Six people sit down to a sumptuous meal at a table laid for seven. In front of the empty place is a sprig of rosemary- “rosemary for remembrance.” A strange sentiment considering no one is likely to forget the night, exactly a year ago, that Rosemary Barton died at exactly the same table, her beautiful face unrecognizable, convulsed with pain and horror.
–GoodReads
My Review
Possibly one of my most enjoyable Agatha Christie reads, and that’s probably biased of me since I always enjoy her books. There’s something soothing in reading her books for me. I do love her style of writing and this one had me trying to figure out the murderer from page one.
I did, however, dislike how harsh people were on about Rosemary Barton but I mean, if that’s how she was and that’s how people viewed her, oh well. Another point that kind of irked me was the way Tony treated Iris. BUT it had little enough bearing that it didn’t take away too much for me.
It’s another dinner mystery for the whodunnit sorts, I’m not sure I can say much to be objective or help someone pick to read this. If you like Christie, I suggest it. If you’re on the fence, this could be a good one to pick as it’s not one Poirot or Marple but Colonel Race instead, and yet you can read any of her books without having to worry about a particular order.
4/5 Cups of coffee from me, but now onto the 2003 movie review!
Woof.
I am watching it right now as I type this. It’s…
It’s the worst Christie adaptation I’ve ever seen and there are some I’m not super fond of (to put it nicely). I actually can’t believe this was based on the book at all. The only reason I have it two cups instead of one is because the acting cast shouldn’t be faulted for the shitty ‘adaptation.’ Seriously.
It barely keeps to the plot at all. There are a couple of characters who have the same names. And the modes of death and murderer/s are the same. Though a character is changed drastically enough that the murderers were almost different.
Honestly, just honestly..this was a disappointment. (I finished before finishing this post lol) Like I’m not sure what the point of this was at all other than to sensationalize a Christie plot. There are plenty of plays and films that change time periods, settings, and tweak things and keep well to the storyline. This is not one of them.
There is hope though! There’s a 1980’s film that’s supposed to be better. I simply didn’t want to pay to stream it, so I’ll have to see if I can find it and do another Film VS. Book on it.
The Differences:
- Modern setting in film (2003)
- Some Characters have different names and jobs entirely.
- Colonel Race is and isn’t in the film, it’s weird.
- Where Race didn’t appear until later in the book the agent(s) are there from the start.
- Colonel Race because a rather odd secret agent who works with his wife and are the Reeces. (He is MI5 in the books but this felt more like they were just inspectors)
- Tony’s plotline dropped entirely in the film and is replaced with Fizz who gets no storyline.
- There’s nothing about Rosemary really
- Pregnancy plot thrown in (TW: Abortion)
- Honestly, the heart of the characters was just left out of the film entirely and we were left with more drama and dramatic flare.
FINAL VERDICT
The book wins, and the film doesn’t even get an honorable mention.
The Caffeinated Reader 
Leave a comment