19,788 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Nov 13, 2017 13:39:46 GMT
Very disappointed with this. Huge liberties taken with the plot and characterisation as I suspected from the trailer. Poirot fighting with a suspect? Preposterous! Poirot cooing over a photo of an ex girlfriend and asking her for inspiration? Would never happen!
Of course it has to bring something new to the table I totally get that but this is fundamental stuff. I also found the denouement to be clumsily directed, I don’t think it was all adequately explained.
Sidney Lumet’s star studded original with Albert Finney is better on every level, including that fabulous score.
|
|
19,788 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Nov 13, 2017 13:42:38 GMT
Oh and the cheeky reference at the end “I’ve come to take you to Egypt. There’s been a death”.
I suspect Mr Branagh hasn’t finished with this yet.
|
|
2,389 posts
|
Post by peggs on Nov 13, 2017 22:16:29 GMT
Very disappointed with this. Huge liberties taken with the plot and characterisation as I suspected from the trailer. Poirot fighting with a suspect? Preposterous! Poirot cooing over a photo of an ex girlfriend and asking her for inspiration? Would never happen! Poirot does what?! So not the 'usual' Poirot then? |
|
642 posts
|
Post by Stasia on Nov 16, 2017 7:36:43 GMT
Saw this a couple of days ago and loved it despite all the funny moments. As well as the Crooked House last week. And the best part of going to the cinema in Moscow is that I paid 5 pounds for both of these (2 for the Croocked House and 3 for the Orient Express) and saw them undubbed with all the accents gorgeousness.
Also: full house for the Express, it sells really well in Moscow!
|
|
3,578 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Nov 16, 2017 8:20:32 GMT
I agree with BurlyBeaR's comment re "Huge liberties taken with the plot and characterisation as I suspected from the trailer. Poirot fighting with a suspect? Preposterous! Pirot cooing over a photo of an ex girlfriend and asking her for inspiration? Would never happen." but conceding that KB had to make his own mark; he seems however to have left a blot as far as some of us are concerned! |
|
721 posts
|
Post by hulmeman on Nov 16, 2017 8:33:12 GMT
Oh and the cheeky reference at the end “I’ve come to take you to Egypt. There’s been a death”. I suspect Mr Branagh hasn’t finished with this yet. Which in itself is a liberty. Poirot is planning to be on the Karnak at the invitation of Linette Doyle. I shall leave this "franchise" alone, I've never been a fan of Kenneth "watch me act" Brannagh |
|
3,578 posts
|
Post by Rory on Nov 16, 2017 9:08:07 GMT
This a vanity project for Branagh. He topples the whole film with some very I'll advised 'updates'. It lacks subtlety and suspense. Michelle Pfeiffer the best thing in it but no-one shines.
|
|
3,578 posts
|
Post by Rory on Nov 16, 2017 9:08:45 GMT
*ill-advised.
Autocorrect!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2017 12:53:53 GMT
Michelle Pfeiffer the best thing in it but no-one shines. Ummmm. Ex- cuse me?  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2017 12:57:59 GMT
Ryan, he's very pretty, but you have to admit that shining has NEVER been his forte, in ANYTHING.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2017 13:09:22 GMT
Ryan, he's very pretty, but you have to admit that shining has NEVER been his forte, in ANYTHING.  |
|
3,578 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Nov 16, 2017 14:25:22 GMT
Who is that in Ryan's post, please, someone -anyone? Since Ryan himself has omitted to explain?
|
|
3,578 posts
|
Post by Rory on Nov 16, 2017 14:34:45 GMT
Michelle Pfeiffer the best thing in it but no-one shines. Ummmm. Ex- cuse me? Ha! I forgot about TB! To be fair, he's not bad in this at all @ryan! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2017 16:00:55 GMT
Who is that in Ryan's post, please, someone -anyone? Since Ryan himself has omitted to explain? What, this one? There's a teeny tiny clue at the top of the image there...  |
|
7,189 posts
|
Post by Jon on Nov 16, 2017 16:27:05 GMT
Think showgirl means the GIF of Jack from Will and Grace
|
|
3,578 posts
|
Post by showgirl on Nov 16, 2017 17:14:55 GMT
What, another mystery man called Tom? No wonder I can't keep up with them all!
|
|
|
|
Post by jaqs on Nov 16, 2017 22:44:42 GMT
Did anyone notice the blatant product placement for Godiva, that briefly took me out of the film. I sat there thinking why on earth would they have american chocolates when they could have Swiss (Or Belgian) for far longer than I should. |
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on Nov 17, 2017 23:14:00 GMT
Gosh - I thought this was dull, dull, dull.
Kenneth Branagh never shut up! His portrayal of Poirot was not his finest hour. I could not get over the moustache! The film was clearly very studio bound - like an old Hollywood movie circa 1948 - perhaps this was deliberate but we expect more realism from film now surely.
The film was VERY wordy but despite this the "plot" took some following. Perhaps me nodding off at various points perhaps did not help though to be fair!
Fine for Christmas Day afternoon telly after the roast!
If you haven't seen this film yet - don't bother!
|
|
2,702 posts
|
Post by viserys on Nov 18, 2017 5:58:41 GMT
I finally saw this yesterday and enjoyed it a lot. I didn't know the novel or the older movies, so had no clue what the plot was about. I mostly enjoyed the period setting, the clothes and all the familiar faces on screen. The somewhat sedate brainy movie also made a nice change from all the superhero nonsense and explosive CGI-fests that dominates the multiplex.
The Godiva thing stood out for me too as did the end - which I'm sure was meant to hint "sequel ahoy!" to the audience. Speaking of the audience, argh. The cinema has introduced numbered seating. So people don't spread out all over the joint anymore but are sitting closely together in the upper middle section. The stink of beer and nachos became overwhelming.
|
|
1,013 posts
|
Post by talkstageytome on Nov 19, 2017 23:09:23 GMT
Saw this tonight and thought it was passable but a bit dull. I enjoyed pretty much the whole cast (don't normally love films full of stars as sometimes it takes me out of the film but it didn't on this occasion really). Thought it was too short and we didn't have time to get to know anyone before dozens of names were being bandied about. Also thought the ending was a bit of an abticlimax and not the big gasp moment they wanted.
I really love Daisy Ridley and I'm sure she's going to be the next Keira Knightly type, so enjoyed seeing her in this. Tom Bateman, Michelle Pfeiffer and Josh Has also very good. Loved spotting Paapa Essiedu and Hadley Fraser at the begining too.
Thought the production was way too cgi heavy though and it was just so distracting. The big sweeping shots of Istanbul at the beginning looked like cartoons. Yikes.
Also, was the moustache cgi? I know that sounds ridiculous but it was just so off.
Anyway, it was alright but I wouldn't jump to see it again.
|
|
2,702 posts
|
Post by viserys on Nov 20, 2017 5:43:18 GMT
The big sweeping shots of Istanbul at the beginning looked like cartoons. Yikes. Also, was the moustache cgi? I know that sounds ridiculous but it was just so off. Not so much like cartoons than very very obviously Malta. Once you've seen that view onto Valletta from the Sliema shore, you will always recognize it straightaway. I know Malta is very often used for movies, but it was a bit lazy to just use the whole city skyline like that. |
|
1,013 posts
|
Post by talkstageytome on Nov 20, 2017 8:31:47 GMT
Oh I didn't notice that specifically but it is a bit lazy to hope the audience wouldn't recognise the view, as you clearly did. The bit that stood out to me was the scene featuring the Blue Mosque and the Hagia Sophia. I don't know if cgi is cheaper than miniature effects, but it definitely looks that way. Don't know how we're supposed to be grounded in the 1930s when 90% of the film is glaringly fake. It's a real pet peeve of mine.
|
|
736 posts
|
Post by dippy on Nov 20, 2017 19:18:12 GMT
Don't know how we're supposed to be grounded in the 1930s when 90% of the film is glaringly fake. It's a real pet peeve of mine. 90%? That's an awful lot, so there was fake stuff (VFX?) in pretty much every scene then? |
|
1,013 posts
|
Post by talkstageytome on Nov 20, 2017 19:24:05 GMT
90% is an exaggeration maybe 😏, but a lot of the scenery (Arial shots of the city / mountains) and the external train shots when the train is moving all looks very fake.
Almost as fake as Poirot's moustache. 😉
|
|
3,578 posts
|
Post by Rory on Nov 21, 2017 0:42:25 GMT
Well no surprises to see via Hollywood Reporter that a remake of Death on the Nile is now on the cards. Hope it has a bit more tension and humour and a bit less hamming up from Ken B than Orient Express.
|
|
