Showing posts with label hugh fraser. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hugh fraser. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 29, 2025

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

 Shutterstock_1746492a.jpg
























"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.





Sunday, October 6, 2024

"THE A.B.C. MURDERS" (1992) Photo Gallery

 


Below are images from "THE A.B.C. MURDERS", the 1992 adaptation of Agatha Christie's 1936 novel. The television movie starred David Suchet as Hercule Poirot:




"THE A.B.C. MURDERS" (1992) Photo Gallery















































































Wednesday, January 20, 2021

"THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK" (1977) Review

 




"THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK" (1977) Review

I have seen my share of movie and television productions that are based on novels and plays by Alexandre Dumas père and his son Alexandre Dumas fils And for some reason, I never get tired of watching them - over and over again. And one of them is the 1977 television movie, "THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK".

Directed by Mike Newell and adapted by William Bast, "THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK" is loosely based on Alexandre Dumas père's 1847-50 novel, "The Vicomte of Bragelonne: Ten Years Later". The novel was the third and last of the author's "The d'Artagnan Romances" literary trilogy, following "The Three Musketeers" and "Twenty Years After". The movie begins with Philippe Bourbon being snatched by a group of mysterious men from his small French estate and imprisoned at the Bastille. It turns out that the men behind this kidnapping is King Louis XIV's finance minister, Jean-Baptiste Colbert and the head of the Musketeers, D'Artagnan.

Aware that Philippe is the twin brother of the king (and the rightful monarch of France), the pair plan to conduct a bloodless coup to eventually switch Philippe with the corrupt and malicious Louis. However, their plans are stymied when the Chevalier Duval, an aide of the also corrupt Superintendent of Finances Nicolas Fouquet, stumbles across Philippe. Fouquet, via instructions from Louis, orders Duval to take Philippe from the Bastille and install him in another prison on the coast. Fortunately for Colbert and D'Artagnan, they learn of Philippe's fate from Louis' reluctant and disenchanted mistress Louise de La Vallière and plot to rescue the royal twin and continue with their plot to replace him with Louis.

When I saw "THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK" for the first time, I thought it was perfect. Flawless. And it became one of my favorite Alexandre Dumas adaptations and television movies for years. After my recent viewing of the television movie, I now realize that it is not perfect. I feel that screenwriter William Bast had changed one aspect of Dumas' novel, "The Vicomte of Bragelonne: Ten Years Later", that had an impact on the 1977 movie's narrative. The novel had portrayed Louis as the older twin and rightful king of France. For some reason, Bast had made Philippe the oldest twin. Why? I have no idea. To justify Philippe's theft of the French throne? Unfortunately, this narrative change left me wondering why Philippe, as the "older twin" was not allowed to be his father's heir and later, successor. In one scene, Colbert explained that former French minister and lover of the twins' mother Queen Anne, Cardinal Mazarin, had Philippe taken away following the latter's birth, in order to manipulate then King Louis XIII. This explanation struck me as lame and confusing. And Bast should have never changed this aspect of Dumas' plot.

Many moviegoers have become increasingly critical of any production that have not closely adhere to its literary source over the years. I have no idea how many of them felt about this 1977 television movie. But I have a pretty good idea how I feel about it. Although I found the major change mentioned in the above paragraph troubling, I had no problems with many of other Bast's changes. I have read Dumas' novel. It was interesting . . . to say the least. I have no problems reading or watching a story with a downbeat ending if it suits the narrative or if I am in the mood to embrace it. I have never been in the mood to embrace Dumas' 1847-50 novel. Which would probably explain why I enjoyed the changes in this adaptation a lot. But wait . . . extreme changes had been made in other adaptations of "The Vicomte de Bragelonne". What was it about this particular adaptation that I enjoyed? I found it better written than the other adaptations.

For me, "THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK" was a tight and well-written story that did not drag or rush the movie's narrative. Which is more than I can say for Dumas' story. Most Dumas' adaptations tend to be part-dramas/part-swashbucklers. "THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK" - at least this version - seemed to be eighty-five percent drama and fifteen percent action. In fact, the only real action sequence in this production turned out to be D'Artagnan's rescue of Philippe from the coastal prison. And if I must be honest, I thought Mike Newell's direction, Freddie Young's cinematography and Bill Blunden's editing made that sequence a tense, yet exciting affair.

However, the meat of "THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK" centered around its dramatic scenes. Thanks to Newell's direction, Bast's screenplay and a talented cast, the television movie featured some very memorable scenes. Among my favorites are Philippe's discovery that he is the King of France's twin brother, Louis' malicious reaction to his failure to impress Louise de La Vallière, a tense conversation between Philippe and Queen Marie-Therese, and the last verbal duel between Colbert and Fouquet. If I had to select my absolute favorite scene, it had to be the one that featured Louis' "Sun King" ballet, Louise's failure to be impressed and Louis' malicious act of using the Queen as a scapegoat for his embarrassment.

As I had earlier stated, the dramatic scenes in "THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK" would have never been fully satisfying to me without its top notch cast. Yes, there were solid performances from the likes of Denis Lawson, Hugh Fraser and Brenda Bruce. But I found myself impressed by other members of the cast. They include Vivien Merchant, who did an excellent job in conveying Queen Marie-Therese's mixed emotions toward her emotionally abusive spouse - whether it was desire, resentment or a combination of both. Ian Holm was excellent as Minister Fouchet's aide, the Chevalier Duval, who seemed to be brimming with cunning intelligence and stealth. I would never associate Louis Jordan portraying a swashbuckling figure. But I must admit that he made an excellent man-of-action in his portrayal of the experienced, competent and quick-thinking D'Artagnan.

Jenny Agutter gave a sublime and passionate performance as Louise de La Vallière, Louis' reluctant mistress who ended up falling in love with the latter's twin. Ralph Richardson's portrayal of France's finance minister Jean-Baptiste Colbert struck me as one of the more entertaining performances in the production. I found Richardson's Colbert cunning, intelligent, patient and more importantly - at least to me - witty. I have seen Patrick McGoohan in several heroic and villainous roles. But I must admit that his Nicolas Fouquet struck me as one of the most subtlety portrayed villains I have ever seen on screen. McGoohan's Fouquet could put Sheev Palpatine from the STAR WARS saga when it comes to subtle villainy. And I like subtle villains. I find them more dangerous.

If I had to give an award for the best performance in "THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK", I would give it to its leading man, Richard Chamberlain. Mind you, Chamberlain had to portray two characters - the decent, yet slightly hot-headed Philippe Bourbon; and the vain and egotistic King Louis XIV. Mind you, I thought Chamberlain did an excellent job of conveying Philippe's sense of confusion, anger and passion. But the actor's portrayal of Louis literally knocked my socks off. Chamberlain's performance was not over-the-top. He did a subtle job of conveying Louis' villainy. And yet, he managed to inject a great deal of - how can I put it - joie de vivre quality in his performance that I found truly entertaining. There was no doubt that Chamberlain's Louis was a villain. But his Louis proved to be one of the most entertaining villains I have seen on screen.

I realize that I have yet to discuss the television movie's production values. We are talking about the 1970s. Although I can recall a good number of television miniseries with first-rate production values, I cannot say the same about several period television productions from both sides of the Atlantic. And "THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK" is a television movie with a 100 minutes running time. However, I thought its production values were first-rate. Despite being a made-for-TV movie, "THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK" was shot on several locations in both France and Great Britain. Thankfully, Freddie Young's photography did an excellent job in enhancing those locations. John Stoll took advantage of those locations and skillfully re-created France and Louis XIV's court of the late 1660s or early 1670s. I am not an expert of 17th century fashion - in France or anywhere else. I have no idea whether Olga Lehmann's costume designs or Betty Glasow's hairstyle are historically accurate. But I cannot deny that I found the hairstyles satisfying and Lehman's costumes beautiful, as shown below:

 

In the end, I am happy to state that "THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK" remains one of my all time favorite adaptations of an Alexandre Dumas père novel. Despite my quibble of one of William Bast's changes in Dumas' story, I feel more than satisfied with his other changes and thought he had presented a first-rate story. And my satisfaction also extends to Mike Newell's top-notch direction and the excellent performances from a cast led by the always superb Richard Chamberlain.




R.I.P. Sir Ian Holm (1931-2020)

Tuesday, September 29, 2020

"THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK" (1977) Photo Gallery

 


Below are images from "THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK", the 1977 television adaptation of Alexandre Dumas père's 1847-1850 serialized novel, "The Vicomte of Bragelonne: Ten Years Later". Directed by Mike Newell, the movie starred Richard Chamberlain:



"THE MAN IN THE IRON MASK" (1977) Photo Gallery