Un cadavre dans la bibliothèque

I have been watching on TV the 1984 version of Miss Marple.

This one is with Joan Hickson in the eponymous role.

What a delight having been subjected to the unsuited Geraldine McEwan version (2004) series in recent times.

The difference between the two is so marked as to be astonishing.

Maybe you should watch both just to see how good Joan Hickson is.

So if you are an aspiring actress do compare and contrast.

Poor Geraldine McEwan, how could you follow what is a definitive portrayal ?

So if you like Christie and Marple - Joan Hickson is number one and second is some far distant even broad daylight. I'd say Geraldine McEwan was in the rear of the pack myself.

This gem is indeed far superior to the Geraldine McEwan version. Although it is a very good attempt and the supporting cast are superb,the period detail very good and is faithful to the book, Miss McEwan just does not have the x factor for Miss Marple. In fact with the contrived voice and the gestures she tries just that bit too hard to achieve what Joan Hickson did with so much ease.

I understand that so far only four of the series have been re-filmed out of a total of twelve, and I am sure that out of the available Miss Marple contenders. i.e. Angela Lansbury, Helen Hayes, Maragret Rutherford,Joan Hickson and Geraldene McEwan it will be found that Miss Hickson is the definitive.

While I slightly prefer A Murder is Announced(my personal favourite of the 12 feature length adaptations) and Sleeping Murder, The Body in the Library is a beautifully done adaptation of a very good book. And yes, it is much better than the Geraldine McEwan version, which was spoiled significantly by that wretched ending. I know people will say it is unfair to rag on the Geraldine McEwan adaptations, but I have to admit while I don't despise them with the exception of about four they are disappointing, particularly Nemesis, Sittaford Mystery and At Bertram's Hotel.

Back to this version. While a tad overlong and a little slow, The Body in the Library is an interesting and very worthwhile adaptation, not to mention more faithful. It is lovingly photographed, with the photography, costumes and scenery as always beautiful, and the music is lovely. The story rarely loses interest, the direction is attentive and the script is sophisticated and thoughtful. The acting once again is very good, with Joan Hickson simply terrific as Miss Marple(and I concur with the reviewers who say she was the best Miss Marple, she is certainly the warmest and the wisest) and Gwen Watford delightful as Mrs Bantry. So in conclusion, a very good start to 12 worthwhile, beautifully filmed and thoughtfully acted and written adaptations with Joan Hickson. 9/10 Bethany Cox

The ending was a total surprise. My guess as to the killer's identity was flat wrong. But, of course, once the explanation is given, the events make perfect sense. There are clues all over the place, but they're very subtle. Some are in the dialogue. If spoken words were taken at face value, we would know instantly who the villain is. Instead, we take these words only in the context of the discussion. Thus, we overlook their significance. This film is probably one of the better TV murder mysteries derived from an Agatha Christie novel.

Casting and acting are fine. As Miss Marple, Joan Hickson plays it low-key and deferential. Other actors are also a delight. Andrew Cruickshank as Conway Jefferson, Raymond Francis as Sir Henry Clithering, and Frederick Jaeger as Chief Constable Melchett enhance the overall quality of acting.

The plot does seem a tad strung out. The story doesn't really justify a two and a half-hour plot. Several sequences, especially in the first half, could have been shortened or deleted. I'm assuming the story takes place in the early 1950s, but the script doesn't really specify.

I like the spine-tingling suspense near the end. All we see of the killer is a shadowy figure and a pair of black-gloved hands. Marvelous! And Miss Marple sums up the entire story: "It's a mystery. But then we all are, aren't we? Even to ourselves, especially to ourselves".

For a Christie near-addict, I find it difficult to even watch the Geraldine McEwan versions...esp. since Hickson was so flawless! I gather Christie herself had chosen her originally. Geraldine: way to ditsy. Rutherford: trying too hard to be comical and the novels are not comedies ! Hickson is scarily CONVINCING as the amazingly shrewd, analytical "old maid" who can still flutter and cluck on occasion...but the intelligence she brings to the role should discourage others. It's like Olivier in Richard III...and possibly Henry V. Case closed; find something else to play. Also: why fiddle with the setting? Christie set it in prewar England. And the supporting cast: most of whom I gather have sadly passed on--just show how deep the "bench" was in the matter of character actors of a certain generation. I doubt you could rustle up the same caliber today.