Talk:Murder on the Orient Express (2017 film)

Cast billing order

Until we get an official billing block, my opinion is that the cast should be listed the same way as the cast of the 1974 film: The actor playing Poirot listed first, and the other cast members listed alphabetically by their surnames. Zuko Halliwell (talk) 16:27, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Penélope Cruz's role.

I think I may have found an article confirming which character Penélope Cruz plays in the film. The article can be found here. The thing is, I'm not sure if it's a reliable source. Also, it's in Spanish. Can anyone tell me if this is a reliable source? Should I use it as a reference? Zuko Halliwell (talk) 20:10, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

This is the 4th filmed adaptation, not the third.

Whoever did this article seems to have either forgotten or just ignored the excellent 2010 adaptation of "Murder on the Orient Express", starring David Suchet. If you're going to include that awful 2001 "made for TV movie" as a filmed adaptation, then you have no excuse to overlook the 2010 version, which was part of "Agatha Christie's Poirot" series. The Suchet version is the same length as any US TV movie; it aired on PBS as part of its feature-length "Mystery!" series. With David Suchet being the definitive Poirot (much the same as Jeremy Brett is for in-period Sherlock Holmes) and with that particular adaptation of "Orient" being tight, tense, horrifying, and heart-wrenching, Branagh has some hefty shoes to fill. And, bluntly, even though I admire most of Branagh's past work, the stiff, wooden trailer doesn't fill me with much hope.

Trying to shoehorn in Pilar Estravados is just another red flag -- anyone familiar with the Poirot books is going to have a huge "Huh?" moment. Seriously, people: whether it's the fake Pilar or the real one, trying to twist canon around to make it fit just kills it. Fine, you want a diverse cast -- you could do that without resorting to cannibalizing other tales in ways that make pretzels out of the canon.

Zenfrodo (talk) 01:37, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

British-American?

Do you think this film should be labeled as British-American since Scott Free is a British company and the Infobox film page (I think) says the country's defined by the nationalities of the production companies? Tjdrum2000 (talk) 17:43, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Well it is based on a British Notable Novel, the project was started in Britain by James Prichard, Chairman of Agatha Christie Ltd. , talking and led by British Filmmaker Kenneth Branagh. production by Scotfree a British Company, and in the right of Agatha Christie. All the whole film was filmed in Studios in Britain. It was made in Britain in the first place. The Film held the world premiere event in London and was as released in Britain before America 15 days — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.99.15.25 (talk) 10:10, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Nationality is not determined by where a film is shot, the nationality of the source material or where a film is first released. (This one was also shot in Malta, not that it is relevant.) Scott Free has had many projects made through the US that were classified as such by reliable sources. It has offices in Los Angeles as well as London. 20th Century Fox, Kinberg Genre and the Mark Gordon Company are US based. This source lists only the US. Until we have entries from the usual reliable sources for the nationality of this film that add UK, it should not be listed as British-American. - Gothicfilm (talk) 11:15, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

When did I say that the Film is determined by where it is shot? I’m saying This Film is a British Novel by Agatha Christie as the right of her company to create this film, produced by British based company Scotfree Production and the owner is a also British Nobel man Riddle Ridley Scott. Also directed by British filmmaker Kenneth Branagh. This film is represent of British culture and made in Britain. One of reasons why the Film was premiered in London where it is origin. So It is not fair you just steal and take credit labeling it as American Film. When The Flim is nothing American. 20th century fox distributing this film doesn’t make this film American. And just realize that 60% of movies in Hollywood these days are created by British filmmakers filmed and produced in Studios in England like Pinewood Studios, Elsteee Studios and etc. Half of Actors and Actresses in Hollywood are British — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.24.144.112 (talk) 11:38, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Your last statements are unsourced hyperbole and inaccurate, to put it politely. 20th Century Fox is not just the distributor, it developed the film's screenplay in the US, and then financed the film. You ignored most of my points above, again talking about the nationality of the source novel and where the film premiered, which is irrelevant to this issue. Again, until we have entries from the usual reliable sources (like Lumiere) for the nationality of this film that add UK, it should not be listed as British-American. This source lists only the US. - Gothicfilm (talk) 12:10, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Gothicfilm. There has been a real issue recently with film nationalities being changed and edit wars erupting over these issues. Our own opinions about which nations should be credited (based on source material, nationality of actors or directors, or where the film is made) are all irrelevant. All that matters is what reliable sources say. ---The Old Jacobite_{The '45} 14:02, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Fox is not a production for this film. It’s a contributor. How did you know if it developed screenplay in the US? When It is made of a Famous British Novel by Agatha Christie it was already screenplayed itself. When The production company Scott Free is based in London? The First project was developed in Britain led by James Prichard and Kenneth Branagh. 90% of works are made in Britain including filming in British Film Studios. Everything was started and settled in Britain. 60% of movies in Hollywood these days were not made in the US. The Real house of Hollywood today are in Britain where the movies were actually produced from — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.24.144.112 (talk) 13:59, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

You make up your own facts and deny any that don't agree. If you read the article you'll see that Fox developed the screenplay before Branagh was hired. It is quite evident that you are not here to build a better encyclopedia, but to push your agenda. - Gothicfilm (talk) 03:23, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Now, several months later, the single most reliable and objective source for country, Lumiere, lists the US and Malta, as seen here. AllMovie still lists only the US, as seen here. The Agatha Christie Estate is not listed as a production company. Best to go with Lumiere. - Gothicfilm (talk) 07:03, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

This doesn’t really stack up. Lumiere lists it as a co-production, as does the BFI. As per the MoS the right approach for a co-production is not to specify a nationality in the lead sentence but to cover the various national interests in the article body and infobox. MapReader (talk) 04:40, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Link to Death on the Nile

I don't agree with the link to Death on the Nile in the section Possible sequels. Chronologically there is a gap of three years between this film and the Death on the Nile. Besides In the Murder on the Nile Hercule Pairot is on vacation in Egypt and is not summoned to Egypt. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 03:07, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that description of the plot is true, but at the very least, it seemed like a reference the way the film had alluded to it. Also, Death on the Nile (1978 film) was the first of the Peter Ustinov as Poirot movies, and the first Poirot film since the 1974 version of Orient Express. So it could have been interpreted as a wink to the Christie fans and nothing more. However, the director Kenneth Branagh has said that he'd like to also remake Death on the Nile I had tried to word it as the meaning of it could be ambiguous and I was trying to be as respectful to the editor that had removed the link to the novel from the plot section as the edit seemed to want to clean up overlinking in that section. – Abzeronow (talk) 07:40, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Glaring anachronism…

As the train pulls out of Istanbul, a sweeping panorama of the city shows the Galata Tower, a cylindrical tower with a distinctive high conical roof; however the roof was actually destroyed in 1875, and not restored until the mid-1960s - in the intervening years, it was flat roofed, but obviously nobody told the production company. Jock123 (talk) 22:35, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

A way more obvious fail of the same sort is visible right at the beginning: the areal view shows the Dome of the Rock with the gold-plated roof that was only applied in 1959-61. Maybe both issues for a trivia section. -- Kohraa Mondel (talk) 21:56, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

OCD

I have problems with the simplistic "Poirot has OCD" statement. Armchair psychiatric diagnoses like this are really harmful. This one is also anachronistic: no shrink in 1937 used the term. They'd describe Poirot as neurotic or (more specifically) psychasthenic. The fact that Branagh interprets the character as being OCD doesn't change these problems – Branagh is an actor/director, not clinical expert.

In the hopes of preventing an edit war, I'm going to put my change here and ask for some (hopefully collegial) discussion.

In 1934, renowned Belgian detective Hercule Poirot solves a theft at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. He is prone to obsessive behavior(footnote), seeks balance in life, and considers his case-solving ability to spot lies a curse.

The footnote will describe Branagh's belief that Poirot has OCD and document it with a link.

— Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 15:15, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Where is this footnote, might I ask? I did not find the film portrayal of Poirot to exhibit obsessive patterns of thought, or feel compelled to perform stereotypical behaviours, both to alleviate psychological distress. Poirot's habit of expecting people to fix their attires is not a symptom, no, nor is his talk of order. He is not obsessive-compulsive, and I believe the words themselves should be deleted from the plot section. Chronikhiles (talk) 10:25, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

It is referenced by Branagh in interviews and other reviews. Here are some more examples: Collider and Chicago Sun-Times. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 14:47, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Branagh is not a mental health professional. I doubt that the article would state that Poirot has arrhythmia just because the actor said so. Because he isn't a doctor, and did not portray the character as suffering from it, and the script did not say so. The same rationale applies for mental health conditions as well. Chronikhiles (talk) 11:28, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Branagh's credentials are irrelevant. Whether or not Christie or the screen writers intended this aspect to the character doesn't matter. The director and actor (Branagh) did intend it and that fact has many references. It is verifiable. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2022 (UTC)