CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

Portia Hilton Blistering performances.

skiddoo This might be the only one of the Annis and Warwick versions to show them kissing. British reserve and all that. :) I very much enjoy watching these wonderful period pieces. This has some dramatic "I don't know which character to trust" moments but I think it had too many similar escape scenes. For baddies, they were very loath to kill people. :) What this story needed was fewer instances of holding people captive or more expendable characters. :)Agatha Christie apparently believed the conspiracy theory that was swirling about in those days that a general strike couldn't be an industrial action but instead had to be a sign of the end of the world as they knew it. There was one in 1926 in solidarity with the miners over their wages being reduced and hours lengthened, and no anarchy, no revolution ensued. In fact, the result was so poor for the miners that the unions decided political action was the way to go in the future rather than general strikes. Brits were as terrified by the demise of Cousin Nicky and his family in 1917 as they had been during the French Revolution with the loss of the French royals. Brits of a certain class were afraid of foreigners, afraid of the great unwashed masses, afraid of traitors within their own ranks. The economy was still struggling in the Twenties, many people felt the Great War had been horribly botched, and the Liberal party ended its disastrous run in Oct. 1922 around the time Christie's book came out and the year the USSR was formed, never to return to power up to the present day. It didn't take a seer to know that starvation wages and the threat of even worse would bring on a strike. You can only push people so far. Eight years after the war when they had sacrificed so much, they expected better. Well, that's understandable. The problem with Christie's timetable is that her book was much more 1922 than 1918. Right after the war people in Britain didn't have the heart for a mass uprising, let alone another war. They wanted some peace and quiet, and time to heal. People just wanted their lives back, damaged though they were. They were still okay with sacrifice and restrictions and the difficulty with finding a job, because that was to be expected. The story simply didn't fit the way people were thinking. And what was that draft treaty? Did Christie even have something in mind? It's fun to think what could possibly have been so very embarrassing that it would cause the masses to rise from their beds of pain in 1918 and carry out a coup, but honestly, Christie, that's lazy writing. So...if the US comes in on the side of Britain in its darkest hour against Germany, the US gets...the first born son of every Brit? Canada? The Prince of Wales as the president's chauffeur? What is sufficiently embarrassing to cause the demise of the nation and WWII? I'm not an expert on British politics but wouldn't the party in trouble just face a no confidence vote and/or an election? So I am taking away two points for the over-abundance of rescues and the premise behind the plot. But I still like Tommy and Tuppence. :)

dsewizzrd-1 Francesca Annis and James "anyone for tennis ?" Warwick are Tommy and Tuppence in this movie length introduction to the trying television series based on an early series of novels by Agatha Christie.This particular novel, one of her terrible "Herzoslovakia" ones has been adapted in attempt to save something from it. A treaty with USA is lost in the sinking of the Lusitania and needs to retrieved to save the international situation and prevent a revolution. Christie was probably referencing this to the pre-WW1 political situation in central Europe, where the changing of secret alliances between the imperial powers led to the outbreak of war in Yugoslavia - the book was written before WW2 (published 1922).Tommy overhears a conversation in a manky house in Soho and they become embroiled in the affair. Product placement – The Daily Mirror (which owned the LWT licence at the time).

bkoganbing The Secret Adversary was Agatha Christie's novel which launched her Nick and Nora Charles characters of Tommy and Tuppence. This story shows how they met and the first case they got involved in.It was back on the Lusitania in 1915 when both were passengers. Some other passengers on that ill-fated ship were involved in a lot of intrigue relating to the late World War. That's over now, but Toria Fuller during the chaos of those passengers abandoning the torpedoed ocean liner grabbed herself a piece of a secret treaty and has had it for lo these many years.Now some Bolsheviks want it to stir up some revolution in the United Kingdom. There's a cell of them operating under the lead of the illusive Mr. Brown. British Intelligence knows about Brown, but no one knows who he is.James Warwick and Francesca Annis as Tommy And Tuppence renew their acquaintance from the Lusitania and get themselves involved in the case as a pair of amateurs. They're needed because the Bolsheviks seem to know all the professionals. They prove to have a knack for solving mysteries.A lot of this might seem melodramatic today, but Agatha Christie was a good observer of the times this was written in. The Russian Revolution had occurred and a lot of governments were pretty uneasy in their seats of power. Christie alludes to a General Strike and she turned out to be a prophet because one did happen in the UK in 1926 a few years after The Secret Adversary came out. It was real enough to the population in the United Kingdom back then.The Secret Adversary is a good introduction to Tommy And Tuppence and proved to a pilot for a BBC series of their mysteries. Recommended for those who think Ms. Christie wrote about Hercule Poirot and Jane Marple exclusively.

CineMagier Having just read the book, I went looking to see if a film had been made and found this. I felt the filmmakers did a very fine job in two hours and stayed very true to the original story. The actors playing Tuppence and Tommy were a little too old for their characters but looked youthful enough to pull it off.Other reviewers complain about Gavan O'Herlihy playing the American, Hersheimer, however I felt he was believable in the role and didn't distract at all from the story. The scenery, props, clothing, autos and music are authentic to the story's time frame of around 1920 and so even though it was made in 1983, it doesn't feel like an "80's" production and for Christie fans, is definitely worth seeing.