If you’re new to the site and would like to get involved please click on one of the buttons in the box below.


ChristieFanForLife ✭✭✭


Last Active
  • Re: News articles on "Murder on the Orient Express"

    Though I have my doubts of this version, I will go see it when it hits the theatres in November. 
  • Re: what is your favorite Poirot?

    @tudes, I still prefer the book over the two adaptations. I might take a look at the Ustinov version again tonight. I think the comparison to the bodies compared to slabs of meat is in there. At least Linda Marshall is in the film and not changed to Lionel . . . .ugh!
  • Re: Can you find the novel with these clues?

    Until GKCFan provides his set of clues for us to guess, I wanted to mention that The Mystery of the Spanish Chest is one of my favorite short stories. And the concept of a man hiding in a chest --very macabre I must say -- reminded me a lot of the play, Rope, where two young university students hide a body in the chest. The difference? In Spanish Chest, the man in the chest is alive and is later killed and in Rope, a young man is already dead when his body lies in the chest. But the idea of a dead body lying in the chest is the similarity between the two works. Rope was made into a play in 1929 (later made into a film by the great Master of Suspense Alfred Hitchcock). Spanish Chest is the expanded version of the The Mystery of the Baghdad Chest, which was written in 1932 so the idea was first conceived 3 years after Rope made it to Broadway. Not only was Agatha Christie well-read but she was an avid goer of and well acquainted with the theatre. I think she was well aware of the play and watched it at some point . . . . or was at least acquainted with the plot by reading about it somewhere or told by someone. Either way, it planted a seed of a story in her mind . . . first starting with the image of a chest. She used the chest prop in another story, this time in The Rats, one in a series of three plays with the main title The Rule of Three. What say you? 
  • Re: Which Agatha Christie are you reading now?

    Luke said:
    I have just finished the Labours of Hercules, and having watched the Suchet adaptation before, I was curious to read the stories for themselves and whilst I can see that they made an effort to cram as many stories into a stand alone film, I can't help feeling disappointed for Christie fans that the stories weren't a series by itself :(  
    It's definitely a shame that this masterpiece of a short story collection wasn't adapted in a series of episodes, a mini-series special. It would have been better to film this in the 90's when the series was at its peak and when the shorter stories were emphasized. They could have filmed each of the stories in Labours while at the same time filming stories from the other collections. It would've cost more money and the production team would be quite busy but it would have been more worth it in the long run. Honestly, they shouldn't have made the effort to cram everything in one film because it was still bad. That's like taking Miss Marple's The Tuesday Night Club Murders collection and cramming all those stories in one single film. It won't work because that's not how the concept was conceived. Works like The Labours of Hercules and The Tuesday Night Club remain part of their respective Poirot and Miss Marple series, but the collections themselves are its own self-contain story arc -- they are a kind of special event. 
  • Re: October's Book of the Month - The Pale Horse

    Well, I'm a bit late to this discussion and I've been away from this site for a long time. Pale Horse is one of my favourites AC books, being definitely in my top 5. This is the only book I find she combines a thriller, a whodunnit and the feeling of the supernatural. As everyone else has mentioned, the fact that different characters from other books get together o are mentioned (that old lady with the milk...) makes me feel AC universe in a more coherent and cohesive way. I also like the main two characters, who remind me of those from Why didn't they ask Evans? or Tommy and Tuppence, but more serious and appropiate to the darker tone of this story.
    I hate how people find Agatha Christie merely a "cozy" writer which sometimes gives off the impression that Christie's books are soft, fuzzy, and cute like what you see in many modern mysteries today that is under the cozy label, and rightfully so too. But The Pale Horse and even Endless Night, two books in the latter half of her career are not cozy. What's so cozy about two girls in a fight and one girl pulling the other's hair from her scalp? That's right out of The Pale Horse. Christie didn't need to make her books graphic and have them soaked with blood in order to have a dark tone. She could be just as dark and create a psychological story just as many modern mystery writers today, including the late Ruth Rendell with her psychological mysteries under the pseudonym Barbara Vine. If Christie lived longer throughout the 70s and into the 80s, perhaps she might have written more books in the vein of The Pale Horse and Endless Night. I also love how in The Pale Horse, she takes characters from other stories and has them make their own appearance, without Poirot or Miss Marple. This makes the characters feel more real and creates as you said a more coherent and cohesive world of her own. It makes her books even more exciting to read as we come across a character from another book and we guess which one that character appeared in.