I have just about all of Poirot's mysteries. There are also some computer game as well. They are the "seek and find" type. Hastings adds a lot to the plot.

This was too different from the book for me to like it. I saw it as a play on stage and it was MUCH better because characters were not swapped around or changed. I suppose one of the actresses wanted to be bad. I won't say which if you viewers want to watch this, but if I were you, I'd skip it!

Being an AC fan of long standing, I like it when her story lines are respected and not altered too much. However, I don't mind changes if they are for the better. Therefore here are the ticks and crosses for Cards on the Table, with particular reference to changes from the book.

Ticks... (1) Leaving all suspects alive. I much prefer this so that they are all present for the denouement. If suspects are killed off it reduces the amount of possible murderers, so I think this is a good change. (2) I think it is more likely that Mrs Lorrimer would want to protect a daughter rather than a stranger, so I think the daughter change is fine. (3) I was never fond of the window cleaner actor playing his role in the denouement in the book, so getting rid of that and placing the setting for the denouement in Shaitana's lounge is better. (4) The sets. First rate, in particular Shaitana's dining room when the table is set. In fact, I would have liked the dinner scene to go for longer as I think it's the best scene in the film. (5) Zoe Wanamaker's portrayal of Mrs Oliver. It could be tempting to overplay this part, but I think she did the character justice.

Crosses... (1) Making Dr Roberts gay. Completely unnecessary. There is no storyline advantage in making the Craddock affair one with the husband instead of the wife. (2) Making Wheeler gay. Completely unnecessary again. (3) Making Wheeler a suspect. One of the things that makes Cards on the Table such an AC classic, is that there are only four suspects and it's still hard to guess the murderer. I would have liked the 4-suspect storyline left intact. (5) Leaving out Superintendent Battle and replacing him with Wheeler. (6) Switching the good/bad characters of Anne and Rhoda. Trying to kill your best friend just because you're jealous of her dating someone is a bit too much of a stretch. So I think a more plausible scenario would have been to scrap the boat accident and leave them as friends, or even alienated. Anne could have been made good with Rhoda remaining good also. (7) There is no way Poirot could have known that Rhoda killed her aunt instead of Anne doing it by accident. (8) If Poirot can remember specific details of Mrs Oliver's books, he would not forget who her detective, Sven Hjerson, is.

Despite its flaws, I still like this film. It just seems that the producers/writers are too fond of being liberal with Agatha Christie's story lines and characters. It is frustrating for viewers who are fans of AC and would like to see faithful renditions of her books on the screen.

"Cards On the Table" gets a lot of negative reviews for the way it derivates from the original novel. Specifically, people take issue with the homosexual elements added to the story. However, despite these changes, the screenplay is surprisingly faithful to the book otherwise. How is this possible? Well, mostly because the final "twists" are added on top of the original storyline. For example, a man in the book who was having an affair with a woman, turns out to be having an affair with the woman's husband. Does this dramatically change the story? Well, I suppose if you are freaked out by the overt depiction of homosexuality in an Agatha Christie film then you will find this appalling. But it's ultimately an adaption. If you don't like it, go read the novel. It remains there, unspoiled.

Otherwise, this in an engaging production, nicely shot and well cast. Zoe Wannamaker makes a somewhat more morose Mrs. Oliver than I pictured, but she has left room to play it a little lighter in future productions. Suchet has deepened the character of Poirot, and he looks more and more like a haunted man. I suspect he is preparing the character for the depths he will reach in "Curtain." The storyline, while not one of Christie's most inventive or engaging, is serviceable. The changes give it a bit of energy the rather pedestrian climax of the novel lacked. The Suchet series has been so wonderfully faithful to the Christie canon--are we really going to freak out when they make some changes to the stories? The victim's homosexuality was strongly hinted at in the Christie novel, and the screenwriter ran with that. All in all, I found the adaption engaging, interesting, and respectful. A good screenplay is more than word-for-word translation of a novel.

'Cards on the Table' is one of my favourite Poirot novels, but this TV film has made a ghastly mess of the original story. Characters have been changed, or entirely replaced by other characters. A character who killed someone by accident in the book, is in this film version made out to have killed deliberately. The two girls have their roles swapped,so that the one who is the murderer in the book, is the innocent one in the film. The girl who is supposed to be guilty (but who in the film is made out to be innocent) turns out to be the daugther of one of the other characters (in the book they aren't related at all). And I need hardly say that there is no mention whatsoever of gay porn in the book. Most annoying of all, Superintendant Battle, who is one of Agatha Christie's best creations, does not appear in this film version at all.

The whole thing is absolutely maddening. If you watch this, do not imagine that it bears any resemblance at all to the original book, because it doesn't.