After all the praise lavished on this film, I decided to watch it, in spite of knowing about the changed ending.
Well, to put it short: if I hadn't read the book and watched the Soviet adaptation, I would have found this one absolutely charming. The actors are good (I especially liked the ones cast as Judge Quincannon and Emily Brent), the pace is fine, considering it was filmed seventy years ago. But nevertheless, first and foremost, it's an adaptation of Agatha Christie's masterpiece, and I viewed it as one.
The good points of it:
1) The shot fired by the judge and Dr. Armstrong when they stage the judge's murder. After all, it was the most reasonable thing to do.
2) The soundtrack. A splendid one (and catchy, too!)
3) The judge's "game of the mind". A nice addition to his character.
4) The Rogers. Both well played, and their interaction was shown quite believably.
The bad points:
1) The whole comic atmosphere. Two of the reviewers compared the film to a parlor game, and I couldn't agree more. The mistrust, tension and fear that completely dominate the characters after Mrs. Rogers dies are simply absent here. Up to the very end, everyone seems to behave as if they're in a murder game. It's okay by itself, it's not like a detective comedy is bad, if you haven't read the book, that is.
2) The general's reduced to a clown-like character, and his story (the most touching story of them all) is barely mentioned.
3) Blore is made an idiot. No: an IDIOT. Of course, he's not a genius in the book either, but here, I was shocked he had lived to his age at all, being so utterly brainless.
4) The change in Vera's backstory. I wouldn't have minded it (although it seems pointless, like Beatrice Taylor being replaced by Peter Brent for no reason), but it makes the seaweed trick nonsensical.
5) Had to mention it. The ending. It seems that THIS judge's real plan was like "seven murders and one matchmaking". I thought he would have had his future victims' photographs! Why didn't he react to the wrong person (Morley)'s arrival? He searched for murderers so scrupulously, yet he failed to deduct that it was Vera's sister who was actually guilty. It seemed to me after watching the film that Lombard and Vera were in fact lying by the end. Why not? It would be very fitting for Lombard to make up a convincing story about him being another man. I mean, when a gun's pointed at you, you'll call yourself any name just to escape! As it's implied that Vera's sister is dead, Vera, too, could throw the blame on her to save her neck (she told Lombard about her sister before the killer was revealed, so she could have thought him Owen).
So, it's a romantic comedy with some mystery thrown in-between, but so different in spirit from the original book it was hard to consider it an adaptation.
Well, to put it short: if I hadn't read the book and watched the Soviet adaptation, I would have found this one absolutely charming. The actors are good (I especially liked the ones cast as Judge Quincannon and Emily Brent), the pace is fine, considering it was filmed seventy years ago. But nevertheless, first and foremost, it's an adaptation of Agatha Christie's masterpiece, and I viewed it as one.
The good points of it:
1) The shot fired by the judge and Dr. Armstrong when they stage the judge's murder. After all, it was the most reasonable thing to do.
2) The soundtrack. A splendid one (and catchy, too!)
3) The judge's "game of the mind". A nice addition to his character.
4) The Rogers. Both well played, and their interaction was shown quite believably.
The bad points:
1) The whole comic atmosphere. Two of the reviewers compared the film to a parlor game, and I couldn't agree more. The mistrust, tension and fear that completely dominate the characters after Mrs. Rogers dies are simply absent here. Up to the very end, everyone seems to behave as if they're in a murder game. It's okay by itself, it's not like a detective comedy is bad, if you haven't read the book, that is.
2) The general's reduced to a clown-like character, and his story (the most touching story of them all) is barely mentioned.
3) Blore is made an idiot. No: an IDIOT. Of course, he's not a genius in the book either, but here, I was shocked he had lived to his age at all, being so utterly brainless.
4) The change in Vera's backstory. I wouldn't have minded it (although it seems pointless, like Beatrice Taylor being replaced by Peter Brent for no reason), but it makes the seaweed trick nonsensical.
5) Had to mention it. The ending. It seems that THIS judge's real plan was like "seven murders and one matchmaking". I thought he would have had his future victims' photographs! Why didn't he react to the wrong person (Morley)'s arrival? He searched for murderers so scrupulously, yet he failed to deduct that it was Vera's sister who was actually guilty. It seemed to me after watching the film that Lombard and Vera were in fact lying by the end. Why not? It would be very fitting for Lombard to make up a convincing story about him being another man. I mean, when a gun's pointed at you, you'll call yourself any name just to escape! As it's implied that Vera's sister is dead, Vera, too, could throw the blame on her to save her neck (she told Lombard about her sister before the killer was revealed, so she could have thought him Owen).
So, it's a romantic comedy with some mystery thrown in-between, but so different in spirit from the original book it was hard to consider it an adaptation.