A Discussion of Agatha Christie Adaptation

The first thing you will notice when you compare Agatha Christie novels to their modern adaptation counterparts is length. These short and fast paced novels, are valued for their clever twists and ability to keep you hooked, but not for their detailed character development or nuance. As a lover of Agatha Christie I am loath to point out her weaknesses, but there is no denying that she is a hard writer to adapt from in this day and age… or perhaps she is the easiest writer in the world. There is so much scope for the screenwriters’ imagination! These slim novels become three episode mini series when left in the hands of modern writers, gaining so much depth and so many moments which were not in the in the literature, without losing their essence.

You may disagree with me, but in recent years the best adaptations have been ITV’s Why Didn’t They Ask Evans? and BBC’s And Then There Were None. Of course, there have recently been a trio of Hercule Poirot movies directed by Kenneth Branagh; however, the long form Christie we’ve had recently is far superior. And Then There Were None pitted a stellar cast against each other in a moody and dark setting, while Why Didn’t They Ask Evans? brought a brighter aesthetic and a wonderfully fleshed out female lead. It is rare that the adaptation is better than the book, but here there is a strong argument that this is very much the case.

And Then There Were None was compelling to watch, no? And I’m not just talking about the sight of Aidan Turner in a towel! Yes, the story is a slow one and we didn’t reach the first murder until the final scenes of the first episode, but the cinematography was incredibly rich and the performances first rate. But it was those little character moments which made this perfection – the building up of personalities, even in those whose presence was fleeting. These characters were fleshed out, their backstories expanded and their interactions developed further than Christie had done. Upon first watching the series, did you stop to consider that though? Or did you simply accept the adaptation for what it was. Personally, having just finished the book I was well aware of how much it had changed between page and screen, particularly with the introduction of the relationship between Vera Claythorne and Philip Lombard and the wonderful drunken party scene midway through. These helped add depth to a story which on screen could have felt hollow, or which certainly wouldn’t have needed three episodes. In books characters can be less well drawn, but on screen everything is on display.

By comparison, I watched Why Didn’t They Ask Evans? before I read it, coming across it on ITV last Boxing Day. I instantly fell in love – how can you not? Lucy Boynton‘s Frankie is an amazing character; colourful, full of life and one of the best dressed women I have seen in a period drama in a while. And naturally Will Poulter‘s Bobby Jones is excellent, carrying the narrative with such ease. The series is bright and airy while still maintaining the dark edge of a detective story, not a single shot being wasted. As you can tell, I pretty quickly fell in love and ordered myself a copy of the book. I was desperate to stay immersed in this world and these characters, but was sorely disappointed in how poorly Frankie Derwent was drawn in comparison to her on screen counterpart. You can feel her fizzing with life, desperate to seek adventure and relentlessly flirting with Bobby in the series, but in the book she is a mere shadow of this character. Hugh Laurie drew her out through his writing of the story, bringing her to life in a way that feels so natural. That is where the genius lies – despite these embellishments not being part of Christie’s original work, neither series feels as though they are taking the stories somewhere they would not naturally go. There is the sense of having the author’s blessing, or at least understanding the tone and stories so well that what they have added slots seamlessly in with the already present material.