Show: Agatha Christie’s Poirot
Episode
Particulars: S1EP10, “The Dream”, original airdate March 19th,
1989.
Standalone
Thoughts: For most of the runtime, this episode is kind of fascinating. I
think this is because it does an excellent job of establishing setting and
mood. The factory is a great combination of Art Deco elegance and the sterile
blandness you’d expect in an industrial setting. Then, when you get to the
scene where Farley describes his dream, the shadows, music, Poirot’s clear
discomfort, and Howard’s voice all combine to be unsettling, which fits the
content of the dream itself. After Farley’s death is discovered, it’s still
interesting, because the situation is so unusual and there’s no obvious clue as
to what happened. So the episode does enough things right to get you invested…
…and then it ruins everything at the very end. Oh, there are
still some good moments (Hastings is used for more than just comic
relief/audience surrogate), and we actually get a “characters are gathered for
an explanation” scene, but the reveal of who did it comes out of nowhere. Sure,
we were given some of the clues, and some of them make sense upon reflection,
but Poirot doesn’t come out and explain how he figured out two key parts of the
crime. It might have worked better if there had been more time spent
questioning people and learning more about Farley’s life and relationships with
others, but as it stands, the ending is a mess, and makes the rest of the
episode feel like a mess too. Not to mention that the very ending is trying for
comedy, but it’s a type of humor that might not work for some people (I’m one
of them), and therefore ends both the episode and the season/series on a
particularly sour note. Personally, I would have stuck this one somewhere in
the middle and ended with “Triangle at Rhodes”. It’s a much stronger episode to
close on, and would have gotten rid of the problem of Poirot going on two
vacations in quick succession…
Number of Tropes
Followed/Subverted: There’s a 2/15 for tropes, and 2/15 for subversions. We
get definite cases of “Coincidental Comment” and “An Affair to Forget” on the
trope side of things. As for the subversions, there’s a decent enough use of
“Fingerprints or Lack Thereof”, because at least the only fingerprints on the
gun are the ones expected to be there. And as you can probably guess, “Playing
Fair” is the other subversion. Would an after the fact explanation have been
too much to ask for at the very least?
Other: *The
30’s newsreel that opens the episode feels very realistic (or at least as
realistic as the examples I’ve seen in other media), to the point where I wondered
if they’d used an actual newsreel and then built off of it. Which I suppose is
the highest praise I can give it.
*The female workers in the factory very much look like
they don’t want to be there (see my header). In fact, given the way that whole
scene is shot, you’d be forgiven if you thought this was the dream of the title, because it has overtones of some
sort of dystopian nightmare. That sort of thing is probably part of the reason
why the episode is at least interesting to watch.
*I’m not sure how to interpret Poirot’s comparing Farley
pies to Wagner. It initially seems like he’s comparing them because they’re
both giants in their fields, but then Poirot reveals that he hates Farley pies,
but they’re famous because there are so many of them. Apparently Wagner has one
hundred and thirteen musical pieces to his name (according to Wikipedia, at
least), but I’m not sure if that’s enough to count as prolific by a composer’s
standards, and therefore if it’s an apt comparison. All I know for sure is that
Poirot’s comment is probably not a
compliment to Wagner.
*There’s a great exchange between Japp and Poirot, where
Japp pretty much outright admits that he will always suspect murder when Poirot
is involved. It’s banter like that that saves lackluster episodes from being
too disappointing.
*I do love this shot;
It’s nicely framed anyway, but the brief moment of eye
contact between Hastings and Poirot to confirm that all is going according to
plan is a great moment. Even if the reveal gets increasingly bonkers, this
part, at least, works.
*Season wrap up: This wasn’t a very strong start for the
series. Unlike Deep Space Nine, where
there were at least a handful of decent episodes in the first season, almost
none of these episodes of Poirot really
struck me as good. David Suchet, Hugh Fraser, and Philip Jackson are all doing
excellent work (Pauline Moran is fine as well, but she rarely gets a chance to
shine), but the mysteries surrounding them aren’t being handled very well. I
don’t know if it’s because of weak source material or just a decision to focus
on the wrong things, but based on this showing, it’s kind of astounding that
this show managed to get another sixty episodes. We’ll just have to wait and
see if things improve, or if this is a show that my memory has been kinder to
than it deserves.
Most Interesting
Character: There are really only two supporting characters who get any
attention, both interesting in different ways. Ultimately, though, I went with;
Benedict Farley
He may have a nasally droning voice, but he’s definitely
got a presence, and he looks and dresses like he’s straight out of the
Victorian era. Plus, you wonder about his backstory. How did he become such a
successful pie maker? How did he manage to get married (twice) and have a child
if he’s such a dour man? As with the previous Most Interesting Character, it’s
the facts we don’t see that make Farley intriguing. Or maybe that’s just the
writer in me.
I found this a very interesting episode for a lot of different reasons, but ultimately it fell a bit short of being satisfying. So many great elements were there, but the end result was a lot like Farley's pies, lots of effort, good ingredients, final taste not so great.
ReplyDeleteSince the whole doesn't work so well, let's look at the ingredients. First (and most noticeable to me), the setting. I agree with you that the set design and physical locations were outstanding. I suspected that the Farley Pies building was either the (or based on the) Hoover Factory in Britain and I was spot on. Try a Google search of Hoover Factory Britain and look at the images. The Hoover Factory was/is legendary as an Art Deco building and would have been instantly recognizable to any English viewers. There would have been an immediate sense of place and time that simply is unavailable to us in the US. So I think the feeling of place would have been even stronger for the typical viewer of the show than you or I can imagine.
The rest of the Art Deco elements were also strong - to the point that I think episode has the best sense of place and time of any episode to date.
Second, there were the "new" characters. I found Farley ridiculous - a Dickensian character dropped into the modern world while everyone else around him (with the sole exception of his daughter) came from the British interwar drawing room drama playbook. Even his attitudes seemed to be drawn from one of Dickens minor novels - the caricature of the money grubbing industrialist who spouts platitudes of how he makes life good for his workers whilst they are actually unhappy. (Offhand comment - the script equates Poirot to Farley in the way he responds to Miss Lemon's request for a new typewriter). In a world of artificial characters, Farley was the most artificial.
Then there was the icy money loving 2nd wife, the ridiculously nebbish chief aide (someone with that level of quivering fear would NOT be able to execute his duties in a major company), the innocent eager young lover, the snooty butler and even the old Junker fencing instructor. The only notable supporting character was the daughter who did a good job of showing that in terms of intelligence and will, she was indeed her father's daughter. She was worth watching, the other annoyed me.
More to come ....
Then there were the recurring characters. Hastings was decently used and showed more insight than usual (his understanding of Miss Lemon's complaints for example), but I still can't figure out what his role in the Poirot family actually is. Japp is good period and I agree his interaction with Poirot in the example you cite is excellent. Miss Lemon .... well the script made her do something completely out of character. Early on when the typewriter jams she says one word that is subtitled as "bother." It wasn't bother; it was the f-bomb which does NOT work for Miss Lemon in the late 1930's. The problem is that a character that would say that with Hastings around would not have been so prim and passive when Poirot was being a jerk.
ReplyDeleteWhich he was. I was really annoyed by the "domestic" Poirot. Is Mr. Little Grey Cells really so dense that he can't see Miss Lemon is seriously upset about the typewriter? The whole thing with the clock was forced for a lame series of jokes that only make Mr. P look no better than Farley in his treatment of his employee.
Finally, there was the mystery which I think was telegraphed way too obviously. The moment "Farley" had Poirot sit with that bright light on him I suspected he didn't want Poirot to see him too closely and then when he refused to let him see the next room, that clinched it. Once it appeared it might be murder, then the murderer had to be the only person who said there was a gun in the drawer or the only person who said she had been told of the dream. The rest was melodrama.
So to sum up my view - obvious plotting, annoying main characterization, stock characters (mostly well done) from different English literary traditions but great set design equals a show great for viewing while pedaling along going nowhere.
"So to sum up my view - obvious plotting, annoying main characterization, stock characters (mostly well done) from different English literary traditions but great set design equals a show great for viewing while pedaling along going nowhere."
DeleteForgive me if I see that as damning with faint praise. That being said, I definitely appreciate your insights and perspectives on this, since you know or notice things that I don't. And if you're enjoying the show in some form, then that's all to the good.