I didn’t like it much, no, I warched it once out of curiosity, because it could have been good, but now I’ve seen it, it’s enough, no need to ever watch it again. I don’t regret the time spent watching it, no, there was some work done, some effort, that made it look good; there were some interesting faces, a beautiful beautiful necklace, but I didn’t feel all this love that should have governed this story. They kept talking about it but I didn’t feel it.
I think this film concentrated on the wrong things and the investigation wasn’t well done, it’s like a pretty woman going from one pretty pose to the other, never doing any actual dancing. Here the investigation consisted of Poirot yelling at one person and then accusing another, when real investigations should be about listening to what other people say. At least, Poirot’s investigations should.
It’s been many many years since I read Christie’s books, and with my bad memory I can’t really be trusted to remember much, but all this about Poirot’s lost love… I think it added nothing of value to the story, and maybe it took something away, diverting attention from the others. Now that I think of it, there were many kinds of love in this film, and yet nothing that touched the soul. Euphemia not wanting her son to marry Rosalie, for one, it felt like a bitter woman whose husband had left for a younger model.
A couple of scenes were unnecessarily vulgar, I must say, I was quite surprised because it doesn’t actually happen all that often. There were no nude scenes, at least it was recognized that with this cast there was no need to call in spectators with such cheap tricks.
I’d like someone to explain to me the bit about ladies Van Schuyler and Bowers being together because of love? As in friendly love or romantic love? Because if it was a romantic relationship that they hid as a rich woman and her nurse, was it really necessary to do it that way, never giving Bowers anything and treating her like a maid? Couldn’t they say they were friends, keeping each other company because alone, and then Van Schuyler could have shared her money without any need to say anything? Because if it was romantic love that was a pretty shitty way to treat her, having her work like a maid more than a nurse, but also never giving her anything, not enough pay to buy herself pretty things, no gifts, and it is made abundantly clear that she likes riches and misses the time when she had that life, in this movie Poirot says she has what 10 years ago were pretty, stylish clothes, but now are old and mended. That’s no love story… on the other hand, if he talked about friendly love, then the way Bowers was treated could make more sense, but if she had been hired out of pity or simply a desire to help her, why did he have to humiliate her by saying it? That whole bit didn’t make sense to me. And Instill have no clue on what the bed covers had to do with it, who made the beds of everyone? Not Bowers, I hope, why should she? So what… ? I don’t know.
I did not like the dancing at the beginning, neither the one between Simon and Jackie, or the one with Lynnet, I thought they were hardly appropriate.
About the actual story in this movie:
So, they put at the beginning a little bit of Poirot’s past (…) when he was young, in the army during the war, and he was already that smart and by noticing when birds fly compared to the wind, he well adviced his group on the best time to attack, and his captain believed him and they made it, but then the captain put his foot on a mine or something, and died. Poirot was hurt too in the explosion. He had a nasty wound on his cheek and upper lip. Apparently he asked his girlfriend not to come, but she’s a nurse and came to see him anyway, speaking of love, that love is more than just a pretty face and stuff like that, so when he shows her his wounds she says that he’ll just have to grow a mustache… which he does, big mustache like his captain had… but nobody in this production mentioned that hairn don’t grow over scars? Much smaller scars prevent hair growth, and with a big wound like that… I mean, it already looks incredible that they could do such a good work in minimizing the damage, but the idea that he could grow those big mustaches is ludicrous.
Anyway, they never married because she died during those days, while she went to visit him, and he never found another love. Later on in the movie, he says that this tragedy made him whomhe is, that he wanted to be a farmer… and so I wonder, why these people, director and producers, insist on calling him Poirot? WHY? Give him another name, make him like you want (you’re already doing that anyway) and then say the story is inspired by Christie, because this guy who talks of a lost girlfriend, never wanted to investigate and keeps running after murderers is NOT Poirot.
After that we see him years later, eating something in a place with live music. First he sees Jackie dancing with Simon, then Lynnet arrives and the two women greet each other like great friends. Jackie tells her of her engagement, the love of her life, this Simon that she hopes might be hired by her friend so he’d have a steady income and could marry her. Jackie says he’s really good and she won’t ever regret hiring him. As soon as she meets him, Lynnet starts looking at him like she’s never seen such a specimen before, they dance in a totally inappropriate way, while bith Jackie and Poirot watch.
Poirot is enjoying looking at the pyramids when he meets his old friend Bouc, acting like a stupid child honestly, who introduces him to his mother Euphemia (and that was the nicest scene of the movie). They are there for a special party, because rich and famous Lynnet just married Simon Doyle! It’s not even been two months since she met him and they’re married already! Anyway, the story follows as we know it, so briefly, first the characters and then the murder plot:
There’s Bouc who doesn’t like to work and would like his mom to give him money all his life, even after married; his mother wants him always by her side, no woman is good enough, she always talks bad about love not being real; Lynette is the super rich heiress, taught by her father how to make money, raised to always have what she wants; Jackie is her dear friend, maybe best friend until she steals her fiancee; Simon is engaged to Jackie until he meets Lynette and marries her; Marie Van Schuyler is Lynette’s godmother and a rich woman who always speaks in favors of communism and workers, but still lives as a rich woman; Mrs Bowers was rich once until Lynette’s father ruined them, and now she follows Van Schuyler as her nurse, acting more as a maid, and she has no money; dr Windlesham is maybe the only person who really loved Lynette and so she didn’t much care about him, she just liked that he adored her; Lynette’s cousin who always took care of her business /money, but now he somehow is in money troubles and hopes that the honeymoon might distract her enough that she might sign documents without reading them; Salome Otterbourne, a great Jazz singer and her niece Rosalie, who manages her career; and Louise Bourget, Lynette’s personal maid, a poor girl always at her service. The murder plot: Jackie follows them everywhere, broken hearted and vengeful. She boards the same ship, of course, and one night after Lynette has gone to sleep, she has a fight with Simon, he says hurtful things and she takes her gun and shoots him; Rosalie and Bouc see him cluthing a red-stained handkerchief to his leg and yelling. Jackie is under shock and Rosalie takes her away, with Simon yelling to stay with her and not leave her that she might hurt herself. Bouc says he’ll go find the doctor for him. As Poirot will guess, now Simon takes the gun that Jackie let down and runs to shoot Lynette, then comes back and shoots his own leg, this time for real and throws the gun in the water. Bowers takes care of Jackie while dr. Windlesham treats Simon. In the morning Louise finds Lynette dead, but Jackie has an airtight alibi, Bowers never left her. Poirot interviews everyone, and Louise gives a weird answer, saying that had she gone out of her room she might have seen someone entering Lynette’s room… which is a real message to the murderer, she wants to blackmail Simon for money, so Jackie kills her. Bouc stole Lynette’s necklace, a beautiful chain made of precious stones with a huge yellow one pending down kept in a Tiffany box, so he was out at night and saw her, but didn’t say anything because if it came out that he was stealing he would go to prison and lose Rosalie. Poirot questions him with Simon present, and they’re all so loud, and Poirot insists that Bouc tell him who he saw kill Louise, but he gets shot and can’t speak anymore. In the water, the gun is found, with the stained handkerchief and the shawl that Van Schuyler couldn’t find. Now Poirot reveals all, that Jackie and Simon were always in love, and he wanted Lynette’s money, but Jackie knew that alone he would never make it, so she made this whole plan. The handkerchief was stained with red acrilic colour, not blood. The shawl had a hole because Simon used it to tone down the noise when he shot himself in the leg. Now that they are found, she shoots the both of them to die together.
I didn’t like the thing about Louise’s blood splattering everywhere, and I didn’t like Rosalie’s aggressive behaviour after learning that Poirot had been hired by Bouc’s mom to investigate her. To investigate is his job, although it’s absurd that he accepts this as a job, but now he only has flattering words for Rosalie and Salome, and yet she acts so outraged and disgusted with him, totally uncalled for.
The end of this movie saw Poirot, without mustaches, hearing Salome singing live…
ITA assassinio sul Nilo
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento