As hard as I try, every time I watch the 2004 version of Death on the Nile, I can't do it without comparing it to the 1978 version. It's impossible. And the newer film, in my opinion, doesn't measure-up. While there are a number of things I could write about, there are two main areas where the newer Death on the Nile pales in comparison.
Acting – with two exceptions, the actors in this film are not the world-class actors in the 1978 movie. Don't get me wrong, the actors here are fine – there aren't any poor performances. But they're not Bette Davis, Mia Farrow, Angela Lansbury, Maggie Smith, David Niven, or Jane Birkin. The two exceptions I mentioned are David Suchet and David Soul. As much as I like the 1978 movie, Peter Ustinov never really feels like Poirot. And, as much as I love George Kennedy, Soul is a better fit in the role.
Tone – the newer film has a much darker, brooding feel to it that the earlier movie. As a result the newer movie's just not as much fun or enjoyable. This really hurts the 2004 production. The 1978 movie actually has quite a bit of comedy in it, but not enough to take away from the serious nature of the subject matter. Even other episode in the Agatha Christie's Poirot series have a lighter touch to them that would have worked much better here.
That's not to say it's a bad movie, there's really a lot here to like. I've already mentioned the two Davids – Suchet and Soul. There's also some incredibly beautiful cinematography, nice costuming, and interesting locations. It's also as faithful to the significant plot points found in Christie's book as the earlier movie. On the whole, the good and bad just about negate each other and I rate it a 5/10.
5/10
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.