Cards on the Table, chapters 21-end, with spoilers!

[Mark Pghfan]

Welcome back to the final leg of the discussion! I chose this book since it was not a particularly well known one of Christie's yet one of her most surprising endings. Unlike most mysteries, including Christie's, there were clearly only four people who could have "dunnit". It was the twisting of this that I enjoyed the most. In the final section, it seemed clear that one person did it, after a confession. Wrong! Then a second person clearly did it after another attempted murder. Wrong! Finally we got to the finish and Poirot out did all his partners (literally!) but deducing the correct solution. I'll let you all in for the discussion, but be alert, spoilers abound! (I can't see how we can get around that in this case.) Later on, we can discuss the changes from the TV adaptation to the book, which were considerable!

[PugMom]

That bit with the window washer was brilliant!

[Tina]

You're on, Pghfan. Bring it. ;-)

[J]

I wondered about that bit with the window washer. It's not exactly entrapment but Is it legal?

[PugMom]

Just a bit of Poirot trickery! It hot the job done!

[PugMom]

I'm thinking (if I have some free time) that I will watch it on Netflix again. I don't remember if there were many differences from the book. I definitely didn't remember the ending. The scene with the boat seemed familiar and the silk stockings!! Those things stuck in my mind. I'm surprised I didn't remember the window washer bit!

[Allison]

I might try and find the movie on Amazon (I don't have Netflix) as I haven't seen it to make any comparisons.

I think the window-washer trick was brilliant, although maybe kind of cheating on Poirot's part? It absolutely worked though.

[J]

Question:

POSSIBLE SPOILER



Referring to the forged letter, Poirot states that Dr. Roberts had to save himself by saying he was not familiar with Mrs. Lorrimer's handwriting in the event the forgery had been detected. Why? Because if he was familiar he would be a suspect in the forgery? Wouldn't the others have been suspect as well? "His mind works quickly, but not quickly enough."

[Mark Pghfan]

Well, since we have wound down this discussion, I though I'd comment on the differences between the book and the TV version. If you don't want the spoilers, stop reading now!




First of all, Battle has been replaced among the sleuths, for a rather unsavory reason. I"ll leave that up to you to find out when you watch. My biggest gripe, though, was that in the book Anne tried to drown Rhoda, but in the TV version, it was the other way around! Why? I suppose because of the other big change, which is that they made Anne the daughter of Mrs. Lorrimer. (For some reason that still doesn't seem clear to me.) Of course Shiatana was much younger than pictured in the book and with a questionable past in addition to his practice of holding power over others by finding out their "sins". Yet another attempt (I presume) of the later Poirot's trying to make things modern for today's audience.

[Tina]

Thanks for that, Pghfan. Yeah the movie just had a different tone for me than the book. Same thing with Sittaford. The movie version on the corny side.

[Mark Pghfan]

Sittaford was WWAAAYYY different than the book. And not in a good way...

[Tina]

Pghfan, Sittaford was my first Christie which got me started on her books. It pulled me right in. Then several years later the film adaptation released and was I disappointed. It was a mystery to watch but-- I remember we discussed (at the old place) how we were disappointed with what the new producers did with the series. At least with most of the adaptations. Death on the Nile wasn't bad.


Pghfan wrote: "Sittaford was WWAAAYYY different than the book. And not in a good way..."