Agatha And The Curse Of Ishtar, Channel 5, Sunday
The modern trend where dramatising Agatha Christie is concerned is to take the novels and update them. Not in terms of the period – those flapper dresses and three-piece suits are all part of the appeal – but in terms of their red-bloodedness. In other words you add enough sex and violence to make them attractive to audiences who prefer Game Of Thrones to Miss Marple, and excuse the shift in tone by explaining that sex and violence is what the books are really about anyway, right? All you’re doing is turning up the volume.
Running alongside that trend is another, which takes aspects of the author’s eventful life and turns them into a plot from one of her own novels. Channel 5’s 2018 Christmas offering was Agatha And The Truth Of Murder, which examined Christie’s famous 11 day “disappearance” in 1926. Here the same writer, Tom Dalton, focussed on Christie’s trip to Iraq to visit her archaeologist friend Leonard Wooley and her fateful first meeting with his much younger colleague, Max Mallowan, whom Christie would later marry (at St Cuthbert’s Church on Edinburgh’s Princes Street, would you believe?).
Onto those bare historical facts Dalton grafted a story turning on sex (natch), murder (natch), stolen Mesopotamian artefacts, poisoned pet monkeys, conniving diplomats and oil. Generally it was good fun (it’s hard for an Agatha Christie drama to be anything else) but you could see Lyndsey Marshal’s Agatha struggling with a script marked by jarring expletives, fnarr-fnarr sex references and po-faced discussions about such subjects as male ejaculation. Playing opposite Marshal in the role of Max Mallowan was Jonah Hauer-King and his amazing eyebrow, which he lifted to look cute or quizzical or goofy sometimes all three at once. It was easy to see why Christie fell for him.
Several scenes were downright bizarre but the one which stood out was when Christie and Mallowan undertook a forensics test using a derringer whose previous owner had been blown to bits – only rigor mortis being what it is, his severed hand was still gripping the pistol. Was it all meant to funny? Was it intended as some kind of post-modern experiment in literary criticism (unlikely on Channel 5)? Could it just not make its mind up about the sort of tone it wanted to set? Or was it just not very good? Even after two hours it was hard to judge, though the fact that the panjandrums at Channel 5 dropped it into a mid-December, Not Quite Christmas TV slot made me think the last was closest to the truth.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel