Year: 1974
Cast: Albert Finney, Lauren Bacall, Martin Balsam, Ingrid Bergman, Jacqueline Bisset, Jean-Pierre Cassel, Sean Connery, John Gielgud, Wendy Hiller, Anthony Perkins, Vanessa Redgrave, Rachel Roberts, Richard Widmark, Michael York, Colin Blakely, George Coulouris, Dennis Quilley
Director: Sidney Lumet
Nominations: Best Actor (Finney), Best Supporting Actress (Bergman), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Original Dramatic Score, Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design
For some reason, the Academy has never been big on Whodunits, even if they're based on the work of the Queen of Whodunits herself, Agatha Christie. In fact, this is only the second Christie adaptation the Academy took any notice of at all, the first being Witness for the Prosecution, not even twenty years before.
This one, however, unlike Witness, was an adventure featuring one of her famous recurring sleuths, in this case the great Belgian detective Hercule Poirot, played here by Albert Finney. In this case, M. Poirot is merely returning to England, having secured passage on an all-booked-up trip on the Orient Express thanks to knowing the director of the train line, Signor Bianchi (Martin Balsam). He's approached by an abrupt, mysterious American businessman, Mr. Ratchett (Richard Widmark), who's afraid someone might be planning an attempt on his life. Poirot isn't impressed by Ratchett and turns down the offer to become his paid bodyguard for the remainder of the trip.
But just because Ratchett might be paranoid doesn't mean he was wrong. One morning after the train is delayed by snow covering the track, Ratchett is found dead in his room, a preponderance of evidence surrounding him.
Who among the twelve passengers killed him? Could it be haughty American socialite Harriett Hubbard (Lauren Bacall)? Mousy, withdrawn missionary Greta Ohlsson (Ingrid Bergman)? Fragile young Countess Helena (Jacqueline Bisset) or her fiery husband Count Rudolf (Michael York)? Eccentric Russian Princess Dragomiroff (Wendy Hiller), or perhaps her androgynous maid
This film was a smorgasbord of talent, with one of the most star-studded casts of any film I've reviewed yet. Among its massive cast are three concurrent Oscar winners, six concurrent nominees, three future winners and one future nominee (yes, there is some overlap in there). Out of them all, only Finney and Bergman managed nominations for this film, with Bergman winning.
As you might guess, this film is fascinating to watch, mostly to just sort of bask in the glow of so many of yesterday's international mega-stars in one place. I understand Lumet got Connery signed first and his star power convinced others to sign on, and the more big stars who joined the cast, the easier it was to convince still more to sign.
The end result is a superbly acted masterpiece with so many great actors doing their thing that none of them really stand out, which is odd because apparently one did. I mean to say that one performance among the supporting cast stood out, because Albert Finney is indeed the clear lead here, as the detective figuring it all out, and he has the most scenes and the most to work with. This would be a role that could be quite boring if done wrong, but the writing and Finney's performance cause M. Poirot to be the true draw in this film. Poirot starts off the film tired and irritable, and just wants everyone to leave him alone, even at one point suggesting that the police in Prague (the next stop) can handle this. Once he is convinced to take the case, he does so with gusto, only to find himself more disgusted by the man who was killed than by his potential killers. The ending, which you probably already know, but which I will not spoil, really gives Finney the opportunity to shine, as solving the case presents a moral dilemma to Poirot that he clearly wrestles with even after the decision is made.
So I can understand Finney's nomination, even if I think the nomination was his award, but the rest of the cast is uniformly excellent and all receive about the same amount of screen time. Bacall, Connery and Hiller's roles are probably the showiest, but showy doesn't mean best acted by any stretch, and I was also impressed with Anthony Perkins's nebbishy attache, the first to react to the true identity of his employer, and the first to suggest that had he known, he would have killed him. Rachel Roberts was also a standout to me, but mostly because I think her character was supposed to be a lesbian, despite this not being hinted at aside from her look and demeanor, which either means they didn't intend this, or that they decided not to make her sexuality have anything to do with the story, a pretty progressive idea for 1974. Roberts herself was not a lesbian, but I haven't seen her in other films, so I don't know if she comes off as masculine elsewhere as she was here.
But none of them were nominated. Instead, Ingrid Bergman was, in a role that would end up winning her a third Oscar. And her performances is...fine. I mean, she's Ingrid Bergman and she's doing what she tends to do here, but I don't really understand how of all the performances in this film, hers is the one to stand out enough to not just be nominated, but to win.
What's funny is that Lumet first approached her about playing the Princess Dragomiroff, and even suggested that if she took that role, it would make her a shoo-in for an Oscar nomination. But she wanted to be Greta, and insisted on it, so Wendy Hiller took the role of Dragomiroff, and took her cue from her costuming (you have to see her costumes to believe them), playing the Russian royal to the hilt, thick accent and all. Bergman's performance is much quieter, much more subtle, but probably more intense for all that. In her big scene, she has to convey several emotions within just a few moments, and she does them all convincingly, while sounding very much like a lot of non-English speakers from Scandinavian nations I've known in real life. So I don't wish to make it sound like she didn't do a very good job; far from it. But I don't know what made it stand out, especially considering she's far from the only subtle, understated, yet powerful performance in this film. It's definitely to her credit that with only a few minutes, and in a role that's quiet and unassuming, she managed to impress so many. I do wonder, however, if Bergman had taken the Dragomiroff role, would she have missed the Oscars, or been nominated for that instead?
I guess I can't really talk about this movie much longer without mentioning that it was recently remade, with Kenneth Branagh directing and taking the title role. I haven't seen that one, though I'd like to very soon, but it's funny that Branagh went the same way as Lumet, hiring an all-star cast that included Willem Dafoe, Judi Dench, Josh Gad, Daisy Ridley, Michelle Pfieffer, Olivia Colman and Johnny Depp in the role of the murder victim. For whatever reason, the Academy failed to recognize that one, even in the costuming or production design departments. I guess lighting can really only strike once.
No comments:
Post a Comment