Avaliações de usuários

First the good news: wardrobe and locations are exquisite. The actors are very good, especially Anjelica Huston as the matriarch of a despicable family. Now for the bad stuff: why oh why add absolutely unnecessary characters into one of the finest plots Agatha Christie ever wrote. The dialogues are stilted and absolutely boring. The language, contrary to the setting, is much too modern and sometimes very crude. For the life of me, I don't understand the importance of a cunnilingus scene on the stairs. It just makes no sense. And last, but not least: it's way too long. The whole story could've been told in 90 minutes, it's much too thin for three hours.

Why do the writers always take a perfectly crafted plot from the queen of suspense and trample it to death?

I'll never understand why the main character of the book gets cut out of the televised version every time. Also, why is everything so dark? It's like it was filmed in the middle of the night with a filter.

It's a good try, but Kay is not the 23 year old redhead party girl from the book, and several other characters don't ring true either. I'm just hoping that they haven't changed the murderer too.

Although, I could see the story being updated to the modern day with Kay as a social media obsessed influencer and Audrey as an ex-supermodel.

I'm giving it 5 stars for effort, even though it misses for changing the story unnecessarily.

I love a good Agatha Christie mystery. Years ago when young I reread the books over and over. I was excited about this adaptation, willing to give it a try because I like Angelica Huston and Mathew Rhys. Unfortunately this version had to muck with a really good Agatha Christie "who-dun-it" mystery. This version has changed characters, omitted some characters, overcomplicated their motivations for murder and switched who got murdered first, changing the plot line which dulls the mystery. Even the detective is swapped from Inspector Battle to Leach which is ironic because the name switch symbolises how the story has been dulled down from dramatic to boring. Leach is drowning in alcoholism and is suicidal which makes him overly dark and not compelling to watch. Angelica Huston is too passive, not dominating or caustic enough to murder, only rich. It's dark, not the plot, but rather the filtering chosen for filming is dark & grimy in a weak ploy to create mystery. It's simply annoying as the character's faces are difficult to see in the dark. Dialogue & plot should create the mystery rather than cinematic filters. Sex scenes are used also to create drama which is another by-product of a weak plot line. Christie employed flirtatious characters, but true to her era didn't use overt sex to tell a story, instead Christie always produced a good plot line with witty dialogue. Worst of all, the story is very slow. Christie skilfully wrote Towards Zero with a delayed murder, but this version can't pull that off and when they change the order of the murder plot lines, it jumbles the mystery right out of the story. The few positives are that the setting & costumes are period-rich with details that make the show nice to view.. But even this is dulled by the overused dark filters chosen for this version. Unfortunately setting & costumes can't trump the importance of plot & dialogue for drama. With weak story telling, this version isn't worthy of Dame Agatha Christie. Her descendants promote this film, as it's a money-making legacy for the corporation Christie has become, but I think Agatha the writer would be disappointed.

The good thing about this was it was just 3 episodes long and, being bbc who don't spend big bucks on the same old actors allowed me to watch the show rather than thinking "What have I seen them in before?" For me the story was too slow at times with a lot of filler (an hour is an hour on bbc unlike other channels that only need 45 minutes) but it was still engaging.

Waiting a long time for the first murder wasn't helpful but that was the whole point of the story we are told.

I was losing interest until Audrey and Neville became intimate on the stairwell in episode 2.

A strange ending it has to be said after twists, turns and double buffs.

I can see why this hasn't been given the same publicity as on social media that other re went dramas have received.

Watchable but you won't miss anything if you don't.

The ABC Murders was much better.

Enjoyable tosh I'd say. Love seeing the mega-rich come unstuck. Love Agatha Christie too so this was a must-see. Looks great, lovely photography.

Reviewer kristhebass mentions the Black barrister played by the excellent Clarke Peters, as if this was an anachronism. This reviewer may be interested to know (but probably won't want to know) that the first Black barrister to practice in the UK was in 1884. No, Agatha Christie probably didn't mention any character's ethnic background so basically anyone could be cast. It's not as if it's 'unhistorical' in this instance. Oh and I think the 'maid' is more of a lady's companion, as she quite clearly states in the first episode.

It's as though no one actually read the book this story was from. Absurd casting. Poorly acted. Poorly portrayed. Poorly rewritten.

What on earth did they do with Audrey?

Where on earth was inspector Battle?

The sets were great. Anjelica Houston was terrific, but the good stops there.

The choice of actress for Kay was just bizarre. How was *she* supposed to be the temptress that took Neville away from Audrey??

Audrey's character is completely unrecognizable.

Speaking of Kay, what on earth was the purpose of her ex being there?

The entire production was just stupid. And a complete waste of time to watch. Slow. Broody. Boring.

The comments regarding the ethnicity of the barrister are unsurprising I'm afraid. I thought that some of review's would mention this & clearly have an issue with it. But the callousness & brutality of their comments never ceases to amaze me. How can some people can be so triggered & really downright ignorant when they see a person of colour in a period piece, especially a work of fiction. I thoroughly enjoyed this adaptation so much that I watched the episodes back to back. This is what the BBC does so well. Programmes should be representative & inclusive of all viewers after all people of colour are licence fee payers too. Bravo.

Neville Strange, a celebrated tennis player goes through a messy divorce with his wife Audrey, who has legitimate grounds after Neville had an affair with the glamorous Kay. Neville takes his new wife to visit his wealthy Aunt, Lady Tresillian, it just so happens that Audrey has been invited as well.

I was truly looking forward to this, as I do with any Agatha Christie adaptation, but in recent years it's been a case of approach with caution.

There are lots of changes, let's be clear, it's altered from the book, with several characters perhaps very different, that said the core essence is still here.

The best element has to be the visuals, it is a stunning looking production, an area where The BBC still thrives, expect stunning clothes, great sets, and as it's set at Burgh Island, expect a terrific location, one Agatha Christie fans will know very well.

The issue I had, the pacing, it is very slow to get going, it takes the best part of two episodes to see an actual murder, they spend an age introducing the characters and building the murder, heading Towards Zero.

I wish they'd put this on over Christmas, it may have added an extra bit of sparkle, putting it on at the start of March felt a little odd, this was a big production.

Not as bold as some of the more recent Agatha Christie adaptations, I don't think it held a candle to the stunning adaptation of And then there were none, in comparison it felt a little bit flat, but all in all it's a good adaptation, and the feel of the book is captured well.

Anjelica Huston steals it as Lady Tresillian, but there are good performances all round, Jack Farthing in particular was excellent.

7/10.

This is only the 2nd title that I've ever rated a "1," the other being "Hit Man" (2023), because both are, at least arguably, criminal exploitations. Screenwriter Rachel Bennette didn't adapt "Towards Zero," she vandalized Agatha Christie's book. The series is all but unrecognizable from the original, which is a callous betrayal of the author as well as her readers.

The name for this practice is bait-and-switch. The Christie name and title lured me to watch, only to find myself confused. I had to forget the original story because, except for names and setting and some plot points, it was a new tale, and not a better one. Ms. Bennett and director Sam Yates treat Christie as a brand, not a respected author, and it is no accident that they chose a writer who is popular enough to lure a built-in audience to help carry their shameless ambition.

They aren't the only predators who treat Christie's work as raw material, then degrade it with gaudy modernization. Kenneth Branagh has increasingly taken extreme liberties with her books. As with "Towards Zero," I become confused watching his latest, and worst adaptation, "A Haunting in Venice." Again, I had to forget the original plot to even follow his travesty of it.

It's the height of arrogance for filmmakers to presume they can improve on Christie. It's also naked greed. Bait-and-switch is illegal in advertising, and it should be criminalized in general.

Fantastic Christie adaptation in my view with all the wonderful twists and turns of the novel elevated by a cast and crew that seemed to get it and how to adapt well for screen, even the editing into 3 parts was well done. Great filming locations gave gravitus to the period settinf and the acting was great. One of the best in a while and one hopefully most Christie enjoyed a lot. Enough here to keep even non fans interest peaked I would say and I hope for more of this calibre in the future. Keep them coming BBC.... just never mention your travesty or an attempt at Poirot with Malcovich and all is well in the world of Christie at the BBC.

The second instalment sees the situations at Gull's point escalate. After a danced through afternoon at the nearby pleasure hotel with multiple partner exchanges and another troublesome newcomer in the form of a former boyfriend, Lady Tressilian is most displeased with her house guests and threatens to change her will. The love triangle at the centre concludes in two people having intimate relations in the stairwell of the house in view of everyone else, a scene that I guess was supposed to be erotic, but ended up more awkward than enticing. Soon after we (finally) get our first murder. Inspector Leach, who has survived his suicide attempt and strikes up an unlikely friendship with Sylvia, investigates the death and soon finds that things might not be as easy as they seem at first glance.

It all continues to be very pretty and glamorous, but by now the changes from the book become glaringly obvious and not all are good ones. The addition of a couple characters are fine, but the original characters suffer a little. Audrey in particular appears little more than a pretty distraction here. It's unclear why Neville seems unable to stay away from her to the point that he betrays his wife right in front of her nose - or why Audrey seems to have her heart set on prying him away from Kay after insisting on the divorce. Both of their motives for this love triangle have been done away with, leaving the central relationships a little flat in result.

BAD: Too S-L-O-W. Pace is toxic. Wasting my life does NOT entertain me.

BAD : As my OH said flatly, as they left the living room after the final episode: "Not worth the wait." Yes, indeedy, at 3h this was far too long.

BAD : Multiple lingering camera shots. These are in place of nuanced facial expressions, that should have been caught on camera for just the right - and short - duration.

BAD : Beautiful panoramas of scenery do NOT make up for a poorly turned out drama.

GOOD: Sarah Phelps - and Kenneth Branagh - had NO involvement in this production. Be grateful for small mercies.

BAD : Endless modernisations that Christie would NEVER have put in her stories. From the 'F' word to . . . Shall I bother to go on?!

BAD : Ticking boxes aplenty.

GOOD: The last 20 minutes has an energy and pace that is absent in the rest of the drama. Which makes this the only time I felt that the magic of Christie's tale's was shown on the screen. A denouement worth watching.

BAD : The problem with training the camera on the cast's faces is that it is asking the actors to just hold an expression (elegant/beautiful/etc.), instead of allowing them to ACT a part. This is one of the reasons we can't see any ACTION on their serene faces. This happened with nearly all the cast, except Matthew Rhys who was clearly asked to look haggard. No beauty appeal there, no lack of expression, as his face was all about the mental pain he was enduring with his PTSD.

BAD : The costumes, hair, and makeup were perfect, and mesmeric in their stylishness. But sadly that plus point can only end as a negative, as someone in the production team seemed to think those could make up for a poor dramatic energy.

GOOD: It's great to see some unknown faces, rather than the pile of well-knowns that often hit us these days. Let's give NEW actors a start on the ladder. A few greats I like, but when I see the face and think of the actor rather than the character they are playing, I know that suspension of disbelief is just about to fail.

BAD : WHY do they keep casting the grand dames/gentlemen of American acting, & not of Britain, in the key roles? Recent Christie adaptations have seen them in their droves. From Glenn Close, to John Malkovich, to Angelica Huston. I mean, I know they're all great actors, but I feel it's somehow product placement. Can't they find anyone in 'Stage' magazine, to fit the bill?!

GOOD: Matthew Rhys is superb. I felt truly shaken when I saw his frazzled facial expressions. And the final scenes are his strongest point. Kudos to the actor.

BAD : Unnecessary, corny, meta references to other Christie novels - the 'Blue Train' and the 'Orient Express' - plus an in-joke titter by the characters, to clarify. (As if we didn't already know . . . !)

GOOD: The setting of the gather-in-the-drawing-room finale was changed to a grass tennis court. Very original. And a fitting location for the coda to this drama. (Unlike the closure to other Christie adaptations, it wasn't a daft setting. I mean: located on the train tracks next to a locomotive engine?! . . . would you believe Branagh?!)

BAD : Style-over-substance piffle. I felt I was watching an episode of a glossy US soap. So, instead, let's get the appropriate pacing back into our TV dramas!

GOOD: What a delight to see Burgh Island on screen again (for the 3rd time). One of Christie's own haunts, and of course used in the superb film of 'Evil Under the Sun'.

BAD : I can't say how many changes they made to Christie's work, as I've never had a chance to read the book. But as this is a modern production, I reckon on a fair few. I DO know that 'Supt Battle' has been removed. And the new detective serves to replace the actions of another key character in the book, who is cut, 'Angus MacWhirter'. These alterations strike me as unnecessary, and arrogant. Will they NEVER stop changing things? After all, as the mantra goes: If it ain't broke, don't mend it.

What's interesting about adaptations from Agatha's writings are the dynamic characters. This journey towards Zero had perfectly timed surprises along the way. Any place secluded wasn't too far from mysteries for Agatha's mind, and the crossovers therefore are always scenic and satisfying. Casting was perfect and performances were sincere. Great cinematography and visuals. Scenic surroundings contrasting to the ordeal has a major impact. Good sound effects and music. Though the characters weren't introduced in length the story was attractive as much as the Poirot series and hopefully we would see more of similar adaptations. Enjoy.

Let me preface this with the fact that I have watched and read countless Agatha Christie stories. I've enjoyed great renditions of the books from ITV's brilliant Poirots and Marples, to the great Peter Ustinov, to Prime Video's 'Ordeal by Innocence', to BBC's 'The Witness for the Prosecution' and plenty in between.

I have of course also suffered through disasters like Britbox's 'Why didn't they ask evans?' and even all of those God awful Kenneth Branagh movies, but I sat through them all the same.

So as you can imagine I'm very familiar with the story Towards Zero and came in with an open mind, looking forward to a new spin on a classic. As I was watching it on BBC iPlayer I had not realised that this was produced by Britbox and not the BBC (that might have indicated what I was in for).

This mini-series was utterly devoid of good writing, acting, characters, cinematography, soundtrack etc. That I must confess I gave up toward the end of the 2nd episode. I don't do that lightly, again I sat through 3 horrendous Kenneth Branagh movies, but 90 minutes of this was a step too far.

Might I suggest instead you simply enjoy the book or watch ITV's Marple S3E3 version instead, and if you've seen those many times like me, watch literally any other Agatha Christie you can find.

Neville Strange, a celebrated tennis player goes through a messy divorce with his wife Audrey, who has legitimate grounds after Neville had an affair with the glamorous Kay. Neville takes his new wife to visit his wealthy Aunt, Lady Tresillian, it just so happens that Audrey has been invited as well.

I was truly looking forward to this, as I do with any Agatha Christie adaptation, but in recent years it's been a case of approach with caution.

There are lots of changes, let's be clear, it's altered from the book, with several characters perhaps very different, that said the core essence is still here.

The best element has to be the visuals, it is a stunning looking production, an area where The BBC still thrives, expect stunning clothes, great sets, and as it's set at Burgh Island, expect a terrific location, one Agatha Christie fans will know very well.

The issue I had, the pacing, it is very slow to get going, it takes the best part of two episodes to see an actual murder, they spend an age introducing the characters and building the murder, heading Towards Zero.

I wish they'd put this on over Christmas, it may have added an extra bit of sparkle, putting it on at the start of March felt a little odd, this was a big production.

Not as bold as some of the more recent Agatha Christie adaptations, I don't think it held a candle to the stunning adaptation of And then there were none, in comparison it felt a little bit flat, but all in all it's a good adaptation, and the feel of the book is captured well.

Anjelica Huston steals it as Lady Tresillian, but there are good performances all round, Jack Farthing in particular was excellent.

It seems from the other reviews that those who regard themselves as guardians of Agatha Christie's work see any interpretation beyond the strict as a kind of blasphemy. Does it stray from the structure of the original? Yes. Does it do so with style and originality? Yes, and Christie's 'voice' is still present. As the family's matriarch, Angelica Huston is magnificent. I haven't seen Matthew Rhys before but, as the investigating policeman, forget all Poirots and Marples, he gives terrific depth to the troubled yet somehow enigmatic detective - very watchable. All performances from the leading to the small were spot on and the panoply of other elements, from scripting to editing were equally so. The tight, absorbing three hours were a delight from start to finish. Director, Sam Yates, and the entire cast and crew should be congratulated.

Extremely poorly scripted. Dialoges are actually a pain to listen to. An orgy of commonplaces. Acting is uneven at best.

I wouldn't mind if the story is a reinterpretation of Christie's original (not all of her works are equally great anyway) but this one is just a mess. Everything feels artificial. Emotional outbreaks

The only good thing about it is the occasional jazz songs. (Not enough though to balance out the many shortcomings.) Other than that only the costumes do even give a try to set the 1930's vibe. (Not a very strong one, but a try anyway.) Everything else is just painfully out-of-time and out-of-place.

Figured I had a good Agatha Christie to watch on my day off. Bailed the whole thing once I saw the horrible modern makeup. Impossible to watch. Very bad visuals. Miss Elliot especially. What a shame. Bad accents as well. I did not waste my time and neither should you.

Was good to see Angelica Huston for a minute though.

ORDER. ORDER. <--annoying aF

Back to watching well done series.

Not this.

Now I must write one hundred and fifty characters for this to post so I will suggest an oldie but goody title Evil Under the Sun with the fabulous Maggie Smith. Make a good cup of hot tea and In~Joy!

Three evenings very well spent. Thank you, Agatha. Thank you, cast and thank you BBC. BBC's 2025 adaptation of *Toward Zero* is a masterclass in suspense! Stellar performances, especially from the lead cast, bring Christie's intricate plot to life. The pacing is perfect-slow-burn tension erupts into gripping drama. Gorgeous cinematography and a haunting score elevate the mystery. Faithful yet fresh, this version honors Christie's genius while feeling modern. The final reveal is brilliantly executed, leaving viewers stunned. A must-watch for mystery lovers-elegant, engaging, and utterly addictive. Bravo, BBC! 🎭🔍 #TowardZero #AgathaChristie.

Why not just write new stuff instead of desecrating masterpieces? Sheer laziness and arrogance to produce something by scribbling over a story which doesn't need updating, reimagining, remastering or whatever.

I could barely make it through the second episode. Not only unrecognisable but BORING! God help me, what a slog it was.

BBC and ITV, for goodness sake stop ruining Agatha Christie's masterpieces.

Or if you really must dramatise her books then do it with respect. You don't fix what's not broken and her books are far from broken. Kenneth Branagh as Poirot and David Williams as Tommy Beresford was an abomination to the senses. You do not win new Agatha Christie fans with casting like that.

Beautiful Devon landscapes, and great acting from Angelica Huston and Oliver Jackson-Cohen. All of the female leads are well cast and brilliant. One sour note is, surprisingly, Matthew Rhys. He's a little too grubby and downcast for this piece. The murder mystery itself is plausible and keeps you guessing. The production design was spot on. Beautiful deco clothing and jewelry. Hairstyles and make-up were perfect. The 1920s-30s period details were largely accurate without being distracting. One club: the modern windows in the Saltcreek house. Always great to see an Agatha Christie piece - and a lesser well-known one, get such a high level production. More, please.