Murder in Mesopotamia

After 12 years of playing Poirot, David Suchet has the part off pat, and it is hard to imagine anyone doing it better. This 2000 TV film is an adaptation of Agatha Christie's 1936 novel of the same name and the location – an archaeological dig in Mesopotamia – and is made the more authentic by Christie's first hand experience with her husband, archaeologist Max Mallowan. Despite the exotic locale however the story is the familiar country house murder mystery in which by observation and deduction the great detective finds the culprit without a lot of help from his sidekick, the jolly Hastings (Hugh Fraser) or anybody else.

What is quite striking about this story as filmed is the utter flatness of all the other characters. To some extent this is a product of the fact that none of the actors is well known, but the script doesn't help either. They are simply boring (the Arabs are non-starters). Their function is to listen to Poriot, provide him with information or disinformation and to die when necessary. Actually one of the victims (Ms Leidner) has an interesting past but she is too pathetic to hold our sympathy. Perhaps the producers were trying to save money on salaries but the cast are not a prepossessing lot.

On the other hand the production values (for a TV movie) aren't bad and much of the film was shot in Tunisia around a real `dig'. (Iraq, alas, was not available). Hercule Poirot, always immaculately dressed and amusingly fussy, can always hold our attention even if he is to a large extent the puppetmaster. Although he makes mistakes along the way we can be assured the characters will fit his theories in the end.

Lousy art but good television.

Worst adaptation ever! If screenwriters have such wonderful ideas about how Christie should have written her stories, they are more than welcome to write their own books! This story was nicely narrated by a nurse and Poirot was supposed to enter the scene a little bit later. Hastings did not appear in the original. I gather that all the unfortunate changes of this adaptation are for viewers to "enjoy" the duo. If you consider the narrative structure of the original, the changes were quite important, and they totally failed to capture the novel's atmosphere . Really, this show changing the endings, the new adaptations of Miss Marple doing the same thing and even the Poirot and Marple manga!!! I guess the grandson has to bleed the copyrights dry before they expire...

You can't expect a prolific author like Agatha Christie to hit a home run every time. And indeed, with Murder in Mesopotamia, she doesn't come up with a very believable denouement.

Poirot and Hastings go to a dig in Iraq (filmed in Tunisia). A woman there, a Mrs. Leidner, tells them an odd story. After the death of her first husband in a train accident, she continued to receive threatening letters from him whenever she began to see someone. She has always suspected his younger brother. However, she has now remarried.

Mrs. Leidner winds up dead, and other murders follow. Poirot tries to find a motive -- the woman wasn't very well liked, so there are a few suspects. And what about these letters? Agatha Christie knew something about archaeological digs thanks to her husband, Max Mallowan. And she knew how to write a good story. But she asks a little too much of the reader in this one.

As Poirot, David Suchet is marvelous, as is Hugh Fraser as Hastings, who constantly is giving Poirot woman advice since he's a married man.

We can forgive Christie's occasional slip-up -- the story is still intriguing and entertaining.

Hercule Poirot is in Baghdad, Iraq, to meet an old acquaintance when he is invited to a nearby archaeological dig by his old friend Captain Hastings. The dig is being led by famed archaeologist, Dr Leidner. He is accompanied by his beautiful wife, her nurse - Amy Leatheran, his long-time archaeological partner - Richard Carey, his assistant - Anne Johnson, a priest - Father Lavigny, another archaeologist - Joseph Mercado, his wife and a team of local workers. The night before Poirot arrives one of the locals is murdered on the dig site. A short time after arriving the site, Mrs Leidner is spooked by a mask at her window, leading her to confide to Poirot that she is receiving death threats. They are purported from her long-dead first husband but she suspects they are from his brother. The next day, Mrs Leidner is found dead in her room, having received a savage blow to the head. There is only one way into her room, through the main courtyard, a very public place, and nobody saw anyone enter her room. How on earth was she then murdered? More importantly, who did it?

The usual intrigue, this time in a very exotic setting. Great location and scenery. Plot has a rather far-fetched backstory, but is very interesting nonetheless. Murder method is rather ingenious and very difficult to work out in advance. Once it is revealed, however, the murderer is easy to figure out.

This is possibly the only Poirot I find difficult to get through, as a novel it's pretty good, full of colour with strong characters, to me though something was lost in translation. The adaptation is so bland, it's actually quite boring, the characters somehow aren't real or genuine.

The murder itself (first one) and its explanation are very far fetched, almost beyond belief, I mean I don't always remember people, but in this particular instance I'm sure some mannerisms or actions would trigger something. However I do like the imagination shown in the killing of Mrs Leidner, it was certainly inventive and different. A few too many liberties with the book, Hastings did not need to be in this one, he doesn't really add anything to it.

The locations are stunning, Tunisia was used as a double for Iraq, and it looks incredible, it's a beautiful land. It had the sunshine that was much needed in Evil under the Sun.

This Poirot features what I'd class as one of the darkest moments, the death of poor Mrs Johnson, what a horrible way to go. I was frightened to drink a glass of water for weeks.

I very rarely watch a Poirot without commenting on the high quality of acting, in this one though I find some of the characters really flat, Ron Berglas's Doctor Leidner is the high point.

I wanted so much more from this one. 5/10