I have always loved this series for how absorbing the stories are, how well acted the adaptations are and how sumptuously and classily the series is made. This very early episode is not one of my favourites of the series, and is not quite as effective as Four and Twenty Blackbirds from the first series. And it is not because it isn't a good episode, it is, very in fact, but there are a few scenes towards the beginning that take too long to set up. And while the story is clever and generally absorbing, it is not one of Agatha Christie's best, I did have a good idea who the thief was and it was between the main suspect and the one who actually did it. However, it is very classy-looking, the scenery and costumes especially are just gorgeous really capturing the era. The music is of the usual hauntingly beautiful quality and the writing has its suspenseful moments as well as some delightful quirks such as a fun car chase, Japp trying not to look at the female suspect as she undresses and Hastings recalling that Japp talks in his sleep reliving past arrests. David Suchet still delights as Poirot, while Hugh Fraser and Phillip Jackson share the lion's share of the best moments. All in all, very good. 8/10 Bethany Cox
16 Reviews
a Macguffin
blanche-228 February 2014
"The Incredible Theft" is one of the staples of detective lore, the MacGuffin plot. These were especially popular during the war where the MacGuffin was a list of agents, a code decryption, or plans for some war weapon. Here it's plans for a war weapon.
Poirot is invited to spend the weekend at the home of the Mayfields. Mr. Mayfield is an industrialist who has developed a new plane. He wants the government to start coughing up some money as he's paid all expenses thus far. The government knows that he once sold weapons to the Japanese, so they're not interested.
Mayfield wants to impress the government so he invites a known Nazi sympathizer and probably a spy to his home to see if he can catch her stealing the plans. His wife is a wreck so she asks Poirot to keep an eye on things over the weekend.
Of course, if it could go wrong, it does, and Poirot finds himself involved with Japp as they try to sort things out.
There is a lot of humor in this episode, but it's not a murder mystery. It's pleasant enough. This is one where the touches of comedy make it worthwhile. Though when you think about it, given the superb acting and production values, these episodes are always worthwhile.
Poirot is invited to spend the weekend at the home of the Mayfields. Mr. Mayfield is an industrialist who has developed a new plane. He wants the government to start coughing up some money as he's paid all expenses thus far. The government knows that he once sold weapons to the Japanese, so they're not interested.
Mayfield wants to impress the government so he invites a known Nazi sympathizer and probably a spy to his home to see if he can catch her stealing the plans. His wife is a wreck so she asks Poirot to keep an eye on things over the weekend.
Of course, if it could go wrong, it does, and Poirot finds himself involved with Japp as they try to sort things out.
There is a lot of humor in this episode, but it's not a murder mystery. It's pleasant enough. This is one where the touches of comedy make it worthwhile. Though when you think about it, given the superb acting and production values, these episodes are always worthwhile.
Stand back lads he's got a blancmange!
Sleepin_Dragon27 October 2015
The brink of war, high society and missing plans make for a teasing case for Poirot.
There are some lovely performances in this episode, my favourite being Carmen de Sautoy's dramatic turn as femme fatale Mrs Vanderlyn. She gets some great outfits too.
It is a really well shot episode, I loved the scene of Mayfield looking on witnessing the plane destroying the van, the explosion looks great. The usual high quality production values are in abundance. I love the casual humour too, Hastings describing being forced to co habit with Japp is funny, he had some great lines.
The car chase is a fun scene, Hastings at last gets to show off his driving skills.
As a youngster I was always gutted when no murder occurred in the episode, it's funny how opinions change as you mature. It's any engaging episode that veers away from the norm. 7/10
There are some lovely performances in this episode, my favourite being Carmen de Sautoy's dramatic turn as femme fatale Mrs Vanderlyn. She gets some great outfits too.
It is a really well shot episode, I loved the scene of Mayfield looking on witnessing the plane destroying the van, the explosion looks great. The usual high quality production values are in abundance. I love the casual humour too, Hastings describing being forced to co habit with Japp is funny, he had some great lines.
The car chase is a fun scene, Hastings at last gets to show off his driving skills.
As a youngster I was always gutted when no murder occurred in the episode, it's funny how opinions change as you mature. It's any engaging episode that veers away from the norm. 7/10
Problematic
Kaiketi22 February 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Contains SPOILERS!
Did I miss something or am I just stupid?
The industrialist manor owner whose wife calls Poirot for help gave a secret document to a Nazi sympathizer because the woman was blackmailing him about selling armor to Japanese years back, a case that was dismissed in England though caused a lot of ruckus. But, the leaked document was falsified and misinformation directed at Nazis. Phew. All well and happy faces everywhere, even in Poirot's face.
But wait! What about the fact that now there was concrete evidence against the manor owning industrialist selling the armor to Japanese?!? Poirot was so disapproving when the blackmail letter and the dastardly deed of selling arms to Japanese was revealed, but after the misinformation feeding to the Nazis was revealed, even Poirot was happy. What?!
Again, did I miss something or am I just stupid? Though, this wouldn't be the first time that Poirot's stories, at least in TV form, would have major plot an/or logic problems.
Did I miss something or am I just stupid?
The industrialist manor owner whose wife calls Poirot for help gave a secret document to a Nazi sympathizer because the woman was blackmailing him about selling armor to Japanese years back, a case that was dismissed in England though caused a lot of ruckus. But, the leaked document was falsified and misinformation directed at Nazis. Phew. All well and happy faces everywhere, even in Poirot's face.
But wait! What about the fact that now there was concrete evidence against the manor owning industrialist selling the armor to Japanese?!? Poirot was so disapproving when the blackmail letter and the dastardly deed of selling arms to Japanese was revealed, but after the misinformation feeding to the Nazis was revealed, even Poirot was happy. What?!
Again, did I miss something or am I just stupid? Though, this wouldn't be the first time that Poirot's stories, at least in TV form, would have major plot an/or logic problems.
The Incredible Theft
Prismark106 August 2017
No murder for Poirot to investigate but industrial espionage and possibly collaborating with a potential enemy.
We are entering the period before the outbreak of the second world war and Poirot is hired by Lady Mayfield as she is worried that her husband who has developed a new fighter aircraft has invited government officials to his mansion to invest in the project as well as wealthy American Mrs Vanderlyn a known Nazi sympathiser.
When the top secret plans go missing Mrs Vanderlyn is the main suspect and Inspector Japp is nearby, actually sharing a room at a guest house with Hastings.
There are several red herrings and a switcheroo but you feel that some of the main players were one step ahead of Poirot all the time. As for Mrs Vanderlyn, extra marks for being in that slinky silver dress.
We are entering the period before the outbreak of the second world war and Poirot is hired by Lady Mayfield as she is worried that her husband who has developed a new fighter aircraft has invited government officials to his mansion to invest in the project as well as wealthy American Mrs Vanderlyn a known Nazi sympathiser.
When the top secret plans go missing Mrs Vanderlyn is the main suspect and Inspector Japp is nearby, actually sharing a room at a guest house with Hastings.
There are several red herrings and a switcheroo but you feel that some of the main players were one step ahead of Poirot all the time. As for Mrs Vanderlyn, extra marks for being in that slinky silver dress.
Bait and Switch.
rmax30482318 May 2014
Warning: Spoilers
This one takes place in or around 1938 and is pretty good. It has the advantage of featuring in its opening scenes the newest of British fighter airplanes, here called the "Kestrel," everywhere else called the Supermarine "Spitfire", maybe a Mark IX. It was arguably the most graceful airplane to come out of World War II and was essential in the Battle of Britain. Nom de Dieu, how I love that airplane! I gather the story takes place at the manor house of Mr. Mayfield, who owns the plant that will produce the new fighter. There are half a dozen other guests. One of them apparently steals the plans for the airplane with the intention of delivering them to the Germans.
It could be any one of the guests. But in fact it's the haughty American looker with the shady past, who is extorting the plans, and so forth. "We must be friendly with the Americans these days," remarks one character. Indeed, it was the case. The arsenal of democracy was happily gearing up for another war and another fortune to be made from that war. American sympathies were with the Allies but there was a small and noisy number of German-American nationals. And few Americans WANTED another war, just as few Europeans did. Charles Lindbergh was convinced the Germans would win next time round.
But why go on? Everything winds up happily and nobody dies. The plant owner, Mayfield by name, had a hauntingly familiar face but the image it evoked was that of a much younger man. It finally drove me to his filmography where it was revealed that the actor, without being credited, had played Kenneth More's son, the aerial gunner on a Swordfish, lost for a time at sea.
I enjoyed the episode.
It could be any one of the guests. But in fact it's the haughty American looker with the shady past, who is extorting the plans, and so forth. "We must be friendly with the Americans these days," remarks one character. Indeed, it was the case. The arsenal of democracy was happily gearing up for another war and another fortune to be made from that war. American sympathies were with the Allies but there was a small and noisy number of German-American nationals. And few Americans WANTED another war, just as few Europeans did. Charles Lindbergh was convinced the Germans would win next time round.
But why go on? Everything winds up happily and nobody dies. The plant owner, Mayfield by name, had a hauntingly familiar face but the image it evoked was that of a much younger man. It finally drove me to his filmography where it was revealed that the actor, without being credited, had played Kenneth More's son, the aerial gunner on a Swordfish, lost for a time at sea.
I enjoyed the episode.
"It just goes to show the dangers of meeting anonymous women at the zoo"
kaberi-893-64231610 September 2015
Should detectives take calls from people who refuse to identify themselves? Miss Lemon thinks not, but when she informs Poirot about the anonymous woman who has been calling, Poirot asks her to put the call through. "On your own head be it", responds Miss Lemon, and so begins one of those episodes in which Poirot's handling of the case will likely never be known to the general public, due to the sensitive nature of the documents that are stolen and later found by Poirot and Hastings.
While the solution is clever, I was left with a sour taste in my mouth by the very entrance of the slinky and villainous Mrs. Vanderlyn. The moment she shows up and proclaims in her so-called "American" accent, "How very En-glish!", one knows two things right away: (1) she is going to be accused of something treacherous and (2) all will not be as it appears to be. Although, as one of the characters later reports, "Froggy thinks she didn't do it", but could such a woman turn out to be innocent? What do you think?
While the solution is clever, I was left with a sour taste in my mouth by the very entrance of the slinky and villainous Mrs. Vanderlyn. The moment she shows up and proclaims in her so-called "American" accent, "How very En-glish!", one knows two things right away: (1) she is going to be accused of something treacherous and (2) all will not be as it appears to be. Although, as one of the characters later reports, "Froggy thinks she didn't do it", but could such a woman turn out to be innocent? What do you think?
No murder, but still very interesting
grantss19 July 2016
Hercule Poirot is hired by Lady Mayfield to observe her husband's business dealings. Her husband is Tommy Mayfield, industrialist and aircraft designer. He has just designed and built a revolutionary new fighter, a fighter that surpasses anything the Germans have. However, in order to complete the project he needs funding and has invited the wealthy Mrs Vanderlyn to his estate to discuss her investing in the project. However, Mrs Vanderlyn is a known Nazi sympathizer and there are fears she may steal the plans of the plane for the Germans. Sure enough, soon after her arrival, a crucial part of the plans goes missing...
No murder, but still very interesting. A few red herrings, a good twist and a decent car chase (not often you say that about a Poirot episode) make for a good theft-espionage drama. Add in some good humour and banter, especially between Poirot and Miss Lemon, and some nice scenes of a Spitfire being flown and you have a good all- round episode.
No murder, but still very interesting. A few red herrings, a good twist and a decent car chase (not often you say that about a Poirot episode) make for a good theft-espionage drama. Add in some good humour and banter, especially between Poirot and Miss Lemon, and some nice scenes of a Spitfire being flown and you have a good all- round episode.
Unusual
VetteRanger9 February 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Not only does this story have no murder, and not all do, to be sure, but it's unusual in another way.
As other fans have mentioned, a wealthy industrialist (Mr. Mayfield) with a breakthrough in aviation technology is nonetheless hampered by a previous incident where the Japanese benefitted. He was found completely innocent in the affair, but the stain on his reputation remained.
He seeks to restore his reputation by catching a German spy at work in the theft of his own plans ... or so it seems.
Poirot is called in by Mayfield's wife, who is concerned that something is amiss, and her husband will wind up behind the eight ball yet again.
So what is the second unusual thing? Poirot's presence, actions, and conclusions have no bearing whatsoever on the outcome of the incident. LOL He's merely an observer, and Mr. Mayfield's plan moves along perfectly ... but to understand what that plan is, you'll have to watch the episode. :-)
As other fans have mentioned, a wealthy industrialist (Mr. Mayfield) with a breakthrough in aviation technology is nonetheless hampered by a previous incident where the Japanese benefitted. He was found completely innocent in the affair, but the stain on his reputation remained.
He seeks to restore his reputation by catching a German spy at work in the theft of his own plans ... or so it seems.
Poirot is called in by Mayfield's wife, who is concerned that something is amiss, and her husband will wind up behind the eight ball yet again.
So what is the second unusual thing? Poirot's presence, actions, and conclusions have no bearing whatsoever on the outcome of the incident. LOL He's merely an observer, and Mr. Mayfield's plan moves along perfectly ... but to understand what that plan is, you'll have to watch the episode. :-)
Some Historical Goofs
monticellomeadow-953567 January 2019
This is a fine Poirot, but a bit unusual in that there are no murders. Rather, it is espionage. Still, well done and, as usual, entertaining. There is a slight historical disconnect though. While clearly meant to be before the September, 1939, outbreak of World War II - the German ambassador is still in residence - the principals still refer to the "PM" and "Winnie" and "Eden" as if the Churchill war cabinet was in power. Of course, that didn't happen until May of 1940, 8 months after war had been declared. Not critical, but a goof not typical of this great series.
Very enjoyable even though not much of a mystery
Paularoc23 August 2012
This is one of the episodes where the side stories and by play between the characters are more interesting than the mystery itself. At the start of the story Miss Lemon and Poirot have a brief exchange about whether or nor he will accept anonymous calls and he says he will which appalls Miss Lemon since with no name she will not be able to file away the information. She later receives a phone call from a "Miss Smith" which she puts through. Poirot agrees to meet the caller at a zoo. The scene that follows is a hoot. The meeting is to be by the penguin pool and there is Poirot in all his penguin-like sartorial splendor awaiting "Miss Smith." Hastings and Japp also have humorous scenes in this episode. Poirot also has his humorous lines particularly the exchange of remarks with Lady Carrington and his telling Hastings that his inconvenience of having to room with Japp at the hotel was no where near as bad as what he had to go through when playing bridge with Lady Carrington. As ever, Suchet shines as Poirot (he is so much more engaging in the earlier episodes than the later ones). The storyline is a simple one - documents important to national security are stolen and Poirot and Japp are investigating. With few exceptions, I don't find spy stories particularly interesting and this was not an exception. This is the second or third Poirot episode that I have noticed that one of the main characters was wearing a fox fur - a truly revolting fashion accessory which I can't understand was ever considered stylish. Interesting how attitudes and fashions change.
"Froggy KNOWS she didn't do it"
gridoon9 December 2007
As you might have already guessed from the title, this episode is not dealing with a murder, but with a theft: to be more precise, with the theft of some top secret plans for a fighter plane from the desk of an English engineer. The main suspect is an American lady that many believe is a spy working for the Germans, but Hercule Poirot, who has been invited to the same house for the weekend, is not convinced that the case is that simple.
This is a rather trifling episode of the Poirot series, and maybe the easiest way to explain that would be to say that murder mystery stories are usually more engaging than pre-WWII spy stories. But then again, "this is a matter of national security", as one character says. No, I think the problem lies elsewhere: in the fact that, if you think about it, the story and its outcome would have been essentially the same WITHOUT Poirot's involvement (can't get into more detail without spoiling it, but think about it). On the plus side, Inspector Japp gets some laughs in this episode, particularly when he's trying not to look at the female suspect while she's getting undressed in the next room. (**)
This is a rather trifling episode of the Poirot series, and maybe the easiest way to explain that would be to say that murder mystery stories are usually more engaging than pre-WWII spy stories. But then again, "this is a matter of national security", as one character says. No, I think the problem lies elsewhere: in the fact that, if you think about it, the story and its outcome would have been essentially the same WITHOUT Poirot's involvement (can't get into more detail without spoiling it, but think about it). On the plus side, Inspector Japp gets some laughs in this episode, particularly when he's trying not to look at the female suspect while she's getting undressed in the next room. (**)
An Incredibly Unusual Event
Littlelep5 February 2019
Most mysteries within each episode of Poirot are solved by the end. In this episode, however, one item is left dangling: the source of the scream in the garden just before the "theft" is uncovered. Poirot makes mention of it later on, so it had some significance, if only to mislead the investigation. Who was the shadow who yelled out?
Espionage thriller on the eve of war in Europe
SimonJack3 June 2019
This is another crafty episode in the British TV productions of Agatha Christie's Hercule Poirot that star David Suchet. At 60 minutes, "The Incredible Theft" is longer than the usual TV hour shows. Most of those run 51 to 53 minutes. Poirot's usual sidekicks all are present in this mystery.
The setting for this film is 1937, on the brink of war in Europe. And that's the heart of the plot as espionage is in the works. This isn't as intriguing and complicated as most of the Poirot mysteries. For instance, there isn't a whole slew of suspects. Yet, there is a clever twist to what appears to the audience. This one is quite different from the usual interesting details that Poirot reveals at the end of most cases.
That twist and the general setting with some nice period aeronautics and flying make up some for the lesser weight of intrigue. This is another very fine production of a tantalizing subject. Agatha Christie makes it a very interesting mystery. It also has the occasional snippets of humor. Here are some of my favorite lines.
Captain Hastings, "You shouldn't tease her, Poirot." Hercule Poirot, "She makes it irresistible."
Hercule Poirot, "I will take a promenade in the garden before turning in. It will clear my brain." Lady Carrington, "You might have done that before we played cards." Poirot, "Madam is too agreeable. Good night."
Tommy Mayfield, "Why do politicians treat everyone else like idiots?" Sir George Carrington, "Probably because they made it for us in the first place."
Sir George, to Mayfield, "Froggy thinks she didn't do it." Hercule Poirot, who overheard Sir George as he enters the foyer, "Froggy knows she didn't do it."
Hastings, "If you ask me, it just shows the danger of meeting anonymous women at the zoo."
The setting for this film is 1937, on the brink of war in Europe. And that's the heart of the plot as espionage is in the works. This isn't as intriguing and complicated as most of the Poirot mysteries. For instance, there isn't a whole slew of suspects. Yet, there is a clever twist to what appears to the audience. This one is quite different from the usual interesting details that Poirot reveals at the end of most cases.
That twist and the general setting with some nice period aeronautics and flying make up some for the lesser weight of intrigue. This is another very fine production of a tantalizing subject. Agatha Christie makes it a very interesting mystery. It also has the occasional snippets of humor. Here are some of my favorite lines.
Captain Hastings, "You shouldn't tease her, Poirot." Hercule Poirot, "She makes it irresistible."
Hercule Poirot, "I will take a promenade in the garden before turning in. It will clear my brain." Lady Carrington, "You might have done that before we played cards." Poirot, "Madam is too agreeable. Good night."
Tommy Mayfield, "Why do politicians treat everyone else like idiots?" Sir George Carrington, "Probably because they made it for us in the first place."
Sir George, to Mayfield, "Froggy thinks she didn't do it." Hercule Poirot, who overheard Sir George as he enters the foyer, "Froggy knows she didn't do it."
Hastings, "If you ask me, it just shows the danger of meeting anonymous women at the zoo."
"Non, non, non! There should not be between the husband and the wife, the sleepy dogs!"
bensonmum216 July 2015
Warning: Spoilers
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.
Very poor adaptation of the Christie story
donlessnau-591-63773024 July 2021
If they'd stayed with the original story, they would have had a pretty good episode. Instead, as happens too much in the BBC series, producers decide to alter
the plot for no beneficial reason and ruin a great story. They also eliminate some characters and add new ones which just adds running time but little else
to the TV episode. It's ok but barely.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
