I watched, last night, the recent TV adaptation of Agatha Christie’s Murder is Easy. I wondered if Ms Christie would have recognised her own book. It seemed to me that, replacing the retired policeman protagonist with a Nigerian torn between his shiny new job at Whitehall and his feelings that he should be “back home” fighting for independence, the adaptation was more interested in dealing with issues of racism and the evils of colonialism than the murders. Instead of the tag, “Only the names have been changed,” it was more a case of “Only the names have been kept the same.”

But then, I’m a purist: I like the books, and I think there are very few book lovers who would ever admit there is a film that is better than the book. 

It can work the other way around, however. Having seen the film, sometimes the book is a sad disappointment. The James Bond books, in my opinion, are not a patch on the films and while I adore the film The Princess Bride, I was not able to get on with the book. In both cases, however, I had seen the films before reading the books. If I came to the book Murder is Easy, having seen this BBC adaptation, would I be disappointed? I think the answer is yes. Perhaps we like best what we have read or seen first.

Not all our favourite books make good films. Films usually need action and brisk dialogue to make them work. Not all of them, of course; Jane Austen’s books contain no gun fights or car chases, and the dialogue is gently witty rather than brisk. It cannot be a coincidence, however, that the scene most people remember from the classic Pride and Prejudice is where Mr Darcy (played by Colin Firth) emerges from the lake where he has been swimming, shirt plastered to his manly torso. New readers of the book will be disappointed not to find that iconic scene there; it was entirely made up by the scriptwriter. We like more action, more drama, in our films than is often portrayed in books. Or perhaps we like the drama to be more obvious. Books can be more subtle than film – although I’m sure many film buffs here will disagree.

I like to think that our lives are more like books than films. Some of us may lead action-packed lives, but for most of us, there are long periods of development which fit a book much better. Internal growth and development don’t show much on the outside.

If you were to make a film of your life, which bits would you skip over, and which bits would you dwell upon? Would you make up more exciting bits or would you choose to develop a theme you feel is important to you? Would you write a faithful script, or would you be like Murder is Easy and change nearly everything except the names?

Mary

A Moodscope member