2105 miniseries was there was no recap from the murderer of how they did it. The message in a bottle passage from the book was the perfect ending. The miniseries... Just ended.
Clever concept. I like how even though you didn't do a deep dive, you still went pretty in-depth with all of these. I had to laugh when 1974 got 0 points at the midpoint tally. I think the film is interesting not as an adaptation but as a reflection on filmmaking practices of the time. Supposedly, the film rights to the story were about to expire, so the owners hastily put this together. That's why they virtually copied the '65 script, they flew to pre-revolution Iran because financial incentives made it a cheap filming location, and while it bombed at the box office, it was profitable for the producers thanks to write-offs and tax sheltering. There's also the Italian giallo-influence so popular at the time that seems to permeate this film. I regret not having seen Identity before watching this. You warned about spoilers, so it's entirely on me. Still, my curiosity is piqued and I now plan to watch it after seeing this video. A thing I don't like about '45 version is that it misses the mark with its tone. It's like they couldn't deal with the seriousness of the material so they added this almost comedic undertone to the picture. 2015 nails it and retains the book ending in lieu of the "happy ending" of the stage play. Despite this faithfulness, it still misses the soul of Christie's story. Like you said, these are supposed to be people who legally couldn't be convicted, their crimes are passive. Here by upping the violence factor for drama, the characters are more black and white, less interesting.
IMHO the 2015 and the 1987 Soviet adaptations are the best. I totally agree that the showing the murders of the 10 accused in the 2015 does work against this adaptation. Unfortunatley BBC One since then goes on with adding shocking scenes to and altering plot points of their more recent mini series adaptations (like "The ABC Murders", "Ordeal of Innocence" aso.) . Though I love "Identity" I wouldn't have taken it in account since it's rather more "inspired by" than an actual adaptation.
I think the original ending was brilliant and perfect. For me, if I hear the ending was changed, personally, then the adaptation of this book in particular goes down in my view. I know that is unfair, but the original ending is just that good.
Agreed. Christie changed the ending when she was adapting it to the stage because she said audiences at plays like happy endings. I thoroughly disagree. Love the woman. But no.
I enjoy every adaptation of this story I see. It has a lot of things I love. Isolated location. A sort of country house party. Great bunch of different characters. A twist. Add in stormy weather and I am sold every time.
Месяц назад
I have a special place in my heart for the 1989 version. I had a year where I was basically homebound with a chronic illness and my dad rented this vhs version for me because I loved the book so much. It was out of print at the time so my dad told the video store that he lost it, paid a fee so I could watch it at home repeatedly . 😂 objectively as an adult, I know it’s a terrible Cannon film but I still kind of love it.
I first watched the "45" version when a child with my parents, so it has sentimental value. I watched it a few times before any of the others, so for those reasons it is a favourite, yet now dated. The only other one that was memorable for me was the 2015 adaptation. It captured the sense of hopelessness and despair of being trapped and not being able to trust anyone, waiting for certain death, plus the unlikeable characters. I don't remember having sympathy for any of them. Identity didn't impress me. I will watch the Russian one next, I hadn't heard of that one.
I'm partial to the 2015 miniseries and the Soviet film since they're the only two to use the original book ending. You have peaked my interest for the 1965 version though. I'd love to see you use this format for the various Orient Express adaptations.
I have read the book and seen both 1965 and 2015. (I've also seen Identity, but we'll skip that). I prefer the 2015 version. I agree that taking away some of the ambiguity of the crimes and making them more clear cut legal crimes instead of moral ones undercut the original story (except for Lombard), but that's forgivable. However 1965 committed greater sins with A) removing character and replacing with another-Lombard, B) changing Vera that she didn't actually commit a crime, and C) changing the ending so Vera and fake Lombard wind up together-thus having the "happy" ending. 2015 is a better film and a better adaptation.
1945 was the best for me. You are correct in that by making each character bloody, cold hearted killers wrecks it. By doing that it just makes me not care about their dilemma.
I wonder if the 2015 miniseries is making a point about privilege and who we believe. Even though they are guilty, they would’ve still been able to escape justice.
Ha, I didn’t even expect the 65 and 74 versions to be in the running. I thought you’d just cut to the chase between the classic original and the newest update (with a mention of the Russian version). 65 and the other Christie’s from that decade has the fun tunes and some cool mod clothes. 74 is like watching paint dry. 45 obviously has the best cast and the directing and pacing by a master, so it’s no contest for me. And 15 is outstanding for a more sinister and book accurate. I couldn’t choose between them. 45 holds up the best so far in a classic sense (the 60s and 70s too dated) time will tell if the mini series will look dated with its slickness. Fun video blog!
The Russian movie is on RU-vid and has subtitles; it is well worth watching. Why is Vera slapping the doctor more acceptable than the way Christie wrote it?
My first Agatha Christie read, 1977. I am currently working my way through the entire Agatha Christie collection. I have yet to return to this one. Next, for sure. Great video, thanks!
Re around 26:20, the reason General MacArthur gets #3 isn't about bludgeoning it's about saying he'd stay there. In the Novel and in the 2015 adaptation, it is General MacArthur who says 'no one is really coming for us, we're not leaving this island,' in a strange and foreshadowing way. So he gets the soldier boy who said he'd stay in Devon. : )
Just stumbled upon your channel and your videos, loving them so far :) Hopefully you can cover Evil Under the Sun sometime soon, it's my absolute favorite (helped by the fact that it was the first Christie-related media i ever consumed in the form of a Wii videogame). Again, thank you so much for all your videos I've already binge watched most of them!
The Soviet adaptation is great though. You should watch it with subtitles. As far as I know it is still the one most faithful to the book. It even kept the original name, although I recon it was possible due to language differences - the word used in Russian translation is not the racial slur while the one Christie used very much is. Anyway, I enjoyed the 2015 version very much. Still, you make a great point about changing the crime of the «accused» from passive to active. To be fair while some of the characters of the original novel were legally in the clear during the time the book was written they could (and should) be prosecuted for their actions in the modern day - the lines are stricter (thankfully) so the modern reader will see their crimes somewhat differently, I think. However, the point about the ambiguity and the need to recognize that the characters might be not that different from the readers still stands. I think I’ll revisit the 2015 version with this in mind, thanks. And the Soviet version too. It’s been way too long. ) Thank you for the video! Loved it!
I read the book and I have some of these movies. I always wished they hadn't changed the ending, loved Identity ...didn't realize it was based on And then there were none. I agree with your rating.
Excellent (and fun) review of the adaptations. I would still afford the 2015 version gold - I loved the time accurate modern house setting as it is believable that no one is hiding anywhere and the style is so Christie - but I absolutely agrre the one failing was changing the crimes to more clear murders in some cases. The reasoning about legal vs moral culpability is at the heart of both Christie's reasining and her murderer's.
I am a big fan! Now I have to fit this information that you do martial arts with being a fellow Agatha Christie fan. ???!!! I really love the movie Identity, I had never realized it had any relation with this book. I played the 2015 version to my sons over a Christmas lunch some years ago and paused it near the end for them to guess who had done it. Such fun!
26:42 The General is the one who didn't even try to escape, accepting that judgment had finally come for him. He "decided to stay." I prefer the Soviet version, actually.
I think you are doing Identity a disservice by comparing it to then there were none. I loved that movie for what it was an original story with it‘s own twist. Every movie lover should see it nonetheless. But overall a fantastic video, you did a great job.
I basically agree with you about the 2015 adaptation: the changing of the ambiguity was a big disappointment; however, as far as I know, it's the only adaptation that carries the book ending (in the house, anyway) all the way to the bitter end; all the other ones take another way. 2015 also has, for me, the closest to my conception of Vera, and I like how she unravels in appearance through the series; and how we can see the difference between what she was before and after Cyril. I only like the Miss Brent of Judith Anderson; I don't like or understand the huge shift in character on her part. 1965 does have that cat, though.....
I am now realizing Detective Conan did a mystery similar to this, but instead of all the people being murderers, they were all detectives. As such, they caught on quick.
I only have watched Identity and 2015 movie so I'll trust you on the rest, but I think 2015 is a bit mixed for me because of how close and...not it is to the book. The quote 'we are the zoo' exemplifies it. Emily Brent was leaning way too hard on the 'scary religious nationalist' character on the movie. On the book she was vocal on not liking Lombard because of his crime in Africa when talking to Vera who was...not really bothered by it? (which I guess is to show from the start that the main girl is no better than anyone else). And what they did to the Rogers was terrible, turning Ethel from a willing accomplice to a victim who dies for a crime that's not her own. Oh and I loled a bit when you mentioned the island hole. That was disappointing😅
I don't read books personally but I loved the 2015 adaption to such an extent I wrote a comment on another video about a month ago praising it and then yesterday your video ended up in my recommended! Good work! Was going to try out Identity but it's Google page recommended Split and I can't abide films that make Dissociative Identity Disorder (formerly known as Multiple Personality Disorder) into the main 'twist' and make them villainous. It's all kind of yawn, predictable and 'isn't that a bit mean?'. Might try the Russian version, given the praise in the comments.
I think I saw the Pleasance version first, but hardly remember it. Then identity, then 1945, which I enjoyed. Yet to see the others. Thank you for the comparison. If only there were a good 80s version.
Only seen 1945, 1974 and the 1989 versions, all enjoyable. I have a bias towards the 1974 version as I saw it first and it is oddly a sort of comfort film. the 1989 version is....odd, though the location I liked enough for being different, though the film felt less like well a film and more an extended version or a weaker Murder She Wrote episode. I do want to see the other versions. Does feel weird having Identity on the list I must admit, but it has me curious if you might redo this once Glass Onion has come out, seeing as the Knives Out sequel is not only another nod to Agatha Christie as the first was but seems to be taking inspiration from And Then There Were None specifically.
I was disappointed in 2015 even though it definitely had great style and the cast were great. (Sam Neill even surprised me as the General, which I thought initially was a terrible mistake in casting). I just think the writer Sarah Phelps took too many liberties in trying to turn Christie’s work into a truly disturbing, hard-boiled, soft-core, pulp fiction dime novel in which none of the characters are likable or even clever. The scene where they are having a party with snuff and booze is particularly noticeable. My favorite is the 1945 one, but it significantly deviates from Christie’s work too, just in the opposite way. 1965 is interesting, but at several points it quotes dialogue from 1945, like chapter and verse. 1974 was mostly disappointing. (even though I loved the idea of Orson Welles as the voice on the recording. If only he had read the lines less sinister and more impartial, like he did in the 1930’s radio broadcast “War of the Worlds.” That tone is more in keeping with Christie’s book, I think). Richard Attenborough was made for the role of the Judge, and he completely blew it. Of all of the adaptations, the one closest to the book is actually not here. The Soviet one. That one has problems, too, but it is almost Puritanical in its adaptation. They even kept the offensive original title of the nursery rhyme from the 1939 book (not the “Ten Little Indians” one but the one before that. I will not say it here because I don’t want to be banned. But it is mentioned on Wikipedia and in John Curran’s books about Christie’s notebooks)
Perhaps it is just nostalgia, I am 81 and saw the 1945 movie on television as a young child, but my favorite is the 1945 version. Also, I never could stand Hugh O'Brian.
In the 2015 version they put a sexual slant in it because they do it in everything nowadays, I have all these versions I love the 1965 version the best .
I have alway been disturbed by the fact that, in the novel, the Judge claims to have received an invite. Would this be seen as a blatant mis-direction?
I have a problem with old movies. I think they overact with mean looks all the time. And the music is too much too. I can't get involved, it makes me laugh.
Miles... I must request an Adaptation for you to review. I feel... I feel that it is needed. So Murder on the Orient Express has been adapted 28 billion times and of all of them TWO are good. Finney, and Brannagh. The David Suchet one is massively overwrought, almost like it's trying to turn it into a modern thriller and the SUSPECTS doing most of the talking during the solution. Feeling bizarrely DOUR by the end of the episode and just generally being dour throughout. The Alfred Molina one is a complete car wreck. If you want an episode where you get to flex your comedic chops, do that one. For some ungodly reason they MODERNIZED it, and made Colonel Armstrong Steve Jobs. The number of stab wounds is different (because why would that be important?!) And literally every performance is Risible. Poor Alfred Molina, an incredible actor, reduced to playing a "modern" Poirot. Thank God Spider Man 2 happens shortly afterwards. My man deserves his marvel paycheck. But topping all of them. By a wide and ridiculous margin. Is the 2007 videogame by AWE Productions and The Adventure Company. I will say nothing other than this. They changed the ending. In the dumbest way possible. ... No seriously dumber than you're thinking. I could give you enough time to think about this and only cut you off when the SUN EXPLODES and you still won't get how dumb this ending is. Miles I make this as a request, but I implore you. This is easily the worst adaptation of an Agatha Christie story to any medium. You HAVE to see this.
@@MysteryMiles I'm afraid I'm not sure what that means. I will however update this by saying that they released another adventure game based on "And Then There Were None" and the Novel's ending... Was the %100 completion bonus. The default ending has two suspects surviving. I'm as much a video game fan as I am a mystery fan, and I will tell you that I have never seen a game make me jump through extra hoops to get THE BAD ENDING.
@@MysteryMiles Nope! Just a fan of Christie stories who found your videos thanks to the RU-vid algorithm. My handle here is my real name, and I'm not sure if this is the appropriate place to mention it, my father was William L. DeAndrea. A published mystery author in his own right. Same goes for my mother Jane Haddam. Around Halloween I go looking for Agitha Christie/Murder Mystery content and I found your channel in the recommended for some David Suchet clips. And I'm glad I did. You're seriously talented, and deserve more of a following. I've been making sure to recommend you to people I know. Keep this up man! I've been looking for this exact kind of Agitha Christie content and I haven't found it until now!
The Russian version is very good. The films that use the original story (not the stage version), even the 2015 version, are not totally accurate to the way the murderer kills himself. Christie was so specific. I wish someone would do it like it is written. BTW: ELK-E (long E) SUMMER :)
To be honest, the 2015 version's way of murderer killing himself is closer to the book. In 1987's they just shot themself, not leaving a mystery for the police
Watched 1974 last night and it is easily the worst adaptation of ANY book I’ve ever seen. It fails on so many levels, and the changes feel at first unnecessary but end up having enormous consequences. The hotel is so big it would be impossible to check every room so they can’t be certain they are alone. There’s also no reason why they couldn’t just split up, hide, and barricade themselves in random rooms to try and wait out the murderer. The changing of the crimes seems pointless but ends up changing the motivation and sympathies towards certain characters. Vera and Hugh actually being innocent is ridiculous and goes against the central premise of the book, they then have to change the ending to counter this which is even worse. A small change causes them to change the entire plot. The poem, there is close to no attempt to stick to the poem and ones like #6 bee sting easily COULD have been changed to snake bite but they were too lazy. #9 and #8 are so different from the poem that really you wouldn’t be able to figure out what is happening. There’s minimal discussion about the gun, there’s never an attempt to confiscate it and it never goes missing and reappears. Dialogue. There’s very little ‘strategising’ outside of a few lines between the judge and doctor. They briefly try barricading themselves in their rooms but Hugh immediately abandons that to see Vera (stupid) and when they hear a noise he bangs on Blore’s door with a gun in his hand who for some reason trusts and follows him (why would he do this?). There are very few moments of accusation, the murder method for #9 being changed means there’s no longer a reason to suspect the doctor, #8 gets sabotaged so again anyone could do it rather than who was without alibi/best opportunity. Awful awful awful film. I can’t believe the GAUL to read the 6th best selling book OF ALL TIME and think ‘yes, I could do a better job of this than Agatha Christie and I will therefore change nearly everything’
