Summoned to Baghdad at the behest of a Russian Countess, Hercule Poirot (David Suchet) instead finds himself mixed up in a murder at a nearby archaeological dig. This is, however, no ordinary murder. With only one entrance to the room the woman was found in and several witnesses to the fact that no on entered or exited, Poirot will have to come up with a clever solution to trap a clever killer.Even with my 6/10 rating, I feel I may have overrated Murder in Mesopotamia. It's got some good points – the exotic Tunisian locations standing in for Iraq, David Suchet, the archaeological dig setting, and an interesting, if improbable, means of murder. And there's something extra appealing about a locked room type mystery. But Murder in Mesopotamia suffers from one hugely ridiculous plot point that I am completely unable to overlook. It's not really the fault of the makers of this adaptation - instead, I lay the blame squarely at Agatha Christie's original work. - BIG SPOILERS AHEAD – Are we really supposed to believe that Mrs. Leidner could marry a man and not realize he was her supposedly dead first husband? I cannot fathom something so far-fetched as this actually happening. I don't care how much his face has changed, I'm unwilling to take that kind of leap in logic. I've always thought it was one of the silliest things Christie ever wrote. Unless she was a complete idiot, surely Mrs. Leidner would have realized at some point that she had married the same man twice. – END OF BIG SPOILERS
6/10
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.