you can't really change a conclusion like that. It is the backbone of the entire story.
they did add an interesting character arc with Peirot though, or maybe it was just more in your face in this version.
It was good, but didn't spend enough time on each character (waste of the talent on screen). I haven't read the book, but did see the 74 version on amazon. The 74 version did a much better job of establishing the kidnapping and creating more tension with each interrogation, plus utilizing their bomb ass cast (sean connery, anthony perkins, bergmnann, finney, I am young but have seen a lot of older films to actually be excited watching them all do their thing).
This one sped through three of the interrogations by combining them all in quick cuts, had two lame minor action sequences for those w/ ADD, and added a lost love for peirot to kill any tension built, so he could look at a picture and sulk.
branagh does hog the screen and tries a sequel set up, but I do think he and his mustache did a great job. Good, but I agree with many that it should've been better and doesn't hold up to the 70 s version.
I guess the movie is really aimed at those who aren't as familiar with the story as those who have read it. I know it's not a good way to go as far as keeping the mystery element for people who know the story already but it's also a classic and most people never like when you mess around with those.
I'm trying to go for an engaging, funny youtube channel so, if you have the time, take a look. Hope you enjoy what you see. Thanks in advance. A review of the movie here- https://youtu.be/j4EHR1Ibmqk
you can't really change a conclusion like that. It is the backbone of the entire story.
they did add an interesting character arc with Peirot though, or maybe it was just more in your face in this version.
It was good, but didn't spend enough time on each character (waste of the talent on screen). I haven't read the book, but did see the 74 version on amazon. The 74 version did a much better job of establishing the kidnapping and creating more tension with each interrogation, plus utilizing their bomb ass cast (sean connery, anthony perkins, bergmnann, finney, I am young but have seen a lot of older films to actually be excited watching them all do their thing).
This one sped through three of the interrogations by combining them all in quick cuts, had two lame minor action sequences for those w/ ADD, and added a lost love for peirot to kill any tension built, so he could look at a picture and sulk.
branagh does hog the screen and tries a sequel set up, but I do think he and his mustache did a great job. Good, but I agree with many that it should've been better and doesn't hold up to the 70 s version.
Obviously yes. This is fiction, they can do whatever they want. If not then what's the point of making everything equal again?
Because if you're adapting an existing source and changing everything, you might as well save yourself some money on the rights. With something like a Christie adaptation in particular, to change "whodunnit" would involve changing so much earlier in the film that it would no longer be an adaptation of the book.
Do the people who feel that there's no point to a remake if they keep the story intact also avoid non-revisionist versions of mythological stories, fairy tales and classic plays?
OMG! Can you believe they kept the SAME ending to Romeo & Juliet? It's SOOOOO depressing! They should've changed it so it had a happy ending!
رد بواسطة Philippe LeMarchand
بتاريخ نوفمبر 10, 2017 في 6:07 صباحا
In terms of "whodunnit" and their fate, no changes. Obviously there are other changes from previous versions and the book.
رد بواسطة HarrySkywalker
بتاريخ نوفمبر 10, 2017 في 6:37 مساءا
That's a shame. That makes the all movie redundant. Why not trying to change everything?
رد بواسطة Philippe LeMarchand
بتاريخ نوفمبر 10, 2017 في 6:42 مساءا
Because you're damed if you do, damned if you don't. People are already complaining about Poirot's moustache not matching the books!
رد بواسطة Rtodd110
بتاريخ نوفمبر 11, 2017 في 2:24 صباحا
you can't really change a conclusion like that. It is the backbone of the entire story.
they did add an interesting character arc with Peirot though, or maybe it was just more in your face in this version.
It was good, but didn't spend enough time on each character (waste of the talent on screen). I haven't read the book, but did see the 74 version on amazon. The 74 version did a much better job of establishing the kidnapping and creating more tension with each interrogation, plus utilizing their bomb ass cast (sean connery, anthony perkins, bergmnann, finney, I am young but have seen a lot of older films to actually be excited watching them all do their thing).
This one sped through three of the interrogations by combining them all in quick cuts, had two lame minor action sequences for those w/ ADD, and added a lost love for peirot to kill any tension built, so he could look at a picture and sulk.
branagh does hog the screen and tries a sequel set up, but I do think he and his mustache did a great job. Good, but I agree with many that it should've been better and doesn't hold up to the 70 s version.
رد بواسطة CraigJamesReview
بتاريخ نوفمبر 12, 2017 في 3:40 مساءا
I guess the movie is really aimed at those who aren't as familiar with the story as those who have read it. I know it's not a good way to go as far as keeping the mystery element for people who know the story already but it's also a classic and most people never like when you mess around with those.
I'm trying to go for an engaging, funny youtube channel so, if you have the time, take a look. Hope you enjoy what you see. Thanks in advance. A review of the movie here- https://youtu.be/j4EHR1Ibmqk
رد بواسطة HarrySkywalker
بتاريخ نوفمبر 16, 2017 في 11:40 صباحا
But what's awesome is the mystery. If I already know everything then it becomes redundant.
رد بواسطة HarrySkywalker
بتاريخ نوفمبر 16, 2017 في 11:41 صباحا
They could have changed the story.
رد بواسطة Philippe LeMarchand
بتاريخ نوفمبر 16, 2017 في 1:29 مساءا
I disagree; it's in the telling of the tale.
رد بواسطة HarrySkywalker
بتاريخ نوفمبر 17, 2017 في 9:16 مساءا
I disagree because the ending has always been one of the main highlights of the Poirot series.
رد بواسطة Philippe LeMarchand
بتاريخ نوفمبر 18, 2017 في 1:25 مساءا
So you want them to change what you say is the highlight?
رد بواسطة HarrySkywalker
بتاريخ نوفمبر 22, 2017 في 12:25 صباحا
Obviously yes. This is fiction, they can do whatever they want. If not then what's the point of making everything equal again?
رد بواسطة Philippe LeMarchand
بتاريخ نوفمبر 22, 2017 في 5:39 صباحا
Because if you're adapting an existing source and changing everything, you might as well save yourself some money on the rights. With something like a Christie adaptation in particular, to change "whodunnit" would involve changing so much earlier in the film that it would no longer be an adaptation of the book.
رد بواسطة Mirabel
بتاريخ نوفمبر 26, 2017 في 5:59 مساءا
I was terribly disappointed. I had heard that the conclusion had been changed, but it wasn't.
I might as well have saved my money and watched the original again! It was exactly the same!
رد بواسطة Philippe LeMarchand
بتاريخ نوفمبر 27, 2017 في 5:19 صباحا
Do the people who feel that there's no point to a remake if they keep the story intact also avoid non-revisionist versions of mythological stories, fairy tales and classic plays?
OMG! Can you believe they kept the SAME ending to Romeo & Juliet? It's SOOOOO depressing! They should've changed it so it had a happy ending!
Pfft! The Beast should've eaten Belle!
etc etc etc
رد بواسطة Mirabel
بتاريخ نوفمبر 27, 2017 في 12:25 مساءا
Different versions usually have some major changes. Romeo & Juliet can use different time frames, costumes, etc.
But when a story is exactly the same, with no major alterations or even character development, then I feel it is a rip-off. Others may not agree.