Ten Little Indians (1987) User Reviews

One of the most impressive, darkest, and truthful adaptations of Agatha Christie's mysteries

[Galina_movie_fan · 9/10 · 15 April 2006]

I re-watched this disturbing, slow but riveting movie last night and it is still one of the most impressive, darkest, and truthful adaptations of Agatha Christie's mysteries. It is not only the mystery but also a very convincing journey into the minds and souls of ten characters, the victims who found themselves trapped on the isolated rock of an island. One of them took upon him/herself to become the jury and the executioner for these ten who never met before but who have in common one dark secret - all of them might have committed a murder in the past.

I saw this film first time on the big screen in the theater in Moscow back in 1987 when it was released. It is very dark, violent, and atmospheric. The film follows Christie's novel (not the play) truthfully including the pessimistic ending, original politically incorrect title, and set design. The film was shot at the Crimea peninsula on the Black Sea and the breathtaking ominous view of the mansion sitting on the large cliff is a shot of the famous castle Swallow's Nest. Another Crimea's landmark that was used in a movie is the Vorontov Estate in Alupka. The front facade is built in the 16Th -- 17Th-century Neo-Gothic or Tudor style by the request of its first owner, Russian general M.S. Vorontsov who was brought up in England and loved English style in architecture.

Film director Stanislav Govoruchin had invited very talented and popular actors for the parts. Just one example. Philip Lombard was played by Aleksandr Kajdanovsky - a friend of Sergei Parajanov and Andrei Tarkovsky who is well known to the movies fans as Mr. Stalker himself from Tarkovsky's film of the same title. The rest of cast played their parts well with Vladimir Zeldin as Old Justice Wargrave, Mikhail Gluzsky as General Macarthur, and strikingly beautiful Tatyana Drubich as Vera Claythorne especially memorable.

I recommend the film to all fans and admirers of Agatha Christie, the Queen of mysteries. "Desyat Negrityat" is not the only Russian screen adaptation of a Christie's novel. I also remember and recommend "Tayna chyornykh drozdov" (1983) ... aka "Secret of the Blackbirds" which is based on the Miss Jane Marple's novel "A Pocketful of Rye".

Back to the island

[dbdumonteil · 9/10 · 11 May 2008]

Having read the book when I was thirteen,and having seen three of the four English language versions ("And then there were none" (1945)"ten little Indians" (1965) and (1974)),I thought that the adaptations were more and more mediocre .No longer.The Russian version is THE version I have been waiting for since I read the novel ,the one a Christie fan must not miss.The version I saw had no subtitles,but as an user has already pointed out,provided you know the story,you will not have problems for,to quote another user ,the screenplay is as "faithful as a dog" The cast ,although completely unknown outside Russia ,is close to perfect except perhaps for Miss Brent :the actress is quite good,but she is obviously too young for the part of a sixty-something spinster.All the others are how we would imagine them when we would read Christie's pages under the blankets ,or,when,when the lights were out,we would shiver in the dark night thinking of someone moving mysteriously on N......island.They are not ,except for Vera (probably because behind her angel's face her soul is black),good-looking,nice ,ludicrous.They are sinister-looking persons ,particularly Lombard who looks at his teeth (his wolf 's teeth) in the mirror .

The movie contains scenes that will leave you on the edge of your seat:particularly the scene of the VOICE:even Orson Welles,who provided it in the 1974 version,could eat his heart out:the camera takes a high angle shot of the table and the "guests " when Mister Owen's voice ,threatening as never ,begins to accuse them .Oh This voice!If it does not make your flesh creep,nothing will!

The N....Island is also faithful to Mrs Christie's depiction,tiny ,which makes the final scenes ,particularly this one (botched in the other versions ,including the Clair one) when Vera and Lombard,having discovered Armstrong's body ,stand by the sea ,with an obsessive soundtrack which only consists of the sound of the waves.

My favorite scene is not included in the novel:Lombard's nightmare;he dreams he is lost in the jungle ;suddenly he finds a helping hand:it's the hand of a black man.

Many flashbacks depict Vera's past: with her pupil Cyril Hamilton by the sea where the tragedy occurred ,Vera and her love Hugo ,the only one who thought she was a criminal.The last flashbacks are in color ,probably because those memories come back to haunt the girl with such a strength that she confuses present and past (that's exactly what she does in the novel ,which explains her final suicide);A short flashback shows Beatrice Taylor ,Miss Brent's pregnant maid ,rising from the river where she got drowned and desperately knocking on her window pane.

Some may find the movie slow-moving and overlong (about 130 min ) but its attention to detail (Vera discovering the nursery rhyme,the clock ,Rodgers counting the little N.....,Miss Brent reading her bible ,or Lombard's revolver (actually a Beretta),and at last the judge in full regalia with red robe and wig) is fascinating.

After the mountains,the Iranian desert and the jungle ,the director brings it all back home .Remakes are no longer a curse.

The other versions were based on the play,and what worked on stage didn't on the screen.

Faithful adaptation of the book

[ddconey · 8/10 · 13 July 2006]

As a film unto itself, this adaptation stands as a well made movie. The production values compare quite favorably with western mystery films (not being much a Russian film buff this was a concern of mine before getting the DVD). Taken as a film this is a well made, well acted and 'good looking' effort. I didn't even mind the subtitles (which usually drive me to distraction). The one 'compliant' I would offer is that the subtitle translations are a little stiff (for lack of a better term). The language is very stilted and often humorous, but they are done well enough that you get the gist of what the actors are saying --- especially if you have read the original book or seen any of the earlier versions of the story.

Regarding the inevitable comparisons to the earlier adaptations of Christie's story (I have only seen the 10 Little Indians from the 60's and And Then There Were None from the 40's), this version is much closer to the original story. This is a much darker adaptation then these earlier efforts and hence not as 'fun' to watch. This film demands more work from the viewer than those earlier, lighter versions. Where those earlier films provided some comic relief (in the person of the bumbling, drunken butler in And Then There Were None and the ham handed sexual relationship in 10 Little Indians) this film has none of that. This is a serious mystery with serious portrayals.

One caveat I might offer (especially in this age of political correctness) is that the statues in this versions are of black children. I mention this only because some may find offense in this aspect of the film.

Other than this I would highly recommend this film to any serious mystery buff or follower of Dame Christie's work.

...As Dark and Grim as Ms. Christie Intended!!!

[marseilletarot · 30 June 2003]

ahh.....After a difficult search, I managed to find a video copy (with subtitles) of the film described above. The other reviewer was the reason I was prompted to find this film. It is indeed the best adaptation of A. Christie's classic suspense thriller. The most gratifying thing is being able to see everybody end up exactly where they are supposed to be in the book. After all, it is called, "And Then There Were None," not called, "And Then There Were Two." Acting, direction, and photography are exquisite. Keep eyes on auction sites for people who have copies of this one....it IS out there somewhere!!

My brief review of the film

[sol- · 10/10 · 2 August 2005]

The Agatha Christie novel upon which this film is based is an excellent read and one of her most popular titles. It has been put into film many times, but each version is far inferior to the actual novel. Except this one. There is no matching the quality of the book, but this Russian one does a very good job, because for the first time the material is not softened down. It is as dark and as grim as Agatha Christie intended her novel to be. It also keeps the original ending, which other versions have adjusted, forfeiting the deeper things that the story has to stay. The flashbacks are woven in perfectly, the sound recording is noticeably sharp, and in general there is very little to complain about this superb rendition of the novel.

A note for prospective buyers:

After some searching, I managed to order a DVD copy of this film from a Russian company via the internet. The DVD quality itself is quite good, however the English subtitles are often poorly translated and out-of-sync with who is talking. Those who have read the novel should still find it easy enough to follow - this is just a little warning. However, that is only on the DVD copy that I viewed. As for the film itself, there is very little wrong with it.

As faithful as a dog

[cluedokid25 · 10/10 · 25 December 2005]

Amazing! AllI can say is amazing! The best movie adaptation yet! I liked the realistic reactions rather than the wise cracks from older versions. Vera was played to perfection right down to the hanging and the Judge, all I can say is brilliant. I'm glad they played out the ending there versions were afraid to do, and the setting is just perfect to the way Christie described it! I'm also happy on the way they did the death scenes in that manor. Aside from liking Vera's breakdown, I was equally amazed by Miss Brents break down to her smashing her bible through the window! The score was just plain creepy! My only grip is the horrible subtitles, that look like they were written by some 4-year old! Plus they were completely off. Like the guy would speak and seconds later, the words would prompt on. Next time I'm watching it subtitle less, after all, it was so close to the book I felt like I didn't even need the subtitles! Overall I give it 9 out of 10 N i g g e rs!

After finally seeing it, this now dethrones the Rene Clair adaptation as the best version of the book

[TheLittleSongbird · 10/10 · 15 January 2013]

Before I saw this Russian version Desyat Negrityat, the best adaptation was the 1945 Rene Clair film, which I consider one of the best Agatha Christie film adaptations there is. The 1965 version was very good, 1974's was okay though heavily flawed and apart from a couple of redeeming values 1989's was barely passable. I had heard so much about the 1987 Russian version, all great stuff just in case you're wondering, and I am so glad that I finally saw it, as it is as brilliant as everybody says. The subtitles are rather stilted and even a few sentences behind towards the end and perhaps the murderer's identity could have been revealed just a little later than it was, but compared to how much in the film's favour there is they weren't enough to ruin the film.

This is indeed the most faithful adaptation of the book, which is saying a lot actually. The book is one of my favourite books ever and a contender for Agatha Christie's best. While there are a couple of changes and additions, namely the sex scene, which I found both erotic and mad without feeling out of place, this is as faithful as you can get as an adaptation of Christie's work. All the names are intact in Desyat Negrityat as is the location, how the murders are committed, the past crimes and the grim original ending. So much so, it is like the book itself come to life, while it was very true to the spirit of the book even the 1945 film didn't manage to achieve that. But aside from being faithful, Desyat Negrityat succeeds brilliantly on its own terms.

When it comes to the dialogue, it is not just word-for-word(apart from Anthony Marston's reply to who had the most beastly luck, which said a lot about his character) but maintains the thoughtful, occasionally humorous and beautifully developed prose of the book. The film is long- just over two hours- and does unfold slowly, but considering the author's style and how much there is in terms of characterisation and insight these were necessary. For me though, because of how engrossing everything was those 2 plus hours flew by. It was also fascinating how we could see the character's thoughts, something that none of the other adaptations did, while the murders, especially Emily Brent's, were very creepy. Whether the ending comes as a surprise to people depends on their familiarity with the book, it wasn't a surprise to me admittedly but it is always intriguing at what the adaptation does with building the suspense and how it executes the solution.

In this regard, Desyat Negrityat does wonderfully. It sticks to the grim tone of the book, and it is very suspenseful, helped by the stunning and appropriately claustrophobic locations and photography. Before now, I thought the book ending was unfilmable, which was why a less downbeat ending was written for the stage I believe. The latter I can see why it was done and it has grown on me overtime having for some time being underwhelmed by it, but apart from Vera's death perhaps being too much by chance the book ending feels as though it has more time to explain everything. Desyat Negrityat proves that the book ending actually can be done if in the right hands. The characters are very true to their book counterparts and developed very well, these characters are not ones you necessarily root for but then again I don't think that was the intent.

On top of this, the music score is very spooky and ominous, without giving anything away or overbearing what's going on. The poem the mystery is revolved around is as omnipresent and fear-inducing as it ought to be. The direction never allows the mystery, suspense and tension to let go, while the acting is excellent, those for Judge Wargrave, Dr Armstrong and Emily Brent being the standouts though Vera Claythorne's actress is strikingly beautiful without being overly so. Not just that, but, although the 1945 film was close to perfect(1965 had two bad performances but the rest were fine, 1974 was a mixed bag and 1989 had only three actors that were halfway decent), it's the only one where nobody is bad. Certainly the only adaptation where the Anthony Marston character isn't annoying. Overall, the best version, just brilliant. 10/10 Bethany Cox

Brilliant ! The best Christie adaptation ever.

[tasha-kalinichenko · 10/10 · 5 June 2007]

I've seen many adaptations of this story but this one is really unrivaled. From the very beginning, you can see the talent of the director. When he's filming the guests waiting to depart, you can feel the tension among them, and the culpability too. On the contrary of the other adaptations, this movie doesn't only show the action, the murder series, but also (and it seemed capital to me) what's in the victims' minds. I appreciated in particular the flashes back. Personally, I only deplore the location. The place where the movie was shot is too well known, and doesn't fit with the idea one could have of the island. To adapt such a famous book is always tricky, but not for Govorukhin ! Mankiewicz couldn't have done better.

More philosophical than the Clair adaptation

[frankde-jong · 7/10 · 19 February 2023]

In 1939 Agatha Christie wrote her famous novel "And then there were none" and in 1945 René Clair made the first adaptation for film.

Although the adaptation by Clair was far from perfect, it was not surpassed for a long time. In my opinion the 1987 Russian adaptation by Stanislav Govorukhin was the long awaited improvement.

The Russian version is much more philosophical that that of Clair. In stead of being a "who donnit" the film treats the relationship between criminal law, ethics and (bad) conscience

With respect to the relationship between ethics and conscience there is a remarkable difference between men and women. At the end of the film (and different from the Clair adaptation) her own conscience is punishment enough for the Vera character.

The film creates a huge gap between ethics and criminal law. The assumption seems to be that criminal law only covers those instances in which a person does the wrong thing on purpose. I think in practice the difference is smaller. Criminal law also covers instances in which a person does not act although he ought to (not saving a person in mortal danger when possible) or acts not with the intention of doing harm but accepting the real possibility that harm nevertheles will happen (drunk driving).

One of the best.

[iconians · 10/10 · 14 September 2010]

This is not the type of movie that a typical moviegoer will seek, so, instead I will give some other insight.

This was the only movie that ever gave me nightmares when I was a kid. Mostly, I think it's because the movie achieved a rare feat of actually transforming not only the book and it's characters to the screen but also the atmosphere.

Many people will not watch this movie just based on it's original name, but I can assure you, the name conveys no negative information. That leads to believe that it's P.C title, is just a cop-out.

As far as adaptations done, there are no better versions of any ever made.

10/10

Pretty Gloomy Stuff

[rmax304823 · 6/10 · 9 August 2008]

There are, that I know of, three other film adaptations of Agatha Christie's novel and this is the grimmest and truest of them. Ten people -- two servants and eight guests, all strangers to one another -- are invited to a weekend on an isolated island. This is the bleakest, jaggedest, rockiest island you ever saw, even though it was filmed on some headland, not an island at all. After dinner, a record player addresses the trapped ten, one by one, accuses each of them of a murder, and announces that they will pay for their crimes.

The guests are a varied lot -- a doctor, a private detective, a secretary, an explorer -- but no matter who or what they once were, they are toast now. They are picked off seriatim -- shot, poisoned, crowned, drowned, chopped up, and hanged. The boat that will arrive in another day or two will find ten corpses on an isolated clump of rocks.

I won't give away any more of the plot because the whole thing is plot. To give away more would empty the coffer. The characters don't count for much, except for that pouty young secretary, Miss Claythorne, which the subtitles render "Klaisern," there being no voiceless "th" in Russian. Some of the men are almost indistinguishable, although two look alarmingly like James Carville.

Well -- it's not exactly light hearted. Next to this, "Boris Gudonov" seems like comedic froth. Hardly anyone smiles. No one laughs. There is no charm, either in the setting or the characters. The most amusing moments come from reading the English subtitles. A terrified Miss Klaisern, thinking she is about to be murdered, is pointing a trembling gun at Mr. Lombard. He leaps at her and shouts, "Now listen to me attentively!" (Bang.) There isn't much of a musical score but Dr. Armstrong bangs out a neat "My Baby Just Cares For Me" on the piano before getting into Hoagy Carmichael. The thematic music leads us to expect to see the Huns attacking Alexander Nevsky and his small band.

I haven't seen the 1974 version with an immodest Elke Sommer for years. But this version is an improvement over the version with Hugh O'Brien on the mountaintop, even though that has Shirley Eaton simmering in oestrus. In many ways, the most enjoyable treatment of the novel is the original 1945 film with people like June Duprez, Walter Huston, and the unforgettable Barry Fitzgerald as the magistrate who is all he seems to be. They're all cop outs, of course, compared to this Russian work, but I can't help thinking that Dame Agatha might have preferred a bit of gaiety and comic irony. She was never one to cry over spilt blood.

It's the only version that sticks to Agatha Christie's original and somewhat bleak novel. We will leave it at that.

The one adaptation that goes there

[Sabrina890 · 10/10 · 3 July 2008]

I believe listing just one, single thing about this adaptation that makes it the best ATTWN adaptation would be doing this film a great injustice, so it's difficult for me to find a place to begin. I suppose I'll start by describing the plot in case there's anyone who's been living under a rock: Ten strangers are gathered to an isolated location, are informed by a gramophone record that they're all murderers who will receive swift retribution, and are killed off one by one in accordance to the gruesome nursery rhyme, Ten Little Indian--sorry, Ten Little Negro Boys.

Call the title (which translates to Ten Little Negro Boys) politically incorrect, but the original title was politically incorrect. Call the characters nasty, but they were nasty in the book. Call the ending depressing, but the ending was depressing in the book. Call this movie a lot of things, but never call it unfaithful. Unlike the other adaptations, which watered down the things that made Agatha Christie's original story a masterpiece, this adaptation is not afraid to go there. It's not afraid to expose the plot for what it is or the characters for whom they are, which is what makes it stand out from the other adaptations.

For instance, take Vera Claythorne. The other adaptations portray her as a bright-eyed, oh-so-innocent young lady who would never do anything bad, never. Here, she only LOOKS innocent, but as revealed in her flashbacks, she is anything but. Tatyana Drubich captures the character of Vera Claythorne perfectly, portraying her as a cold-hearted monster in her flashbacks when she's allowing her pupil to swim out to sea and drown, and then portraying her as a human and sympathetic character when she has her breakdown at the end, realizing that although Cyril had her lover's money, he was only an innocent child who hadn't yet lived his life.

In the book, the characters merely speak of nightmares they had; in the movie, you see them. For instance, Lombard dreams of traveling through a jungle, only to be confronted by a large tribe man whom Lombard fights off. The tribe man falls and has a blank, horrible look on his face. Lombard opens his mouth to scream but can't (you know that awful feeling dreams?) and wakes up sweating and takes a drink.

Basically, the movie is extremely faithful to the book, taking only one, major liberty: The infamous bedroom scene between Lombard and Vera, a scene that gives me the chills because what happens between them borderlines between an intense love-making session and rape. It shows the characters at their maddest, showing two people who were having a civilized conversation at the beginning of the movie now behaving like rabbits in mating season, and the two actors play the moment beautifully. (I have to wonder, though, would Agatha Christie view it that way?)

And last but not least, there's the part that many users have mentioned already but I might as well mention it: Instead of using the romantic, happy ending from the play, this version uses the dark, downbeat ending of the novel, which is what gives this adaptation its reputation for being unafraid to 'go there'. It goes to show that Stanislav Govorukhin read the novel, not the play, and saw a potentially great ending for a great movie. (Besides, a happy ending for Lombard and Vera in this adaptation would be kind of awkward, considering, you know, that little moment of insanity)

Overall, this is a superb adaptation that deserves its reputation amongst Agatha Christie fans.

Faithful to the novel, but both too much and not enough so

[Jimmy-128 · 6/10 · 9 November 2013]

This is the only movie adaptation of Agatha Christie's landmark story that stays true to the novel's ending, and for that, many people are willing to overlook its flaws. But the flaws are there, largely due to the language barrier, and it keeps this from being the perfect Christie adaptation that it could have been.

Very little has been cut from the book, so that anyone who owns a copy of the book can practically dig out their copy and recite the dialogue word-for-word. And by the time the fifth murder happens, you're tempted to do so. The adaptation goes beyond faithful into slavish, and you can practically put your brain on autopilot.

Moreover, whoever did the subtitles either has never read the book or is simply not familiar enough with English to do a good job. When Rogers greets the guests upon their arrival in the novel, for example, the scene is presented from Anthony Marston's point of view, and Marston is not paying attention, so Rogers' dialogue comes out (deliberately, on Christie's part) choppy and missing some words ("What was it the butler chap was saying? Mr. Owen...unfortunately delayed...unable to get here till to-morrow."). The translator evidently thought that that was how English is constructed, and repeats Rogers' words exactly.

But while not everything has been cut, some material has been...and some of that is important. In both novel and film, after the accusation scene, it's revealed that Mr. Blore is traveling under an assumed name, "Mr. Davis", from South Africa. But while the novel gives us a scene where he introduces himself as Davis, the film doesn't--so the "revelation" doesn't have the impact it should.

Even more important is the second murder--it hinges on the poisoned drink being left where anyone could tamper with it. However, in the film, the drink isn't administered, so the second murder is impossible.

Another, minor point is Anthony Marston's confession. He describes as what happens as "beastly bad luck", at which point someone asks, "For them, or for you?" Marston's next line is cut from the film--"Well, I was thinking - for me - but of course, you're right, Sir, it was damned bad luck on them." This is the key to the whole character--Marston isn't the kind of person who actively does wrong, he simply does and thinks about it afterwards, if at all.

Still, as one other reviewer has mentioned, this is the adaptation that "goes there". The final murder is absolutely chilling. But it could have been so much tighter, and it's not.

Ten Little Indians went out to dine... One choked himself...

[dac87 · 2 August 2004]

I must say first off that I am a HUGE Christie fan; Ten Little Indians was the first Christie novel I had read and I was just blown away! The story was so complex and the resolution so brilliant that I was left speechless. What made this story so great is the fact that everything one usually suspects to happen in a book... for instance, one realises early in to tha book that everyone on the island is marked for death... but almost always there are usually two heroic characters who fall in love and overcome the antagonist. When one thinks that, one tends to look at Miss Claythorn and Lombard as the two who likely fit the bill... but this is not so, for they never fall in love, nor are they by any means likable people (they both were murderers and one even killed a little boy). Then, of course there is the fact that they both die.

One would think that this would be the subject of a thousand wonderful adaptation... Well, it's almost right. There were many film versions but none matched up to the book's splendor. Then I finally get my hands on this (not easy) and I was stunned at how good it was... it follows the book all the way down to the original ending. The characters were well played, the plot was quick, and the scenery was beautiful.... all in all I I've this film a 9/10.

10 Little Indians in the Soviet Union.

[morrison-dylan-fan · 10/10 · 10 September 2014]

Talking to a fellow IMDber on the Horror board during the 2013 October Challenge,I found out about a highly praised adaptation of 10 Little Indians which had been filmed in the Soviet Union.With having recently seen a wonderful stage adaptation of the novel,I felt that with my 600th review coming up,that it was the perfect time to see the novel transferred to the big screen.

The plot:

Each receiving a letter from a Mr and Mrs Owen inviting them to an isolated (private) island near Devon,a group of 8 strangers get off a boat,and walk towards the Owens country mansion.Entering the mansion,the group is shocked to find no sign of the Owens at all,with the only people around being 2 newly hired servants,who have been given written instructions about when dinner should be served.

Getting comfortable in their bedrooms,the guests discover a framed poem in each of the rooms,which is about how a group of 8 people are killed 1 by 1.Sitting down for dinner,the servants put a record on.To everyone surprise,the record appears to be a recording made my Mr Own,who lists all the activates that the guests have done,which led to the (wrongful) deaths of individual's.Trying to make sense of what's taking place,one of the guest suddenly drops to the ground after taking a drink.Checking the glass,it is discovered that the glass contained a small amount of poison.Taking a look at the 10 figures on the table,the group discover to their horror that 1 figure has weirdly disappeared…

View on the film:

While the title was shot in a location that was not exactly Agatha Christie's English country house mansion, (in this case, Crimea)writer/director Stanislav Govorukhin cooks up an extraordinary,chilling atmosphere.Closely working with cinematographer Gennadi Engstrem, Govorukhin gives the film an unexpected poetic quality,with the windows in the mansion being used to reveal the overlap in each of the guests lives.

Along with the stylish window shots, Govorukhin also builds a strong feeling of isolation,thanks to Govorukhin using tightly coiled side angles to show the endless waves and rocks that the mansion is surrounded by.Showing a real Giallo edge, Govorukhin gives each of the mansion murders an ultra-stylised appearance,with Govorukhin using various stocks of film to go back in time to show the events that cause each of the deaths.

Sticking extremely close to Christie's novel (with this being the only adaptation to feature the original ending,and also not to change any of the characters from the book) Govorukhin avoids the risk of the adaptation being a dry affair by giving the movie a real burst of infectious energy,with Govorukhin painting each of the group with a deep sense of dread,as they start to see the cursed poem come to life.

And Then There Was One That Got It Right

[writers_reign · 9/10 · 16 July 2008]

This version of Agatha Christie's Ten Little Non-PCs is head ans shoulders above the previous versions notwithstanding that one was the work of Rene Clair. It's a testament to the quality of this version that I watched an unsubtitled version containing to the best of my knowledge none of the four Russian words I know - please, thank you, yes, no - yet had no problem in following the story. Director Stanislav Govorukhin has opted for atmosphere/acting about 60-40 and it pays off. He lets us know from the first just how isolated the 8 guests and 2 servants will be on not so much an island as a large rock, a huge block of granite rising almost sheerly out of the sea. The camera pans around the rock as the passengers disembark and when the boat turns back there is not even a glimpse of mainland. There's a nice touch on the soundtrack with versions of both My Baby Just Cares For Me and Stardust, including the verse. All of the actors were completely unknown to me and I was sufficiently impressed with the judge and Vera to ascertain their names, Vladimir Zeldin and Tatyana Drubich respectively.

Govorukhin! A name to remember

[drystyx · 10/10 · 7 November 2010]

That's the director of this film.

Those of us who read the novel before we saw the film will be pleasantly surprised by this film.

We know that there have been many Hollywood versions of the Agatha Christie murder mystery. Each worse the one before. The worst was easily the one with 1960s morality and preaching.

AN THEN THERE WERE NONE, which had numerous subtitles deemed derogatory today, but looked upon with tea party innocent acceptance then, is easily Christie's masterpiece. It is the story which is retold in almost every TV action series in one form or another, in which an isolated group of people, in this case ten, are killed off one by one, realizing that their murderer is one of them. It is the basis for NINE DEAD, SAW, most horror films, and most reality shows.

Christie's words flowed in this book as she never had them flow before or after. It was her magical work. One could wonder if this was the same author of the other Christie books. This was easy reading. You could pore through every word, and remember every word.

Christie was so gifted, and her obvious jealousy of the stunning brunettes holds her back, but that is all that holds her back. This novel was a masterpiece.

Now, for the remarkable news. GOVONUKHIN is the director of this masterpiece. He carefully kept nearly every word intact. It flows and looks perfectly period piece British. There are times that his directing will astound students of the art.

The ten people are portrayed with magnificence. The setting, the atmosphere, everything, is as close to the book as one can do in a reasonable time frame.

In case you haven't heard, the ten characters are all accused by their unknown host of murders for which they were not penalized for. The book makes it clear, as does the film, that these aren't what are viewed as murders, but a subtle sort of murder. The main character, Vera Claythorn, for example, was watching over a young boy, and relented one day in letting him swim to far out in the ocean, and failed to save him. Philip Lombard, the one described as wolf like in the book, abandoned twenty Africans in a safari (I believe in the book it was 21, and actually Lombard was one of about three who abandoned them) in a situation in which they would all starve, but there were provisions for a few.

In British tradition, Lombard's view that Africans didn't mind dying is met with weak resistance by some of the others, though not totally accepted by the group as a whole. Christie is insightful enough to point out that it is indeed the religious fanatic, Emily Brent, who is the one that is most troubled by Lombard's easily dismissal of humans who are different.

The third central character, Blore, is bearlike in the book, yet much like Lombard in character. Here, he and Lombard are much blonder, and even more alike, but it really enriches the theme of the British social order, and works exceptionally well. In all of literature, there are probably not two characters more definitive of "frenemies" than these two, and perhaps they are the two original "frenemies".

I could elaborate on the ten characters, but it is better to let the viewer do that. It isn't a spoiler to say that the principal three are fascinating. Their British superiority glows in a realism that will amaze you. The killer is even more spine tingling in his realism than the caricatures of modern horror.

This is an awesome film. And kudos to a director, but also to the entire troupe of actors, stunt men, down to the cue card holders, because this team was a winning team. This is so much like the book, that I can't say to read the book first, but either way, you'll enjoy it, I'm sure.

I don't know what more I can say. It's hard to describe how great this piece is, and I am afraid of the usual letdown if I laud it too much, for you'll expect too much. Simply expect a well told story, and take the ride.

A first class version.

[Sleepin_Dragon · 10/10 · 13 April 2023]

Ten people find themselves on an isolated island, and one by one they begin to die, is the killer hiding on the island, or hiding in plain sight?

For my shame I haven't watched this movie for about a decade, that's bad on my part, because it is a superb adaptation.

Who'd have thought that a Russian adaptation of Agatha Christie's incredible novel, would be the first to follow through with the original ending, it took some courage not to opt for the softer conclusion.

Great atmosphere, it's tense, suspenseful and claustrophobic, they truly captured the tone and essence of the book. Some of the earlier adaptations, films I love, but have a degree of humour, the book is a straight up thriller, it doesn't have sentiment or humour, this adaptation is bleak, as is the story.

Each of the characters look the part, Miss Brent looks exactly as I pictured the character from the book, as so The Doctor and Judge.

The music is great, the visuals are spot on, I love the property they use, it has that isolated feel.

I only wish a British made adaptation had been made along these lines, not until the later BBC series was it adapted again.

Perfect adaptation, 10/10.

Highly acclaimed, but not much fun to watch

[gridoon2024 · 6/10 · 31 July 2016]

This Russian adaptation of one of Agatha Christie's most famous stories is highly acclaimed, especially by Christie purists, mainly for sticking to her original book ending, which is more grim, and more logical, than the "revised" one which Christie herself wrote for the stage version, and which all other film adaptations so far have used. It also deserves praise for its great location, and for the depth (and ambivalence) given to Vera's character. But the film is also plodding, talky, and overlong; it's more labor than fun to watch. Of course I don't expect this story to be a barrel of laughs, but a little more life and humor might have helped. And what might have helped even more are decent English subtitles - this being a hard-to-find movie, I had to settle for what I could get, which was nearly incomprehensible subtitling by someone for whom English was probably the fourth language. **1/2 out of 4.

A really great film.

[BattleRoyale96 · 10/10 · 14 May 2011]

Desyat Negrityat (a.k.a. And Then There Were None or Ten Little Indians) Is really an amazing film! This is the closest adaption to Agatha Christie's novel! You may or may not like the cast but that's up to you; I think they did a really great job. The actors are not what I imaged the character will look like but who cares. If you don't like subtitles then you might want to skip it but I suggest you don't if you really want to see a true adaption.

Spoilers:

In the other film adaptations to Agatha Christie's And Then There Were None it had a happy ending were Vera and Lombard fall in love live happily ever after or something like that. In this version, Vera shoots Lombard and hangs herself like the book. If you don't want an "unhappy" true ending then skip it, but that will be the biggest mistake.

Making a befitting thriller out of Christie

[tonosov-51238 · 7/10 · 29 October 2023]

Even with a large portion of the movie being scenes of discussions, with dialogues that sometimes sound unnatural from some of the actors, the movie perfectly builds tension and delivers a creepy finale that provides a bit of change to the original story yet arguably makes it better. The changes are minimalistic and give the ambitious killer much more agency in a non-contrived way. I don't think it's hard to argue that it's much better than someone reading a letter from the bottle.

The chosen location in Crimea was marvelous and truly makes the mansion feel like some Alcatraz, where the judgement is going to be served to inmates. Romashin and Kaydanovskiy are the highlight of the ensemble, perfectly acting out the transition from confident studs who don't care if someone knows about their crimes to paranoid, anxious wrecks.

Extraordinary Adaptation

[yusufpiskin · 9/10 · 22 October 2021]

Desyat Negrityat is a 1987 Soviet film based on the Agatha Christie novel Ten Little Indians. Its director, Stanislav Govorukhin, also wrote the script. This adaptation draws attention with the fact that almost no part of the novel has changed.

This adaptation draws attention with the fact that almost no part of the novel has changed. Unlike previous Hollywood/British adaptations of the same story, none of the characters or their crimes have been changed, and the film ends with the original brutal finale of Agatha Christie's novel.

Best Christie Adaptation Ever

[devinemandate · 9/10 · 16 August 2014]

I am a fairly avid Agatha Christie fan, having read dozens of her works. Few of her books, if any, are better than her tale of ten doomed people who are marooned on an island and die one by one at the hand of an unseen foe (early on, they are all accused by a disembodied voice of committing murders that are untouchable by the law). I have been wishing to see an excellent film adaptation of And Then There Were None (or Ten Little Indians...or Ten Little N*****s if you're a real purist--in which case this edition may satisfy you even more thoroughly) for many years. I don't know how I did not know this Russian version existed until last night, but I am extremely happy I found it. It leaves the others, including the fairly charming 1945 edition, in the dust. (To be fair, I've seen the '45 and '65 edition, but not the English-language ones from the 70s and the 80s, which I've heard are not worth watching according to multiple sources.) Most of this review will come from the POV of someone who enjoys the Christie book (though I will be careful not to give away the biggest stuff).

I'll start by saying the racist element is troubling for a modern American audience. The Russian title is along the lines of the original 1939 book title Ten Little N*****s, and in some versions of this film, the subtitles use this term consistently (the one I saw uses "Indians", which is admittedly still offensive, but considerably less so IMO). Certainly the figurines representing each of the guests are African in depiction. If you are able to look past this, it's the best version there is. But if not, it would be completely understandable. A couple of other negatives: the subtitles are often a bit comical or not grammatically accurate, but that part, for me, was easily overlooked after a few minutes in the face of its overwhelming positive qualities. Finally, while the music is generally pretty good, it occasionally became a bit over-the-top for my taste.

The cast, direction, cinematography, screenplay, and atmosphere are all fantastic. The vast majority of the words (though obviously in Russian) are lifted directly from Christie's novel (if the subtitles I saw are to be believed), and the names and situations are almost exactly as in the book as well. These are tremendous positives, in my eyes, though it could be seen as being slavish to the original work. Two significant changes (there are others, but I feel they're in line with the original novel's intent): 1) Phillip Lombard has a dream about the East African natives he abandoned (this is hardly a spoiler as he is one of the only people to readily admit he is guilty of the crime of which he is accused). 2) Lombard and Vera Claythorne have sex (somewhat disturbing, almost non-consensual sex). While there is certainly some sexual tension between them in the novel, it does not come close to boiling over like in this movie. #1 made me giggle a time or two, while #2 was perfectly fine for me, right in line with the atmosphere and situation established in the movie.

As far as it goes, I'd say I would have had the audience discover who the killer was about 90 seconds later than this movie does, and I'd have had the killer linger in a little more detail about how they did it, but the fact that they have more or less kept the novel's ending (instead of the play/movie adaptations' endings since) is such a big win for me, the Christie fan viewer.

I cannot recommend this work enough if you want to see a good Christie adaptation. I'd say my previous favorite was the '70s Death on the Nile with Peter Ustinov (though Suchet is a better Poirot) and Mia Farrow, but that pales significantly in the face of the universally good performances and excellent atmosphere of Desyat negrityat.

Faithful Adaptation

[starr_69 · 8/10 · 16 March 2006]

Being a huge fan of the novel and of the (somewhat unfaithful) 1945 version, I decided I had to see this adaptation after reading other comments about how closely it sticked to the book.

After viewing it, I do believe it is a faithful adaptation. I feel it captures the mood quite well, it genuinely feels like the novel. I also appreciate the fact that no one lives in the end.

I only have two complaints about the movie. The first was the sex scene that I'm sure I would remember if it was in the novel. It was more like a rape which kind of threw me off. In any event, it seems like it was added just to inject a bit of skin to the proceedings. Secondly, I didn't like how the judge commits suicide. His method strays from the source material and leaves no mystery as to who the killer was, as in the novel.

Of course, these are minor complaints that really have nothing to do with the film as a film, but with the film as an adaptation. As a film it does all fit together well. Overall, it was a well made, entertaining movie.

As others have noted already, the subtitles on the available DVD are not well made. The subtitle track is full of bad grammar and misspellings. The names of characters, or at least the spelling of their names, change throughout. For one not already acquainted with the story, it might be a little hard to follow.

Faithful to a Fault...But still a great piece of work!

[sanddragon939 · 8/10 · 19 May 2012]

Having seen all the four British adaptations of Agatha Christie's bestselling novel 'And Then There were None' AKA 'Ten Little Indians', I decided to turn my attention to the Soviet adaptation of this great work-'Desyat Negrityat'. For me, the biggest lure of this film was the fact that, unlike the English adaptations, it retained the dark and disturbing ending of the original work.

As I had expected, this film WAS a much more faithful adaptation of the book than any other, in EVERY respect. And therein lies one of its faults. With virtually every scene in the novel included, the pacing off this film suffers, especially in the first half; there are long stretches of expository dialogue which, while informative vis a vi the plot, leaves the viewer yearning for action. Where the film succeeds however, is firstly, in the setting-the sheer modern simplicity of the house on Indian Island belies the horrifying deaths which occur within its walls one after the other, a juxtaposition which is chilling indeed. Secondly, unlike any of the other adaptations, this film does a great job exploring the inner torment and psychological conflicts of the characters under siege...the character of 'Vera Claythorne' in particular; adding a depth to the story lacking in previous theatrical renditions.

On the whole, 'Desyat Negrityat' has its flaws, but it is a great watch nonetheless...and leaves one hoping for an English adaptation of the novel that is nearly as faithful!