"THE A.B.C. MURDERS" (1992) Review

 

"THE A.B.C. MURDERS" (1992) Review

As I had pointed out in my review of the 2018 adaptation of "THE A.B.C. MURDERS", Agatha Christie's 1936 novel, I have been a fan of the latter for years. And as I have also pointed out, there have been at least four adaptations. In this review, I have decided to focus on the 1992 television adaptation from the "AGATHA CHRISTIE'S POIROT" series.

Starring David Suchet as the Belgian-born detective, Hercule Poirot, "THE A.B.C. MURDERS" begin with Poirot welcoming his old friend Captain Arthur Hastings, who has traveled from his Argentina ranch for a visit to Britain. Poirot reveals a letter he had recently received from a possible serial killer named "A.B.C.", who declares his or her intention to murder a citizen of Andover, whose name starts with an "A". Following the death of one Alice Ascher in Andover, Chief Inspector Japp and Scotland Yard becomes involved when Poirot receives a second letter from the killer, who needles the detective with his/her intent to kill a second victim in a seaside town called Bexhill-on-the-Sea. After the murderer kills a third victim, an elderly millionaire from Churston; Poirot recruits the victims' relations and loved ones to assist him and Hastings in the hunt for the killer. And unbeknownst to Poirot and the police, a non-descript, middle-aged stockings salesman named Alexander Bonaparte Cust found himself present at the locations of each victim.

As much as I liked the 2018 adaptation of Christie's 1936 novel, I must admit that I prefer this version over it. Unlike the former, this television movie managed to adhere a lot closer to Christie's novel. Unlike many, I would not consider the latter as a requisite for a good adaptation. I can think of a few first-rate Christie adaptations that were not that faithful to the original source. But in the case of "THE A.B.C. MURDERS", I believe Clive Exton was wise to be as faithful as possible to Christie's 1936 novel. Why? I believe it is one of her best creations and it is a personal favorite of mine. It seemed very rare for mystery writers - especially those like Christie - to create a story about a possible serial killer. The only other time I can recall Christie creating something similar was her 1939 novel, "AND THEN THERE WERE NONE". Another aspect of this story that I enjoyed was the sense of urgency in Poirot and the police's hunt for "ABC" after the second murder had been committed. This was especially apparent in Exton and director Andrew Grieve's use of fast-paced moments of newspaper headlines, newsreel narrations and close-up shots of A.B.C. railway guides. And thanks to Grieves' direction, along with performances by David Suchet and Donald Sumpter, the television movie included an excellent scene that featured Poirot's interview with the arrested Cust.

Although "THE A.B.C. MURDERS" is a favorite of mine, it is not perfect. Once again, the series brought in Scotland Yard's Chief Inspector Japp to serve as the main police investigator in this story. I have always enjoyed Poirot and Hastings' interactions with Japp, but I do get weary of the series using Japp as the main police investigator in nearly every episode or television movie. Especially since none of the murders in this story were committed within Scotland Yard's jurisdiction. Arthur Hastings appeared in the form of two problems for me. One, I was not a fan of the running joke involving the dead Amazon Cayman that Hastings had shot and brought with him from South America. I did not find it funny or amusing. And two - as much as I have enjoyed Hugh Fraser's performances as Hastings over the years, I found Exeter's portrayal of him as this idiot rather excessive. Although I consider this adaptation superior to the 2018 miniseries, I must admit that the latter seemed to more style and punch in its production. This movie's first half had style. But after the fourth victim, I had to struggle to stay awake, due to the second half's more plodding style . . . at least until Poirot's revelation of the killer. I have a complaint about the casting, but I will bring it up later. But I do have one last complaint. The movie featured one of those scenes in which involved the police chasing the murderer after Poirot exposes the latter. God, I hate them. The "AGATHA CHRISTIE'S MISS MARPLE" with Joan Hickson was the first to utilize this trope. And unfortunately, "AGATHA CHRISTIE'S POIROT" continued it every now and then.

The performances in "THE A.B.C. MURDERS" struck me as first-rate. David Suchet gave his usual fine performance as the Belgian-born private detective, Hercule Poirot. As stated earlier, I was especially impressed by his performance in a scene in which Poirot interviews the major suspect. Although I had an issue of how Captain Arthur Hastings was written for this TV movie, I cannot deny that actor Hugh Fraser gave his usual excellent performance as Poirot's companion and best friend. Philip Jackson was excellent as usual as the tart-tongued Chief Inspector Japp. There were two other performances that stood out for me. One came from Pippa Guard, who gave an excellent performance as Megan Barnard, the blunt and tart-tongued sister of the second victim, Betty Barnard. But the one stand-out performance came from Donald Sumpter, who portrayed the stocking salesman, Alexander Bonaparte Cust. Sumpter did a superb job in making such a non-descript personality so interesting and slightly creepy. The rest of the cast provided first-rate support - including Nicholas Farrell, Cathryn Bradshaw, Nina Marc, David McAlister, Ann Windsor, Peter Penry-Jones, Vivienne Burgess and Donald Douglas. Speaking of the latter - he had been cast as Franklin Clarke, the younger brother of the killer's third victim, Sir Carmichael Clarke. I have been aware of Douglas ever since I was a kid and have always regarded him as a first-rate actor. But I believe he had been miscast as Franklin Clarke, who had been described as a handsome, charming and charismatic man in his early-to-mid 40s. Although attractive, Douglas had been in his late 50s when he portrayed Franklin. Also, he seemed to come across more like some hale and hearty Englishman than what Christie had described the character in her novel.

I have no problems with the television movie's production values. In all honestly, I would rate the movie's production as solid. There was nothing mind boggling about it. Rob Harris' re-creation of London and other parts of Great Britain struck me as solid. Only his discovery of the De La Warr Pavilion in Essex struck me as a godsend. I found Christopher Gunning's score solid, but not memorable, along with Peter Wenham's art direction. However, I must admit that Carlotta Barrow's set decorations; especially in scenes that featured Alice Ascher's store, the De La Warr Pavilion, Cust's apartment and various hotel rooms, and Poirot's own apartment; struck me as above par and worthy of notice. But I have to give kudos to Barbara Kronig, whom I believe did a superb job of re-creating the 1936 fashions for characters from various backgrounds and personalities.

Anyone with common sense would know or realize there is no such thing as a perfect movie or television production. This certainly applies to "THE A.B.C. MURDERS", the 1992 television adaptation to Agatha Christie's1936 novel. The pacing for the movie's second half had threatened to bog down during a small period of time. The joke surrounding Arthur Hastings' dead cayman had become tiresome and never-ending. And I believe one of the characters had been miscast. However, these flaws seemed trifling in compared to the movie's virtues. The cast led by David Suchet struck me as first-rate. Most of the television movie possessed an energy and style, thanks to Andrew Grieve's direction. And screenwriter Clive Exton had written a first-rate adaptation. I believe he did this after recognizing the excellent quality of the source material. "THE A.B.C. MURDERS" is one Agatha Christie adaptation I will continue to enjoy for years to come.

This article really disgusted me. I never thought this blog would be so careless in writing and posting an article on something as important as this fire.

Just to let you know, TWO major fire departments in the Southern California area were fighting those fires - the Los Angeles CITY Fire Department and the Los Angeles COUNTY Fire Department - before they were joined by other fire departments from around the country and other parts of the world. Are you blaming Bass for the destructive fires for Altadena and Malibu? Because both are under the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles County, not the City of Los Angeles. Are you blaming the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors for the destructive fires in Malibu and Altadena? Apparently not.

There was no water shortage. The firefighters in the Pacific Palisades were having water pressure issues with the local hydrants, because so many of them were using the latter due to the size and speed of the fires. Southern California was dealing with the Santa Ana winds in January and they usually appeared in the late summer and fall. The region is still dealing with a drought that had not seen any rain for a long period of time. Which is why those fires were unusual. Also, despite the $17 million dollars (that were supposed to be used by the Department for Human Resources and publicity) cut, the Los Angeles City Fire Department ended up receiving a four percent increase in its budget - a great deal of that money being utilized for firefighting services. I found this out from "The Los Angeles Times". And this makes me wonder why Fire Chief Kristin Crowley had complained about the budget in the first place.

I'm really disappointed in Ms. Landwehr's article. I'm disappointed that she had obviously failed to do her homework and instead utilized SKY NEWS (a British right-wing publication owned by Rupert Murdoch with a history of questionable reporting) as the main source for her article. And I'm disappointed that this blog would allow Ms. Landweher's article to be posted in the first place.

"G.I. JOE: RETALIATION" (2013) Photo Gallery

 

Below are images from "G.I. JOE: RETALIATION", the sequel to the 2009 movie, "G.I. JOE: THE RISE OF COBRA". Directed by Jon M. Chu, the movie stars Dwayne Johnson, Byung-Hun Lee, Adrianne Palicki, Ray Park, and D.J. Controna:

 



"G.I. JOE: RETALIATION" (2013) Photo Gallery

"Hoppin' John"

 

"HOPPIN' JOHN"

Popular in the Southeastern region of the United States, Hoppin' John is a peas and rice dish that has been popular holiday dish for generations. In fact, this dish has traditionally been served in the U.S. South on New Year's Day. Many believe serving Hoppin' John on this particular holiday will bring prosperity and luck for the year.

The peas - whether they are cowpeas, black-eyed peas, Sea Island red peas, and iron and clay peas - are symbolizes pennies or coins. Diners will sometimes add an actual coin to the pot or leave under the dinner plates. Ingredients such as chopped onion, and sliced bacon seasoned with salt are usually cooked with the dish. Some recipes use ham hock, fatback, country sausage, or smoked turkey parts instead of bacon. A few recipes also include green peppers or vinegar and spices.
Cooks usually serve Collard greens, Mustard greens, Turnip greens, chard, kale, cabbage or similar leafy green vegetables with Hoppin' John to further add to the wealth, since they are the color of American currency. Cornbread is usually served with Hoppin' John to also symbolize wealth, since it possesses the color of gold.

Hoppin' John was first mentioned in Caroline Howard Gilman's 1837 book titled "Recollections of a Southern Matron". The author referred to the dish as "bacon and rice". Sarah Rutledge's 1847 cookbook, "The Carolina Housewife" included a recipe for Hoppin' John. And "The Oxford English Dictionary"'s first reference to the dish came from Frederick Law Olmsted's 19th century travelogue, "A Journey in the Seaboard Slave States", first published in 1861.

However, it is believed the Gullah people first created Hoppin' John in the low county areas of North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia; as a one-pot dish during the Colonial era. On Sapelo Island, Georgia; Geechee red peas are used instead of black-eyed peas in the community of Hog Hammock. Residents of the Sea Islands off of coastal South Carolina, use something similar - Sea Island red peas. The Gullah's West African ancestors brought rice and bean dishes to the New World, as enslaved people. Among the West African dishes that Hoppin' John may have evolved from was the the Senegalese dish, Thiebou Niebe.

Below is a recipe for Hoppin' John from the Soul Food Pot website:


"Hoppin' John"

Ingredients (Hoppin' John):
*1 pound of dried black-eyed peas
*6 cups of chicken stock (use vegetable stock for vegans & vegetarians)
*1 cup of diced red onion
*2 cloves of minced garlic
*1 bay leaf
*1 teaspoon of smoked paprika
*¼ teaspoon of red pepper flakes
*½ a teaspoon of dried thyme
*2 teaspoons of chicken bouillon (vegans & vegetarians use a Creole seasoning)
*1 ½ teaspoon of salt
*1 teaspoon of black pepper
*1 cup of collard greens, finely chopped, fresh, or pre-cooked
*¼ cup of green onion, chopped to garnish (optional)

Ingredients (Rice):
*2 cups of white rice
*2 cups of chicken broth
*1 teaspoon of salt
*¼ teaspoon of black pepper


Preparations (Hoppin' John):

1. Open the Instant Pot lid and pour the chicken stock into the stainless-steel inner pot.
2. Add the black-eyed peas, onion, garlic, bay leaf, paprika, red pepper flakes, thyme, chicken bouillon, salt, pepper, and collards.
3. Stir the ingredients to combine.
4. Make sure the beans are soaking and covered in the liquid broth.
5. Close the Instant Pot lid (make sure the valve is up – in the position for sealing) and pressure cook on high for 15 minutes.
6. When the cooking time is finished, allow a natural pressure release for at least 10 minutes.
7. To open the Instant Pot lid, move the valve to ‘venting’ and manually release any remaining pressure, if applicable.
8. Remove the bay leaf, transfer the black-eyed peas to an air-tight container, and set them aside. Or if you’re extra (like me!) and have more than one Instant Pot, keep the black-eyed peas in the Instant Pot on the 'keep warm' setting.
9. The next step is to wash out the inner pot or use a second Instant Pot to make the rice.

Preparations (Rice):
1. Add the rice, chicken broth, salt, and pepper to the Instant Pot stainless steel inner pot.
2. Stir to mix the ingredients and make sure the rice is covered in the liquid.
3. Close the Instant Pot lid (make sure the valve is in the sealing position – up) and pressure cook on high for 4 minutes.
4. When the cooking time is finished, allow a natural pressure release for at least 2 minutes.
5. To open the Instant Pot lid, move the valve to ‘venting’ and manually release any remaining pressure, if applicable.
6. Fluff the rice with a fork.


Preparations (Finish):
1. Use a large serving spoon to combine the set aside black-eyed peas with the cooked rice.
2. Mix well and then serve Black folks soul food Hoppin John right away.
3. Optionally, garnish with chopped green onion, serve, and enjoy!

Favorite Episodes of "HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER" Season Two (2006-2007)

 

Below is a list of my favorite episodes from Season Two of the CBS series, "HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER". The series was created by Carter Bays and Craig Thomas:



FAVORITE EPISODES OF "HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER" SEASON TWO (2006-2007)



1. (2.09) "Slap Bet" - Barney Stinson discovers Robin Scherbatsky's secret behind her aversion to malls. His discovery leads to the infamous slap bet between him and Marshall Eriksen.





2. (2.05) "The Greatest Couple" - Lily Aldrin moves into Barney's apartment, when he uses her to drive away needy dates.





3. (2.21) "Something Borrowed"/(2.22) "Something Blue" - Nothing goes as planned when Lily and Marshall's wedding day finally arrives. Also, Ted Mosby and Robin's relationship turns a corner.





4. (2.03) "Brunch" - When Ted and his friends spend a weekend with his parents, he discovers a family secret during brunch. Marshall and Lily, who are still apart, intentionally try to get each other sexually aroused.





5. (2.13) "Columns" - Ted cannot find an opportune time to fire his old boss; who now works for him, but still keeps undermining his work.

"LINCOLN" (1988) Review

 

"LINCOLN" (1988) Review

Can anyone recall the number of Abraham Lincoln biopics seen in movie theaters or on television? I certainly cannot. In fact, I do not know how many Lincoln biopics I have seen. Perhaps this is not surprising. Hollywood has created more productions (both movie and television) about the 16th President of the United States than any other who has occupied the White House. One of those productions was the 1988 two-part miniseries, "LINCOLN".

Based on Gore Vidal's 1984 novel, "Lincoln: A Novel", "LINCOLN" followed Abraham Lincoln's years in the White House, during the U.S. Civil War. Actually, both the novel and the miniseries began with President-elect Lincoln arrival in Washington D.C. in late February 1861, at least a week before his inauguration. Although the limited series covered his complete four years in office, the majority of the production only covered his first years in the nation's capital. During those years, Lincoln not only faced his struggles in conducting a civil war against those Southern states that had succeeded, but also his political enemies (from both parties) and the mental condition of his wife, First Lady Mary Todd Lincoln.

Without a doubt, I believe "LINCOLN" is one of the better Hollywood productions made about the 16th president. I would place it up there with Steven Spielberg's 2012 movie of the same title and the 1974-1976 limited series, which starred Hal Holbrook. In regard to the 1988 miniseries, director One aspect of this series that struck me as innovative was the cynical tone that seemed to surround Lincoln's portrayal and the miniseries' narrative. Past productions have touched on Lincoln's political oratory skills, sense of humor and ability to maintain a balanced control of the men who served on his cabinet, the country's military leadership and Congress. Yet, these productions also tried to portray the 16th president as some ideal statesman, in which compassion, wisdom and an alleged "lack of ambition" dominated his personality. Which explained why I always had trouble regarding Lincoln as an interesting character in these productions.

This did not seemed to be the case in both Gore Vidal's novel and the 1988 miniseries. I tried to recall any moment in which Ernest Kinoy's screenplay and Gore Vidal's novel had dipped into some kind of sentimental idealism toward Lincoln, his Administration and even his family. The closest to any kind of idealism I could find proved to be two scenes. One included a conversation in which the First Lady revealed her abolitionist views to the biracial modiste, Elizabeth Keckley. Another also featured Mrs. Lincoln's militant response to Confederate troops attacking Union installations on the outskirts of Washington D.C. Instead of the noble and ideal statesman forced to guide the country through a civil war and a social revolution, Vidal's Lincoln seemed to be an astute and at times, cynical man who seemed to be a bit possessive about his presidential power. Part One featured one marvelous scene in which Lincoln smartly nipped in the bud, his Secretary of State William Seward's attempt to transform him into a powerless head of state. And there were those moments in Part Two that featured Lincoln's clashes with the Army of the Potomac's commander, George McClellan.

Lincoln's pragmatic nature seemed to permeate his dealings regarding emancipation and with his family. Many are now aware of the president's initial support of the American Colonization Society, an organization formed to encourage free African-Americans to immigrate to and form colonies in West Africa. His support had continued during the early years of the Civil War and the miniseries featured this issue in an interesting and emotionally complex scene that involved Lincoln's White House meeting with a delegation of African-American leaders during the summer of 1862. What made this scene even more fascinating was Lincoln's disappointed response to the delegates' refusal to convince many Blacks as possible to resettle in Chiriquí province of Panama. Lincoln's interactions with his immediate family proved to be more emotional, especially with his wife and younger sons. Yet, even in some scenes with the First Lady, the President could be cool, sardonic and sometimes dismissive. I find it even more interesting that the next major production about the President - namely the 2012 Spielberg movie - seemed to have adopted some of the miniseries' ambiguous portrayal of him.

One of the major issues I have with "LINCOLN" is its production values. I found them to be a mixed affair. I certainly had no problems with R. Lynn Smartt's Emmy nominated set decorations. They struck me as a strong recreation of mid-19th century interior decor. However, William Wages had received an Emmy nomination for his cinematography. I must admit that I am at a bit of a loss at this nomination. I never found his photography particularly mind-blowing. Not even the photography featured in various montages featuring well-known Civil War battles. And I disliked his use of natural lighting in many night time shots - both interior and exterior. Both Joseph G. Aulisi and George L. Little had received Emmy nominations for the miniseries' costume designs. I believe both had deserved the nominations, namely for those beautiful costumes worn by the female characters. Aulisi and Little did excellent jobs in re-creating the fashions worn by high-ranking women during the early and mid-1860s. As for those costumes worn by male characters . . . I was not that impressed. The men's costumes looked as if they had arrived directly from a costume warehouse for second-rate stage productions.

I thought the casting director did a pretty decent job in finding the right actors and actresses for the roles. Mind you, I noticed that a good number of the cast bore little or no similarity to the historical characters they had portrayed. This seemed to be the case for the likes of Deborah Adair (Kate Chase), John McMartin (Salmon P. Chase), Richard Mulligan (William H. Seward), Ruby Dee (Elizabeth Keckley), James Gammon (Ulysses S. Grant), and especially Mary Tyler Moore (Mary Todd Lincoln). But . . . I cannot deny that all of them either gave solid or excellent performances. I was especially impressed by Adair, Mulligan and Moore. The miniseries also featured first-rate performances from the likes of Stephen Culp as one of Lincoln's secretaries, John Hay; Gregory Cooke as the Lincolns' oldest son Robert; Jeffrey DeMunn as William Herdon, Lincoln's former law partner; Robin Gammell as Stephen Douglas; Cleavon Little as Frederick Douglass; and John Houseman as Winfield Scott.

I had a problem with two particular performance. I had a problem with Thomas Gibson's portrayal of Kate Chase's future husband, William Sprague IV during Part One. I thought Gibson gave an exaggerated performance that was further marred by a questionable New England accent. And although Ruby Dee had received an Emmy nomination for her portrayal of Elizabeth Keckley, I could not find anything particularly outstanding about her performance. Do not get me wrong. I believe the actress gave a very solid performance as Keckley. But the miniseries gave Dee little opportunity to truly display her skills as an actress. Because of this, I found myself more impressed by Gloria Reuben's portrayal of the modiste in 2012's "LINCOLN".

Mary Tyler Moore had also received an Emmy nomination for her portrayal of First Lady Mary Todd Lincoln. And I can honestly say that she had more than deserved it. Moore did an excellent job of conveying the First Lady's volatile personality, sharp wit and political astuteness. And while I had a small issue with the transcript's portrayal of Mrs. Lincoln, a part of me wishes that Moore had won that Emmy. I was astounded that Sam Waterston did not receive an Emmy nomination for his portrayal of Abraham Lincoln. Astounded and disappointed. Perhaps the competition for the Emmy's Outstanding Lead Actor in a Limited Series category had been too heavy for Waterston to garner a nomination. You know what? I still believe the actor had deserved that nomination. I believe Waterston gave one of the best on-screen interpretations of the 16th president I have ever seen on film. And his portrayal of Lincoln had fortunately avoided the usual sentimental idealism that have dangerously come close to making Lincoln a one-note saint. Waterston's performance sharply reminded me of Lincoln's real skills as a politician.

Aside from two performances, I have few other issues with "LINCOLN". What film stock was this miniseries shot on? Because visually, it did not age very well. I already had a problem with Wages' use of natural lighting. But the miniseries looked as if it had aged a good deal over the past thirty-six years in compared to other television productions filmed during the same decade. Over the years I have learned to tolerate historical inaccuracies in dramas like "LINCOLN". But there were three inaccuracies that did not sit well with me. One of them featured black activist/abolitionist Frederick Douglass at the August 1862 White House meeting between Lincoln and five leading members of Washington's black community regarding colonization. One, Douglass did not live in Washington during the war years. And two, he was never at that meeting.

The other two inaccuracies involved former law clerk-turned-Union officer and close friend of the Lincolns, Elmer E. Ellsworth. Following his death at the hands of a Virginia tavern owner, the miniseries had the First Lady having an emotional fit during his funeral. I believe this scene was supposed to indicate Mrs. Lincoln's mental instability. The thing is . . . this never happened, especially since Ellsworth was closer to the President than the First Lady. And it was Lincoln who had emotional difficulty accepting the officer's death, not his wife. The miniseries also indicated that following Ellsworth funeral, Mrs. Lincoln had passed out and remained unconscious for three days, waking up during the outbreak of the First Battle of Bull Run. I have already pointed out that the First Lady had never been traumatized by Ellsworth's death. I would also like to point out that Ellsworth had been killed in May 1861. The First Battle of Bull Run had occurred on July 21, 1861. So, Mrs. Lincoln had remained unconscious . . . for two months? Seriously? One more thing, why did most of the miniseries' narrative occurred during the twelve months between February 1861 and February 1862? By the time the miniseries had moved beyond this time period, one-half of Part Two had played out. By the time the narrative had reached 1863, only 45 minutes had remained of the production. And the next two years were practically rushed. I believe this problem had stemmed from the 1984 novel, in which the majority of it had only covered those twelve months.

As I had just pointed out, "LINCOLN" was not a perfect production about the 16th president. The miniseries had its flaws. But I cannot deny that I believe it was one of the better ones ever produced by Hollywood. Based on Gore Vidal's novel, "LINCOLN" gave a deep and lively account of Abraham Lincoln's four years in the White House. And one can credit Ernest Kinoy's transcript, Lamont Johnson's Emmy winning direction and excellent performances from a cast led by Sam Waterston and Mary Tyler Moore.