Let's talk about "restart" first. The interpretation of the work itself can be ever-changing, not to mention that for as many as four previous editions, this edition will become very different and unrealistic, and it is not easy to completely follow the original work (if this film is more faithful to the original work, it will be a piece of cake for book fans. beauty). Novels with a British background and an American film market environment obviously have a stronger market voice. The presentation of the story is not very similar to the original, there is no soft spreading of details, and the sense of infiltration is slowly fascinating, but more borrowed from the rhythm of half detective-type stories, the lively rhythm plus the interpretation of music, pictures and characters, giving The shock of people is captivating. I personally think it's reasonable, and for the artistic presentation of images and sounds like movies, a brighter style does fit the audience's reception.
This major change is more clearly reflected in the protagonist's characterization (those who say that this film accurately restores the image of Poirot in the novel must have never read the novel and are talking about it). I understand that Poirot is not a person suitable for fighting in Agatha's writings, nor is he such a tough person who is so tough on clues, and certainly not a person who will be hurt by photos every night. At one point it was like seeing Downey's "Sherlock Holmes". Kenneth Branagh did add a lot to the plot in order to give Poirot a new image on the screen. I don't know if this was to cater to the taste of the American film market, or if it was Branagh's own interpretation of Agatha's work. In this film, Poirot's image is more American, and his intriguing and strange personality cannot be found. The "egg size" and "Wailing Wall judgment" at the beginning of the film are completely unnecessary in my opinion. . Perhaps Branagh is to enrich the characterization, reveal the detective power of this image with a little eccentricity and a sense of humor, and then pave the way for a "no gray area" line. When reading Agatha's works, I usually feel that although Poirot is the core of the existence of the series, it is indeed not as rich in character creation as this film. This should be a work that tries to reflect the complete image created by the original multiple works. best effort. Although it should not be liked by book fans, the image of Poirot is still successful for the film itself (but the Wailing Wall is really redundant).
In the process of watching the movie, I was immersed in the habit of Branagh's previous movie aesthetics. It seemed that I was watching the gorgeous set and exquisite character modeling like watching "Cinderella", until later, the multi-faceted mirror's character mapping, The light and shade of the train in the mountains, the rhythm of the top view in the carriage, the artistry of the 12 people lining up like a painting, and the gradation of the oil painting color of the warm sun in the snow at the end. All these details make me feel that Branagh's control of the camera is very good. I saw some netizens say "every frame is a postcard" (not so exaggerated, but it is indeed a lot of good). These shots can help the storytelling. And the line-up of 12 people is not only as simple as art (the last supper), but also very stage. Compared with the "one-person speech" in the car in the past, the dialogue between Poirot and the crowd seems to bring the audience to the beautiful interior set, and the conflict of the dialogue has a sense of self-face (of course, the acting skills of the big stars are online. It's really in place), this new setting really shocked me, and I still get excited when I think about it. Branagh also seems to give viewers with different reading progress some space to think. The scene of the final case statement seems to be the jury's verdict of justice, and it also seems to be the last farewell to the past symbolizing the betrayal of crime and punishment. Different, but any one can appreciate Branagh's intentions.
As far as actors are concerned, I personally prefer Michelle's characterization. Of course, the strong tragic color can easily arouse our inner sympathy, but my love comes from the pictures given to me by the characters under Michelle's acting skills. The beauty of people also includes the graceful elegance under the last excited expression.
In addition, the background music of the film is remarkable, that is, the fading in when the last train leaves seems to be a little slower, maybe it is to leave time for us to appreciate the "impressionist" picture. I suddenly remembered that the case of "Nile River" was specially mentioned at the end. I don't know if it was a tribute to Agatha's series of works, but it would indeed win the hearts and minds of book fans. However, the director should not really want to make a sequel, otherwise the male protagonist of this film will be too plump.
For Agatha, I'm just a novice in the fandom. Of course, Her Majesty should not mind our descendants interpreting her great works in our own way. After all, there are a thousand Hamlets in a thousand people. Kenneth Branagh interprets this role in the 1996 version of "Hamlet", and now think that his profound stage skills have indeed added a gorgeous personal color to "Murder on the Orient Express".
(The picture comes from the Internet)
View more about Murder on the Orient Express reviews
