Steve Myers I am completely amazed by some of the other comments here, which claim it's a flawed if reasonable movie. The film is a remake of a classic, which wasn't that great in the first place, but this is simply dire. Let's just think about some of its points:The Acting: I use the term loosely. I'm really not sure what anyone was on when this was made. I don't know if people didn't like each other, whether they were doing it for a bet or what. I have huge respect for all the actors: Angela Lansbury is a treasure (and is probably the only one to come out the film well), Elliot Gould tries his best with this nonsense and Cybill Shephard works her socks off to try to make the role something else. But somehow everyone ends up as though they know they're not in an danger of repeating a classic and so just walk through the roles. If you watch as Cybill and Elliot deliver their lines, whether or not it was ad libbing, lots of it just looks, sounds and is played like a rehearsal - and not a good one at that.The Story: It's a good mystery story, but it comes off as fake. There is nobody to care about, nobody to go along with. Cybill's character comes across as just a plain spoiled brat. What's with the million pounds bit? I know the rest of the casehave to believe she's a bit mad and that her story isn't true, but I really wanted HER to vanish, not Miss Froy! Updating it correctly so it has the Nazi references is good, but the Nazis are played as comic-book baddies, so it's just odd. And the English are comic book goodies too. Arthur Lowe and Ian Carmichael do the roles to perfection, but you do end up wanting to slap them.The Direction, Script, Production... I'm putting all the rest of what's wrong with this in the same place. Other reviews have called this a much maligned film, but it really does deserve maligning. There's almost nothing good about it, unless you count its comic relief potential. It's too bizarre for words - some of the scenes should not have made it into a finished project.This is just a bad film; everything's wrong with it from the stereotypes to the casting to the direction to the look of the whole thing. It would be nice to look at it now and forgive it its flaws, but there are just too many of them! Any film you can't watch without cringing doesn't deserve a good review.It gets 2 out of 10 from me because of its classic heritage and because of Angela Lansbury. Otherwise it wouldn't merit a score.

Poseidon-3 Almost all the ingredients are present for this to be a charming and colorful remake of an Alfred Hitchcock classic: stunning scenery, lovely music and talented behind-the-scenes craftspeople. Unfortunately, a pair of anachronistic lead actors does everything but sink it. Shepherd plays an American heiress in the late 1930's, continually marrying and divorcing as part of a plan to glean her inheritance. From Bavaria, en route to London, she boards a train, still hung over from a night of revelry and wearing her evening gown. A kindly nanny (Lansbury) takes her under her wing, inviting her to lunch and seeing that she gets a nap during the long trip. When Shepherd awakes, Lansbury is gone and what's more, no one will admit to ever having seen her! Gould, a magazine photographer, begins to assist Shepherd, never quite sure if she has actually seen this woman or if she's hallucinating after a drunken night that continued into a tipsy morning. The duo is also aided by doctor Lom. Practically everyone else seems in on some grand conspiracy to cover up Lansbury's existence. Gould and Shepherd delve further and further into the mystery as the danger escalates. Despite her presence in other non-contemporary films such as "Daisy Miller" (another flop), Miss Shepherd has no business acting in a period piece. Though she does look nice in her dress, her manner is far too brusque and her carriage is far too contemporary to pull off playing someone from another era. Apart from that, her horrible, flat voice is completely at odds with the material and she simply can't muster up any enthusiasm for the proceedings. At one point, Gould accuses her of being hysterical and yet she's just as sedate and unexcited as she was before. Her makeup looks, at times, clownish, with all the highlighter applied under her eyes paired with bright blush. Gould, another actor who should only be cast in present day projects, gives into one concession for his period role. He parts his unruly hair and tries to mush it down. Otherwise he, too, is all wrong for this time and setting, though at least he attempts to give a performance. They share precious little chemistry and their misguided performances threaten at all times to derail the movie. Lansbury offers up a characterization that would soon become very familiar to viewers of "Murder She Wrote", as her work here and that of the early years of the TV series are quite similar. Lom is dependably solid. Old pros Lowe and Carmichael ably portray a couple of cricket-obsessed fussbudgets who alternately help and hinder the investigation. Harper and Runacre are a pair of secretive lovers. Nedeva does well in a small role as a nun. Some exquisitely beautiful Austrian scenery helps add a bit of luster to the film, but it's not enough to plug all the holes. While the plot line is creaky (and has been used in countless other films and TV shows), it would still be irresistible if not for the jarring presence of the two leads. Fans of theirs will be far more forgiving, but those who like a little class and authenticity in their films will be put off by their frequently obnoxious characterizations.

Ilovehandbagsandshoes I haven't seen the original but I watched this with 1 hour delay on two channels simultaneously, I was at home with a cold at the time and feeling very sorry for myself. Anyway, if you would just put the two leads aside for a moment (although Eliot Gould was SO cute in the movie and Cybil Shepperd did the visual pun of Marilyn Monroe on the air vent very well when she gets out of the train...) The thing I really liked about this film were the characters of Charters and Caldicott - they made me laugh hysterically - there they are drinking tea - understating this understating that - then suddenly.....they are really terrific minor characters. I would love a whole film on those two. Very affectionate look at English manners. ARTHUR LOWE MADE ME FORGET HOW ILL I FELT!

pawebster The story is silly -- well, preposterous really, but it's great fun.I agree that the Shepherd and Gould are a bit tiresome and overdone, but in fact, on the whole, they're fun too.The best feature of the film is Angela Lansbury. She is brilliant as the nanny, catching every nuance with perfection, and should have had some kind of award for her performance.The cricket fans are good and Gerald Harper is also convincing and chilling as the hard-hearted adulterer.It is refreshing to see a film where there are no computer effects, and where real locations are used. I don't think we'll see too many films made this way again.