pyrotechnic67-889-392816 I gave up on this mess when they we 1/4 way through and had introduced at least 8 new characters in a remote family castle that all could have been guilty. Screams coming from a detached house, etc., etc, I haven't read the Christie book, went to the 'net to find out at where this thing was going and discovered the only thing in common with the book was the title. Liked Hickson more as Miss Marple as well. This one presents as nothing so much as being an old busy body who needs to mind her own business.

bkoganbing Julia McKenzie becomes the latest in a long line of actresses to essay the part of Agatha Christie's spinster sleuth Miss Jane Marple. She may look like she's engrossed in her knitting, but she doesn't let anything escape her attention.In this story McKenzie is joined by two young companions, in fact one of them is young Sean Biggerstaff who finds a dying man on a cliff near his home. He lives long enough to give the words of the title as his last words. So why didn't they ask Evans, whomever Evans is? The trail leads them to the Savage family mansion and this is one crazy crew. Two brothers who were the breadwinners died and the rest are a lot of upper crust wastrels with no intention of being anything else. That leads to opening up a large can of worms and an elaborate murder plot that claims another victim and the final victim is still a target.By this time McKenzie and Biggerstaff are joined by Frankie Derwont who must have read some Nancy Drew books imported from America. She's a persistent young woman and Biggerstaff and her have some chemistry, but it takes time to gel.Christie stories are timeless and the BBC has a new Marple who looks like she's enjoying the part.

benbrae76 Yet another terrible "Marple" adaptation of a non-Marple/Christie novel. Except that, despite the producers' insistence that it's based on Dame Agatha's novel, it ain't based on Dame Agatha's novel. They hadn't even the decency to tone down the words "based on" to perhaps "as suggested by but nothing like", as once again their hack writers have been encouraged to get busy with the hatchet. If they want to carve up Agatha Christie's great plots into sub-standard ones because they haven't the intelligence to think up their own original plots, that's OK by me, but please...find new names for the characters, and new titles for both the series and the episodes within it...and keep Dame Agatha's name off the credits!!I'm all for exploring characters and making improvements in any plot, but considering that Agatha Christie books (alongside the Holy Bible and the works of William Shakespeare) are the best sellers of all time, and the most ever translated works worldwide, it would seem to me that her original characters and plots don't need either exploration or "improvement". The arrogance of the producers and screenwriters of this series in taking on such a futile and totally unnecessary task astounds me! I can't for one moment imagine that Agatha Christie would approve of this adaptation, nor indeed most other offerings in this dreadful "Marple" series. Neither can I understand those in authority of her estate approving it, so one has to wonder how and why it has been allowed to be screened under her name. Surely the estate can't be that hard up for a dollar or two? So why allow Dame Agatha's genius to be insulted and belittled in this way? The magic of Christie's writing is the simplicity and ease in which she weaved complicated plots with believable characters, which were always solved with logical denouements, not as in these "Marple" adaptations where most plots have been turned into chaos with illogical denouements, and with characters turned into cardboard cutouts, by inferior writers and producers who think they know better than she did.Right from "reel one" there are numerous holes in this implausible new plot, and the actors seem to sleepwalk throughout an utterly tedious script. To combat the tedium however, for the male viewers there is the beautiful Georgia Moffett to drool over, and Sean Biggerstaff and Rafe Spall are suppled for the female viewers. Apart from that there's very little going for this fiasco. One is thankful that the Hickson/Marple adaptations have been preserved, for both posterity and for the sanity of true Christie fans.

sharkey197 This novel of Christie's is one of my favorites for its charm, it's wonderful characters of Frankie and Bobby and it's immensely witty plot. It was wonderfully adapted already into a magnificently faithful version which had superb costumes, but the way. This mishmosh bore no resemblance to the novel and was poorly acted as well. Why would any writer think they could take an Agatha Christie title and then just change it around into something better? When Perfection has been reached, there is no where else to go. If the writer is such a great writer, let him write his own mystery story.Please, please stop making these awful, embarrassing adaptations and leave Agatha intact before someone who doesn't read her books tunes in and thinks this is really her work. They will wonder why her reputation has lasted nearly 100 years.