Mistero a Crooked House

I have not read the book, so I'm unable to make comparisons. Seeing as Agatha Christie thought this to be her best book, I'm guessing the novel was 10x better than the movie.

I felt the film itself moved quite slowly, despite being nearly 2 hours long. I felt myself at points losing interest. I'm thinking we needed a Marple or Poirot in this to spice it up a bit! I'm absolutely obsessed with the Poirot series; I find it thrilling, jam packed with twists, and so when I come across any Agatha Christie adaptation, I'm expecting them to live up to these high standards, but this fell short. I don't believe there was enough time with the suspects for the audience to build cases against them. However I must say that the big reveal of the actual killer left me speechless, it made up for the rest of the movie being quite boring, otherwise my score would be a lot lower. I'd say instead of big named productions, stick to the BBC/ITV adaptations of Agatha Christie's work....so much better.

By the way Glenn Close was fab.

If you liked: Knives Out Murder on the Orient Express Ten Little Indians

This is a yet another modern film adaptation of Agatha Christie's mystery crime stories. Now, it isn't that I've never heard anything good about this film; I've actually never heard anything at all, which is surprising, considering how much I enjoyed it. A huge family house, a murder, everybody is a suspect - classic, what else do you want? I liked the story, I liked the cinematography and directing, and the acting was also ok; however, this film, like "Murder on the Orient Express"; which is also based on Agatha Christie, got very mediocre reviews; and I think I now understand why.

First reason is that I'm a bit too obsessed with detective stories so I might let everything except for the mystery elements slide because I'm so immersed in trying to guess the outcome myself. So, if the story is good, I don't notice anything else that might be bad, but that's only for detective films. Despite that, I did notice that the film kept tilting dangerously towards a melodrama, which I hate in any kind of movie that isn't a melodrama (my problem with Hitchcock's "Vertigo" as well); but overall it didn't seem too unnecessary and distracting. Another reason could be that most people who gave this film bad reviews, especially the critics, are actually familiar with Christie's work (I'm more of a Conan Doyle guy) and are comparing it to the novel rather than to other detective movies. So, for them, after a while "there is not a great deal happening plot-wise, with the programme not so much gripping us as drifting pleasantly by". Perhaps when you already know the outcome the adaptation itself isn't that great; although on the other hand once you've read the story first it's almost next to impossible to perceive it as a film and compare it to films; rather than to see it as an adaptation and compare it to the book; so I don't blame them.

I enjoyed it a lot more than "Orient Express", and it was the first film that was very similar to "Knives Out" (which I loved), so it is a film I recommend; especially if you know nothing about the story.

I enjoyed the film. That is personal choice, which I imagine is the whole point of a review. I was not aware that as suggested by one reviewer, an opinion was any less valid because " five reviewers have only been members for two weeks " or because another reviewer is such an expert on Agatha Christie, that they think the author is a " HE " and this was " his favourite work ". in itself odd, given that Christie herself frequently said it would be " And then there were none " ? I enjoyed the film, that does not guarantee that everyone will. But at least watch it, then you will know. OK ?

It is so wonderful to see Agatha Christie's work still in demand, on the small and big screen alike. Brave to see the production team take on Crooked House, a feat never before attempted. The results are pretty good, as a novel I think Crooked House is one of her best, it is outstanding, so the story is not in question, firstly it's quite a faithful adaptation, and they were brave enough to stick with the shock ending. The acting is excellent, Glenn Close is commanding in every single scene, showing the class act she is. Gillian Anderson and young Honor Kneafsey also impress. The settings and fashions are flawless, it looks wonderfully glamorous, and is again in keeping with the text. If I were being critical I would pick on some of the editing and cutting, at times it was a bit clunky, which is a shame because the core elements are strong.

I'm always glad to see a new production from Agatha Christie's catalogue of brilliance. More please, 7/10

More than 40 years after her death, the almighty Mrs. Agatha Christie is more alive than she ever was! I've been a massive fan of her work since many, many years, so you can imagine how ecstatic I am with this Christie-revival. The BBC still regularly produces fancy mini-series based on her work (recently there was another great version of "And then there were none", starring Sam Neill and Charles Dance) and within one and the same year there were no less than two large-budgeted film productions with impressive cast ensembles. Kenneth Brannagh played it safe, with another umpteenth but nevertheless enjoyable interpretation of "Murder on the Orient Express", but most of all I was looking forward to the very first adaptation of the fantastically bonkers - and Agatha's personal favorite - story "Crooked House".

At first, I was a bit concerned regarding the choice of director. The French born Gilles Paquet-Brenner's first film "Walled In" really sucked, and he didn't do a very impressive job transferring Gillian Flynn's powerful novel "Dark Places" into a compelling thriller, neither. But hey, maybe it's because I'm biased regarding the source material, but "Crooked House" nevertheless became a good old-fashioned and absorbing mystery-whodunit with a stellar cast, lovely decors and a thoroughly ominous atmosphere. But it's the phenomenal story that is domineering here. Like I said, I'm biased, but if the novel is faithfully adapted it's difficult to ruin a good Agatha Christie tale. If you haven't read the novel or read any plot spoilers, I dare you to guess the denouement! The dead of 76-year-old family patriarch and self-made millionaire Aristide Leonidès quickly turns into murder when it's discovered that his insulin got replaced by a lethal poison. Leonidès large and entire family, including a sexy young wife and a sister-in-law from his previous marriage, all live together at the immense family estate and, in familiar Agatha Christie style, each had a motive to murder the overbearing old man. His beloved granddaughter Sophie enlists the help of private detective, with whom she had a brief romantical history in Cairo, but he doesn't make a lot of progress in unmasking the culprit.

For people who aren't as obsessed with Agatha Christie than me, "Crooked House" is perhaps slightly overlong and admittedly it takes too long before the second obligatory incident occurs. Meanwhile, however, there are many great dialogues and a continuously mounting suspense to enjoy. The young cast members (Max Irons, Stefanie Martini, Honor Kneafsey) do a more than adequate job, and it's always a pleasure to see some veterans, like Glenn Close, Terence Stamp and Julian Sands.