Mistero a Crooked House

Multi-millionaire Aristide Leonides has just died, apparently of a heart attack. Private investigator Charles Hayward is approached by his granddaughter Sophia and asked to investigate his death as she believes he was murdered. Hayward takes on the case and visits the Leonides estate, questioning the family. He discovers that it is far from a simple case - the family is incredibly dysfunctional and nothing is as it seems.

Decent, though not great, adaptation of the Agatha Christie novel. Good setup with a fair amount of intrigue and mystery. Solid performances from a cast that includes Glenn Close, Julian Sands, Terrence Stamp and Gillian Anderson. Great work by 13 year old Honor Kneafsey as Josephine - she almost steals the show.

However, after a solid start, the intrigue doesn't get built on very well and the middle-to-end part drags a bit. Even more disappointing, the ending feels very rushed and out of the blue.

Another negative is the performance of Christina Hendricks as Brenda. I know she is supposed to be a femme fatale but she didn't have to try to sound like Marilyn Monroe on helium. Way overdone and quite irritating.

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 ?

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.

Seeing the negative reviews, I expected something more like the recent Orient Express remake, which was difficult to watch. This was nothing like that. It had an even, slow build to an ending that Glenn Close brings home. It was basically what I wanted from an Agatha Christie story, a bit of mystery, not too gory, and a little twist that I may have guessed, but couldn't be certain about.

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.