There is a rhetorical question
That
gives me indigestion
Why
is it your nose runs pray tell
There is a rhetorical question
That
gives me indigestion
Why
is it your nose runs pray tell
Are you wearing a push up bra?
Well, I think you’ve pushed them up too far
I’m not sure where they should begin
There was a custom in Calydon as there was in many lands
That
the first fruits of the harvest be sacrificed to the goddess
Unfortunately,
one summer King Oeneus made the mistake
Albeit
accidentally of omitting to make a sacrifice to Artemis
Artemis,
furious at Oeneus's negligence reeked vengeance
And
sent down the most enormous wild boar to Calydon
The
Boar ravaged Calydon, destroying everything in its path
Oeneus
called in Atalanta and the noblest men to take it on
The
King’s own brothers and his son Meleager joined the hunt
The
Boars skin was offered as trophy to the one who killed it
Many
of the men were unhappy fighting alongside a woman
Atalanta
was a great huntress and she fought where she saw fit
Despite
his being married Meleager was in love with Atalanta
And
he convinced his uncles and the others they should follow
Atalanta
was the first to see the beast, and quickest to shoot
Amphiaraus
followed suit hitting the beast’s eye with an arrow
Meleager,
was a fearless young dare-devil and took his chance
An
excellent hunter he took his spear and gorged the Boar
But
the great boar was big enough that it kept charging at him
And
would have killed him but for the quick action of Atalanta
Meleager
won the Boars skin and the credit for the beasts kill
But
such was his infatuation with Atalanta he gave it to her
But
the other hunters didn't like the idea of a mere woman
Getting
the prize instead of a man no matter how good a hunter
The
loudest of the protesters were Meleager's own uncles
And
they declared that if he didn't want the great boar skin
That
was quite acceptable, but it could not go to Atalanta
And
by the right of blood, it should go to one of his own kin
Meleager
in his anger fought and killed all of his uncles
And
then he presented the prized boar’s skin to Atalanta
His
mother Althea unable to forgive him for his actions
Was
so distraught in her grief she killed her son Meleager
Are you wearing a puzzled expression?
You must really think I have some gall
But if it wasn’t for pickpockets like me
The difference is between
A
drug dealer and a prostitute
The
hooker can wash her crack
I have long been a fan of Agatha Christie and having read all of her books several times over I watch any of the adaptations that are served up before me.
The
Poirot series is a particular favorite because first and foremost David Suchet “is”
Hercule Poirot to a Tee, secondly the attention to detail is exceptional and
last of all every single adaptation has been set in the period Agatha Christie
wrote them in.
So,
when I first saw "Agatha Christies Marple" advertised I was very
pleased and though not fully convinced that Geraldine McEwan was right for the
role, the appetite was suitably wetted.
The
first offering was “The Body in the Library”, with a subtitle of “based on the
book by Agatha Christie”.
It
always fills me with dread when I see the words "based on" under the
title not for what it says but for what it does not and in this case my worst
fears were soon realized.
Now
I have become well accustomed to changes being made to original works when
adapting them for television and film in fact it’s been done in the Poirot
series to great effect without deviating from the essence of original text.
It
was the opening scene of “The Body in the Library” which set the tone for the
whole performance as far as I’m concerned having never occurred in the book,
after all how could the family be affected by V2 rockets when the book was
written two years before they were invented but then the production company had
decided to set a book written in 1942 in the early fifties for no apparent
reason at all.
Another
odd thing was that in the book it was a simpleton who found the second body,
but he was written out of the screenplay for some reason presumably because
village idiots are not PC, then to cap it all they changed not only the motive
but the culprit as well.
My
main bone of contention about “The Body in the Library” is that it’s a cardinal
sin as far as I am concerned when adapting any “who done it” to change the
person who committed the crime.
This
is fundamental you can change the place, the means and even at a pinch the
motive but never ever the perpetrator.
There
are somethings that you just cannot do after all even with the most popular
works of literature such as those by Shakespeare there are things you would not
do, for example you wouldn’t have an adaptation of “Romeo and Juliet” with a
happy ending.
The
next offering was “A Murder is announced” which just had too many discrepancies to list.
Next came “Murder at the Vicarage” in which I think perhaps the most
disturbing aspect was the portrayal of the young Miss Marple as the “bit on the
side” of a married First World War army officer, talk about character
assassination and if that wasn’t bad enough, they managed to turn all the
sympathetic characters in the story into people I just couldn’t wait to become
victims.
For
example, one character, Mrs. Lester was played as a dreadful lush while in the
book she was sympathetically portrayed as Mrs. Lestrange who was terminally ill
and had returned to the village to be reunited with her daughter before she
died.
The last helping of the first series or as I prefer to
think of it the final weeks
debacle otherwise called “4:50 From Paddington” which was clearly not based on the
book at all.
Obviously the screenwriter just watched a video of the
Margaret Rutherford film and wrote the screenplay accordingly.
Series two duly arrived with the rendition of “Sleeping Murder” which changed just about everything
including plot, characters and motive “The
Moving Finger” fared no better and even managed to make every single person
completely detestable, I should just add that one of the parts was played by
John Sessions and I tend to dislike any production with him in on principle.
The screen writers and production company
really surpassed themselves with the last two films, I really do hope they are
the last, “By the Pricking of My Thumbs”and “The Sittaford Mystery” neither of
which were Miss Marple books.
If memory serves me well there were at least
12 Miss Marple novels and a further thirty short stories of which they have so
far only murdered six of the novels so why on earth they have turned their attention
on to mutilating the sixty plus books which did not feature Jane Marple I just
do not know.
But
I suppose my biggest complaint is in the casting of Geraldine McEwan in the title
role, as good an actress as she might be and I have enjoyed her performance’s
in the past such as “the prime of miss Jean Brodie”, “Mapp and Lucia”, the
Barchester Chronicle's” to name but a few.
That
having been said I should continue to say that being a good actor is not
sufficient reason to play a part and this has been demonstrated in many
productions.
As
anyone who witnessed Albert Finney and Peter Ustinov trying and failing to
portray Poirot will testify.
Now
Geraldine McEwan is not the first and will I’m sure not be the last to be
miscast as Miss M.
Margaret
Rutherford the eccentric old Dame of British stage and screen was wonderful in
a series of adaptation made in the sixties, but she was no more like Jane
Marple than Bruce Willis is.
Helen
Hayes was an American Actress, who people of my generation will remember from a
series called “the Snoop Sisters”, who made a series of TV movies in the
seventies but made no attempt to play the character.
Angel
Lansbury was the next in the role and played the part exactly as she did
Jessica Fletcher in the American hit series “Murder she wrote”. As a result,
most Americans think Agatha Christie wrote the series.
It
was the BBC, God bless them, who cast Joan Hickson in the role and she remains
to this day the definitive Marple.
Sadly,
or so the story goes she didn’t get to appear in as many of the Miss Marple
stories as she should have done due to a very damaging technician’s strike at
the BBC.
To
my mind it is essential to get the person in the title role spot on otherwise whatever
else you do in the production just wont gel.
It
would of course help if Ms McEwan had made some effort at all to even look like
the character, instead of a tall, thin, neatly dressed spinster with a pink,
wrinkled face, pale blue eyes and white hair worn in an old-fashioned manner
piled atop her head we have an untidy frump with Wurzel Gummidge hair and a
leer like Benny Hill on viagra.
I
think it’s the inane grinning and the smugness in her portrayal, which grates
on me the most.
I
hope they don’t make anymore because if they do I will be duty bound to watch
them for no other reason than to criticise them.
I
would hope the writers of the offending screenplay’s will hopefully return to
writing daytime soaps for the Outer Mongolian broadcasting corporation after of
course being horsewhipped.
Some
useful tips either for those responsible for what we have so far been served up
or any who might be thinking of doing so in the future.
Firstly,
read the bloody book, or have someone read it to you, secondly watch the BBC
adaptations with Joan Hickson and finally get the chap that does the Poirot
adaptations to write them because he has obviously read the original works and
has a fair idea of what’s required.
If love is blind
To
be unkind
Why
is lingerie?
So
popular to see