I have all the books in the house, and I read all of them and I can't believe how much Sarah is giving freedom to herself in these adaptions. These filming are destroying Agatha concepts.
If Sarah thinks she can be smarter than Agatha, then make a new movie without mentioning her name. Do not try to introduce your ridiculous plots which are not compatible with the crucial elements and concepts from the book.
Spoilers:
1. In the book Venables is disabled and one of the most crucial guys in the book on who you have most suspicions minds. He is completely ignored in the film. He shows just for less than a minute in first part and he is not disabled...Sarah did not know what to do with him, another proof that she is completely the worst adapter of all Agathe movie adaptations
2. Zachariah Osborne is NOT so intrusive and intruding in the book like it is on the film. His point is just to accuse Venables and then he is just one isolated man who appears only two more times in the book. Sarah destroyed the idea of the Osborne. IT DOES NOT make any sense or logic for the killer to be so intrusive, to always run for the Easterbook, to reveal to the Easterbook that witches are doing the killing IT DOES NOT make any sense. That is why Osborne isolated himself, after being a "witness" in the book. If he didn't reveal that Easterbook would not have that trace!!! But why would a killer reveal that??? Witches in the book were far more discrete. The point of Osborne is to be quite and set isolated from the world so he could no be revealed that he is the killer. While in the film you see him all the time! This is stupid. If he did not appear so much no one will know that he is the killer, that was Agatha's idea
3. Why putting himself (Osborne) on the list??? Another nonsense. In the book he is not on the list. In the film Easterbook and Osborne are only alive on the list, making himself as main suspect.
4. Another nonsense - In the book you schedule a meeting with witches and after SOME time targeted person is being killed. In the film Easterbook went to the witches and in the SAME time while he is at the witches, Hermia and policeman are murdered(???) by the same "concept" of murdering.. That is not according again with Agatha's idea and main point of the "The Pale Horse", where you first take a bet, and then after is propagated to others man is dead..I mean REALLY how they can kill person so quickly if they follow the concept after seance????...it wouldn't be possible to execute poisoning so quickly (basically at the same time or little bit after Easterbook's seance) in the book or in the movie...
The plot is so SLOW and so full of memories...we see Easetrbook previous wife in the bath for I think more than 5 times...it completely destroys dynamic of the film. Murderer in the book is revealed because of the consecutive number of events. Dear Sarah, that is what makes mystery. Murderer in the film is revealed because of ONE sentence: Osborne said all of them are dead (except Easterbook and himself) before Tuckerton body is discovered. OK if that is the case then movie should be finished exactly at that point. I mean...again..REALLY??? Who can like this plot for children??? But the biggest lack is that Osborne jumps out and stands out and talks too much WITHOUT any LOGICAL reason to do so. He is the murderer, he should not focus so much attention on himself. In the book it is so great imagined but Sarah ruined everything. "The Pale Horse " from 2010/or 2011 with Marple is so much better than this ridiculous story.
As someone sad and I completely agree: Sarah hasn't understood a novel before destroying it for a generation. The worst Christie adaptation ever and the violence totally irrelevant to the plot. Using the violence she is taking the time which should be used for better plot. I understand little modifications but the complete plot...???
If Sarah thinks she can be smarter than Agatha, then make a new movie without mentioning her name. Do not try to introduce your ridiculous plots which are not compatible with the crucial elements and concepts from the book.
Spoilers:
1. In the book Venables is disabled and one of the most crucial guys in the book on who you have most suspicions minds. He is completely ignored in the film. He shows just for less than a minute in first part and he is not disabled...Sarah did not know what to do with him, another proof that she is completely the worst adapter of all Agathe movie adaptations
2. Zachariah Osborne is NOT so intrusive and intruding in the book like it is on the film. His point is just to accuse Venables and then he is just one isolated man who appears only two more times in the book. Sarah destroyed the idea of the Osborne. IT DOES NOT make any sense or logic for the killer to be so intrusive, to always run for the Easterbook, to reveal to the Easterbook that witches are doing the killing IT DOES NOT make any sense. That is why Osborne isolated himself, after being a "witness" in the book. If he didn't reveal that Easterbook would not have that trace!!! But why would a killer reveal that??? Witches in the book were far more discrete. The point of Osborne is to be quite and set isolated from the world so he could no be revealed that he is the killer. While in the film you see him all the time! This is stupid. If he did not appear so much no one will know that he is the killer, that was Agatha's idea
3. Why putting himself (Osborne) on the list??? Another nonsense. In the book he is not on the list. In the film Easterbook and Osborne are only alive on the list, making himself as main suspect.
4. Another nonsense - In the book you schedule a meeting with witches and after SOME time targeted person is being killed. In the film Easterbook went to the witches and in the SAME time while he is at the witches, Hermia and policeman are murdered(???) by the same "concept" of murdering.. That is not according again with Agatha's idea and main point of the "The Pale Horse", where you first take a bet, and then after is propagated to others man is dead..I mean REALLY how they can kill person so quickly if they follow the concept after seance????...it wouldn't be possible to execute poisoning so quickly (basically at the same time or little bit after Easterbook's seance) in the book or in the movie...
The plot is so SLOW and so full of memories...we see Easetrbook previous wife in the bath for I think more than 5 times...it completely destroys dynamic of the film. Murderer in the book is revealed because of the consecutive number of events. Dear Sarah, that is what makes mystery. Murderer in the film is revealed because of ONE sentence: Osborne said all of them are dead (except Easterbook and himself) before Tuckerton body is discovered. OK if that is the case then movie should be finished exactly at that point. I mean...again..REALLY??? Who can like this plot for children??? But the biggest lack is that Osborne jumps out and stands out and talks too much WITHOUT any LOGICAL reason to do so. He is the murderer, he should not focus so much attention on himself. In the book it is so great imagined but Sarah ruined everything. "The Pale Horse " from 2010/or 2011 with Marple is so much better than this ridiculous story.
As someone sad and I completely agree: Sarah hasn't understood a novel before destroying it for a generation. The worst Christie adaptation ever and the violence totally irrelevant to the plot. Using the violence she is taking the time which should be used for better plot. I understand little modifications but the complete plot...???