fordraff
If this film were a spoof, a send-up, a parody of a typical PBS Mystery Show, it would succeed admirably. But it is not. We are intended to take it seriously, and suffer a 160-minute disaster, which proves again that the PBS Mystery Show is off the rails.This film starts promisingly by introducing us to Dr. Edmund Bickleigh and his older, overbearing wife, Julia. But it never makes clear how this mismatched couple came to be married. Julia was of the upper class and remains a snob. Edmund Bickleigh had told Julia and others that his father was a doctor, but in reality, his father was a quack who sold a nostrum made of gin, chalk dust, and sugar syrup that his father and mother cooked up in their kitchen. With no explanation of how this twosome met and came to marry, we'll just have to accept their marriage as "the given" of this show. Plausibility is definitely not this film's strong point.Into a nearby mansion moves the young and beautiful Madeleine Cranmere. Beautiful is probably not the correct word--flashy, trendy, and perhaps even tacky would be more appropriate to describe her looks. Anyone with an iota of sense would understand immediately that this woman was a phony and on the make. But not Edmund. He quickly falls in lust with her, and with her ardent encouragement, they begin an affair--a sexless affair, however, for Madeleine always stops Edmund before they can have sex. Her object is marriage to a rich man, for she is actually broke and on the lam from French debt collectors.Madeleine is supposed to be the femme fatale of this mystery, but she is so badly acted by Megan Dodds that she's a caricature, a hoot--appropriate for a spoof but not a serious film. Even her obvious blond wig was funny. In every scene that she appeared, I watched closely to see how bad her acting would be.At this point, viewers will fall out of sympathy with Edmund, and the film begins to fail, for there is no other character to sympathize with. Edmund is obviously a fool propelled by his gonads, hot to trot with any available woman. We learn that Julia knows of several affairs Edmund has had over the years but ignored them because the women were "lower class." The remaining characters are domineering (the wife), nags (Ivy), liars and fakes (Madeleine), adulterers, drunks (Madeleine's husband Denny), stupid, unperceptive (Rev. Hessary Torr), gossips, hypocrites, etc. The viewer is set adrift and can only watch what has now become a predictable drama unfold.To be able to marry Madeleine, Edmund plots to kill Julia and does so. But it's too late. By the time Edmund has administered a fatal dose of morphine to Julia, Madeleine has already agreed to marry Denny Bourne, a rich young alcoholic. In his eagerness to stop this marriage, Edmund declares himself available, stupidly revealing to Madeleine that Julia is dead--BEFORE Julia's body is found and their maid phones Edmund at Madeleine's place to inform him of his wife's death.The plot goes on and on, ricocheting from one film noir cliché to another, eventually ending up with the biggest cliché of all--Edmund found not guilty of the murder he did commit but convicted and hanged for one he did NOT commit.We have a trial scene here that marks the nadir of the film and perhaps of the entire PBS Mystery Series itself. The judges are stereotyped bewigged old farts asking their long, involved questions in plumy tones. The spectators hum and haw and gasp on cue. If this film were a spoof, this courtroom scene would be perfection."Malice Aforethought" has already been made once for the Mystery series. Why did we need another version, and a poor one at that? Is this what PBS is using my donations for? The new Miss Marple series gives the old woman a backstory consisting of an adulterous relationship with a soldier who is killed in World War I, a Miss Marple who reads Raymond Chandler (Could anyone be further from Philip Marlowe than Miss Marple?) and, in the first episode's conclusion, the grisly reality of showing the two culprits being readied for their hangings. Please! No more of this Marple series for me, despite Geraldine McEwan.According to Spoto's biography of Alfred Hitchcock, page 341, just after Hitchcock had finished "I Confess," Hitchcock wanted to turn Malice Aforethought into a film starring Alec Guinness as the mild-mannered but murderous doctor. However, Guinness would not be available to make the film for at least a year, so Hitchcock went on to "Dial M for Murder." I wonder what Hitchcock would have made of this novel had he filmed it. Hitchcock made some stinkers in his day, but I don't think he would have made one this bad
pandatopino
I thought this was unusually good - there was enough irony, a sense that he story was presented a little tongue-in-cheek, that it was easy to suspend disbelief. Had the drama been entirely 'straight,' the fact that more or less all the characters were unsympathetic would have been annoying - one must care what happens in order to keep watching.Instead, the very self-aware tone well complemented the fine acting and the later plot twists.I am interested that the original novel dates from 1931 and is said to have been generically significant a) by exploring the psychology of a murderer and b) in that the identity of the murderer is known at the very beginning; the 'mystery' is therefore whether he gets away with it, and indeed, who else he intends to target.
lamps
What a lovely, absorbing production. Bursting with period style supported by actors clearly enjoying the opportunity given to them. Ben Miller especially and intensely so.Even the most grotesquely contrived modern TV soap story line would struggle to compete with this dark plot. Love, sex, greed, jealousy, murder most foul and to cap it off, a twist in the tail.Most of all I enjoyed the pace. I dare say the whole thing could have been crammed into a Miss Marple style one hour afternoon TV filler but thankfully it wasn't. Three hours was timed to perfection. Enough time to absorb the period whilst the plot unfolds at a suitably measured pace.Unlike some two part TV dramas, there's no padding. We don't experience the disappointment of a promising first part followed by a damp squid second.A credit to all involved, especially it's producers.
citadel90
I had the great pleasure of watching installment one of this film on PBS last night. All I can say is "wow." The Brits have, done it again! Amazing setting, great costuming and Ben Miller as Dr. Edmund Bickleigh is amazing.I am an independent director and am preparing a short film for the State of Virginia set in the Revolutionary War and if we weren't so short for time (and sadly, budget, I'm sure Ben would cost a packet) I would SCRAMBLE to get him to play SOME part in this film! He has an intensity that I have not seen recently and his character is entirely believable.The rest of the cast is just as impressive: Barbar Flynn, Lucy Brown, all of them absolutely amazing.If you haven't yet seen this film and have the opportunity to do so, I could not recommend it more enthusiastically.Semper Fidelis, Sean Annapolis, MD
