Murder Is Easy

Agatha Christie has a chequered history with Tv and Film adaptations, from early Poirot characterisations that made him French, yes French. Margaret Rutherford was a fun but hardly faithful to the source Miss Marple. The recent ITV adaptations of Marple have played fast a loose with the narratives and even changed murderers at points. So, it's true to say that adapting Christie can be fraught with difficulty when it appears 'easy'.

This adaptation was a mess on many levels. From a sub Wes Anderson approach to texture and editing rhythm, strange close ups, wobbly camera work and a script that clanked along pouring exposition on top of the imposition of a post-colonial narrative - it just didn't mesh.

The ideas were bold, and in many ways could have been brilliant, just so many choices at once going away from the source material began to stress the story so much that it became vague and confused, an original piece about colonial attitudes in the 20th Century or a straight down the line thriller would have been much more effective and a much stronger choice from the BBC.

The problem with BBC commissions at the moment is their lack of vision to make original drama, they appear to want to be commercial whilst trying to service what is current and hotly debated. This leaves the BBC feeling confused and only concerned with issues that trend in London and liberal media outlets.

ITV have delivered Christie stronger, better and more radically than the BBC over the last two decades. So perhaps it would be nice to see this 'tradition' of a bbc Christie at Christmas knocked on the head, until they begin to understand how to produce drama that doesn't betray the source.

This was just a real dud.

I love to watch BBC crime series. Most of them are excellent. The lesser ones are still of a good standard.

Murder Is Easy is well below standard. So much so I was hesitant at first, feeling I was missing some hidden point.

I endured the dreadful acting. David Jonsson looks like he's been eating lemons. Then there's the dreadful timing, robbing the already sluggish story of all suspense.

To top it off, the camera work is wooden and awkward. Everything looks like it has been filmed on a theatre stage.

Finally, the makers insist on emphasising the bigotry of the era in a haphazard way. It becomes irritating when Jonsson breaks protocol and is meekly insulted or discriminated. He never stops smirking.

The only mystery here is how on earth this series was allowed to see the light of day.

Well, the scenery and locations didn't disappoint. They're absolutely gorgeous (filmed in Scotland I believe).

Agatha Christie stories are pretty rote so the bar isn't too high, but this two-parter didn't manage to clear it.

The body count was really too high for Our Hero (Luke Fitzwilliam) to sink his teeth into any one murder and frankly while he did ID the killer in the end ... he was one step behind the whole way, unlike say Miss Marple.

About the casting and the plot line:

I was very distracted by the fact that David Jonsson's left eye is much smaller than his right. There are many many closeups of his face where this affected my ability to focus on the plot.

Apparently in order to justify casting a Black actor in the lead role, they gave him a back story as being from a rich Nigerian family and coming to London to work in a diplomatic post as an attache to some British muckymuck. He speaks with a posh accent and there is almost no relevance to his African background in terms of the plot.

We get some stereotypical racist comments about "mud huts" from the local high and mighty lord of the manor, but almost everybody else in the film basically just accepts him and appears virtually color-blind. In 1954 rural England? I dunno about that.

Also, he's not given much to do, other than to wander around snooping, and then give a knowing smile in almost every scene.

The dialogue he was given to say didn't help at all.

I couldn't help feeling, this would have been a much better production if they'd just stuck with a snoopy old maid like Miss Marple as the detective.

Agatha Christie wrote many dozens of murder mysteries, some famously ingenious; but either 'Murder is Easy' was a dud, or this adapatation is badly screwed up. People start dying in a small English village, but everyone still alive is remarkably unperturbed and several seem not to care if they're suspected to be the killer. Eventually, the real culprit is unearthed, and explains exactly how they've done it, although our amateur detective hero has identified the villain without in fact piecing any of it together for themselves. I've seen Christie adaptations that were fun, preposterous, or anachronistic; but none as anemic as this.

Firstly I'm a big fan of the whodunit period drama. From Miss Marple to Poirot etc. When I saw this advertised on the BBC over the Christmas period I was hoping for a good watch.

This starts off intriguing with Miss Pinkerton boarding a train, making her way to Scotland Yard. On the train, she meets Luke Fitzwilliam, whom she tells her tale of a murderer in her village. Fitzwilliam, an investigator himself, who is frustrated at a delay in starting his new job and so goes to Miss Pinkerton's village to investigate her claims.

To be honest, I found this one a bit boring. The way it played out and was acted it almost felt like a parody of Agatha Christie rather than a serious drama.

Although David Jonsson carried the lead well enough it didn't really suit the story to have Fitzwilliam's character changed to Nigerian. It made it difficult to believe the setting where the story takes place and that it was 1950s Britain.

I would recommend spending two hours doing something better than watching this. There are much better adaptations of Agatha Christie's work than this and time would be better spent watching them. Sadly yet again another Christmas and another sub par BBC adaptation.