A comparison of Agatha Christie's 1953 novel, After the Funeral, to two of its film adaptations: Murder at the Gallop (1963) Agatha Christie's Poirot: After the Funeral (2006)
Glad about the results here, definitely one of my favorite Suchets. The killer's breakdown at the end is INCREDIBLY well acted, and insanely disturbing.
This is my mums favourite Poirot mystery. Must have watched it a dozen times with her. Nice review of both movies mate, it helps to clear some things up.
@lelaloreanachehade7590 Thankyou, I've spent many a day watching murder mysteries with her. She spooks easily and likes someone to be with her to keep the gollywoggles away.
I’ve watched After the funeral many times and stumbled upon Murder at the gallop but I didn’t even realize that it was the same story. Keep up the good work👏🏾🙏🏾🙌🏾
My mum loved Margaret Rutherford so I always liked her Miss Marple films despite them being so different from the books. However my personal favourite was always David Suchet as Poirot who is very like the Poirot of the books. I find it amusing that the characters are always slightly changed for modern audiences because we are after all watching a period piece .
Miles, this is your best analysis yet - a masterpiece just as is the book, and the two film adaptations. However, I’m slightly disappointed that you couldn’t find time for a brief clip of Miss Marple doing the twist to the chagrin of Horace.
I haven't seen the Margaret Rutherford movies, so can't compare, but I cannot agree more that the Suchet adaptation of this book is very good (and I also wasn't upset to see no Gregory in it). In fact, it's one of the very few cases of both the book being one of my favourite Poirot novels and the movie being one of my favourite David Suchet Poirot episodes.
this is my favorite new channel! As someone who has read every single book, play, and short story Christie ever wrote it is delightful to find someone else with a deep love and appreciation for her work as obsessive as myself.
I agree with your assessment! The plot, acting and character development in the Suchet version are great. This is one of my favorite adaptations. Also, it's fun to see Michael Fassbender in an early role! He definitely already had that dark, brooding thing down :)
I really have to search out and watch these Miss Marple films from the 50s. I love all the Suchet Poirot series films. Thank you for this great comparison video!
BUT - i love Margaret Rutherford and couldn’t care less about being true to the author’s books. She is just plain incredibly wonderful and her husband’s character plays opposite to her character perfectly. they are quite a team comedically. 😂🤣🌷🌱 on the other hand, Suchet’s Poirot is true to the author’s spirit. and i very much like his series!! so very well produced in every way. 🙂🤔🌷🌱 it’s really like comparing apple pie to roast chicken. :) Great videos, however. your views are like roast chicken baked with apples, onions, etc. it’s a very enjoyable review of the way the characters are written and changed along with how true the films are being to the novels. it’s really fun and very interesting! and your editing is perfect. brilliant work! 🥂 thanks so much :)🌷🌱
I'm a huge Suchet as Poirot fan and like that movie adaptation very much. You're correct: most of the family? Extremely unlikable. I love the Rutherford adaptations because the humor is so much fun and Stringer is a sweet sidekick companion to Rutherford's Marple. I enjoyed your comparison 👍🏾
I adore any Christie where there is a big rich family all brought together at the family mansion, like After The Funeral. Reminds me of Pocket Full of Rye and 450 from Paddington, two of my faves
There is only one miss Marple & that is the one & only Joan Hickson the only one to play her the way she was meant to be played. ❤❤ she will always be my favourite.
Fun thing is, in the german dubbed version, the title of the Margaret Rutherford-Movie is "Der Wachsblumenstrauß", directly referring to the flowers that lead to the conclusion - even though said flowers are not part of the storyline. 🙂 There was I, as a child, long before the comfort of the internet, trying to decipher what kind of symbolic code with hidden meaning the title was representing 😀
That's the title of the _book,_ in the German translation. My mother had/has a copy. I find it very frustrating that so many translations change the title. If it's a play on words that won't work in the target language, I understand. What's wrong with, "Nach der Beerdigung"? 🤨
@@thekingsdaughter4233 I will never understand that either. Sometimes their stupid german titles (or different english titles wtf???) give the complete wrong impression. If you want to get mad about this, think of "Made in Dagenham", a cute little movie about women's strike for equality and then google the german title. It's ridiculous (and was a guarant to make the movie fail in cinema & home video release).
This is the story that Ryan Murphey used a little bit of for Knives Out right? I know he used lots of tropes but there's 3 key things I can spot in his film and this story. Great video by the way.
They're both excellent films, but so very different that they may as well have been made from entirely different books. I love the fun of Murder at the Gallop, but it's not really a detective story at all, and more just a great Margaret Rutherford romp.
Digging the new presentation. Very sleek. I wish i could so a song cover for you. Smooth Jazz cover of Tom Petty's Running Down a Dream would be the perfect theme!
Another great one Miles. It's always a highlight to see a new review from you. Fully agree with your summation. I like the 2006 adaptation better (although I find the incest embellishment needlessly off-putting, after my first viewing, it was a long time before I felt like I wanted to watch the episode again). The mystery elements are just SO clever and deserves to be the focus like they is in the Suchet version even if it is a shame that the series mandate that all events take place pre-WWII omits an important theme of the change the war brought to society. A minor note: I hate that you felt the need to write "stand-in" over the image for "Gregory." No doubt this was done to quiet the whining from everyone who didn't get the running gag where you insert clips of favorite figures from pop culture in for book-only characters. I always thought it was amusing and needed no explanation, but as is so often the case, a vocal few can spoil the fun for everyone with their complaints.
Great video as always I'm glad you circled back to do a full video on this, I had wondered if it's mention in one of the round-up videos was all we were going to get Also, thank you for pointing us towards the Agatha Christie, She Watched podcast. I binged a whole bunch of their episodes after your last video but I (mostly) agree with your opinions more.
I've never seen the Margaret Rutherford adaptations- Aileen Atkins is my Miss Marple - but hearing the AC references so blatantly almost made me choke on my pistachios!
This is one of my favourite episodes of Suchet's Poirot, how on earth did I not know there was another version with Marple? Also I'd love to see you review the film of Crooked House with Glenn Close
@@MysteryMiles oh wow I just saw it pop up on my feed, I thought I must have not realised you already reviewed it and then I say "1 hour ago" 😅 great minds
I did find it odd that they changed the valuable painting from a Vermeer in the book to a Rembrandt in the Suchet version. Maybe Rembrandt paintings are more distinct?
I don't have any statistical evidence to back this up, but my personal theory is that, of the Dutch Masters, your average English-speaking audience is *perhaps* more familiar with the name Rembrandt than Vermeer. Both equally acclaimed and talented, but maybe one name is more instantly recognizable, like making the painting a Van Gogh over say a Klimt. Or maybe the showrunner just like Rembrandt's work more than Vermeer's? Who can say...
What's funny is a long-lost Vermeer would be a bigger deal than a Rembrandt. There are a lot more Rembrandts than Vermeers. But I think Rembrandt is a more recognizable name to someone who knows nothing about art. He's become a by-word FOR great artist, though usually in the negative, "He's no Rembrandt!" and the like.
It really isn't fair to compare the Margaret Rutherford "Miss Marple" movies with any others, since the Rutherford movies are very loosely based on the Christie novels if at all. While Margaret Rutherford is an accomplished actress, her movies, while extremely entertaining, are far from faithful representations of the books.
Fair or not, it's certainly entertaining. Plus a comparison like this introduces them to an audience who's probably never seen them, and it's very interesting how even the Rutherford version manages to stay more true to the book in slight instances than even the Suchet adaptation does.
Exactly but this guy has something against the Suchet series which is why he does ‘reviews’ like this and unfairly gives the victory to MR in the last one but I’m glad he had enough sense in this review.
@@suzie_lovescats I really don't think he has a vendetta against the Suchet series, and arguing he does makes you sound like a humorless fanboy. He has no doubt taken umbrage with elements of certain episodes, but just as often, he's praised the series and Suchet himself for its fidelity and production values. Overall, I'd say he's very fair with his analysis and while I may occasionally disagree with some of his conclusions, I'd argue he makes an effort to explain his reasoning for disliking some of the adaptations in an understandable and meaningful way. Lastly, his reviews are for purely for entertainment; they're not a formal criticism like the type you'd find in a periodical like the New York Times. He's allowed to be humorous, flippant, and capricious. These are his opinions, they don't change anything, and he's not beholden to some scholarly standard. Despite that, I'd say he still displays that level of gravitas roughly 70% of the time.
@@UnownshipperI never said he’s not allowed an opinion, but I’m also allowed to have an opinion about him. Yes he doesn’t have a vendetta against the Suchet series but he still comes across as biased to me but only sometimes.
I love most of the episodes of Poirot, but I did not like this one. I actually loved the one with Margaret Rutherford and found it a lot more fun to watch. The one with Suchet was almost unwatchable for me. I frequently watch Poirot episodes over and over, I'm re-watching "Murder on the Orient Express" right now, but "After the Funeral" is not one I re-watch. Once was enough for me!
