Opening this week

‘Murder on the Orient Express’ film review: A high-speed version of Agatha Christie’s famous novel

Kenneth Branagh turns out an enjoyable performance as Hercule Poirot, even though his movie lacks a sure sense of suspense and dread.

Kenneth Branagh’s Murder on the Orient Express moves decisively away from its literary source as well as Sidney Lumet’s acclaimed film adaptation. Agatha Christie’s immensely popular Murder on the Orient Express is an audaciously plotted murder mystery that takes place on board the train. A venal businessman named Ratchett has been stabbed to death in his sleep, and everybody on the coach is suspect, from his secretary and valet to the British colonel and his lover. Unfortunately for the murderer, Hercule Poirot, the greatest detective ever born, is also a passenger.

Christie’s intricate plotting and pithily observed ensemble of characters were faithfully transported onto the screen by Lumet in 1974. Lumet’s version replicated much of the novel’s dialogue and plot twists. Albert Finney played Poirot, the Belgian with the pointy moustache, distinctive mannerisms and the tendency to lapse into caricature in his enthusiasm to hunt down wrongdoers.

Branagh’s movie is a pared-down, speeded-up version of the novel. That is both good and bad. The director also stars as Poirot, delivering a witty and charming performance as the detective who matches Sherlock Holmes in his unerring ability to distil the truth from seemingly random events and clues. The lengthy and suspenseful interrogations that provide Poirot vital clues to the murder have been trimmed, at the cost of losing the sure sense of anticipation that Christie creates on her pages and Lumet reproduces in his movie. The characters zip by rather than linger, and many of Poirot’s deductions are presented as brilliant guesswork rather than the result of those famed grey cells working overtime to crack a seemingly unsolvable killing.

Play
Murder on the Orient Express (2017).

Branagh’s version is altogether more light-hearted and fleet, clocking in at a crisp 114 minutes. Much of the running time is devoted to depicting his interpretation of Poirot, whose obsession with perfection and balance is revealed in the opening sequence set in Jerusalem. As Poirot boards the Orient Express, the star-studded cast floats into view, including Judi Dench, Michelle Pfeiffer, Willem Dafoe, Penelope Cruz, Derek Jacobi, Daisy Ridley and Johnny Depp as the loathsome Ratchett. The cast has been well chosen but is severely underutilised. The brightest star in the galaxy remains Branagh, who exercises his privilege as director to the fullest.

One of the welcome updates in Michael Green’s screenplay is in the matter of race. Christie’s very British observations on the provenance of her characters have been replaced by a multiracial cast that better reflects the diversity of moviegoing audiences. Arbuthnot, for instance, isn’t an Army colonel any more but a black American doctor (Leslie Odom Jr) whose relationship with the white Mary Debenham (Daisy Ridley) has greater layers than the pairing in the novel.

The biggest change is in the characterisation of Poirot, who is more suave and attractive than in previous avatars. The movie centres around Branagh’s performance rather than Poirot’s brilliance, and benefits from the veteran actor’s complete investment in his character. The moustache is more luxuriant than before; the Belgian accent is put to good use; the complete lack of self-deprecation is played with a judicious mix of humour and respect.

However, Branagh’s consummate performance fails to even out the sheer lack of suspense and the poignancy of the reason for Ratchett’s death. The new movie has been handsomely shot and produced, but the raw punch produced by Christie in her extended climax is missing.

The movie seems to be in a great rush towards the sequel that is suggested at the end – a forthcoming adaptation of Christie’s Death on the Nile. Branagh makes for a fine Poirot, and perhaps the next time, he will settle for a leisurely cruise rather than an express tour.

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

When did we start parenting our parents?

As our parents grow older, our ‘adulting’ skills are tested like never before.

From answering every homework question to killing every monster under the bed, from soothing every wound with care to crushing anxiety by just the sound of their voice - parents understandably seemed like invincible, know-it-all superheroes all our childhood. It’s no wonder then that reality hits all of a sudden, the first time a parent falls and suffers a slip disc, or wears a thick pair of spectacles to read a restaurant menu - our parents are growing old, and older. It’s a slow process as our parents turn from superheroes to...human.

And just as slow to evolve are the dynamics of our relationship with them. Once upon a time, a peck on the cheek was a frequent ritual. As were handmade birthday cards every year from the artistically inclined, or declaring parents as ‘My Hero’ in school essays. Every parent-child duo could boast of an affectionate ritual - movie nights, cooking Sundays, reading favourite books together etc. The changed dynamic is indeed the most visible in the way we express our affection.

The affection is now expressed in more mature, more subtle ways - ways that mimics that of our own parents’ a lot. When did we start parenting our parents? Was it the first time we offered to foot the electricity bill, or drove them to the doctor, or dragged them along on a much-needed morning walk? Little did we know those innocent acts were but a start of a gradual role reversal.

In adulthood, children’s affection for their parents takes on a sense of responsibility. It includes everything from teaching them how to use smartphones effectively and contributing to family finances to tracking doctor’s appointments and ensuring medicine compliance. Worry and concern, though evidence of love, tend to largely replace old-fashioned patterns of affection between parents and children as the latter grow up.

It’s something that can be easily rectified, though. Start at the simplest - the old-fashioned peck on the cheek. When was the last time you gave your mom or dad a peck on the cheek like a spontaneous five-year-old - for no reason at all? Young parents can take their own children’s behaviour available as inspiration.

As young parents come to understand the responsibilities associated with caring for their parents, they also come to realise that they wouldn’t want their children to go through the same challenges. Creating a safe and secure environment for your family can help you strike a balance between the loving child in you and the caring, responsible adult that you are. A good life insurance plan can help families deal with unforeseen health crises by providing protection against financial loss. Having assurance of a measure of financial security for family can help ease financial tensions considerably, leaving you to focus on being a caring, affectionate child. Moreover,you can eliminate some of the worry for your children when they grow up – as the video below shows.

Play

To learn more about life insurance plans available for your family, see here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of SBI Life and not by the Scroll editorial team.