E-mail
Print
Trains, murder mysteries and Hercule Poirot
Lumet adaptation of Christie novel spot on
By Melissa Campbell
Christie wrote “Murder on the Orient Express” in 1934 but withheld the rights for a filmic adaptation for many years because she feared that censors would not allow the book’s original and quite unconventional ending. She made the right choice
Agatha Christie’s novels have been prime material for film and TV adaptations and interpretations. Her novel “And Then There Were None” has been remade a dozen or so times, her famous sleuth Hercule Poirot is the star of his own British TV series entitled Poirot.
Her other famous character, Miss Marple, was the inspiration for the Angela Lansbury show “Murder, She Wrote.” But no adaptation is quite as successful or compelling as Sidney Lumet’s 1974 film “Murder on the Orient Express.”
The story is set on the famous Orient Express train. Detective Hercule Poirot is taking the train from Istanbul to Prague. While caught in a snow drift in the Balkans, one of the 13 passengers, Mr. Ratchett, is murdered in his sleep, poisoned and stabbed 12 times. As Poirot attempts to discover which of his fellow travel companions is the killer, he discovers that nothing is as it seems.
What transpires is a web of lies, secrecy, and surprise as only Christie can provide. The result is something no one could have expected, yet seems completely plausible and satisfying.
Through the editing, the snowdrift that has stalled the train and given Poirot time to investigate becomes an hourglass of sorts. Lumet cuts between the events onboard, and the slow process of digging the train out of the snow. As the snow is cleared, Poirot has less and less time to find the killer.
Five years earlier, a baby named Daisy Armstrong was abducted and killed in a brutal kidnapping, which led to the suicides of Mr. Armstrong and the Armstrong’s nanny, and contributed to the death of Mrs. Armstrong.
It is discovered, after his death, that Ratchett’s true identity is Cassetti, one of the higher-ups in the kidnapping. Poirot discovers that each of the 12 remaining passengers has a connection to the Armstrong, and thus an equal motive to kill Cassetti.
The film introduces us to the Armstrong kidnapping as a sort of prologue, shot with heavy optical effects. The event alternates between reenactments, black and white photographs, and newspaper clippings.
It is scored, yet there is no diagetic sound (sound connected to the action in the film). The shooting and editing styles separate it from the rest of the film and give it an eerie memory or dream-like feel.
We then flash forward to our players as they board the Orient Express. The film boasts an impressive cast that includes Albert Finney (“Big Fish”) as Poirot, Lauren Bacall (“The Big Sleep”), Ingrid Bergman (“Casablanca”), Anthony Perkins (“Psycho”), Sean Connery (“James Bond” series), and Michael York (“Austin Powers” series).
Finney is outstanding as Poirot, the particular Belgian with a penchant for finer things. Poirot is reserved and proper, yet more of a chameleon. He is very clever at reading people, and finding the proper way to approach each person to get the information that he needs.
Finney shows us the extreme of Poirot’s personality, from the banal in some of his more cooperative interviews to the outraged as he is increasingly fed evasion and lies. He gives the character a vitality and complexity that interprets and plays homage to one of Christie’s most beloved characters.
The film’s cinematography is also worth mentioning. It earned photographer Geoffrey Unsworth (“Superman”) an Oscar nod, and for good reason. Unsworth employs many unorthodox angles, including wide-angle close-ups.
He also captures some beautiful landscape shots as the train travels through Eastern Europe, eventually getting caught in a pristine white landscape. His photography of the film’s murder scene near the conclusion is stunning, with the use of a single long shot and beautiful yet haunting blue lighting.
Christie published “Murder on the Orient Express” in 1934, but withheld the rights for a filmic adaptation for many years because she feared that censors would not allow the book’s original and quite unconventional ending. She made the right choice.
The combination of Lumet (“Network”) and screenwriter Paul Dehn (“Goldfinger”) is faithful to the novel, yet still brings an innovative approach through the use of camera and editing (most notably in the film’s prologue). The result is a tightly-woven, well-paced murder mystery that is worthy of being associated with the godmother of murder mysteries.
> Comments