Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Hmm, I've always found the work of Agatha Christie to be tedious and full of tiresome paper thin stereotypes and clichés.  Adaptations always seem like a ham actor's dream and always seem to be full of assorted luvies all vying to put their individual stamp on several hours of boring 'spot the hammy thesp' television.

 

So, not being about 90 years old, I find it hard to get worked up about Disney's attempt to 'reboot the franchise'.  It was rubbish before, so they'd have to really mess up to make it any worse.  Short of having Mylie Cyrus or Rebecca Black cast as Marple, it can only be an improvement.

 

Carnelian
Originally Posted by carpet:

The link is not working! But do you mean the story that Jennifer Garner, 39 year old actress, is playing Miss Marple?

 

I bet Justin Bieber will be playing Poirot next.

Again, an improvement on the hammery of David Suchet and the rubbish stereotype character that is Poirot

 

Suchet: Mais oui monsieur, très bien! N'est pas? Although I am supposed to be, how you say, fluent en Française, I only use French words that are easy for the English reader or viewer to understand, n'est pas! So, I only speak French to GCSE grade D level.  How you say, 'guide book French'.  N'est pas, monsieur? 

Carnelian
Last edited by Carnelian

The article to which the link should lead to reads:

 

29 March 2011

Miss Marple rebooted by Disney

Marple Some news travels fast and jaws may drop just as quickly.  Breaking today was the fact that Disney has done a deal and will 'reboot' the Miss Marple franchise.  This involves the casting of Hollywood actress Jennifer Garner in the main role.  And yes, it is the role of Miss Jane Marple to which I refer.

But the casting is not the main issue (as today's Daily Telegraph attests).  It's the concept.  For the Disney rebooted Miss Marple is a Marple revisited and redrawn.

  • It's to be her younger self. Well that's OK then; sometimes the younger, formative self works well, see The Young Indiana Jones. (But it's also worth remembering that 'young' versions often follow massively successful originals and are simply made to extend the money-spinning bandwagon journey.)  PLUS
  • It's to be modern day. Again, this can work: think the BBC's recent and hugely successful Sherlock.  PLUS
  • It's to be set in America.  Sorry, I can't think of one mitigating offering for this.  It's like mangoes turning into olives.  Taking such a big attribute of the stories is to change their nature completely.

And taking all three together is simply a step too far.  It's like taking a step too far and walking over a cliff into the ocean, or stepping from solid ground into quicksand.  It's just not recognisably the same.

Finally, back to that first point; it's to be a younger Marple.  Surely the magic of Marple lies in the fact she's a wise old woman, a keen observer of humankind with many years of quiet practice behind her?



El Loro

When I was younger I read every book Agatha Christie wrote. I loved to get lost in them and devour every twist and turn of the mysteries. My favourite character was Miss Marples, the more I read of her sleuthing the more I conjured up an image of what I thought she'd be like in personality, behaviour and even appearance. I remember watching a film with Margaret Rutherford as Miss Marple and as much I'd enjoyed other Rutherford films - I love the old films -she wasn't "my" Miss Marple at all.

 

When tv started producing Agatha Christie mysteries I found my Miss Marple in Joan Hickson, she portrayed her exactly as I'd thought of her, for me she was Miss Marple.

 

When I read the Christie books that featured Hercule Poirot I didn't conjure up an image of him in the same way I had with Miss Marple but when David Suchet played the part I thought he was also perfect in the character. I wouldn't watch a Disney or American version, Disney's great at some things like their theme parks and films but not everything they do.

Yellow Rose

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×