Desyat negrityat

This is not the type of movie that a typical moviegoer will seek, so, instead I will give some other insight.

This was the only movie that ever gave me nightmares when I was a kid. Mostly, I think it's because the movie achieved a rare feat of actually transforming not only the book and it's characters to the screen but also the atmosphere.

Many people will not watch this movie just based on it's original name, but I can assure you, the name conveys no negative information. That leads to believe that it's P.C title, is just a cop-out.

As far as adaptations done, there are no better versions of any ever made.

10/10

I've seen many adaptations of this story but this one is really unrivaled. From the very beginning, you can see the talent of the director. When he's filming the guests waiting to depart, you can feel the tension among them, and the culpability too. On the contrary of the other adaptations, this movie doesn't only show the action, the murder series, but also (and it seemed capital to me) what's in the victims' minds. I appreciated in particular the flashes back. Personally, I only deplore the location. The place where the movie was shot is too well known, and doesn't fit with the idea one could have of the island. To adapt such a famous book is always tricky, but not for Govorukhin ! Mankiewicz couldn't have done better.

Desyat Negrityat is a 1987 Soviet film based on the Agatha Christie novel Ten Little Indians. Its director, Stanislav Govorukhin, also wrote the script. This adaptation draws attention with the fact that almost no part of the novel has changed.

This adaptation draws attention with the fact that almost no part of the novel has changed. Unlike previous Hollywood/British adaptations of the same story, none of the characters or their crimes have been changed, and the film ends with the original brutal finale of Agatha Christie's novel.

The Agatha Christie novel upon which this film is based is an excellent read and one of her most popular titles. It has been put into film many times, but each version is far inferior to the actual novel. Except this one. There is no matching the quality of the book, but this Russian one does a very good job, because for the first time the material is not softened down. It is as dark and as grim as Agatha Christie intended her novel to be. It also keeps the original ending, which other versions have adjusted, forfeiting the deeper things that the story has to stay. The flashbacks are woven in perfectly, the sound recording is noticeably sharp, and in general there is very little to complain about this superb rendition of the novel.

A note for prospective buyers:

After some searching, I managed to order a DVD copy of this film from a Russian company via the internet. The DVD quality itself is quite good, however the English subtitles are often poorly translated and out-of-sync with who is talking. Those who have read the novel should still find it easy enough to follow - this is just a little warning. However, that is only on the DVD copy that I viewed. As for the film itself, there is very little wrong with it.

In 1939 Agatha Christie wrote her famous novel "And then there were none" and in 1945 René Clair made the first adaptation for film.

Although the adaptation by Clair was far from perfect, it was not surpassed for a long time. In my opinion the 1987 Russian adaptation by Stanislav Govorukhin was the long awaited improvement.

The Russian version is much more philosophical that that of Clair. In stead of being a "who donnit" the film treats the relationship between criminal law, ethics and (bad) conscience

With respect to the relationship between ethics and conscience there is a remarkable difference between men and women. At the end of the film (and different from the Clair adaptation) her own conscience is punishment enough for the Vera character.

The film creates a huge gap between ethics and criminal law. The assumption seems to be that criminal law only covers those instances in which a person does the wrong thing on purpose. I think in practice the difference is smaller. Criminal law also covers instances in which a person does not act although he ought to (not saving a person in mortal danger when possible) or acts not with the intention of doing harm but accepting the real possibility that harm nevertheles will happen (drunk driving).