MovieChat Forums > Murder on the Orient Express (1974) Discussion > Only Crime Here is the Two Hours Stolen ...

Only Crime Here is the Two Hours Stolen from My Life

posted 14 years ago by Brian Scott Mednick
14 replies | jump to latest

I had never seen Murder on the Orient Express until last night - well, I had not missed anything all those years. What a bloated, boring, humorless film. A good mystery should make you want to know who the killer is, but I had no interest - and was even more disinterested when I found out.

How can such a great director like Sidney Lumet and such a great cast turn out such a dull film? Albert Finney and John Gielgud are the only actors whose performances really merit any attention. Ingrid Bergman, as wonderful an actress as she was, certainly did not deserve an Oscar for her role, especially in a year that saw the ladies of Young Frankenstein and Blazing Saddles - Teri Garr, Madeline Kahn, and Cloris Leachman - all of whom were more deserving than Bergman.

The film takes for ever to get going and once everyone is finally on the train, it just drags. Save your time and instead watch Murder by Death, Neil Simon's spoof of this very genre of mystery that is actually more entertaining, thrilling, and witty than anything in this train wreck.

[–] megArnold 14 years ago

Go back under your bridge and watch Transformers...

[–] liscarkat (19427) 5 years ago

Funny, how the legacy of the "Transformers" franchise seems to be that it is always cited as the ultimate in tasteless viewing by posters seeking to insult others.

[–] rob-949 14 years ago

I was just thinking the same thing. It's a full 22 boring minutes at the front that could have been chopped that's used to introduce the characters and linger FOREVER on boring details like the band playing and the train departing the station, as well as a couple establishing shots. I was born well before the MTV generation but even I was just climbing the walls having to sit through the dull, uneventful beginning.

[–] saltandpepper66 14 years ago

Uneventful? There were clues given during the beginning, characterisations established, locations established, the train is turned into a character.....the only reason this post was started was because the first posted thought his "only crime here..." subject line was clever...well it isn't 1/1000th as clever as any line in this movie. Don't bring the MTV generation into this...if you don't appreciate the beginning and think it's boring, you understand or appreciate good story-telling.

[–] Harold_Robbins 14 years ago

The OP is certainly entitled to his opinion, but it's the kind that makes me wonder if he saw the same film I did, the same reaction I had to Time Magazine's review of TITANIC: "The regretful verdict here: Dead in the water" (but fear not - I'm the guy who thought 35 minutes of FARGO quite sufficient, and gave the DVD away, and who hated, despised and detested ADAPTATION - my reactions to and opinions about these films raise quite a few eyebrows, to be sure).

"'Nature,' Mr. Allnut, is what we are put here to rrrrrriiiiise above!"

[–] rohit_sidhu 14 years ago

It's funny that I actually enjoyed Murder on the Orient Express and Adaptation whereas I found Titanic passable and Fargo quite dull.

[–] mizhu 14 years ago

Seriously, I always hate posts that try to grab you with an immediate impression such as 'There goes goes another hour, two hours, four hours, sixteen years of my life I'll never get back'.

(and by the way, that has now become an internet expression that is not only over-used, but shows a certain lack of intelligence. It's the same as today's 'THIS' to show agreement).

The only crime was committed by YOU. If you didn't like it, you should've stopped watching it. But, alas, you chose to keep on. So you have only yourself to blame, not the movie.

[–] Jimmy-128 14 years ago

This.

;)

[–] suckerpunched 14 years ago

It was interesting if only as an insight into the writer's mind and what She thought would be a good thriller. Otherwise it was ludicrous. The reason it's difficult to figure out is that it would never have happened. 12 people all keeping their mouths shut and showing up on a train to kill someone one stab at a time. Symbolic perhaps, but not realistic. I didn't feel it was excruciating, though.

Also, Mr. Harold Robbins appears to have bad taste in films. Fargo? Great. Titanic? *beep* Sorry, Harry.

[–] King808 14 years ago

*Sigh* Some people just can't go along for the ride. Always have to find something believable, or reasonable, etc.. to hold on to. Just don't understand what movies are about. Some people only need to watch documentaries, or Non-Fiction entertainment, while being so concerned with what's plausible. I don't get mad at them anymore, it's turned to pity. Tsk Tsk, you guys miss out on so much.

[–] Jimmy-128 14 years ago

Actually, in the 1930s, it was almost plausible.

1. Hardman's a detective, and he's the one who tracks Ratchett down.

2. The conspirators have to get MacQueen and/or Masterman into Ratchett's employ. MacQueen gets the job first (although it is a bit of a coincidence that MacQueen just "happens" to be around when Ratchett fires his previous secretary), and he's the one who checks Masterman's references ("All good, Mr. Ratchett!").

3. With MacQueen now in charge of Ratchett's schedule, he makes sure that Ratchett picks the Orient Express to travel, and picks a time of the year when no outsider is likely to be on the train.

4. The conspirators engage every carriage they can, making up a fictional man for the second-class carriage MacQueen will also be using. They can't get the compartment that Bianchi has reserved, but they get every other one--the only empty compartment is the second-class one with Hildegarde Schmidt, and it's unlikely that a outside woman will be traveling alone during the off-season.

5. Mary Debenham, the most intelligent and organized conspirator, works out the plan with MacQueen's help.

[–] f2039 13 years ago

i dont think this was a bad movie, but it had too many flaws about the portrayal of Istanbul. they should have hired someone who has an idea about 1930s Istanbul. during the years this movie was set in;

- Adhan (call to prayer) was read in Turkish, not in Arabic as in the movie

- You couldn't wear fez in public (that red hat you see on Turkish guys). It was forbidden as it was seen a symbol of Ottoman regime. even if somehow you managed to wear it in public, you couldnt do it at the heart of Istanbul, the biggest city of the country.

Also

- The place they show as "Asian part of Istanbul" is actually European part of Istanbul, as it's seen from boat's location.

- There are no sheeps and shephards in Istanbul. They are in villages, not in cities.

- People didn't dress like that in 1930s.

[–] elisedfr 12 years ago

I love Murder By Death, but MOTOE is really not that bad. It must have been a difficult film to make -I know of few Christie adaptations which have really won the heart of audiences and critics, as much as the books they're based on. The actors are a bit theatrical but it's part of the fun. And there is a great, subtle atmosphere: the luxury and class of the settings and the all-star cast faced with a truly dark and melancholic plot. The music emphasizes it pretty well.

" You ain't running this place, Bert, WILLIAMS is!" Sgt Harris

[–] roger-395 9 years ago

Go watch a blue screen blockbuster with car chases and explosions. That seems about the level your mentalty can process.