Mystères croisés : Signature mortelle

A good mystery gives clues that help you solve it before the characters. Some are good and some lead you the wrong way. This movie has both.

Many romance stories have the leads start out antagonistic and that's the case here. In this case Logan was justified for a while in looking down on the help offered by Tess which certainly appeared coincidental. I actually thought Logan warmed up to Tess pretty fast. These two actors have worked together several times, but I didn't think that was overly obvious. Still, the warmth starts to show.

I thought that the early scenes were a little choppy. Some of the acting was surprisingly stiff throughout. At times there was too much melodrama. The dialogue was not nearly as witty as you would hope in a movie like this. These are little things, but contribute to the overall atmosphere.

Overall, it's watchable with a decent mystery.

A gallery owner is killed during an art heist. Police detective Logan O'Connor (Brennan Elliott) finds a strangely half-filled crossword puzzle at the crime scene. He goes to the New York Sentinel to talk to a reporter and raises the interest of crossword puzzle editor Tess Harper (Lacey Chabert). She uncovers unusual clues in the puzzle. Logan is dismissive and she decides to investigate on her own.

Chabert is adorably cute and charismatic. That goes a long way in these types of TV movies. It's not surprising that Hallmark is doing a whole series of these with her. Elliott is functional although it would be great to have someone with a lot more screen presence. The basic premise is a little overly complicated. I get that these types of movies need a hook and it's getting harder to find an original premise. It's workable enough to get this franchise off the ground. Chabert is so sweetly charming that she is able to propel this initially but the sequels will determine whether this is a success or not.

As a Hallmark TV movie, I thought this one had a decent edge to it, and the chemistry between the two leads Lacy Chabert, as Tess, and Brennan Elliott, as Lt. Logan O'Connor, worked quite well. I'm a big crossword puzzle fan, so the inclusion of them into a murder mystery heightened my interest.

Yes, some of the dialogue was trite and the ending was a little lame, but it's always fun trying to decide who the killer is. Overall, the film was somewhat better than I anticipated.

Tess Harper (Lacey Chabert) is the crossword editor for a New York newspaper. She discovers that someone may be hiding clues to a string of art thefts in the crossword puzzles the paper publishes. The police think she's a crank. However, they change their opinion when one of Tess' colleagues at the paper is murdered.

I know I haven't rated A Puzzle to Die For very highly, but honestly, it's not as bad as I feared it would be. There's a reason I don't watch Hallmark films - they usually don't appeal to me. But this one, the first in The Crossword Mysteries series, really isn't half bad. There's a certain charm to the production that I enjoyed. Plus, there were several aspects of the mystery that had me engaged. Finally, I find it impossible to watch Chabert and not be drawn in by her screen presence - and that incudes her role in the dreadful Lost in Space. Sure, she's not going to win an Oscar, but she's solid enough in this movie.

So, if A Puzzle to Die For isn't half bad, that means it's not half good also. For starters, without naming names, I found some of the acting weak. And, I found way too much of the dialogue childish. There are several groan-including scenes where grown humans say the most ridiculous things. Finally, I really didn't care for the ending. I found it completely unbelievable.

Finally, even though I've only rated this a 5/10, I can see myself checking out the other films in the series. While this one may not have completely worked on me, I see enough promise to watch more of The Crossword Mysteries.

Edit: Since I finished writing this last night, I can't stop thinking about this silly film and how much fun I actually had watching it. I'm thinking I may have been too hard on it with my preconceived bias against Hallmark films. As a result, I think a bump in the rating is deserved.

6/10.

Not a bad movie..,.clever plot...well acted...well produced. But again the Canadian inferiority complex screams from the screen. The film was shot mostly in Toronto. I recognized many areas. But it is set in New York City. Why do Canadian filmmakers do this time and time again. If American filmmakers want to shoot in Canada and disguise Toronto as New York, fine. But this was a Canadian produced and Canadian tax supported production. So why wasn't it set in Toronto? Can you imagine Australia doing this? Or India? Or any other country? It is craven and embarrassing. Films should be a window on the country that produces them. What is the point of a Canadian film industry if it does not showcase Canada?