Ten Little Indians (1988)

Overrated and overhyped

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

That's the director of this film.Those of us who read the novel before we saw the film will be pleasantly surprised by this film.We know that there have been many Hollywood versions of the Agatha Christie murder mystery. Each worse the one before. The worst was easily the one with 1960s morality and preaching.AN THEN THERE WERE NONE, which had numerous subtitles deemed derogatory today, but looked upon with tea party innocent acceptance then, is easily Christie's masterpiece. It is the story which is retold in almost every TV action series in one form or another, in which an isolated group of people, in this case ten, are killed off one by one, realizing that their murderer is one of them. It is the basis for NINE DEAD, SAW, most horror films, and most reality shows.Christie's words flowed in this book as she never had them flow before or after. It was her magical work. One could wonder if this was the same author of the other Christie books. This was easy reading. You could pore through every word, and remember every word.Christie was so gifted, and her obvious jealousy of the stunning brunettes holds her back, but that is all that holds her back. This novel was a masterpiece.Now, for the remarkable news. GOVONUKHIN is the director of this masterpiece. He carefully kept nearly every word intact. It flows and looks perfectly period piece British. There are times that his directing will astound students of the art.The ten people are portrayed with magnificence. The setting, the atmosphere, everything, is as close to the book as one can do in a reasonable time frame.In case you haven't heard, the ten characters are all accused by their unknown host of murders for which they were not penalized for. The book makes it clear, as does the film, that these aren't what are viewed as murders, but a subtle sort of murder. The main character, Vera Claythorn, for example, was watching over a young boy, and relented one day in letting him swim to far out in the ocean, and failed to save him. Philip Lombard, the one described as wolf like in the book, abandoned twenty Africans in a safari (I believe in the book it was 21, and actually Lombard was one of about three who abandoned them) in a situation in which they would all starve, but there were provisions for a few.In British tradition, Lombard's view that Africans didn't mind dying is met with weak resistance by some of the others, though not totally accepted by the group as a whole. Christie is insightful enough to point out that it is indeed the religious fanatic, Emily Brent, who is the one that is most troubled by Lombard's easily dismissal of humans who are different.The third central character, Blore, is bearlike in the book, yet much like Lombard in character. Here, he and Lombard are much blonder, and even more alike, but it really enriches the theme of the British social order, and works exceptionally well. In all of literature, there are probably not two characters more definitive of "frenemies" than these two, and perhaps they are the two original "frenemies".I could elaborate on the ten characters, but it is better to let the viewer do that. It isn't a spoiler to say that the principal three are fascinating. Their British superiority glows in a realism that will amaze you. The killer is even more spine tingling in his realism than the caricatures of modern horror.This is an awesome film. And kudos to a director, but also to the entire troupe of actors, stunt men, down to the cue card holders, because this team was a winning team. This is so much like the book, that I can't say to read the book first, but either way, you'll enjoy it, I'm sure.I don't know what more I can say. It's hard to describe how great this piece is, and I am afraid of the usual letdown if I laud it too much, for you'll expect too much. Simply expect a well told story, and take the ride.

This is not the type of movie that a typical moviegoer will seek, so, instead I will give some other insight.This was the only movie that ever gave me nightmares when I was a kid. Mostly, I think it's because the movie achieved a rare feat of actually transforming not only the book and it's characters to the screen but also the atmosphere.Many people will not watch this movie just based on it's original name, but I can assure you, the name conveys no negative information. That leads to believe that it's P.C title, is just a cop-out.As far as adaptations done, there are no better versions of any ever made.10/10

I believe listing just one, single thing about this adaptation that makes it the best ATTWN adaptation would be doing this film a great injustice, so it's difficult for me to find a place to begin. I suppose I'll start by describing the plot in case there's anyone who's been living under a rock: Ten strangers are gathered to an isolated location, are informed by a gramophone record that they're all murderers who will receive swift retribution, and are killed off one by one in accordance to the gruesome nursery rhyme, Ten Little Indian--sorry, Ten Little Negro Boys. Call the title (which translates to Ten Little Negro Boys) politically incorrect, but the original title was politically incorrect. Call the characters nasty, but they were nasty in the book. Call the ending depressing, but the ending was depressing in the book. Call this movie a lot of things, but never call it unfaithful. Unlike the other adaptations, which watered down the things that made Agatha Christie's original story a masterpiece, this adaptation is not afraid to go there. It's not afraid to expose the plot for what it is or the characters for whom they are, which is what makes it stand out from the other adaptations. For instance, take Vera Claythorne. The other adaptations portray her as a bright-eyed, oh-so-innocent young lady who would never do anything bad, never. Here, she only LOOKS innocent, but as revealed in her flashbacks, she is anything but. Tatyana Drubich captures the character of Vera Claythorne perfectly, portraying her as a cold-hearted monster in her flashbacks when she's allowing her pupil to swim out to sea and drown, and then portraying her as a human and sympathetic character when she has her breakdown at the end, realizing that although Cyril had her lover's money, he was only an innocent child who hadn't yet lived his life. In the book, the characters merely speak of nightmares they had; in the movie, you see them. For instance, Lombard dreams of traveling through a jungle, only to be confronted by a large tribe man whom Lombard fights off. The tribe man falls and has a blank, horrible look on his face. Lombard opens his mouth to scream but can't (you know that awful feeling dreams?) and wakes up sweating and takes a drink. Basically, the movie is extremely faithful to the book, taking only one, major liberty: The infamous bedroom scene between Lombard and Vera, a scene that gives me the chills because what happens between them borderlines between an intense love-making session and rape. It shows the characters at their maddest, showing two people who were having a civilized conversation at the beginning of the movie now behaving like rabbits in mating season, and the two actors play the moment beautifully. (I have to wonder, though, would Agatha Christie view it that way?) And last but not least, there's the part that many users have mentioned already but I might as well mention it: Instead of using the romantic, happy ending from the play, this version uses the dark, downbeat ending of the novel, which is what gives this adaptation its reputation for being unafraid to 'go there'. It goes to show that Stanislav Govorukhin read the novel, not the play, and saw a potentially great ending for a great movie. (Besides, a happy ending for Lombard and Vera in this adaptation would be kind of awkward, considering, you know, that little moment of insanity) Overall, this is a superb adaptation that deserves its reputation amongst Agatha Christie fans.

As a film unto itself, this adaptation stands as a well made movie. The production values compare quite favorably with western mystery films (not being much a Russian film buff this was a concern of mine before getting the DVD). Taken as a film this is a well made, well acted and 'good looking' effort. I didn't even mind the subtitles (which usually drive me to distraction). The one 'compliant' I would offer is that the subtitle translations are a little stiff (for lack of a better term). The language is very stilted and often humorous, but they are done well enough that you get the gist of what the actors are saying --- especially if you have read the original book or seen any of the earlier versions of the story.Regarding the inevitable comparisons to the earlier adaptations of Christie's story (I have only seen the 10 Little Indians from the 60's and And Then There Were None from the 40's), this version is much closer to the original story. This is a much darker adaptation then these earlier efforts and hence not as 'fun' to watch. This film demands more work from the viewer than those earlier, lighter versions. Where those earlier films provided some comic relief (in the person of the bumbling, drunken butler in And Then There Were None and the ham handed sexual relationship in 10 Little Indians) this film has none of that. This is a serious mystery with serious portrayals.One caveat I might offer (especially in this age of political correctness) is that the statues in this versions are of black children. I mention this only because some may find offense in this aspect of the film.Other than this I would highly recommend this film to any serious mystery buff or follower of Dame Christie's work.