Poirot is invited to spend the weekend at the home of an industrialist who has built a new plane. The man's wife fears that a Nazi sympathizer may use this opportunity to steal the plans.
As my rating clearly indicates, I'm not a fan of The Incredible Theft. Sure, it's got most of the trappings you'd expect - excellent period detail, incredible sets and locations, solid cinematography, and very good acting. But I have two big problems with this episode that I cannot get past.
First, I'll start by quoting something I wrote just yesterday for Charlie Chan at the Olympics. "If I have one negative to say about Charlie Chan at the Olympics it's that the movie is more spy/adventure than murder/mystery. Whether it's Chan, Sherlock Holmes, or Hercules Poirot, I prefer the plots that revolve around a murder more than those that get all tied up in a wartime distractions. I love those scenes where the great detective gathers all the suspects together before making the final reveal. I know this is a matter of personal opinion and taste, but I do rate this movie lower because, for me, the entertainment value isn't as great." These are my exact feelings toward The Incredible Theft. Without a murder to solve, it's not as fun for me.
Second, Poirot really does nothing in The Incredible Theft. He's as much a bystander as we are. He doesn't do much of anything to stop the theft of the plans. And nothing would have been any different had he not been in the house for the weekend. The theft would have occurred in the exact same manner.
I don't know if my problems are with the script or with a short story Christie wrote (I can't remember reading it), so I don't know who to blame. In the end, I suppose I can summarize my feelings toward The Incredible Theft by saying, why bring Poirot into a plot where there's no murder and he's not asked to do anything.
As my rating clearly indicates, I'm not a fan of The Incredible Theft. Sure, it's got most of the trappings you'd expect - excellent period detail, incredible sets and locations, solid cinematography, and very good acting. But I have two big problems with this episode that I cannot get past.
First, I'll start by quoting something I wrote just yesterday for Charlie Chan at the Olympics. "If I have one negative to say about Charlie Chan at the Olympics it's that the movie is more spy/adventure than murder/mystery. Whether it's Chan, Sherlock Holmes, or Hercules Poirot, I prefer the plots that revolve around a murder more than those that get all tied up in a wartime distractions. I love those scenes where the great detective gathers all the suspects together before making the final reveal. I know this is a matter of personal opinion and taste, but I do rate this movie lower because, for me, the entertainment value isn't as great." These are my exact feelings toward The Incredible Theft. Without a murder to solve, it's not as fun for me.
Second, Poirot really does nothing in The Incredible Theft. He's as much a bystander as we are. He doesn't do much of anything to stop the theft of the plans. And nothing would have been any different had he not been in the house for the weekend. The theft would have occurred in the exact same manner.
I don't know if my problems are with the script or with a short story Christie wrote (I can't remember reading it), so I don't know who to blame. In the end, I suppose I can summarize my feelings toward The Incredible Theft by saying, why bring Poirot into a plot where there's no murder and he's not asked to do anything.