Agatha Christie, said to be one of the most prolific writers of the 20th century, her works have been countlessly adapted into movies and TV series. On February 19th, I had the pleasure of viewing the latest adaptation of Christie’s book Death on the Nile (1937). Directed by Kenneth Branagh, I had seen his last cinematic adaption of the series Murder on the Orient Express (2017), Branagh has again led an ensemble cast while playing detective Hercule Poirot.
I found the rich opulence and historic clothing to be quite enchanting in the first film and this newest movie also proved to be a rich tapestry of costume and set design. Of course, I watched the film in part for its portrayal of the attractive Gal Gadot, who graced the screen in shimmering silver and white pieces. I loved the renderings they had of some of Egypt’s most mystifyingly beautiful, historical sites along the Nile. The Egyptian UNESCO-protected heritage sites were set reproductions, a requirement considering some of the stunts tried by a few of the characters in the film. The movie is a superficial reminder of how the remains of Ancient Egypt—thousands of years old—can quickly deteriorate in a few hundred years under the care of freewheeling tourists.
To anyone who thinks watching this movie can get them out of reading is sorely mistaken. All films, based on this Poirot adventure, are poor substitutes for the book by Agatha Christie. You might even need movie-to-book stories published after each adaptation, slightly ironic considering these movies are based on a book. None of the movies are bad per say but to summarize Christie’s characters in segments of mere hours can be too hard a task for an audience to keep up with. Christie’s books are filled with at least 10 characters, all different yet each having a slight motive for the initial murder. Their connections with other characters differ and are based on relations of the societal and secret amorous nature. Branagh has opted, like directors before him, to combine characters together to have a more succinct cast that won’t confuse the audience more than what is relatively needed. The truth is watching this movie and predicting the first murder and who the murderer is easy. You will know by the second half of the film even if you didn’t read the book and this can be partially blamed on combining characters together. The only characters who stayed the same and kept their motives from the original Christie plotline are henceforth the only ones who could still be the logical killers. I guess that’s a spoiler alert: there’s more than 1 murderer.
There were some changes that I loved—I liked the jazz singer, a character completely altered from book to screen. Yet, there were other changes that led me to write this movie review. The storyline I am most intrigued by is the lesbian couple reveal. Was this a plot point written by Ms. Agatha Christie? Or is this another element of today’s world that slipped into a script, otherwise filled with heterosexual characters? Please, keep in mind that I didn’t read the book, nor have I watched previous adaptations, I was clueless to what was happening. But after watching so many movies there are often moments when you can tell certain plot holes have perhaps formed. In this movie, it was the character combinations and sub-themes, like race, that made supposed motives and friendships among characters questionable.