Agatha Christie: Inocencia trágica

Before you start watching this, you should know that the story has been rewritten, it's not exactly like the one in the book. Now that that's out of the way, without complaining about the fact that this wasn't an adaptation as much as it was a rewrite, I'm just going to say what I thought about it as a movie not as a story.

The actors did their best, there weren't any moments when I found the acting to be questionable. They had depth, were three-dimensional and just made the story interesting. I've got nothing bad to say about the actors or the characters.

The plot was intriguing, but an exciting story is expected from an Agatha Christie adaptation. It had depth, it definitely keeps you on your toes and again, nothing bad to say about that.

The directing wasn't as good as I wanted it to be. It is a bit excusable, considering there was quite a wide variety of scenery and an intriguing plot, so it didn't need some amazing directing, although as I have previously said, it could have been better.

Summing up, it's a great mini-series to watch, I definitely recommend it. You shouldn't watch it if you expect the story to be exactly like Christie's book. I didn't really mind that, it felt like a gust of fresh air. I'm actually giving it a 8.5/10.

First, I didn't read Agatha Christie and didn't know the story before hand.

I found the whole thing a bit of a mess. The editing, directing, story/script, and acting were all annoying. There was no tension or real suspense, but I did stick through to the end because it was bearable and I did want to see the reveal. I also hoped it would get better...which it did, slightly. The last episode was the best because it had movement, but the whole of the story plodded along with unlikeable characters, flashbacks, and just didn't have anything clever or gripping in the way it was written or acted out IMHO!

5.5 stars for me. Feb2024.

Evidently the writer thinks critics of her are 'b*****s' and will kick off at you if you dare criticise. Actually she only really borrowed the characters and a few of the story traits. It is nothing like Christie, more TOWIE meets Stephen King. She'd have been better off rebadging this as 'inspired by'. Maybe shed have attracted less flack, but controversy sells! Christies fnas will be very confused, little of the original remains. Overall its not bad but lacks that real understated Christie class. It's brash and tarty. Youll hate everyone and not really care what happens by the end of the first part. Not a good start...

A darker adaptation of an A.C. work. No Marple or Poirot (good) a straight forward mystery with plenty of red herrings. Re-worked by Sarah Phelps ,sometimes these are overworked, get boring. This one wasn't. Morven Christie, who I'm a big fan of, was certainly in total control of her part and acted out in style. Nice to see Bill Nighy playing it straight to the end, not his usual cameo of an aging rock star. I also liked that they used a reverse of film and clock as not to confuse you in stating a look back in time. A mystery with twists and turns to the very end, supported by a fine cast.

This is a superb show. Period. I really dislike it when people come in with this "I read the book"" approach and "blah blah blah is different". WHO CARES! Enjoy the show.

Are people only allowed to use Christie stories with strict adherence to the book (rhetorical). That would be ridiculous. Is she sacrosanct?+

This is simply a superbly acted, superbly directed, very enjoyable story. Now look at what's happened to the rating because Christie extremists come in with this snotty attitude. Really too bad. Please get the popcorn and judge for yourself.