Bluebell Alcock Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

Mathilde the Guild Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Scarlet The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Cristal The movie really just wants to entertain people.

johnniedoo Hard to pin down the year of this episode from autos. Many anachronistic models spanning more than one decade-more like 2decades. Did not spoil the episode for me as they were great to see and so many super clean, no dust or rain spots. I loved them all. 2018 now so all were vintage today.

misctidsandbits So, here we are with the redoubtable Miss Marple, a lovely Claire Bloom and a fine cast. Some of the neighborhood regulars are back, like Ms. Bantry, the maids, Inspectors Slack and Craddock. It is fun to be at Gossington Hall again, albeit under new owners. Of course, that's key to the storyline and adds to the interest. I liked Ms. Bantry before and again in this. The relationship between her and Ms. Marple is interesting. Somehow, their talks offer up a spark that leads to a rewarding line of inquiry. Inspector Slack is always an entertaining character, in attitude expressing looks, droll remarks and the die hard approach he always takes, many times in error. One review here mentions a part of the book that greatly impressed me as well. It was a description of Heather Badcock. In the allusion to her village parallel, Alison Wilde, she says, "… She didn't know what people were like. She'd never thought about them. And so, you see, she couldn't guard against things happening to her. It comes really from being self-centered and I don't mean selfish by that. You can be kind and unselfish and even thoughtful. But … you never really know what you may be doing … most people have a sense of protection. They realize when it's unwise to say or do something because of the person or persons who are taking in what you say, and because of the kind of character that those people have. But as I say, AW never thought of anybody else but herself. She was the sort of person who tells you what they've done and what they've seen and what they've felt and what they've heard. They never mention what any other people said, or did. Life is a kind of one-way track, just their own progress through it. Other people seem to them just like – like wallpaper in a room. I think HB was that kind of person."And of Ms. Badcock particularly, "… she wasn't a considerate woman. Kind, yes. Considerate – no. She would be fond of him (her husband) and look after him when he was ill and see to his meals and be a good housekeeper, but I don't think she would ever – well, that she would ever even know what he might be feeling or thinking. That makes a lonely life for a man." However, Ms. Marple did speak most of this in this adaptation, which was revealing of the woman's vulnerability to danger. Some say this is a weaker entry in the BBC Marple lineup, but I don't see it like that. The 1980 version with Taylor/Hudson et al. and Lansbury as Ms. Marple strayed more from the book - well, it's the Hollywood treatment. Some compare this BBC version to that since it came along later, but shouldn't. The BBC series is entirely truer. They did it right. The village and settings are always wonderful. I enjoy it thoroughly, one for the collection to see regularly. This gets a "well done" from me.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU The poor village of Saint Mary Mead is invaded by some American actors and actresses for the shooting of a film. The main actress was actually raised in the village before moving to America. It's obvious Miss Marple does not consider cinema actors as very respectable people, though that is no reason to kill them. But apparently it is by far enough to justify their suicide. The story is sordid about the past, but that is nearly nothing when compared with the sordidness of the present they impose onto themselves and one another. Working conditions of actors and actresses are horrific and producers are the worst exploiters that can exist and they deserve our full and complete condescending contempt. Add into that picture a couple of adopted children, rejected afterwards, and then a real child reduced to an incurable fate by German measles during the pregnancy and you have the squalid reality of this case. So it is nearly nice of Jane Marple to overlook the slight detail that the death of that actress was not entirely natural though it looks suicidal, or maybe not entirely suicidal though it looks absolutely natural, or whatever other mixture with artificial added in the lot. In one word good riddance and just hope God is just as understanding as we are not.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

tedg Commenting on film is in the long run a matter of advising on who you can trust and who you might want to avoid.I can tell you that one person who to avoid is the adapter of this, Bowen. He's been involved in other Christie adaptions and is so brutal in how he handles the core mechanics of what Christie created, he's so evil in his intent he murders the thing.So either you can avoid this, supposing what you want is a good mystery after the fashion that Christie created so wonderfully...or you can watch it and try to deduce why Bowen murdered it so, what there was about his intent that made this happen. The mystery at this level is quite fascinating, especially if you look at the other Christie screenplays he's done. Its a metadetective narrative: why did he do it? What's the motive?Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.