“What a disgusting woman. Ooh! Why hasn't anyone killed her yet?
Forget the past! Turn to the future! What's done is done. Your despair cannot change anything.
- Look, do you see the moon? Now it is visible so clearly, but if you look out at the sun, the moon will disappear in its rays. Something like this happened to us. I was the moon. The sun came and Simon stopped noticing me.
Agatha Christie’s detective novels are a huge asset in the world of literature. They are impeccably good and inspire and inspire others to create such interesting and twisted novels, and readers of all generations can enjoy this something.
In 1974, I successfully filmed Christie’s novel “Murder on the Orient Express” & #39; and this is Sidney Lumet’s finest hour. The film was warmly received by both viewers and critics, and the writer herself was able to see it. Poirot himself was so beautifully played by Albert Finney that it was thought that he would return to this role, but no.
Four years later, John Gillermin will film another book by Agatha Christie ' Death on the Nile'. The role of the legendary Belgian detective Poirot goes to Peter Ustinov, who will return to her six times.
'Death on the Nile' turns out to be a pleasant and interesting, detective drama with a bunch of famous and respected actors. The film adaptation of the book turns out to be worthy, and the movie is full of some charm, charm, atmosphere and dignity. What is interesting is that the film was not shot in the studio with scenery. It was actually filmed in Africa, and we see real footage of the pyramids and the Nile. This adds value and truth to the film itself.
The heiress of the millionaire Lynette was not liked by many. She stole the groom from her best friend, had bad relationships with different people. Traveling on a steamboat along the Nile along with a new loved one, their rest is spoiled by a friend whose fiancé was taken away. She decided to turn Lynette's life into hell. But there was an even greater tragedy: Lynnette was killed, and there is a killer among the passengers on the ship Karnak. Fortunately, among the passengers was the famous detective Hercule Poirot, who takes on this case. . .
': In youth, until the soul of a person has time to harden, it is so easy to wound. '
For some reason, you think confidently and as if you know who the killer is, but the plot has something to surprise, and so you just guess. The finale really surprised, and the movie looked fascinated. The book was laid out on the shelves, and the film adaptation in my opinion turned out to be as worthy as ' Murder on the Orient Express'.
Very beautiful costumes, dresses, chic shootings at the pyramids. The film is full of secrets and charm. The picture is made with love, and it feels good when watching. As in 'Murder on the Orient Express' there is an excellent, even more than successful cast.
The plot revolves around a love triangle played by Mia Farrow, Lois Childs and Simon McCorkindale. The second roles were such respected personalities who brightened up this film: Batt Davis, Maggie Smith, George Kennedy,
Angela Lansbury and David Niven. Everyone played well, there was incredible tension and intrigue.
This film is like a good and strong, proven wine for aesthetes, fans of the genre, people with good taste for cinema. At first, you do not underestimate Peter Ustinov. That's because Albert Finney played Poirot too brilliantly. But in the process, something happens, and you realize that Ustinov is not bad and he succeeds in the role. This can be seen repeatedly.
Since childhood, I love Poirot most of all to see in the person of Davil Souchet, who for many years played in the series of his favorite Belgian detective. Ustinov wants to praise that his Poirot seems so warm and kind. Finney and Suche Poirot have deeper and more mysterious ones.
'Death on the Nile' - British, crime, detective drama 1978. The result, a successful film adaptation, at one time even a little underestimated. The film is interesting, with good direction and magic of actors. I tell him 'yes'
': Do not dispose of your heart to evil. For in this case evil will not slow to appear. It will certainly come... He will take possession of you, and it will be impossible to expel him.39 (c) Poirot.
Agatha Christie has often been lucky and still is. With literary talent and recognition in life, everything is clear, but this is a matter of the past, and today she remains one of the luckiest authors in terms of film adaptation – she is filmed very much and often well. This applies not only to the classic series about Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple, but also to the recent Murder on the Orient Express. But one of Christie’s most brilliant film adaptations, perhaps, remains “Death on the Nile” (1978) by John Gillermin.
Shooting, as close as possible to the conditions in which the characters of Agatha Christie’s novel lived, allow us to feel a special atmosphere now – a hot desert, a rare life-giving coolness of water, an impending premonition of trouble and a froze of consciousness. The mysterious charm of ancient Egyptian monuments merged here with the English stiffness and precision of a real detective. The external entourage, scenery of the action turn into a motif of the narrative: a sophisticated scheme of murder seems to be inspired by complex labyrinths inside the eternal pyramids, where the cult of death reigns. This is the case when the scene and the murder inside the detective are so tightly intertwined that they become clues to each other; the same technique Agatha Christie used in Murder on the Orient Express, where the confined space of the train was to unravel the tangle of relationships within a random group of fellow travelers.
“Death on the Nile” is a perfect detective, which keeps the viewer on the limit of nervous tension until the last frame, emotions change from the thirst to quickly find the end to the gambling desire to find it yourself. But there is a feature in this film - you want to review it even when you already know the plot, because although the detective puzzle does not capture you, but you can enjoy other advantages. For example, to follow the logic of the investigation of Hercule Poirot, noticing the little things and building his own system of reasoning. Or you can still meticulously look at the outfits of the heroines and notice the successful details of the interior. And, of course, you can enjoy acting, which in this film at the highest level.
Director John Gillermin collected a brilliant actor ensemble, the level of “star” with it can be compared only that “Murder on the Orient Express” 2017 Kenneth Branagh. In 1978, the shooting, which took place on a real steamboat sailing the Nile, gathered Peter Ustinov, Maggie Smith, Jane Birkin, Bette Davis, Mia Farrow, Olivia Hussey, Angela Lansbury and many others in a single team that introduces a gullible viewer into a maze of passions and crimes. Like his hero, Peter Ustinov attracts more attention than others. And although, the creators had to change the appearance of the greatest detective, our admiration for the artist, and the way he played it does not affect: Hercule Poirot remains one of the best literary and film detectives even with blonde hair and wheat mustache.
The unforgettable Belgian detective Hercule Poirot, literally living a crime investigation, is rightfully considered one of the most respected and fruitful literary detectives that have ever been invented. Through the efforts of the writer Agatha Christie Poirot managed to squeeze even Sherlock Holmes himself and thereby become another symbol of the genre, which invariably captured the attention of readers of good old Europe and the whole world. Stepping on the pages of the novel in 1920, the eccentric Belgian, refusing to close relationships with women for the sake of delicacies and rich detective work, subsequently became a participant in three dozen novels, as well as stories and novels written directly by Agatha Christie herself, who is not going to transfer her favorite character into the wrong hands. Gradually, the name of Hercule Poirot acquired the status of a legend, his adventures were repeatedly reprinted, translated into a variety of languages and were always relevant, because the style of charming retro, as you know, does not lend itself to aging. But while books with Poirot at the head came out with a fair consistency, fans of the detective had to wait a lot of time until his investigations migrated to the big screens. Filmmakers were in no hurry to get involved in Christie’s adventures for a variety of reasons, including legal ones, and yet in 1974 Sidney Lumet showed us the cult “Murder on the Orient Express”, which marked the next stage of a kind of confrontation between Poirot and Holmes, which stepped into a completely different creative plane.
The screen adaptation of Sidney Lumet boasted a magnificent cast, excellent scenery, enticing music and an atmosphere of comfort, even despite the fact that the whole story is tied to the murder. The image of Hercule Poirot, embodied by Albert Finney, instantly went to the people, thanks to which the actor became firmly associated with the public with the detective Agatha Christie, and the box office figures of “Murders on the Orient Express” & # 34; made the producers think about continuing the series, meanwhile, Lumet and Finney had no relation. The talented and too prolific director switched his attention to other projects, while the actor, beloved by millions of viewers in the image of Poirot, refused to endure torture in the hands of makeup artists, clearly realizing that his patience would not be enough to continue the filming process in hot places. And yet, no one thought to abandon the next round of film adaptation of the legacy of Agatha Christie, which took over “Death on the Nile”, no less respected than “Murder on the Orient Express” novel, rightly considered the most influential work of the writer in the famous “Eastern cycle”.
So, the plot of the film takes us from the hot Egypt, where excursion ships go along the full-water Nile, one of which is the Karnak. By chance or evil fate, on a luxury ship is a motley company of various people, at the first meeting does not cause any special suspicion. Rich, respectable lady Lynnette Ridgway (Lois Childs) hand in hand with her new husband Simon Doyle (Simon McCorkindale) goes on a cruise in order to properly dispel and leave bad thoughts behind, but her dreams of a bright future are not destined to come true, as an unknown killer deprives Lynnette of life in the most cruel way. The first thing under suspicion is Linnett’s longtime friend, Jacqueline de Belfort (Mia Farrow), whose deceased took the groom. It is this variant that seems the most plausible to Hercule Poirot (Peter Ustinov) staying on the Karnak by pure chance. But according to his custom, the world-famous detective is not in a hurry to grab the first find, but tries to understand the issue from all available sides. And the further the investigation goes, the more confusing the case becomes. As it turns out, too interesting personalities gathered at Karnak, and far from without reason. The truth always tries to escape from Poirot for serene smiles and lies, but he is also not so simple and will do everything in his power to ensure that justice is served.
The director of the film adaptation of Agatha Christie, John Gillermin, was obliged to build no less intriguing spectacle than what his colleague Sidney Lumet had done before him. And, in truth, it was not so difficult, since the basis of “Murder on the Nile” was an incorruptible pearl of the detective genre, written in 1937 and has not lost its fascinating shine. The brilliant Agatha Christie was once again able to exceed all expectations, building a truly intricate intrigue that lasted until the very last chapter, and John Gillermin, in turn, managed to revive glimpses of our imagination and show on film everything that we had to paint in our minds. “Death on the Nile” traditionally takes us back to the past, when gentlemen have not yet forgotten how to be courteous, and ladies knew their worth and could prove it by actions, and not only by pretentious appearance. The narrative is relaxed and at the same time saturated, drawing us into a long-lost world, revived before our eyes. The abundance of remarkable characters staying in a chic entourage makes you follow what is happening without interruption, so that the veil of luxurious outlandish beauty does not miss the most important thing and, perhaps, come to the right conclusions long before Poirot himself reveals them.
Directly the great detective this time appeared before us in the guise of Peter Ustinov, two-time winner of the Oscar, who has the honor to take the baton from Albert Finney. The intelligent and incredibly talented performer did not bring excessive amateurism to the classic image of the Belgian detective, but tried to become a continuation of what Finney had already done. Ustinov plays a slightly strange but eerily charming gentleman who does not miss the opportunity to demonstrate his outstanding deductive abilities. And although we meet Poirot at a respectable age, and he himself is somewhat tired of the busy life of the ever-in-demand detective, Ustinov brilliantly returns him to active action, inspiring fresh strength into his character. It is also noteworthy that Poirot from Death on the Nile, for all his stylistic and atmospheric attachment to the Sidney Lumet tape, looks both familiar and completely different, extraordinary, charismatic. This perception was determined only due to the fact that the director managed to make a winning tandem with Peter Ustinov, who became almost more Poirot than Albert Finney. And then Ustinov again appeared before us in his famous image, making a serious competition to David Souchet, not to mention Kenneth Bran, who picked up Poirot in the new century.
In conclusion, I want to say that “Death on the Nile” is an excellent continuation of the beloved million screen version of the legacy of Agatha Christie. The authors of the film presented us with a beautiful, elegant spectacle in the best traditions of the style of Hercule Poirot, made each character see a possible killer and enjoy the long-awaited denouement, supported by iron facts. So get ready to brainstorm with Hercule Poirot and keep up.
8 out of 10
In this film, in the role of the famous Belgian detective Hercule Poirot debuts English actor Peter Ustinov. Although "Death on the Nile" is part of a series of films about this literary hero invented by Agatha Christie, started by the film adaptation of "Murder on the Orient Express" (carried out 4 years before that by Sidney Lumet), I still tend to consider this tape to be the beginning of the franchise. After all, in the film Lumet Poirot played Albert Finney, and since this picture - it embodied Ustinov. Who, I will say running ahead, played this detective and in low-budget TV productions, which are free spins off of popular films. Of course, you can not avoid comparing the main actors. After all, each actor tried to portray a hero familiar to everyone from the books, to endow with some individual, characteristic only to him character traits, without any doubt, playing as close as possible to the literary source. But the undisputed favorite in this field will appear only in the early 90s, and before everyone’s favorite series with David Souchet – each screen Hercule Poirot was good in his own way. For example, Peter Ustinov, who with his mighty dimensions and rather lush mustache, at first glance seems inappropriate in this image, is already perceived ideally during the viewing of the picture, since the actor masterfully manages to get used to the image of the famous Belgian. Even in the plot of the picture there is humor, sometimes almost “black”, but able to nevertheless make the viewer laugh. Fortunately, among those who want to see the adaptation of the classic detective Agatha Christie, there will probably be the lion’s share of those who have already read the book. Therefore, as befits a good movie, a well-made genre product (in this case, a detective) does not lose its charm even after the original name of the attacker is revealed in the finale. I must confess that I have not read Agatha Christie’s novel, and in the course of viewing, I have made my own guesses about the identity of the killer. And after a few "false" suspects, I figured out the real culprit. However, not possessing the same amazing mindset as Monsieur Poirot, he could not completely link some logical inconsistencies of the crime committed. What the Belgian masterfully accomplished in the final speech, when he brought the passengers of the ferry a consistent and convincing staging of the events. In the course of which there were already as many as 3 corpses.
And so, the plot tells the story of a bohemian journey on the Karnak ferry up the Nile, during which rich tourists hope to enjoy the beauty of ancient Egypt, stopping on a tour of historical sites. The company assembled, as is usually the case in such cases - very motley: newlyweds who are pursued by an unbalanced young lady - a friend of his wife and ex-fiancée of her husband, an eccentric writer - an erotomaniac, her infantile daughter, a treacherous lawyer trying to pull off some sort of fraud with papers, a young maid, a young man - a Marxist in an open talk about the need to destroy the class of exploiters, a suspicious doctor who has a passion for jewelry - an elderly person with his companion and a rather good friend of the country - including his old manager. They begin to investigate the murder. Since the very girl who stole the groom’s girlfriend was killed, the initial suspicions fall on the abandoned bride who pursued them. However, she has an ironclad alibi - on the night of the murder, she could not sneak into the cabin of a hated friend - a breakaway, and this can be confirmed by many passengers on the ferry. Not all of whom have the same alibi, but the reasons for the murder of a young woman – everyone had plenty: for the murdered one quarreled with someone (doctor), someone threatened with a trial (writer), someone could bring to the clean water (a smart lawyer dealing with her affairs), and someone simply did not like (young Marxist). But once the amateur took up work with his “gray substance” – the criminal can be sure that he will not be able to escape responsibility!
A wonderful cast: Simon McCorkindale, Jane Birkin, Lois Childes, Bette Davis, Jack Warden, Mia Farrow, John Finch, Olivia Hussey, George Kennedy, Angela Lansbury, David Niven, I. S. Johar and of course charismatic and chic in the image of Poirot - Peter Ustinov. Elegantly written script, which gives the “variability” of events, which causes a comic effect, as it shows how the same murder is committed by different characters. The excellent work of costume designer Anthony Powell was even awarded an Oscar! Just as good is Jack Cardiff's camera work and Nino Rota's great soundtrack. And the director John Gillermin, who is familiar to everyone mainly from the remake of “King – Kong” – seems to have jumped above his head in this work, demonstrating a confident and masterful treatment of star performers employed in the main and secondary roles. Definitely, this picture is one of the samples of the detective genre, and it is certainly recommended for viewing by all fans of Agatha Christie’s work, an action movie or just wanting to have a pleasant evening.
In 1974, the director Sidney Lumet filmed the famous detective Agatha Christie Murder on the Orient Express, which quite unexpectedly for those years became a box office hit and collected many awards. However, the names of the actors involved spoke about the extraordinary production: Albert Finney, Ingred Bergman, Lauren Bacall, Anthony Perkins, Vanessa Redgrave, Sean Connery, Richard Widmark, etc.
A few years later, on the wave of this success, several more adaptations of the books Agatha Christie, shot on a similar principle: exotic shooting locations, a set of famous actors for almost all the roles of the film and proven for decades plot, which will surely attract fans of the work of the legendary detective writer.
One of these adaptations is the film John Gillermin "Death on the Nile" (1978), which is an adaptation of the novel of the same name Christie, published in 1937. In the Soviet box office, the film was released in 1981 under the title "Fatal Journey". The film was created on the same principles as "Murder on the Orient Express", although the success of the audience and critics had much less.
Although, as I think, the plot of this production is known to everyone who is familiar with the book, I will remind you briefly: On a steamboat sailing the Nile, a rich woman named Lynnette Doyle (Lois Childs), who recently married an impoverished nobleman Simon Doyle (Simon McCorkindale), was killed.
The victim made many enemies during her life, from which it is concluded that the killer could be any of the passengers on the steamer. But who killed the millionaire? It can be a former friend (Mia Farrow), from whom she stole the groom. Or is it a writer, author of love novels (Angela Lansbury), who wrote a book in which the main character - a nymphomaniac - an obvious hint of the murdered?
Or is it a rich kleptomaniac who stole some trinket from her? It is these questions that the Belgian detective Hercule Poirot (Peter Ustinov), who is once again trying to retire and calmly go on a trip - but his fame as an excellent detective every time prevents him from doing this.
So, I must say that the film adaptation of this detective Agatha Christie is made at a very respectable level - in addition to the chic cast, the audience has the opportunity to watch full-scale shootings of Egypt, Nile and Sudan and, of course, remember the good old story known to the detective. Of course, there are some inconsistencies in the plot, but you especially do not pay attention to them due to other "bonuses" of the picture.
The cast of the film consists exclusively of 'stars', which can serve for fans of Agatha Christie a weighty 'bonus' when watching. However, not all actors of the film are indisputable. Peter Ustinov as Hercule Poirot does not make the most pleasant impression, especially if you compare him with Poirot performed by Albert Finney in "Murder on the Orient Express" <.
The role of Jane Birkin is not special, nor is the performance. The same faded is Lois Childs in the role of a murdered millionaire. Bett Davis in the role of a kleptomaniac is very interesting and expressive. Maggie Smith in the role of her companion forms an organic duet with Davis. Mia Farrow in the role of the former friend of the murdered too much overplays.
Angela Lansbury in the role of the author of 'erotic novels' is perhaps the most striking character of the film. Olivia Hussey in the role of her daughter is expectedly sad, but no more. David Niven in the film once again demonstrates the appearance of 'one hundred percent British gentleman', although the role hardly offered more. George Kennedy's role is not particularly memorable.
In the technical aspects of the picture, there are no special complaints - operator work is quite at the level, field shooting is performed well, Views of Egypt add color to the film. So, in conclusion, if you like the work of Agatha Christie, this film is worth watching. Thank you very much.
- Hastings, mon ami, that's impossible! You went to see a new movie yesterday based on my trivial investigation on the ship. Why do you keep quiet?
- Poirot, I'm afraid you won't like my words.
- Come on, Hastings, I've always been calm about your stupidity, you know that. Do you really like this movie?
- Great movie!
- Damn it, I knew it.
- Yes, yes, Poirot, I understand that you do not like the adaptation of your adventures, however, let’s reason clearly.
- Oh, I didn't expect this from you, my friend, well, I'm all ears.
- Take, for example, the plot of the film. In my opinion, the intrigue is whipped up very skillfully, and until the last moment it is really unclear who exactly killed poor Lynnet.
- Mon dieu, Hastings! What intrigue you are talking about, in this case everything fell into place 5 minutes after the discovery of the body.
- Your modesty today truly knows no bounds.
- But it is! And this British John Gillermin managed to stretch the investigation for a good 2 hours of screen time!
Poirot, it seems to me that your painful ego should not prevent a talented director from captivating the viewer with a really interesting plot plot. At the beginning of the film, he very skillfully “described” all the main characters, in the middle he intrigued with a very stylish, innovative technique, illustrating all your versions with sketches about each of the suspects with weapons in his hands, and in the end he did everything as you like: everyone sits and, with bated breath, listens to the brilliant Poirot, right?
- That’s right, Hastings, but why did they remove a few important characters from the story?
- But you’ve just been arguing for a long time, do you want the film to last even longer?
- I regret to admit that there is some common sense in your words, mon ami.
- Let’s talk about the actors.
- Yes, yes, Hastings, you will not claim that this British Peter Ustinov could at least closely embody my image on the screen?
- That's exactly what I was going to say. You may not realize it yourself, Poirot, but all your “cute” pranks from the outside always looked exactly as it is shown in the movie: your insane worship of the mustache.
- But they are really excellent, Hastings!
- Yeah, yeah, I know, calm down, Poirot. So, your mustache, your Belgian ancestry, your pompous maxims about small gray cells: all this was shown quite close to the “original”, don’t you think?
- I don’t know what to say, Mon Ami. You put a knife in my back.
- Don't be dramatic, Poirot! And the other actors were pretty good, weren't they? Angela Lansbury alone is worth it! In my opinion, the image turned out very funny, although slightly more buffoonery than it was necessary.
- That's right, Hastings, most of the characters in this movie have nothing to do with reality at all.
- But that's the story, Poirot. It was important for the director to carry all the characters along the different poles of the social map: a communist, an eternally drunk writer, a poor maid, a cartoonish German surgeon, a pompous lady from high society and her rude housekeeper. All the characters were played with a lot of humor and irony, which went to this film only good, whether you like it or not.
- Hastings, you are unbearable!
- I love you too, my friend. You just have to admit that scrupulously re-creating this investigation would have caused the viewer only a healthy dream, but not interest. And here everything is done as it should: a beautiful soundtrack, beautiful Egyptian landscapes, talented actors and, of course, a fascinating plot. What more do you want, Poirot?
- All right, all right, Hastings, calm down. Come on, you better have breakfast. I believe that great things await us today!
- Are you going to curl your mustache, Poirot?
- Mon dieu!
8 out of 10
Actually, the whole story quite capaciously fit into the synopsis for the film.
Pretty, well-off Lynnet (L. Childs) embarks on a Nile cruise with her lover Simon (S. McCorkindale). They are followed by Jacqueline (M. Farrow), from whom the latter left for her rich friend. During another fun evening, Jacqueline, having been drinking, wounds Simon in the leg. And later in the night, his fiancée, Lynnette, is killed.
I like the colorful and very original works of Agatha Christie and Rex Stout. I can’t find an explanation for this, but in the movie I think “She Wrote Murder” is no less original, where the wonderful Angela Landsbury also played.
Nevertheless, I would like to start with Mr. Ustinov - a brilliant actor, but, unfortunately, members of the film crews, who are extremely disgusting in the life of a person, as the "grandmother's tales" narrate. It is, of course, completely different from the usual Susha. That makes him no less attractive. It is impossible not to mention infinitely my favorite Bette Davis, who by that time was perhaps the most famous actress of the “trupe” of this film. At that time, the audience, I think, it was even more pleasant to see her - the actress very rarely appeared on the screen, except for episodic roles in TV series. The last big role was the role of the mother in the film “Anniversary” (1967), absolutely disastrous, passing and in general some slurred opus. Angela Landsbury, already named by me, plays absolutely amazing! I would even dare to say that the second most memorable role after Poirot himself. Her look, behavior and audacity somehow reminded me of the role of Margot in the performance of the same Bette Davis in All About Eve.
The first hour of the picture seems sluggish. At one time, I remember being sleepy. But after that very shot at Jacqueline, the plot begins to develop quickly and rapidly.
The characters in the movie are written out perfectly for the detective (in fact, it could not be otherwise - with such and such actors). There are small sags with editing - other characters disappear somewhere for a long time, which in fact is not very striking. The only two rather faded roles I thought were Simon and, sorry, Louise. The first one is really bad, and Jane Birkin I just can’t stand it, but that’s my problem.
The film is highly recommended for viewing, but stock up on two hours of free time and would strongly recommend watching it with Soviet dubbing.