Is anyone else think it's making the murderers identity is too obvious

I agree, this adaptation is even worse at singling him out as the murderer than the Russian version.

I am watching with a person who unbelievably to me doesn't know the story (book, movie or play) and they have no clue who the killer is. I think those who do know the story will pick up on things that a general audience will not. And Justice Wargrave in part 2 does take part in the room searches. He is not the only one who displays various shades of calm, I think the spectrum of reactions to the situation from Wargrave's calmness to Mrs. Rodgers hysteria is fully seen.

I find the foreshadowing, especially for Vera, very obvious but again I know what I am looking for and at.

All in all, even though I know the story, I am finding this an excellent adaptation. The cast is all around excellent, the atmosphere (sets, clothes, location and music) is brilliant and the slow build up of tension is perfect for a psychological murder mystery rather than the slasher genre this book spawned.

And last but not least, Aidan Turner in a towel! That man is sex personified, in a tux, casual clothes, bathrobe, unclothed, smoking [which I hate in RL], the camera loves him. Lombard is an amoral mass murderer and I'm finding the book lover in me betrayed by almost wanting the bad boy and guilt ridden child murderer to have the play ending.

I think you need to have a bit more faith in the spirit of Agatha Christie, and remember that while experienced readers/viewers may have an inkling, I can assure you those in the dark will be hazarding any number of guesses. Normally when first watching (or reading) a whodunnit, the audience will legitimately suspect everyone... even the killer rightly so once or twice, but through the course of the bulk of the story will be led astray by the red herrings and sleight of hand.

The first and biggest trick being played on us is the title (well, the "doggerel"): half the audience may believe that this is a special murder mystery where everyone dies (or in equal measure the last person surviving is the killer) and an outsider -- perhaps a key person from one of the flashbacks -- is responsible.

As for Justice Wargrave, don't forget that upon arrival he was the very first person to remark that something was amiss ("She's not even here... it's very strange... very strange, indeed..."), and later after dinner he is the first to suggest a plan to leave the island ("... then we confront them!") which lends credence both to the notion of his innocence in the scenario, and to his calm, mature demeanour. Meanwhile, the audience has been carefully conditioned to suspect Vera Claythorne from the start, who on the surface would appear the mark of irreproachable politeness and naivety, but due to the protagonist-like focus given her (she was the first person we saw, the first person to travel to the island, and hers was the first backstory of which we knew and the act of murder last to be properly explained), I guarantee the audience has her as their prime candidate due to the nature of the genre, where the audience thinks they are outsmarting the writer, but the writer is actually outsmarting them.

Just think back to when you first read the novel. When you think about it, the Judge is the obvious candidate for someone to have arranged a live trial and sentencing of 10 guests, hidden in quite plain sight, but you fairly were misled when you didn't know what to look out for like you do now knowing the solution.

I find that every time I watch an Agatha Christie adaptation or reread one of the books, all the clues seem incredibly obvious, whereas the first time I come across the story they're really hard to single out from the red herrings. That's what made her such a good writer - the signs are all in plain sight all the time but many people don't see them.

I'm watching with my family, and my dad didn't know the story and still doesn't know who the killer is. He noticed the line about the judge being famous for imposing the death penalty frequently and thought it suggested that there was a lot more to the judge than meets the eye, and that perhaps he is the most guilty of the guests. He thinks the final episode will reveal that the real reason the judge was invited was that, despite his gentle demeanor, he has calmly caused the death of dozens of people on thin evidence, and that his story is being left to last because it's the most subtly horrifying. From my perspective, of course, that's an obvious clue that the judge wants to sentence these people to death as well.

At the moment, my dad's theory is that it could be Lombard because he's the only person to have confessed (perhaps encouraging the others to do so), could be Blore (there under false pretences, pretending to be incompetent), or could be Armstrong (pretending to be unbalanced). The rest of the family is having enormous fun trying not to give it away.


You don’t have to be angry to have an opinion worth hearing.

I have been pleasantly surprised here too by the perplexity of those who did not read the book. One of those I am watching with does suspect Wargrave, but not conclusively.

I remember, reading the book for the first time, making my guess on the 'follow the money' principle: only Marston, Wargrave, and possibly Armstrong seem to have the capital to pay for the island and make the arrangements, judging by their background, while we know most of the guests are not that well-off. But, with the adaptation, you don't get that level of description of their backstories.

I too am watching it with someone who has never read the book or seen any adaption of it, so it's fascinating listening to his suspicions and his reasons for them. He knows that I know and I am giving nothing away! He is a highly intelligent man, a lawyer who is used to reasoning things out.

So far, he hasn't even considered the judge...!

The judge was calm but that did not mean he was the obvious murderer especially as he is screen to die.

Then again I have seen other versions of this story.

It's that man again!!

Watching this was the first time I've experienced ATTWN, so from a position of ignorance, I would say that they did it just right.
I didn't suspect the Judge for quite a while, with the Doctor and Vera herself being my prime suspects for most of the journey, although I couldn't work out a motive for Vera, her foreshadowing got a lot of screen time and it became clear to me quite early on that she had 'murdered' the boy.