Five Little Pigs
- Episode aired Dec 14, 2003
- TV-14
- 1h 33m
IMDb RATING
8.4/10
4.4K
YOUR RATING
Lucy Crale enlists Poirot to investigate the 14-year-old murder in which her mother was hanged for poisoning her artist father.Lucy Crale enlists Poirot to investigate the 14-year-old murder in which her mother was hanged for poisoning her artist father.Lucy Crale enlists Poirot to investigate the 14-year-old murder in which her mother was hanged for poisoning her artist father.
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
I saw this when it first aired in 2003, when I was 11, and I was very impressed, really I was. Two years ago, I read the book, and I personally think the book is up there among the best with Death on the Nile and Murder in Mesopotamia. What impressed me most with the TV adaptation, which I got on video recently, was that some of the scenes, like the hanging scene, were genuinely haunting, and that's what I want to feel in a mystery. The music score gave that haunted feeling and some poignancy, in an already complicated story. As far as I can remember, the overall structure was faithful to the book, and I also liked the actress of Caroline Crale, as you really feel for her, and Amias was certainly hissable here in the way they made him behave. Marc Warren and Gemma Jones also do well as Meridith and Mrs Williams. Also what the writers got right were Angela's disfigurement and although it was changed, the ending with Lucy in the lovely dress was very effective. As ever, David Suchet is impeccable as Hercule Poirot, and he is helped by a brooding script. However there were two things I didn't like about the adaptation- the idea of Blake being homosexual(I don't think that was in the book), and Julie Cox was perhaps too old for Elsa. All in all, technically and visually it's a delight to look at, and I enjoyed this adaptation very much, though I do prefer the book. 9/10 Bethany Cox.
I'm quite opinionated when it comes to Agatha Christie's books-turned-movies, but this one was simply great (ignoring a minute comparison with the book).
I liked pretty much everything, from the actors, and I LOVED Rachael Stirling's performance as Caroline Crale, to the directing filled with flashbacks. Everything was so tense that you could even feel the powerful emotions and feelings the characters were going through. You could even feel sorry for the murderer in the end, as you were made to understand exactly what he was going through. Once again, I have to say that the acting was top quality.
One of my favourite episodes!
I liked pretty much everything, from the actors, and I LOVED Rachael Stirling's performance as Caroline Crale, to the directing filled with flashbacks. Everything was so tense that you could even feel the powerful emotions and feelings the characters were going through. You could even feel sorry for the murderer in the end, as you were made to understand exactly what he was going through. Once again, I have to say that the acting was top quality.
One of my favourite episodes!
Regular readers of my comments know I have dozens and dozens here that complain about Christie films. Oh, I'll ramble on and on about the nature of detective narrative and how the filmmakers (different each time) always seem to apply formulas in ways that trample on the most fun parts.
What a sourpuss! What a killjoy!
But it all sets the stage for my enthusiasm over this project.
Here's the basic problem set. You must set the track of the story so that facts can be interpreted in different ways, "playing fair" with different outcomes. At the same time, there are important mechanics of narrative which move the viewer into the thing, detecting, writing, conspiring. And then we have the cinematic and theatrical needs. All that stuff about faces and places, character and rhythms, types of rhythms.
We have it all here, thanks to some smart people and the happy structure of the novel, which is a rashoman-like retelling of the same event. Each layer, each visit shows more and we know some versions will be lies.
Yes, I must admit the trick of the overly juggled hand-held camera and washed colors for the "movie within" was a bit amateurish and annoying. But forgivable, especially since this Poirot is so unlike all the other Suchet portrayals. This one is not a prissy joke, but a mind on legs, one that can be patient with a foolish world. Swapping directors around is so interesting because even with the same actor, you get a completely different character.
This one also has a higher level of acting talent than in the series stories.
I've remarked on Julie Cox before. Striking woman, something like an anorexic Polly Walker.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
What a sourpuss! What a killjoy!
But it all sets the stage for my enthusiasm over this project.
Here's the basic problem set. You must set the track of the story so that facts can be interpreted in different ways, "playing fair" with different outcomes. At the same time, there are important mechanics of narrative which move the viewer into the thing, detecting, writing, conspiring. And then we have the cinematic and theatrical needs. All that stuff about faces and places, character and rhythms, types of rhythms.
We have it all here, thanks to some smart people and the happy structure of the novel, which is a rashoman-like retelling of the same event. Each layer, each visit shows more and we know some versions will be lies.
Yes, I must admit the trick of the overly juggled hand-held camera and washed colors for the "movie within" was a bit amateurish and annoying. But forgivable, especially since this Poirot is so unlike all the other Suchet portrayals. This one is not a prissy joke, but a mind on legs, one that can be patient with a foolish world. Swapping directors around is so interesting because even with the same actor, you get a completely different character.
This one also has a higher level of acting talent than in the series stories.
I've remarked on Julie Cox before. Striking woman, something like an anorexic Polly Walker.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
10Edu-16
Quite the best Christie adaptation I or my wife have seen to date. We were particularly surprised by how emotionally engaged we were. Where as with most detective stories you remain dispassionate, quietly observing from the outside, FLP draws you in to care about the characters and come the final denouement we are both intellectually and emotional rewarded by the resolution.
The direction and story telling are perfect - cutting neatly between the present and five flashback accounts of the same 14 yrs old incident. We are led gently up all manner of garden paths, and even allowed to think we've 'nailed it' only to have our smugness shot down in the final reel. The acting is far above the norm, and the casting, especially of the flashback 'younger versions', particularly effective.
FLP is lovely to look at - with a nice contrast for the flashbacks to a heightened, over exposed look, and lovely to listen to - the score is a magnificently clever variation of the basic Poirot theme.
Yes - an all round joy that we even wanted to watch again the next day. A 'whodunit first' for us!
The direction and story telling are perfect - cutting neatly between the present and five flashback accounts of the same 14 yrs old incident. We are led gently up all manner of garden paths, and even allowed to think we've 'nailed it' only to have our smugness shot down in the final reel. The acting is far above the norm, and the casting, especially of the flashback 'younger versions', particularly effective.
FLP is lovely to look at - with a nice contrast for the flashbacks to a heightened, over exposed look, and lovely to listen to - the score is a magnificently clever variation of the basic Poirot theme.
Yes - an all round joy that we even wanted to watch again the next day. A 'whodunit first' for us!
Finally! I've now seen all of the feature length installments of the Poirot movies featuring David Suchet. And wouldn't you know it - the last one I watch just happens to be one of the best of the entire series.
Five Little Pigs, which happens to benefit from staying fairly true to Agatha Christie's original work (at least as best as I can remember), is a poignant, gut-wrenching, and beautifully filmed movie. As Christie did in her novel, the mystery is told though a series of five interviews that flashback to that fateful day when a murder was committed. Director Paul Unwin handles this portion quite nicely. I was worried about all the hand-held shaky-cam, but it works well for the iffy memories of events of fourteen years previous. Even though I knew the outcome, I thought the mystery elements were well done. I think someone without knowledge of the plot would really enjoy this part of Five Little Pigs. The acting, other than the abysmal performance of Aimee Mullins as the adult Lucy, is more than acceptable. By now (or by 2003 at least), Suchet has grown in the role of Poirot to the point that I cannot imagine anyone else even attempting to do the character. Two other real highlights for me were the music (it's quite beautiful) and the photography (there are some gorgeous landscape shots throughout the movie). All together, an 8/10 seems about right by me. Had the adult Lucy not been so distractingly poorly played, I could have easily rated Five Little Pigs higher.
Five Little Pigs, which happens to benefit from staying fairly true to Agatha Christie's original work (at least as best as I can remember), is a poignant, gut-wrenching, and beautifully filmed movie. As Christie did in her novel, the mystery is told though a series of five interviews that flashback to that fateful day when a murder was committed. Director Paul Unwin handles this portion quite nicely. I was worried about all the hand-held shaky-cam, but it works well for the iffy memories of events of fourteen years previous. Even though I knew the outcome, I thought the mystery elements were well done. I think someone without knowledge of the plot would really enjoy this part of Five Little Pigs. The acting, other than the abysmal performance of Aimee Mullins as the adult Lucy, is more than acceptable. By now (or by 2003 at least), Suchet has grown in the role of Poirot to the point that I cannot imagine anyone else even attempting to do the character. Two other real highlights for me were the music (it's quite beautiful) and the photography (there are some gorgeous landscape shots throughout the movie). All together, an 8/10 seems about right by me. Had the adult Lucy not been so distractingly poorly played, I could have easily rated Five Little Pigs higher.
Did you know
- TriviaSecond generation actors Toby Stephens (Philip Blake) and Rachael Stirling's (Caroline Crale) respective mothers Maggie Smith and Diana Rigg starred together in another film based on an Agatha Christie novel: Evil Under the Sun (1982) which preceded this one in the chronological order of publishing.
- GoofsYoung Amyas is seen painting with his left hand. As an adult, he uses his right hand.
- Quotes
Hercule Poirot: Human nature has an infinite capacity to surprise.
- ConnectionsReferenced in Agatha Christie: Murder on the Orient Express (2006)
- SoundtracksFirst GNOSSIENNE
by Erik Satie
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official sites
- Languages
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content