Murder in Three Acts & Dead Man's Folly (1986)

[portico]

When I opened my heart to Peter Ustinov's Poirot, I was aware that he played the character a half a dozen times. What I was not aware of was that half of those were theatrical releases, and the other half were tv movies. I love a tv movie, so this did not bother me. I requested my friend Kevin, who keeps me in weird old movies by virtue of his personal film library (we call this the Kevin Streaming Service and if I paid for it it would be worth every single other streaming fee combined), track down all of the post-"Evil Under the Sun" Ustinovs, and he obliged. All hail Kevin.

I started with "Murder in Three Acts" (1986), because it rang the softest bell.* The biggest surprise, right off the bat, is that it is set in the 1980s.
 

I have nothing against modern settings for Christies (if I did, this project would get very disappointing very quickly), but having already seen Ustinov play Poirot in the 1930s, I was forced to accept that Hercule Poirot exists in the same state across all decades, which I was delighted to do. It felt like a reversal of Suchet's Poirot, who lived from middle to old age while frozen in time circa 1938. I love television.
 

So: Murder in Three Acts. It's not good! It's a mediocre script and a very typically try-hard 1980s American cast. Emma Samm's Egg (yes, the character is called Egg) is obsessed with the first suspicious death being a murder, but we are never given a reason as to why--not even a bad one! The setting is Acapulco (shifted from the original in Cornwall), presumably because it allows there to be a small group of people who socialize while not particularly liking each other, as well as explaining why these folks are all American. However, no effort is made to explain why these American white people are all living in Mexico, aside from Tony Curtis' Charles Cartwright who, as a retired film star, may be free to live richly wherever he pleases. And where he pleases is THIS HOUSE:**

There are some things to enjoy in "Murder in Three Acts," aside from the house. Ustinov's Poirot remains an absolute delight. I do think you could have changed all of the set trappings to the 1930s or even the 2030s and his performance would be unchanged. (That said, I enjoyed very much seeing him in scenes with 1980s word processors, because that is an aesthetic I adore.) He's so beautifully consistent: ego-driven yet puckish, dismissive of brains he sees as less than his, but still delighting in the people who come with those brains.

Tony Curtis was also perfectly cast, as a star in the twilight of his career. Where everyone else is overacting to the detriment of the whole, Curtis is overacting appropriately. Without him in the cast I think the whole thing would have fallen apart. It would have felt like Poirot was the only human in a cast of Muppets and I don't mean that as a compliment. Ustinov himself is too much a Muppet to pull that off.

I've also now watched Ustinov's "Dead Man's Folly" (1986) and this time I was prepared for the setting, although I needn't have been. Since the story takes place almost in its entirety at a country house, there was really no need not to set it in the 1930s. I guess they didn't want to shell out for costumes.
 

I don't have much to say about this one! It was stronger on the whole than "Murder in Three Acts," if a little less fun. I believe it was an American production (I think all of the tv movies were), so there were characters randomly changed to be American, although it's set in England and is explicitly about the death of the country house as an institution. West Wycombe Park stood in for Nasse House, the first time it appeared in a Christie, but far from the last. The stand-outs for me were Ustinov (as always), who delivers this wonderful little speech so earnestly that I teared up, and Sandra Dickinson's 30 seconds as visiting actress Marilyn Gale, in which she inexplicably and delightfully gives her best Lina Lamont.
 

The best thing about these movies though, is that sometimes Ustinov will let out a little laugh, and it's just Prince John in the room with us. Feels like winning the lottery, every time.

*The thing about this project is that I have seen or read every one of these already. However, depending on whether there was a version made for the David Suchet Poirot series or either of the Marples (all of which I've rewatched within the past few years), some will be more recognizable than others. The first of the Ustinov made-for-tvs is Lord Edgware Dies, which is obviously very fresh in my mind, so I'm holding off on it for a bit.

** Appropriately enough, this was Lana Turner's Acapulco home.

 

Comments

[genarti]

I don't have any incisive commentary here, but I love this post. They all sound like drought film experiences, whether or not they're actually good as movies. And all haul the Kevin Streaming Service, which sounds frankly INCREDIBLE!

[portico]

The Kevin Streaming Service is the best thing in my life lmao. Whenever I go on a hunt for old movies, I can find them there. And movies being unavailable anywhere to watch makes Kevin so angry that he'll add things for that reason alone. It rules.

[genarti]

(Drought experience! Whoops, you can tell that was phone typing. I meant great experience, of course.)

Good, Kevin sounds like a GIFT. Please tell him the internet appreciates him lol

[skygiants]

profoundly seconded, please tell Kevin he's got fans who approve of his attitude towards access as preservation