Poirot

I literally grew up with Poirot, Sunday nights as a nine and ten year old were all about Poirot, Pistachio nuts, Terry's Pyramint.

The productions evolved over time, the early hour long format episodes were much lighter viewing, over time they became more gritty, more daring. One good example is Series 3's Plymouth Express, a much darker presentation they anything that had gone before. By the time you reach Elephants can remember in Series 13 there was something very dark about the production.

I would imagine it became more difficult for the producers over time, they were able to cherry pick adaptations during the early years, some books were much more suitable to the screen then others, The ABC murders and Death in the Clouds would have been so much easier to work with then say The Big Four or Cards on the Table.

The adaptations remained fairly faithful to the book, there was never a fear of them doing what they did with the Marple series, and transplant Poirot into novels he was never intended to be in, for a good reason each of her works had a certain flavour. A few times changes were made to the books, I can only imagine for good reason, too many characters, budget restraints etc. The Big Four and Appointment with death being altered more then some.

So good was David Suchet in the role, that now when you think of Poirot you see David in your mind. I think it will be a while before someone attempts to remake Poirot for the small screen. David had a lot to live up to, Poirot had hit the big screen, Murder on the Orient Express and Death on the Nile had both been huge adaptations, the remakes both compete favourably. Suchet is Poirot.

Characters were switched and added quite a lot, Hastings, Japp and Miss Lemon were often drafted in, but in later years that wasn't the case. It's hardly surprising as each is so enjoyable. Watching them all reunite in 'Lord Edgeware dies' was special.

Generally the productions were very good to excellent, for me at the top of the pile are The ABC Murders, Curtain and Sad Cypress, each are literally flawless. The Murder of Roger Ackroyd and The Big Four are two of the relatively few lesser offerings, with the only true misfire being Murder in Mesopotamia.

For years I hoped for the productions to be completed, at times it seemed like they'd never get through them, I'm so glad they did, but I am missing him.

Who knows maybe one day The Monogram Murders will be made, not a Christie story I know, but it would be worth it to see Poirot anew once again. This truly was a fabulous series. 10/0

Granada Television scored another hit with David Suchet's faithful delineation of the irritating little habits and precise fastidiousness of Agatha Christie's Hercule Poirot to provide the most credible interpretation to date. The same production company had also been responsible for the earlier extremely watchable Sherlock Holmes series with the incomparable Jeremy Brett. Although Sir Peter Ustinov gave colourfully entertaining performances in various movie and TV dramatisations (`Death on the Nile', `Evil Under the Sun', etc.) his pompous Belgian detective always seemed too large and gregarious to be convincingly possessed of all the little foibles of Christie's narratives.

Hugh Fraser is appropriately laid back as Poirot's companion, Captain Hastings, in noticeable contrast to his more commanding Wellington in the enjoyable and successful ITV dramatisations of Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe novels. A convincing Chief Inspector Japp is provided by Philip Jackson who, whilst in respectful awe of Poirot still attempts to promote Scotland Yard as other than the implied bunch of duffers most famous fictional private detectives encounter. Pauline Moran played the ever-efficient assistant Miss Felicity Lemon. Other than these four constants, a host of guest actors, directors, scriptwriters and cinematographers were involved in the series to provide a variety of storylines and styles. Over the past decade Carnival Films amongst others have also made various one-offs with the same key cast.

The two episodes I have seen recently, and first shown in February 1989, seem to particularly warrant some observation on their themes. `The Third Floor Flat' makes a tongue-in-cheek comment on ‘The Queen of Crime' herself with Poirot losing his bet with Hastings to detect the murder culprit in an amateurish theatrical play, as the writer (whom Poirot dismisses as `an imbecile') does not reveal all the facts until the wily detective on the stage has exposed the perpetrator to an assembled gathering of the usual suspects. In this instalment the motive for the inevitable murder is given as the absurdly flat refusal by one spouse to grant a divorce to the other, a common mechanism of Christie's that is rather extreme and not wholly satisfying. This episode is also notable for a rare display of emotion by Hastings when he is visibly shaken after his beloved vintage car is wrecked, and Josie Lawrence makes a guest appearance in one of her first straight roles after the comic improvisations of `Whose Line Is It Anyway'.

Fine photography and attention to detail prevail to create a nostalgic impression of 1930's London although there is not much evidence of the Great Depression affecting this particular society. There is a superb evocation of the art deco period with the Mansion flats being particularly impressive and similar to those found around Marylebone.

`Triangle at Rhodes' affords Poirot a chance to escape the London scene and his usual crowd, and provides us with a travelogue promotion, whilst also touching on attitudes to divorce. With her boyish husband (Peter Settelen) seemingly besotted with the archetypal femme fatale, Valentine Chantry (Annie Lambert) on her fifth marriage, Marjorie Gold (Angela Down; `Emma') makes a deliberately misleading impassioned proclamation on the ease of divorce in the 1930's claiming she is from the old fashioned generation that doesn't believe in it or holds with the modern attitude to life of `easy marriage, easy divorce.' If divorce was that easy then it is a contradiction to Christie's often used plot device for removing stubbornly recalcitrant partners. Although divorce was a painful experience for Dame Agatha herself in 1928 (with her husband's affair leading to her notorious disappearance for eleven days in 1926, the subject of Michael Apted's stylish 1979 film `Agatha') she does not address the issues with any feeling, only using it as a contrivance, unlike Charles Dickens some 70 years earlier in the 19th century with his social commentary in `Great Expectations', when there was little scope for women caught in an abusive marriage. With Italian troops occupying Rhodes there is some recognition of history as Poirot passes on his observation of the strengthening of harbour defences to a highly improbable MI5 type, ineffectively trying to hide as a harmless Major (Timothy Knightley) by paying unreciprocated attention towards another English hotel guest (Frances Low) holidaying on her own, who in turn seeks Poirot's protection.

Incidentally with 2001 being the 25th anniversary of Dame Agatha's death on 12 January 1976 her books are being relaunched by HarperCollins and the Palace Theatre in Westcliff-On-Sea, Essex has dedicated a festival season to all 23 of her plays.

The original Granada series is available in DVD and VHS tape formats from Amazon and Britannia Music.

Reading Christie's Poirot was a great experience for me. But the shear plot and the style of the books written aren't the only reason why I like the Poirot series. It's the atmosphere of the era which was brought to us in a splendid manor. Watching Poirot makes me want to move back 80 years a go, live in Art Deco and ride the famous steam lines from coast to coast.

The cleanliness of the frames, perfection of scenery and the scholar English dialogs really made me enjoy Sunday afternoons. Yes, I know it's an ideogram of times long passed but it still is one of the best portrayed history based motion picture contents.

Also, Poirot shows one particular thing that really was authentic for the time when novels were written - concern for crime and it's impact in society. Today's vision of murder is widely accepted as something normal and common. Watching all sorts of CSI programs made today's environment accept murder as an acceptable category, no matter how sinister, bizarre and pointless it is. Poirot represents a completely different point, showing that a crime was a scarce and socially unacceptable unlike today. By enlightening all the aspects of the crime Poirot makes not only good entertainment, but a conclusion with meaning and a clear message.

Concerning Poirot, I'm sorry about two things - that the world has degraded so much in the last 80 years, and the fact we don't have more good series like Poirot.

10/10

What can be said about Mr Hercule. Is it his perfectly groom mustaches? His great and always neat suits? I will tell you...His use of the little gray cells(to poirot saying "use the gray cells" is saying use your brain and look at things from a different perspective.

I have been, not only an Agatha Christie fan, but i just simply adore Poirot. He is brilliant and its fascinating the way he solves the crimes! Reading the books is good, but watching Mr. David suchet play the role in any poirot film is brilliant casting and he brings the character to life! If any of you have read the books and have not seen any of them brought to life, i suggest watching any poirot film starring suchet, you will not be disappointed! Enjoy!

David Suchet is absolutely the best Hercule Poirot I have ever seen. He personifies the Hercule in Agatha Christie's books perfectly. Also, Hugh Fraser (Hastings) and Philip Jackson (Japp) play their parts wonderfully. This show has a very good story line and each episode has a baffling mystery. If you are a mystery fan, I recommend this show to you. Make sure you look for it!