Clevercell Very disappointing...

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Numerootno A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

asssstrokeable I am a very very big fan of the Agatha Christie novels made into films especially when David Suchet is Hercule Poirot (the best by far!).Although I have recently come across this copy of Murder on the Orient Express and to tell you the truth I am very sorry that I did!!!!It is bad, bad, bad, bad!!!!!I know it is made for television viewing, but please you can not even use this as an excuse. It is too modern. Yes you can do re-makes with different actors/actresses but still have the feel of the time period in which the story is set. This doesn't. There are so many cross references to present time (Hercule using a laptop with access to the internet! get real!).I will not even start into Alfred Molina as Hercule because it would be unprintable.Did the director, producer or anyone involved in making this debacle even read the book???? This is SO awful, please stay clear.If you appreciate the correct adaptation of this classic, I beg you, make a point of watching the 1974 version.

igorlongo OK, it's a TV movie.OK ,they have moved a great story in the modern age without too much money and with some undistinguished TV actors.But Molina is a great, great, great Poirot (and actually now the best living film actor) second only to Suchet...because Suchet can live in Poirot's age! And Natasha Wightman is far better than pale-acting Vanessa Redgrave as the frosty and haughty Mary Hermione Debenham (and Amira Casar give some sense and heart to the Helena'character ;Jacqueline Bisset was only beautiful, but she don't gave any feeling to her part as the only living survivor in a butchered family.Casar was tragic and shattered.Bisset was a model on the catwalk):The screenplay is quite faithful, and not a buffoonery as sometimes it happens with Poirot films (if Ustinov is on the crime scene,alas!)So, not so bad at all...And I love to think Monsieur Poirot in the arms of beautiful Vera De Vasconcelos!!!! They could make a miniseries,I would love to see Molina solve faithfully at last THE MURDER OF ROGER ACKROYD!!!!!!

IslandMadMacs Then prepare to be flattered. This film has long since been shunted aside as the dubious and inferior version of the 1974 classic. And while it's true that the 'made-for-tv' label lacks the star-studded ensemble which had Lauren Bacall leading a troupe that would be virtually impossible to recast today, especially given the salary and artistic 'demands' of current leading performers; what's completely overlooked is that this film *works*. I first saw this when it was broadcast on a local CBS affiliate in 2001, not out of interest but curiosity. How would Alfred Molina interpret the role so memorably and indelibly created by Albert Finney? How would the writers craft the isolation needed for the plot to work - given this takes place in modern times and deals with the virtual impossibility of escaping the information world? And most importantly, how would the director and writers create enough drama for this, one of the best loved "murder-mysteries" in filmdom, when everyone even remotely familiar with the original film production knows in advance how it all ends?Despite all those hurdles, I was impressed. Molina delivers a wonderful performance as the dandified private detective. Even going so far as to give us a wonderful (and accurate) character revelation - seen early in the film when he must deal with the loss of a beautiful and vivacious woman. And speaking of which - when did it become okay to accept implied homosexuality in character where Christie herself had Poirot of the novels hopelessly in love with a woman? (Countess Vera Rossakoff) How and when does his sexuality even become Poirot's most important character trait to comment on? The amount of reviewers here suggesting that very thing is STUNNING. Read the books before making assumptions! I'd like to quote TV character Frasier Crane here (another metrosexual like Poirot) and say, "I've never seen anyone 'in' themselves before." And to the "reviewer" who points to the inaccuracy of the real Orient Express' existence. Well, duh, it's *explained in the film*. Guess you wouldn't know that if you had watched the film in the first place. And if you had, why point out the "inaccuracy"? Don't try to ply your con here you pretentious fop. (this reviewer actually has the nerve to claim humility in his post - incredible)Still, I do agree that Meredith Baxter was terribly miscast. Never an actress of great ability, her portrayal in the key role of Caroline Hubbard was far beyond her reach. And her screeching voice does tend to wear on you. However, I'd like to offer up cheers to Dylan Smith, who did an absolutely outstanding job as the gimmick entrepreneur and freshly born capitalist Tony Foscarelli - he was hilarious!I can recall early in 2001, when hearing about this production, speaking with a fellow film fan about how shocking it was that David Suchet was not cast in the role he had been steadily doing for more than ten years in the ongoing BBC series. But after seeing this film - I have to tell you that Molina does a fantastic job. Within ten minutes he was Hercule Poirot. Admittedly a touch more gregarious and less coiffed-n-dandified than you would expect. And quite a bit taller than imagined by Christie, but still a worthy interpretation.There are far too many reviewers here who seem to be extremely priggish themselves. Frothing over the '74 version as if it we were talking 'Casablanca' or 'Gone With The Wind' where recreation or reinterpretation is truly impossible. Relativity. Everything is relative and should be placed in its proper context. It's been nearly *thirty years* since the Lumet version. My God, an entire human generation has been born, grown up, and had kids of their own since 1974. Are you so entrenched in your own wistful memories of youth to deny another generation Poirot and Christie? That's well-aged hubris and denial talking. "No, it's *our* story", "No, *ours* is better!" Can you hear the creaking bones of the baby boomers? (I'm one myself so don't go pointing your cane at me)I would encourage you to find your own path and not be deterred by doddering old codgers who won't give up the torch. Sometimes you have to TAKE it from their decrepit clutches. Especially the Boomers - who are obviously not going to do so gracefully.Is this as good as the 1974 version? No. But, is it as good as the story it wants to tell? Yes, very much so. Check out both films and enjoy the subtle variations of a new storyteller.

BeafyBear This is an awful adaptation. It's so obvious that CBS just dragged this out again to maximize the popularity of Alfred Molina these days (Spiderman 2, Fiddler on the Roof). The only aspect of this production that held my interest was the set design/art direction. The acting was totally "Movie of the Week", as was the script. This really did not need to be udpated. Who was it updated for? Those that enjoyed the original will be disappointed. It's just dreadful.Avoid it.