Four and Twenty Blackbirds

For the first episodes of the then new TV series "Agatha Christie's Poirot", which was still in its 'experimental' phase - and nobody would have dreamed back then that it was to last TWENTY-FIVE seasons! - the producers picked some of Agatha Christie's short stories featuring the great detective; and they certainly made VERY good picks. Like in this case, with the fascinating case of the mysterious 'coincidence' of two brothers dying within just a few days, and the seemingly small, but Immensely important details of the meal one of them ate at his restaurant shortly before his death...

This was only the fourth episode of the first season of the series - and yet, everything's already there: David Suchet has practically 'become' Hercule Poirot (not without some additional humor for the delectation of the TV audience, but that only adds to his lovable eccentricity), the supporting cast also is formidable, and set design, costumes, hairstyles and everything else visible (or audible) are GENUINELY 20s' style in every little detail. It was already more than clear that this series would turn into something big! But this episode has also got a VERY interesting additional attraction: it takes us into both the painters' and the theatrical world of the time, AND, as the biggest contrast imaginable, in the very next scene we get an insight into a forensic laboratory of the 1920s... All in all: it's really unbelievable what a great artistic and entertainment value a 50-minute TV series episode can achieve!

Poirot attends a meal with his dentist Bonnington. Waitress Molly casually talks about people being creatures of habit, she tells Poirot about fellow diner, Henry Gascoine, an artist and man of habit, broke his long standing routine recently, arriving on a different day, and eating different food. Poirot is instantly intrigued by Henry's deviation, more so when he learns that night poor Henry tumbled down the stairs to his death. Poirot attempts to learn more about Henry, talking to his neighbours and model, Poirot learns that Henry's estranged brother Anthony has also recently died. The little grey cells spring into action as Poirot smells a rat.

Brilliantly acted, I especially loved Holly De Jong's performance as Dulcie Lang, I will forever be a fan of Holly's after her brilliant performance a few years previous in Blackadder II.

As a fan of all things art deco i find this episode in particular a treat, some of the art work on show is just fabulous.

The music hall scenes look so good, a fun era expertly recreated. Some of the costumes too are rather wonderful. The seaside scenes also look so nice, meticulous.

I've always considered this one of the best of the early Poirot episodes. it's a super smart episode, it's a very clever plot, I've always liked the art of misdirection and the use of doubles. Short on suspects, but that seems not to matter.

For some reason when I was younger, I ignored Agatha Christie stories. In the past few years, I've discovered them from borrowing audio books from the library and greatly enjoyed them - which let me to start reading as well. And so I was delighted to find out about the Poirot series. The few I've seen that I'd read were true to her stories, and those that I'd not read always left me impressed with her writing and tight plots, and left me guessing until the end "who dun it". One really couldn't miss a minute of it.

Therefore I expected so much more from this episode. In fact, until I looked at the other reviews, I really did not think it was based on a 'real' Agatha Christie story. I thought it was written by someone else just using the character. It was just too simplistic and obvious. But as always, the settings are beautiful, although I was still left very disappointed with the plot line. That said, I still have hope for other episodes in the series.

This was one of the Poirot episodes that required a lot of padding by the screenwriters. The original story itself was quite basic: at dinner one evening, Poirot hears a waitress make a chance remark that a regular customer had ordered a meal that was very different from his usual tastes. A few days later he hears from his dinner companion that that same habitual customer from the restaurant had happened to die that very evening, apparently by accident. Poirot's curiosity is aroused, and by talking with a series of acquaintances of the dead man, and calling on his knowledge of human nature, he is able to determine that the man's death was not all it appeared to be.

A simple enough story, and lacking some of the detail that would make it appealing to television viewers. So, the writers added in some considerable amount of background of the dead man's artistic career and family, along with a series of references to contemporary forensic science (faint traces of CSI!), cricket, and even a passing reference to Raffles, a fictional mystery-solving character from the 1930's. Nothing wrong with any of that. Didn't really add to the essential story, but didn't take away from it either. All in all, an episode that was enjoyable but not very memorable.

When Poirot is having dinner at a restaurant the waitress draws his attention to a old man, an artist with a strict routine.

He eats there on a certain day and has a particular set of dishes but recently he has varied the days he attends and the menu which piques Poirot's little grey cells.

The old artist is soon found dead from a fall, he was an eccentric who did not allow his paintings to be sold. Now he is dead, the paintings are valuable.

Suspicion falls on his twin brother, they both fell out some years earlier over a woman and not spoken since then but he too also dies after suffering a long period of ill health.

As Poirot states, there is a significant lack of suspects in this matter so the suspect is rather obvious. What we do get is Hastings being interested in the cricket score which is a running theme in this episode. The director also pays great attention to period detail with money spent on art production and extras such as the pier scenes.