Generally, Christie picked what sort of narrative tricks she wanted to play, and then that mystery device led her to pick her detective.
If it was an evil mastermind, Poirot was called in. If it were a series of opportunities and accidents with perhaps a genius, well then that's Marple territory. If its a tragic or sinister conspiracy, or anything else, then Tommy and Tuppence were our entry into the story, one watching the other. Its a pretty hard and fast rule if you diagram the mysteries, so its a strange thing to see Marple placed in a world not hers. This is sort of a detective adventure, a quest, even in the book. So our biddy is very passive and not particularly insightful as she has to be.
In this case, there's a second difficulty. A clue in the story is a painting. Christie was no schooled in narrative dynamics. There's no evidence that she ever read the theories of the times. But its clear that she thought about different elements of narrative and was aware that popular literature was growing toward cinematic devices. I believe this is affected this book and the painting is something of a movie within the movie. Its why she references Macbeth's witches, being a sort of play within the play.
The adapter knew this and emphasized the movie within this movie: a film of "Jane Eyre."
The plot revolves round predictions and shifting identities. And metaphoric witches.
The production tries to be snappy, somewhat screwball in places, and sometimes dipping into personal tragedy. It doesn't work for me.
Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.
