In terms of "whodunnit" and their fate, no changes. Obviously there are other changes from previous versions and the book.

That's a shame. That makes the all movie redundant. Why not trying to change everything?

@Harry Skywalker said:

That's a shame. That makes the all movie redundant. Why not trying to change everything?

Because you're damed if you do, damned if you don't. People are already complaining about Poirot's moustache not matching the books!

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

@M. LeMarchand said:

@Harry Skywalker said:

That's a shame. That makes the all movie redundant. Why not trying to change everything?

Because you're damed if you do, damned if you don't. People are already complaining about Poirot's moustache not matching the books!

But what's awesome is the mystery. If I already know everything then it becomes redundant.

@Rtodd110 said:

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.

They could have changed the story.

@Harry Skywalker said:

But what's awesome is the mystery. If I already know everything then it becomes redundant.

I disagree; it's in the telling of the tale.

@M. LeMarchand said:

@Harry Skywalker said:

But what's awesome is the mystery. If I already know everything then it becomes redundant.

I disagree; it's in the telling of the tale.

I disagree because the ending has always been one of the main highlights of the Poirot series.

@Harry Skywalker said:

I disagree because the ending has always been one of the main highlights of the Poirot series.

So you want them to change what you say is the highlight?

@M. LeMarchand said:

@Harry Skywalker said:

I disagree because the ending has always been one of the main highlights of the Poirot series.

So you want them to change what you say is the highlight?

Obviously yes. This is fiction, they can do whatever they want. If not then what's the point of making everything equal again?

@Harry Skywalker said:

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.

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!

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

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.