Agatha Christie's The Pale Horse

1997 "A Supernatural British Mystery Classic"
Agatha Christie's The Pale Horse
6.2| 1h40m| en| More Info
Released: 01 July 1997 Released
Producted By:
Country:
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Writer Mark Easterbrook has a vested interest in solving the murder of a priest. That's because Mark himself is under suspicion. But to save his reputation and put the real killer behind bars, he'll have to go through a mysterious list of names that's suddenly turned up and may hold the key to the murderer's identity.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Trailers & Images

Reviews

TheLittleSongbird The Pale Horse is a good clever story if not among Agatha Christie's best. This 1997 adaptation of it is not a good adaptation of it at all and is disappointing on its own too. There are definitely far worse adaptations of Christie's books around(ie. Austin Trevor's Lord Edgware Dies, Alfred Molina's Murder on the Orient Express, 1989's Ten Little Indians, The Alphabet Murders and Geraldine McEwan's At Bertram's Hotel and Sittaford Mystery). But you can also do with far better as well(ie. the Russian version of And Then There Were None, Witness for the Prosecution, 1945's And Then There Were None, 1974's Murder on the Orient Express, Peter Ustinov's Death on the Nile and Evil Under the Sun and all of the Joan Hickson and David Suchet adaptations).Any redeeming merits? Yes there are, even with anything I don't like there are actually not that many times where I have found no redeeming qualities in that regard. And that is the case with the Agatha Christie adaptations I didn't like either, though Trevor's Lord Edgware Dies and McEwan's At Bertram's Hotel came close. The Pale Horse does look good, the scenery, costumes and photography are very nicely done and give the adaptation a look that is both glossy and atmospheric. The acting is very good too, Colin Buchanan and Andy Serkis are very engaging, but I agree that Leslie Phillips and Michael Byrne give the best performances. The former roguish but interestingly with a plummy-rich voice that you don't hear a lot, and the latter terrifying in his arrogance and condescension. Jayne Ashborne is indeed lovely, but also for me compared to everybody else a little bland. The first 15 minutes were also entertaining and drew you right in.Much doesn't work though. The music does not fit at all, it tries to be authentic to the setting that the story was originally set in, but it was such a shame that the setting that this adaptation adopted didn't follow suit. As a consequence, the effect was jarring and it even felt somewhat dreary. The dialogue is awkward and stilted often, is confused, jumps around a lot and very little is given developing the characters and story. The characters are just not interesting either, there are too few of them which really undermines the effectiveness of the final solution, as a result the ending(always a highlight with Agatha Christie) was flat. It was the story that fared the worst, to put it kindly it was a mess. It was convoluted to the point that it was either really implausible or/and very difficult to tell what was going on sometimes, it felt incomplete and like it was skipping over important plot points and characters. It was also very dull, Christie's books are deliberately paced but always engrossing but this adaptation's sprawling nature, drawn out scenes and little development in all honesty made the adaptation a chore to sit through. Something I didn't get from the promising first 15 minutes, and not since McEwan's Sittaford Mystery has an Agatha Christie adaptation made me feel as strongly as that. On top of that, the Macbeth-like witch scenes were clumsily shoe-horned in, and came across as melodramatic and just plain silly.Overall, love Agatha Christie, didn't care for this outside of the production values and cast. 5/10 Bethany Cox
Terrell-4 "The names...you'll take them to the police?" The dying woman gives the priest a list of names on a slip of paper. Not long after, Mark Easterbrook (Colin Buchanan) runs down a dark alley to assist a man being beaten. The assailant disappears. As the man dies he hands the list of names to Mark. Yes, the man is the priest. Hmmm. The Pale Horse, or Agatha Christie's The Pale Horse, has a clever plot and occasionally good acting, It also has a muddied story line, a use of the three witches from Macbeth that teeters between silly and melodramatic, an unfulfilled hint of horror, an irrelevant red herring, too few suspects and a villain who is easily fingered. When Mark gives the list to the police, they naturally think that Mark himself beat the priest to death. The inspector is no Morse or Dalgliesh. Think of Elmer Fudd with a working class accent and a dumb, sly nature. It's up to Mark to prove his innocence, uncover a dastardly murder business and expose a mastermind who overacts. Mark, his girl friend Kate Mercer (Jayne Ashbourne) and Sergeant Corrigan (Andy Serkis), a young, friendly copper, eventually realize that all except one of the names are of people who have died far earlier than nature most likely intended. Eventually Mark discovers that the three eccentric old ladies who live in The Pale Horse, their ancient home that long ago had been an inn, believe themselves witches...and witches who have the power to bring death. This seems to give them great satisfaction. Then Mark learns of a bookmaker who has a sideline of accepting wagers on people's lives. With a proper introduction and evidence of financial reliability, he will, for instance, bet Mark that Mark's inconvenient former wife will be dead within two weeks. Mark will bet that she won't. In this case, Mark doesn't have an ex- wife, only Kate...and with her posing as the object of the bet, they'll expose a neat little murder-as-wager business. Ah, but what is the role of the three witches, for they must forecast the death. And if there is, indeed, murder, how can it be so well disguised as illness that no questions were raised about all those names on the list? Things become desperate for Mark when Kate soon takes to her bed, deathly ill and fading fast. The plot, indeed, is clever. However, the combination of a script which sprawls, direction which allows this, and a basic misconception of how to play up Macbeth's witches with our horrid three, gives us 100 minutes with long stretches of dullness. Colin Buchanan, a good actor, makes an engaging Mark Easterbrook. For years he has been the Pascoe in the long- running Dalziel and Pascoe series. Andy Serkis is an unexpected gem as the sergeant...young, friendly, careful around his dunderhead superior, smart enough when it counts. Overshadowing them all are two practiced, pungent scene-stealers, Leslie Phillips and Michael Byrne. Phillips' talent to play plumy-voiced rogues is unmatched. Byrne is equally adept at arrogant, condescending bullies. Whenever they appear they provide the real pleasure in this story. There have been many, many British television productions of Agatha Christie mysteries. Most have been very good. A few are a matter of taste (I've never warmed up to Tommy and Tuppence), and some simply have not worked well. The Pale Horse, I'm afraid, falls in this last category. It's not embarrassing or amateurish; it's just not very well done.
[email protected] Myers We rented this expecting to have a cozy evening at home. I came away very disappointed. Most Agatha Christie adaptations are very good, and I was not familiar with this particular story. The first 15 minutes promise an entertaining experience, but then it more or less runs off the tracks.The writing is pretty poor and should have provided additional exposition. Watching this was like reading a novel and skipping the even numbered chapters. I had only a faint clue as what was going on and could not figure out why the characters were doing or why they were doing it, mostly the latter.In the future, I will stick to the Hercule Poirot or Miss Marple stories. With them, you know what you are getting and won't be disappointed.
Sheldon Aubut Very good actors, but one of the worst productions of Agatha Christie's works I've seen. The soundtrack tried to add to the feel of the period but only helped to make the film seem "dated". I've only recently re-discovered Agatha Christie as I had read only a couple of her books as a child in the 50's, and I've now been devouring all the works NetFlix has to offer. I've especially enjoyed Joan Hickson as Miss Marple and was looking forward to seeing one of Agatha Christie's later works having been released in 1961.I was so very disappointed in this "made for TV" movie as it was full of cliché's, miserably wrong music, incredibly bad direction and was one of those movies where I want to yell at the characters on the screen, "How can you be that stupid." I've not read the book but it appears that this could have easily have been an exceptional movie, but instead I felt that my intelligence was being assaulted more and more by the minute. The ending was a huge let-down. What a waste.