A very happy New Year to all readers of 'Do You Write Under Your Own Name?' I hope you've had an enjoyable and refreshing break over the festive season. I've done plenty of writing, and in due course I look forward to talking in more detail about what I've been up to. But I've also had plenty of time off!
Among other things, I followed a very good recommendation from Bethan, my lovely editor at Head of Zeus/Aries and indulged in a couple of games of Cryptic Killers. I'll probably write more about this another day, but basically it's an update of the old Wheatley/Links crime dossiers, and it's very well done.
I've also watched a variety of good things, including Red Joan, starring Judi Dench. A Ghost Story for Christmas is a long-time favourite of mine and I enjoyed catching up with one I'd missed, A View from a Hill, which dates from 2005 and was based on a story by M.R. James. This year's story (see the above photo of the actors) was an adaptation by Mark Gatiss of Arthur Conan Doyle's Lot No. 249 and it was very entertaining. A striking new element was introduced into the storyline which may be controversial to some, but I felt it was appealing and well done.
There was also what promised to be an interesting new element in the latest version of Murder is Easy. It's in the nature of adaptations that changes have to be made to the source material. Furthermore, there's not much point, in my opinion, in doing the same-old, same-old thing with the work of famous writers who have already been extensively adapted. This Christmas, I've reacquainted myself with the films of Evil under the Sun and Death on the Nile, both starring Peter Ustinov as an unlikely Poirot, and the original The 39 Steps starring Robert Donat. All of them hold up pretty well. The key to the success of an adaptation is that the script is capably written - for instance, the Ustinov films were written the gifted Anthony Shaffer. Unfortunately the reviews of Murder is Easy that I've read have been scathing.
'Doing it well' is a reason why I think it's important for writers not to prioritise quantity over quality. I've been working very busily on my writing in recent times and that's set to continue for a while to come. But I'm very keen to have breaks every now and then, so as to keep my writing fresh, and I've more or less managed to stick to my principles on this. I'm looking forward to what 2024 holds in store, and I do hope to meet some of you, the readers of this blog, during the course of the next twelve months. And please keep your comments and emails coming!
4 comments:
Happy New Year, Martin!
I don't think the reviews of 'Murder is Easy' were scathing enough, truth be told! The first part was sort of ok, but the second descended into nonsense. I'm not sure whether the implausibility of the story is the fault of Christie's original novel (I've never read it, but it's not supposed to be one of her best) or of the adaptor, but it just is ridiculous. And there was some terrible acting (or terrible directing of actors). But the worst fault in my view was the desperately awkward self-consciousness of the whole production; no-one involved seemed to have the faintest idea of how people in the 1950s spoke or behaved, which meant that none of the characters were remotely convincing. Apart from all that, Mrs Lincoln... Actually, I'm not sure there was a redeeming feature!
Modern adaptations of Christie don't have to be like that - while I loathe and detest the Sarah Phelps adaptations of recent years, Hugh Laurie's version of 'Why Didn't They Ask Evans?' had a lightness of touch and was at ease with itself, which made it properly enjoyable. (Even the far-from-outstanding Tommy and Tuppence of a few years back was good fun, and written by someone who seems to like Christie's books rather than hate them.)
Anyway, getting down from that particular hobby horse... Looking forward to reading Sepulchre Street soon - hoped to have picked up a copy from the bookshop I visited today, but not in stock (boo!) so will have to try elsewhere.
Best wishes, Mike
Thanks very much, Mike, a great comment. Murder is Easy is one of the very first detective novels I read and I have always had a soft spot for it. I think it's under-rated, especially in terms of the concept of 'the least likely person'. If I were adapting it, I'd focus on the very creepy nature of the idea that 'murder is easy' and also try to do the black magic stuff with a degree of conviction. The idea of having Lavinia Pinkerton's death 'on stage' in the Tv version, rather than just reported, was excellent, but the inquest scene was risible, as was the portrayal of Whitfield. So, a missed opportunity, to put it kindly. I liked the 'Evans' remake too. Hope you enjoy Sepulchre Street!
I thought Murder Is Easy could have been subtitled 'But Screenwriting Is Difficult'. That said, the clothes, cars and scenery were lovely; it was one of those programmes best enjoyed with the sound turned down.
Nicely put, Jonathan, and happy new year! Hope to see you again before too long. Yes, the show was visually striking - very strong colours, obviously a deliberate choice, although I suppose some might argue that they did unfortunately reinforce the impression of a cartoon, which was a shame.
Post a Comment