The Pale Horse

This would have been better without some completely pointless changes brought in to the plot. At the start there is a completely implausible attempt to suggest that Mark is suspected of being the killer. Nothing in the show suggests the police would suspect him in this way and the plot line dies quietly, having wasted a fair amount of time. Most of the performances are adequate at worst but the dialogue is often poor. One of the things which made the book successful was the way it at least played with the idea of the supernatural. No one could be fooled by the witches here. Agatha Christie was usually luckier than this in her adaptors for the screen.

I think those who despised this mini series must be Agatha Christie purists. I've never read her; don't care much for mysteries though I know she is revered. So I went into this brief series with low expectations and did n-o-t feel it was the trainwreck others had. Love Sewell in everything so that was a plus. Even liked the ending. It was watchable, perhaps because it reminded me a bit of Wicker Man or just for whatever reason...I did not hate it, nope not at all.

"The Pale Horse" is based on a late mystery novel by Agatha Christie. By 1961, her two most famous detectives had become immortalized with many novels and short stories. She would still have a few more mysteries to write about Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple as she was winding down her writing career. And with only a dozen films having been made based on her stories, there were another dozen in store before her death in 1976. But modern fans will be most familiar with the several dozen feature films and TV movies from the1970s through the first two decades of the 21st century. Of those, Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple appear in the vast majority.

This movie is quite different just in having all new characters with a very good plot. Black magic was a draw for her novel of the same title and the film. But it differs from the book in some characters, including not having Ariadne Oliver in a small part.

Christie wove a very interesting plot here. She wrote several mysteries around the supernatural, including black magic and witches. But Christie fans learn early to not suspect the dark characters of being the actual culprits in her stories. I did have suspicions about one outcome, but I really missed the conclusion and who the villain was.

The film seems to be updated to the late 1990s in England when it was made. I aways prefer her Poirot and all of her characters and plots to be set in the older and original times. Mystery fans especially should enjoy this film.

Very good actors, but one of the worst productions of Agatha Christie's works I've seen. The soundtrack tried to add to the feel of the period but only helped to make the film seem "dated". I've only recently re-discovered Agatha Christie as I had read only a couple of her books as a child in the 50's, and I've now been devouring all the works NetFlix has to offer. I've especially enjoyed Joan Hickson as Miss Marple and was looking forward to seeing one of Agatha Christie's later works having been released in 1961.

I was so very disappointed in this "made for TV" movie as it was full of cliché's, miserably wrong music, incredibly bad direction and was one of those movies where I want to yell at the characters on the screen, "How can you be that stupid." I've not read the book but it appears that this could have easily have been an exceptional movie, but instead I felt that my intelligence was being assaulted more and more by the minute. The ending was a huge let-down. What a waste.

After Sarah Phelps' butchering of the story, I was hoping this adaptation was better...

It isn't.

A lot is ommited from the book (as usual with any adaptation that isn't Agatha Christie's Poirot, which makes changes but always keep the core of the story intact), including the best character- Mrs. Oliver.

In this one, Mark witnesses the murder and puts himself in the frame, then (reluctantly) investigates to find the real killer.

Our first issue, beyond the budgetary constraints that makes the supposedly 60s setting feel token and badly done, is Mark himself. Our hero is pretty dim here, obstinate, and kind of a moron. Even though he's in the frame and a supposed artist (he doesn't seem to know anything about art), he refuses to believe anyone telling him that the other deaths are connected.

Next we have the cops, who are complete idiots on the level of a Monty Python sketch, complete with Andy Serkis with ridiculous hair and a chief inspector that constantly looks to camera with a devilish smile. I realise cops in reality are probably this inept sometimes, but I doubt they look to camera and grin about it.

Everything else just annoyed me. I think it is Mark's attitude throughout, a kind of cooler than thou attempt at James Dean that falls flat.

He looks so disinterested and dismissive, sulking his way through scenes as if his life doesn't hang in the balance.

And the rest of acting is more panto than murder mystery. Even Serkis is bad.

The women fare a lot better, with better acting from them. None of it saves the adaptation, though, which would have been a lot better if they'd stuck to the book more.