ORDEAL BY INNOCENCE: Blu-ray (Cannon Films, 1985) Kino Lorber

Rather incongruously undermined by Dave Brubeck’s jazzy underscore, all but deflating the rank uncertainty to be gleaned from cinematographer, Billy William’s moodily lit location work in and around Dartmouth, England, director, Desmond Davis’ Ordeal by Innocence (1985) is a vacuous, dull and badly mangled ‘whodunit?’ of the Agatha Christie ilk, with Donald Sutherland as an unprepossessing paleontologist about to unearth a murder. I love Dame Christie. No one did the ‘locked room’ murder mystery better than she. And there have been enough truly great adaptations of her prolific masterworks to prove their perennial engagement with audiences of every age, rife for a good crime story. However, on screen, Ordeal by Innocence is nothing like a good crime story – the crime, (or in this case, more than one) already having been committed before the arrival of our low-key hero to these brooding and perpetually fog-laden shores. In short order, and an interminable parade of B&W flashbacks, we learn that wealthy socialite, Rachel Argyle (Faye Dunaway) was murdered in the parlor of her husband’s ancestral home; her adopted son, Jacko (Bill McColl), suspected of the crime. The law decided Jacko was guilty and he was hanged by the neck until dead. Case closed. Well, not exactly! Problem: Dr. Arthur Calgary (Sutherland) can vouch for the boy’s whereabouts at the time of the murder. He was giving him a lift by car and was still many miles away from the scene of the crime when Rachel was brutally bludgeoned to death. Even after being told this revelation, widower, Leo Argyle (Christopher Plummer) is not terribly interested in reopening the case – less so, when Calgary becomes frustrated by his lack of enthusiasm to exonerate the boy’s reputation. And the local constabulary, fronted by Inspector Huish (Michael Elphick) is downright odious in his disdain of Calgary’s poking and prodding into this seemingly open and shut case. Conscience alas, will not allow Calgary to surrender his search for the truth.

Ordeal by Innocence has a lot going for it, not the least its superb cast. But Alexander Stuart’s screenplay is awash in red herrings, and worse, lumbers along at a snail’s pace, dropping elements of obfuscation as though they were a trail of breadcrumbs in this ‘connect-the-dots’ thriller. Most egregious of all; the decision to have Dave Brubeck write and perform the score. Brubeck’s work in the field of jazz is legendary and I have long been an ardent admirer of his quartet. But Brubeck seems incapable of realizing he has been assigned to write the score for a thriller. His upbeat and bouncy tunes play like a very bad joke; like having to stage an orgy where all the participants are forced to watch Bugs Bunny cartoons naked. Certainly, gives new meaning to the phrase, ‘What’s up, doc?’ But I digress. Director Davis gets the least mileage out of his all-star roster, and is further hampered by the audiences’ expectation to find a Hercule Poirot-styled sleuth at the heart of this investigation. Alas, Christie’s departure into psychological drama was noted for its sublime low-key hero, typified by Donald Sutherland’s persona, though regrettably, not in his performance. Sutherland’s Calgary is, at intervals, as obtuse as Peter Falk’s Columbo, albeit, with none of Falk’s penchant for adding a bumbler’s charm to the proceedings. So, we are left with a very sullen and impractical crusader.  But screenwriter, Stuart has made another tragic error in transposing Christie from page to picture, omitting her fondness for drawn-out dialogue between two or more characters. Instead, Stuart employs a sort of Cole’s Notes edition to these conversations that now play as mere connective tissue to simply bump the story along from one improbable consequence to the next.

And so, the body count rises and the list of ‘unusual’ suspects gets more muddled and less mysterious until we have unearthed the truth long before Calgary even thinks to look in the right spot for clues. Ordeal by Innocence was first published in 1958. Yet, despite its popularity with Christie’s readership, it would remain untouched by the cruel mistress of cinema until this 1985 adaptation. Seemingly eager to reboot the tale as a Miss Marple mystery, ITV did another variation in 1992 starring Geraldine McEwan as the teller of the tale.  And then, in 2018 came Amazon’s wickedly dark reboot; a 3-parter, infinitely more sinister than anything Christie could have dreamed up herself or arguably would have wished it to be. So, to date, Ordeal by Innocence awaits its proper turn as a creepy psychological thriller. Davis’ slog, is a once-in-a-lifetime experience – meaning that once in a single lifetime is more than enough to realize how badly bungled even a good piece of writing can become when placed in the wrong hands to oversee its translation. Ironically, Brubeck’s score compliments the general undercurrent of confusion surrounding Jacko’s untimely death and his family’s indifference to unravel the mystery to clear his ‘good’ name. Or perhaps, this is the point Brubeck’s score is trying to make. That Jacko Argyle did not have the proverbial ‘leg’ to stand on and was virtually despised by all of his adopted siblings.

Calgary implores friend of the family, Gwenda Vaughn (Diana Quick) to aid in his discovery of the truth. She bitterly refuses. Calgary also runs afoul of Jacko’s sister, Mary Durrant’s (Sarah Miles) good graces, whom the late Rachel Argyle threatened, along with her husband, Philip (Ian McShane) to write out of the Will. Calgary’s next port of call is Jacko’s brother, Micky (Michael Maloney) who is carrying on an incestuous relationship with their sister, Tina (Phoebe Nicholls). Well, sort of. As virtually all of the Argyle children were adopted, there is no blood tie between Tina and Micky to prevent their relationship on the grounds of moral decency. Neither sibling is particularly saddened by Jacko’s passing, nor are they very interested to see his name cleared of any wrong doing. Indeed, Tina forewarns nothing will happen anyway. Leo has seen to that. Along a lonely street, Calgary is nearly crushed by an on-coming car, shortly thereafter, startled half out of his wits by Inspector Huish, who is eager to have him leave these parts, leaving well enough alone. Now, Calgary turns to Jacko’s widow, theater usherette, Maureen Clegg (Cassie Stuart) who, like the rest, is not particularly saddened by the loss of her husband, though inadvertently, she provides Calgary with some fascinating clues, including Jacko’s insidious attraction to the family’s housekeeper, Kirsten Lindstrom (Annette Crosbie).

But interviewing Kirsten proves another dead end, as she paints a portrait of Jacko as a wanton with his outstretched hand, chronically asking for money. Young Hester Argyle (Valerie Whittington) suggests Jacko had an open marriage with many female companions on the side, including Mrs. Leech. Jacko was also involved with Leech’s husband, Archie (George Innes) – a notorious bookie. Perhaps Jacko owed Archie money and he came to collect, exacting his revenge on Rachel instead. Or maybe Jacko and Archie were conspiring on the perfect murder to gain access to the family’s fortunes. Who can say? Meanwhile, Calgary learns from Kirsten that Rachel rewrote her Will shortly before her demise to reflect her mounting impatience with Jacko’s frequent run-ins with the law. Confiding his findings to Archie, Calgary learns Jacko was engaging a woman under the radar – for what purpose? Hardly love. Or was it?  Sometime later, Tina is interviewed by Calgary about Jacko’s lady friends. She confesses to having seen someone near the gates on the night of the murder, although she thought then it might be Leo and Gwenda. And indeed, Leo and Gwenda appear to have grown quite close since Rachel’s death – perhaps, even before it. Calgary confronts Gwenda with the allegation she is Leo’s mistress. Was she being blackmailed by Jacko over the affair - right? She denies it. Returning to Micky’s flat, Calgary discovers Tina’s body among the tackle in the garage. Micky attacks Calgary, accusing him of involving Tina in his investigation. This likely led to her murder. But Inspector Huich seems to think Micky killed Tina, even as he attempted to attack Calgary upon discovering him hovering over Tina’s remains.

A short while later, Kristen confronts Calgary as he pours over local newspaper clippings at the library. He stresses to her that nothing remains of the investigation – if one ever existed – to get to the bottom of Mrs. Argyle’s murder. Did the police even look for clues? Or did they simply close the case on Jacko regardless of the evidence? Kristen clarifies, Rachel knew her husband was having an affair with Gwenda. Although she abhorred their ‘creeping around’ she nevertheless allowed the affair to continue. Back at his rented flat, Calgary finds Maureen waiting in his bed and eager to please. Although attracted to her, he resists the urge to be seduced, long enough to recognize that perhaps the real murderer is not yet finished with the killing spree. Indeed, not long thereafter, Archie’s body is discovered lying among the plants in his greenhouse. Gwenda’s impromptu arrival on the scene, and even more over, her nonchalant acceptance of the corpse, leads Calgary to suspect perhaps she is the one behind these terrible crimes. Gathering the remaining suspects at the Argyle home, Calgary uses the process of elimination to determine Kristen as the real killer. Now, Kristen reveals she was not being blackmailed by Jacko as Calgary suspected. In fact, the two were lovers. And even though Kristen knew Jacko was using her merely to suit his own purpose, she killed Rachel to please him. Afterward, Kristen learned Jacko was already married. She felt betrayed and jealously allowed Jacko to hang as her supreme revenge on him.  Her terrible handiwork revealed to the family she seemed so utterly devoted to, Kristen departs from the Argyle home in utter disgrace. Indeed, she has no reason left to live. Preparing to take her own life by leaping off the cliffside, Kristen is asked by Hester if what has been revealed is actually the truth. Even when told it is, Hester cannot believe it. And witnessing the woman she came to rely upon after her mother’s death now commit suicide, Hester lets out with a blood-curdling scream as Calgary’s boat departs for the mainland. He has solved the crime that baffled everyone…and yet, to what purpose?

Ordeal by Innocence ought to have been a better movie. In writing this synopsis, I believe I have given a far better summary of the actual events than as played in this movie; the scenes herein, turned out with a sluggish ennui, and, clumsily strung together to Dave Brubeck’s interminably upbeat jazzy score, frequently playing over lines of dialogue, and intruding upon the heightened suspense at the most inopportune moments, virtually diffusing all the thrills into a sort of silly, sing-song-like prose. Director Davis’ treatment of a bona fide Agatha Christie masterpiece is pedestrian to say the least. He gets considerable mileage from the moody Dartmouth landscape, sheathed in perpetual shadow, the steely blue-grey of morbid autumn dawn, or heavily laid in a drape of smoking-pot-lit fog. But otherwise, his direction completely misses its mark. The scenes do not evolve or even make any attempt to build to moments of shock and surprise. They simply hinge together, one upon the next, truncating Christie’s verve for conversational dialogue between characters with punctuated lines recited as though from an Aeschylean tragedy. Please, no aspersions to fine art. The final result here is one of sheer disbelief, not only in the plot, but the notion that any sane producer could have green lit these results for a general release without thoroughly re-cutting the picture, and, still not expect it to bomb at the box office.

Ordeal by Innocence arrives on Blu-ray from Kino Lorber. The results are middling at best. Rumored to be derived from a ‘new 2K scan’ from original elements, what’s here is much too heavily saturated and grain-heavy. Toning down the color on one’s monitor helps, though it tends to wash out the image in totem. And we have yet to mention the interminable gate weave and telecine wobble that intermittently afflicts and destabilizes this image, drawing undue attention to jump cuts and fades. Contrast, on the whole, is excellent. I suppose, that’s something. And not every scene is a grainy mess. A good many reveal the subtly nuanced architecture of these quaint – if unsettling and craggy – Dartmouth locales. The 2.0 DTS mono is another cause for concern. While Dave Brubeck’s score plays loud and clear throughout most of this presentation, dialogue throughout is thin and strident. I sincerely wonder whether this is the result of overdubs done without finesse in a studio, or some ‘sound engineering wizard’ attempting to get the best results off ‘live’ recordings made under less than optimal conditions on location. Whatever the case, none of the dialogue here ever even remotely sounds as it should – no bass, no reverb, just tinny and grating on the acoustic nerve. For shame! Extras? None. Probably, just as well. I cannot imagine an audio commentary improving my opinion of this creaky claptrap. Bottom line: pass and be very glad that you did.

FILM RATING (out of 5 – 5 being the best)

1

VIDEO/AUDIO

2.5

EXTRAS

0