"Third Girl" TV review
There are things that changed in this adaptation from the novel. I can understand why--they make sense. I liked/disliked the episode for just a few reasons. There are spoilers here though, ruining both the David Suchet episode and the novel of the same name.
I liked: the music (the theme song is back! Yes!); the acting (again, superb!); the actress and actor portraying Frances Cary and Sir Roderick, respectively; the inclusion of Mrs. Oliver and Poirot's valet George, and the settings/locations. The casting of the actors for both Frances and Sir Roderick were perfect for me. Little times do the actors match what I imagined them to be whilst reading a novel. It happened to me this time! I don't know why Roderick was blind, but his portrayal was great. The 'look' of Frances was great, even though "Third Girl" is set in the 1960s in the novel--the filmmakers made her look great on TV. She looked like the bohemian she was supposed to be. (The same goes with David Baker, but more on that later.)
I was disappointed with: the omission of the reason why Andrew Restarick's painting was removed from Crosshedges, the writing of the check from Andrew to David--the blackmailing; the change of the character of the murdered woman Seagram/Louise Carpenter; the switching of the numbers of the girls' flat; all the confusion of the stupid teacher A.J. Battersby; the missing Doctor Stillingfleet and the drugging of Norma by Frances Cary.
I can understand why three things were omitted from the TV episode: the important papers Sir Roderick lost, the dual identity of Frances Cary/Mary Restarick (as the 2nd wife of Andrew in the novel); and the leaving out of Dr. Stillingfleet. There is always too much in any novel, and I suppose that could go the same for Agatha Christie.
I guess the filmmakers thought the subplot with Roderick's missing secret government papers and the true motive of Sonia was too much for a televised story. I will admit that this detracts from the central action within the novel. It was disappointing to not include Dr. Stillinglfeet (a friend of Poirot's who appears in the short story "The Dream"), because in the novel he saves Norma's life, gets her off the drugs Frances administered to her, and eventually he marries Norma. I think for the sake of the pace of the episode, he was written off: he appears in just a few chapters and either talks to Norma or reports to Poirot over the phone about her condition. It was much simpler having Norma in Poirot's flat and doing away with Stillingfleet. Now because he was out of the picture, the screenwriter was able to pair Norma and David together.
The very curious change to the story, the MAJOR one, was Frances Cary. In the novel, she also poses as Andrew's wife Mary Restarick (he's not married in the TV story) and she's a painter. She travels back and forth wearing the golden wig as Mrs. Restarick and poses (as Frances) as an artist who puts on art shows. Here on television, she's the half-sister of Norma!? That doesn't even come out right on TV. Too confusing and dramatic, really. Oh, the shock! They should've at least made it that she was a rotten thief that joins Andrew (really bad man Robert Orwell from South Africa) in the scheme for the money, all like in the book. For TV, do away with Mary Restarick the wife, but still keep Frances Cary as the murderer and thief and co-conspirator. In the end, the TV story is screwed up and botched all because of Frances Cary. The worst part of the episode!
The surprise (good) of this Suchet story was the survival of David Baker the artist. I actually liked him in the novel, and was devastated that he was killed. I felt that he should've lived and made a life with Norma instead of the boring Stillingfleet. I'm glad that the screenwriter felt the same way I did. The story was written and set in the 1960s, and they made the episode look right set instead in the 30s. So, David doesn't have the long hair and the vest--but he looked great and Bohemian nevertheless on TV (and is still described by Ariadne Oliver as the "Peacock"). Something very lacking in the televised adaptation was his making the painting of the fake Andrew Restarick. It was essential, to convince people that Orwell was Andrew. The artist's blackmailing the fake Andrew of course led to David Baker's demise, and wasn't included so that David could survive through the story and 'get the girl' (Norma).
Overall, I was satisfied with the adaptation. Poirot threw in plenty of French in this one, Zoe Wanamaker's portrayal of Ariadne Oliver is awesome (she still gets coshed on the head like in the novel!), the music was dramatic and familiar, and the production is always of a very high caliber. Oh, and Poirot still has cards up his sleeve and gathers everyone in the room to provide the solution, just like old times!
I liked: the music (the theme song is back! Yes!); the acting (again, superb!); the actress and actor portraying Frances Cary and Sir Roderick, respectively; the inclusion of Mrs. Oliver and Poirot's valet George, and the settings/locations. The casting of the actors for both Frances and Sir Roderick were perfect for me. Little times do the actors match what I imagined them to be whilst reading a novel. It happened to me this time! I don't know why Roderick was blind, but his portrayal was great. The 'look' of Frances was great, even though "Third Girl" is set in the 1960s in the novel--the filmmakers made her look great on TV. She looked like the bohemian she was supposed to be. (The same goes with David Baker, but more on that later.)
I was disappointed with: the omission of the reason why Andrew Restarick's painting was removed from Crosshedges, the writing of the check from Andrew to David--the blackmailing; the change of the character of the murdered woman Seagram/Louise Carpenter; the switching of the numbers of the girls' flat; all the confusion of the stupid teacher A.J. Battersby; the missing Doctor Stillingfleet and the drugging of Norma by Frances Cary.
I can understand why three things were omitted from the TV episode: the important papers Sir Roderick lost, the dual identity of Frances Cary/Mary Restarick (as the 2nd wife of Andrew in the novel); and the leaving out of Dr. Stillingfleet. There is always too much in any novel, and I suppose that could go the same for Agatha Christie.
I guess the filmmakers thought the subplot with Roderick's missing secret government papers and the true motive of Sonia was too much for a televised story. I will admit that this detracts from the central action within the novel. It was disappointing to not include Dr. Stillinglfeet (a friend of Poirot's who appears in the short story "The Dream"), because in the novel he saves Norma's life, gets her off the drugs Frances administered to her, and eventually he marries Norma. I think for the sake of the pace of the episode, he was written off: he appears in just a few chapters and either talks to Norma or reports to Poirot over the phone about her condition. It was much simpler having Norma in Poirot's flat and doing away with Stillingfleet. Now because he was out of the picture, the screenwriter was able to pair Norma and David together.
The very curious change to the story, the MAJOR one, was Frances Cary. In the novel, she also poses as Andrew's wife Mary Restarick (he's not married in the TV story) and she's a painter. She travels back and forth wearing the golden wig as Mrs. Restarick and poses (as Frances) as an artist who puts on art shows. Here on television, she's the half-sister of Norma!? That doesn't even come out right on TV. Too confusing and dramatic, really. Oh, the shock! They should've at least made it that she was a rotten thief that joins Andrew (really bad man Robert Orwell from South Africa) in the scheme for the money, all like in the book. For TV, do away with Mary Restarick the wife, but still keep Frances Cary as the murderer and thief and co-conspirator. In the end, the TV story is screwed up and botched all because of Frances Cary. The worst part of the episode!
The surprise (good) of this Suchet story was the survival of David Baker the artist. I actually liked him in the novel, and was devastated that he was killed. I felt that he should've lived and made a life with Norma instead of the boring Stillingfleet. I'm glad that the screenwriter felt the same way I did. The story was written and set in the 1960s, and they made the episode look right set instead in the 30s. So, David doesn't have the long hair and the vest--but he looked great and Bohemian nevertheless on TV (and is still described by Ariadne Oliver as the "Peacock"). Something very lacking in the televised adaptation was his making the painting of the fake Andrew Restarick. It was essential, to convince people that Orwell was Andrew. The artist's blackmailing the fake Andrew of course led to David Baker's demise, and wasn't included so that David could survive through the story and 'get the girl' (Norma).
Overall, I was satisfied with the adaptation. Poirot threw in plenty of French in this one, Zoe Wanamaker's portrayal of Ariadne Oliver is awesome (she still gets coshed on the head like in the novel!), the music was dramatic and familiar, and the production is always of a very high caliber. Oh, and Poirot still has cards up his sleeve and gathers everyone in the room to provide the solution, just like old times!
Comments