Murder on the Orient Express(2017)
The most drastic change from the latest version of Murder on the Orient Express movie versus its predecessor is probably Hercule Poirot's mustache. No longer referring to Dali's mustache, he is now more like the tentacle of The Lorax . There are at least 4 movie versions of one of the greatest detectives in this fictional universe, but what Kenneth Branagh , undeniably, is the one with the most epic mustache.
Branagh who also acts as a director-and I assume also the person responsible for proposing the mustache-no longer need to worry whether the film is capable of performing differently than the previous adaptation. Once we see the mustache, we can not forget it. Every Poirot appeared on the screen, our attention immediately stolen by his mustache. Maybe that's the purpose; to keep our attention awake.
As with all Agatha Christie novels, Murder on the Orient Express belongs to the realm of "whodunnit" mystery aka "who's who." And as with all the "whodunnit" mysteries, when the mystery answers have been presented, the film becomes meaningless. Given the story of Murder on the Orient Express that has been so popular, it seems that many already know "who the perpetrators". So, the point now is no longer about who did it, but how the movie can bind us until the disclosure of who did it.
This process is quite interesting anyway, because we are accompanied by the names of stars and the production of first-class production. Branagh uses a large and sharp 65mm format camera (also used in Dunkirk ) so the visuals look fantastic. He often shoots uninterruptedly long shots like highlighting crowds at the station or introducing passengers on the Orient Express train. The reason? Of course let's look cool. The set for the carriage is also very grand. Its classy furniture and utensils do look convincing as an exclusive tool for people of the privileged social stratum.
If in the 1974 film screened by Sidney Lumet we are accompanied by Albert Finney, Ingrid Bergman, Sean Connery, and Lauren Bacall, then in this latest version we need not worry lonely. There is Michelle Pfeiffer as the widow, Penelope Cruz as the missionary, Willem Dafoe as the professor, Judi Dench as the queen and Olivia Colman as her assistant, Daisy Ridley as an elite girl who has a secret relationship with the doctor portrayed by Leslie Odom Jr. , and Johnny Depp as the gangster Ratchett who was accompanied by his assistant ( Josh Gad ) and his butler ( Derek Jacobi ).
The film is swiftly introducing us to Poirot, an intelligent detective who is almost a maniac of symmetry, including the lack of boiled eggs or horse eek. Genius and crazy are really thin. He then asked for help to solve the case of theft of ancient artifacts, where the suspect was a priest, a rabbi, and a priest. Poirot not only solved his case, but also managed to tackle the culprit with cunning. Calm down, the solution will not provoke a religious war.
Poirot's deduction ability was then required in London and for that he had to ride on the Orient Express train. But just like Detective Conan wherever we go always invites death (try counting how many people in Japan are killed because of Conan's presence, we will not discuss here because it is material for another article), Poirot's journey also becomes a case. A passenger was found dead with dozens of pricks. The suspect is likely to be one of the train passengers. Luckily the train stopped because of an avalanche, giving Poirot a chance to search for clues and interrogate passengers one by one.
Well, I'm not going to say more about the mystery, much less the disclosure. But I can tell you about how my impression of how the movie rolled the mystery. The process of investigation is not as precarious as the 1974 version. The "whodunnit" mystery is when we are invited to try to guess who the perpetrator is. But this movie seems overwhelmed in exposing the details of the events and motives of the suspect candidates, so it even makes me confused with who is doing what. The disclosure scene at the end is also less greget. Poirot seemed to fail to unravel how he solved the complexity of the case.
I know, the mystery of "whodunnit" does not require character development. It handles character with a clinical approach; we only need the background, characteristics, and motifs of his character. So, it would be fun to watch this star studded cast having fun with their role, which they are . Calling them should get more spotlight, I think is quite wrong. But their role is dwarfed here. This relates to the mystery answer, which I will not reveal, but affirms that Murder on the Orient Express is actually a story with an ensemble cast , similar to Agatha Christie's And Then There Were None . But what we can here here is solicitation of Hercule Poirot's solo, which seems to be intended to start the Hercule Poirot Cinematic Universe .
The truth can not be called entertaining anyway. Branagh seems to really like to direct himself as this eccentric detective. Any gestures, accents, and actual traits are ridiculous with enthusiasm in such a way that at the point we are amazed at how seriously ridiculous looks are. He dominates every scene and we will always be forgotten that what we are seeing is actually Branagh not Poirot. Well, its all rich thanks to his mustache. Wait a minute, or maybe it's not a mustache?
its an interesting detective movie and cant wait to see it on big screen, this kind of movies are not been made this days , they have been relegated to TV
I still think no one can do what David Suchet does.