Hercule Poirot finds himself investigating the murder of his dinner host, Mr. Shaitana, who was stabbed in the heart while his guests played bridge. There are eight guests and Poirot finds himself in the company of three other investigators. The foursome interview each of the other guests in turn but make little headway until Poirot manages to reconstruct the various bridge hands played at the suspects' table. In doing so, he is able to identify one particular action that leads him to identify the killer. Written by
Alexander Siddig who plays the opening character goes by the name, 'Mr. Shaitana'. Ironically, this name means 'the naughty one' or 'the devil' in Hindi. See more »
When Poirot is discussing the rubbers of the bridge game he infers that each handwriting sample is different. Other than one rubber where the writing is only physically smaller, the handwriting samples are identical. See more »
[to Major Despard, who is on horseback]
there was a Mrs. Luxmore.
How did you know?
My friend, Madame Oliver. She discovered that your editor made one tiny error. In Chapter four, you mentioned that you went on safari, accompanied by the Luxmores. Plural. Later on, there was only one.
Did you shoot him?
[after a short pause]
Were you in love with his wife?
[Scene shows Major Despard, now standing right by Poirot; confessing his past]
Luxmore claimed that he was looking for herbs and ...
[...] See more »
I was appalled to see tonight's airing of "Cards on the Table." It was one of my favorite stories that I first read thirty years ago.
The whole premise is interesting: 4 suspects, 4 sleuths, and an audacious murder committed in the same room as the other suspects.
The unraveling requires an analysis of the play of several hands of bridge and a psychological comparison of the suspects (rather like Philo Vance's analysis of a poker game in the earlier "The 'Canary' Murder Case", which may have been an inspiration for "Cards").
I am not a purist. One expects a couple of details of a book's plot to be changed for dramatization or conciseness. And sometimes, the coincidences Dame Agatha employs strain credulity.
However, this filmed version was so radically altered from the book, that despite having re-read it last year, I was constantly wondering what was going to happen next.
Although the murderer remained the same, much of the back story, and the motivations and ultimate fates of several characters (both main and secondary) were completely different.
It was followed by an airing of "The Under Dog." It reminded me that the film adaptations of the Poirot short stories are frequently much different than the written versions (this one has a larger role for Miss Lemon, who makes rather silly attempts at hypnotism); however, the novels are usually more faithfully done.
I hope "After the Funeral" (another favorite story of mine being released this year) fares better. Unfortunately, I've already noticed, by viewing the notes for the cast list here at IMDb.com, that the character responsible for setting the plot in motion is missing. Where is Cora Abernethie Lansquenet?
29 of 42 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?