Murder On The Orient Express Review

Murder On The Orient Express 

 A movie based on the best selling novel of the same by Agatha Christie, "Murder On The Orient Express" tries its best to standout although it does face some stiff competition with movies such as "The Greatest Showman", "Jumanji: Welcome To The Jungle", "All the Money in the World", etc. However, it fails to hit the mark for me, why you may ask? The idea that all of the passengers on the train are somehow connected to the murder of a young heiress,  Daisy Armstrong by Cassetti, a man who got away with her murder.

The film begins with a shot of the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem and a boy who's constantly running back and forth because this man, who we later learn to be Hercule Poirot, compares the height of one soft boiled egg to the other, looking for perfection. The Chief Inspector of Police reminds him of the upcoming riot, if he doesn't hurry up and get on with the case. The accused are the Rabbi, the Priest and the Imam. Unbeknownst to the audience, it's the Chief of Police Inspector who thrives off riot, needs it or else he won't have a job anymore.

Moving on, Poirot boards a ship where he meets Governess Mary Debenham and Dr. Arbuthnot, both of who'll he meet again on the train. Later on, Poirot finds himself in a restaurant with an old friend, Monsieur Bouc who happens to be quite "high up" in the company that runs the Orient Express, which he now requires as a man approaches him with a telegram in hand, insisting that his presence is essential for a homicide case. Guess who now needs a train seat on the Orient Express? Try harder movie.

While boarding the train, Poirot runs into Mrs. Hubbard a blonde woman in her late 40's who's something of a potential love interest for Poirot, however do I get the feeling that Poirot isn't interested in a fling. The film then presents us with the antagonist, Mr. Ratchett. A man who fulfills the stereotype of a villain with no redeemable qualities because the film wants you to hate this man to justify what happens to him in the future, which I must say is just cheating as not everybody is fully rotten to the core. Even Mrs. Hubbard's flirtatious advances are rejected by the cynical Mr. Ratchett. In his cabin, Mr. Ratchett finds a note that reads "You better watch yourself". He then turns to the butler and accuses him of knowing who wrote it, how would the butler know it? Presumably the butler has been tending to guests the whole afternoon, but managed to see someone walk into Mr.  Ratchett's cabin to put the note there. No, he obviously doesn't know. Facepalm.

Moving on, it's now morning and Poirot starts walking towards M. Bouc's table only to have Mr. Ratchett try to speak to him on the way over. When he finally makes it to his table, M. Bouc tries to say something deep and meaningful about the situation on the train, which is a great analysis and I appreciate the effort, but I just think it's very uncharacteristic for his character as he's basically Poirot's sidekick and he's only here for comic relief and assistance.
We get a glimpse of the relationship between Princess Dragomiroff and her German maid, Hildegarde Schmidt and not a great relationship at that, seeing as the Princess is too bitter to see that her maid is trying her best. Then, we see the racist Mr. Hardman complain about being seated next to Dr. Arbuthnot just because his skin is different color to his own. The Governess, appalled by his comparison of mixing red and white wine to black and white people. When she says something like "I must say that I do enjoy a good rosé,". Well done movie now that's what I'm looking for.



Finally, Mr. Ratchett approaches Poirot determined to get his attention. He wants Poirot to watch his back while he's on the train. At first, Poirot shrugs him off only to have a gun pointed at him by Mr. Ratchett. Poirot fed up now, straight out refuses this offer even with Mr. Ratchett increasing the sum of money. Poirot's reason for wanting nothing to do with Mr. Ratchett is quite honorable, he declares "I detect criminals, I don't protect them". We stand by Poirot on this seeing as Mr. Ratchett hasn't done anything to deserve our admiration. Poirot promptly leaves the table.


The train stops briefly, allowing Dr. Arbuthnot and McQueen to grab a few drinks before hopping back on the train. The train continues its journey into the night through the snow. Poirot has found himself captivated by his novel, I don't blame him as I often find myself unable to put down a novel, but this means that Poirot is awake for this fatal night. It starts with the an attendant knocking at his door only to be dismissed. The attendant is then summoned again by Mrs. Hubbard. Poirot hears something at the door again, he opens it to find a blonde woman running down the corridor with a red kimono on, her identity unknown. Poirot finally finds himself drifting off to sleep, when snow falling from the mountains, derails the train, throwing passengers to the floor. The train is now stopped.


M. Bouc announces to the passengers about their current situation. They have to wait until help arrives. In this scene, we see two new faces, Biniamino Marquez and Pilar Estravados . Pilar says this "it's not for us to say, if we deserve to arrive safely at our destination or if like Lucifer we must fall". Now you aren't even trying to hide your secret plot, especially since after she says this, it goes quiet with everyone looking at one another. Just told the audience who murdered Mr. Ratchett. Facepalm.

Guess who's not gathered around? Mr. Ratchett! Dr. Arbuthnot declares that the murderer struck blind when he stabbed Mr. Ratchett. Poirot tells M. Bouc that he's using this time on the train for rest, but when is a perfectionist ever resting? I mean it's not like a man has just been murdered or anything, but we know that he'll still solve the case anyway because why would this movie be even made, it's the director just prolonging the conclusion of the movie.


I mean Poirot to be fair to M. Bouc, you're always in a lying down or seated position when measuring the height of your soft boiled egg, so M. Bouc isn't too far off. I love how the movie depicts the racism that was still so ever present in that span of time and how the movie states that the police had a prejudice against people of color, although the police try to claim that their fair. .For someone claiming to be the greatest detective in the world, why isn't he acting suspicious of the passenger's reaction, I know they're astonished, but it's still so unusual.

McQueen, we don't want a life story, just get to the bottom of it. Wow, you don't judge on race, but it depends on which race, those are two contradictory statements. Wait one second, so they burn the note and for some reason it appears on the gauze, I'm just confused.

Let me just say the worst thing about this movie is it keeps changing focus, it goes from searching for clues to bringing up a famous case and we haven't gotten to see a fair amount of screen time from each of the actors that are possible suspects and it's hard to keep up to speed because everything is changing so quickly.

Some great detective... solving the case when the whole family is dead. How did Mr. Ratchett get away with it for so long anyway? Okay the interviews aren't that important seeing as they pass the blame off to someone else. Why does Mr. Ratchett pull out a gun like that she's not threatening him at all. I mean if a uniform smells of bourbon, you don't just turn to the nearest alcoholic and they're immediately the murderer, he may be a suspect, but you don't put all your eggs in one basket, the movie is just trying to create some tension.

Isn't it a coincidence how all the passengers magically have a connection to the Armstrong Family? The movie doesn't even try to hide this fact.  I swear we never get to see the Count and Countess Andrenyi, which is completely unfair so we don't get to form an opinion on them, except that the Count needs to cool it down a notch.



The movie never goes into detail about his Katherine, why mention it if you'll never explain it? Why is that door open in the train carriage when he's talking to Mary? It's unnecessary and the movie only does it to get the audience on the edge of your seats because there's the possibility of falling to your death. Great timing Poirot, somehow he was able to predict when they were lifting the train back onto the track? The movie really wants to keep him alive. We never really get to see Marquez.

The movie tried to do to much in a short space of time and missed out on important details and characters' backstories.

Ending? They all assisted in the killing of Cassetti as revenge for how the death of Daisy Armstrong affected them. Poirot decides to walk away as he can't really judge it seeing as they were only getting revenge.

Rating: 5/10