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

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.

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.

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.