If there is one thing I hate, it is movies pretending to be based on books, which change the plot of said book. The change of murderess and heroine was bad enough, but what the heck motivated the script writer to insert gay porn into the story, and several gay men? They sure were not in the book. Agatha Christie rarely ever alluded to homosexuality in her books, and it is very easy to miss. Here, it comes with a sledge-hammer, and most certainly she would not have written such a plot. Now, if you want to make a movie about homosexuality in the 1930s, fine. Just don't call it "Agatha Christie" then.
Oh, and a note to writers of previous comments: This is not a "politically correct" thing, to insert random gay people into stories where they don't belong. Politically correct is treating (in this case) gay men decently. Randomly inventing pseudo-gay stories to "pepper up" a story that does not have them is not "politically correct" -- it is crap.
So, a note to the producers: If you want to make movies about homosexuality in the 1930s, fine. If you want to make movies from Agatha Christies books, also fine. Just stop mixing up the two.
Oh, and a note to writers of previous comments: This is not a "politically correct" thing, to insert random gay people into stories where they don't belong. Politically correct is treating (in this case) gay men decently. Randomly inventing pseudo-gay stories to "pepper up" a story that does not have them is not "politically correct" -- it is crap.
So, a note to the producers: If you want to make movies about homosexuality in the 1930s, fine. If you want to make movies from Agatha Christies books, also fine. Just stop mixing up the two.