Miss Marple - Témoin indésirable

Miss Marple is visiting her friend Vera for her wedding. Gwenda is marrying Leo Argyle, whose wife Rachel was murdered two years previously. Their son Jacko was found guilty of her murder and executed. On the first night there, a stranger, Dr Arthur Calgary, arrives and informs everyone that Jacko was clearly innocent as he was giving him a lift in his car at the exact time of the murder. This news is not received well by the Argyle family.

Fairly intriguing though engagement is limited. Miss Marple is her usual bland self and there is nobody interesting to add colour. Dr Calgary was supposed to be the void-filler but he is too stammering and nerdy to be interesting. So don't expect any interesting side-plots (unlike many of the Miss Marple) episodes - just watch for the mystery.

By the amazingly low standards of the ITV 'Marple' series, this one is not bad. On the message board, the contributor 'Last picture show' points out, quite correctly, that the plot does not in fact make sense. However, I failed to notice this when watching and found the ending satisfying at the time.

Despite disfiguring the original book for insufficient reasons, this version did hold my interest. One factor was Juliet Stevenson and Denis Lawson's performances. The tragedy of Gwenda's life comes over very well. Another plus point is Julian Rhind-Tutt as Dr Calgary. He makes the part amusing without descending to silliness. In fact, everyone in the production seems to take it fairly seriously. This is a relief after the facetiousness of other episodes in this series.

As ever, there are anachronisms. We appear, as usual, to be in the early 1950s and the series designer takes great pains over this. However, it is all thrown away when the script includes phrases such as 'leg-over merchant', 'move on' (in the sense of getting over a tragedy) and - most glaringly of all - 'scam' (this last one from the mouth of Miss Marple). 'Scam' is first recorded in America in the 1960s. I doubt that it reached England before the 70s, and even then, elderly ladies like Miss Marple would hardly be likely to use it. (On the other hand, we also never thought that Miss Marple was a safe-breaker until this film!) There are more anachronisms with some of the hair and costumes.

Despite the defects, this one is worth watching.

I can't believe that there are quite a lot of people out there that don't like the New Marple. I have been a fan of Agatha Christie from a very young age (10). I've read most of the books, seen all the movie and TV adaptations. While in my opinion Joan Hickson was Miss Marple down to a tee. I thoroughly believe that Agatha Christie would have approved of the New Marple series, if she were alive today. People seem to forget that Agatha Christie was an author who was ahead of her time, and there are many themes running through her books, that when they were first published readers did not think twice about. Now however readers are a lot sharper, about reading between the lines. Some people out there who blast this series seem to forget that scripts for the new Marple have to be approved by the Agatha Christie estate before they are made, and if her own relatives approve of the series. Who are we to say otherwise?

I liked the book, didn't love it, but it was interesting. But I was disappointed after seeing this adaptation of Ordeal by Innocence-I do think that Sittaford Mystery, By the Pricking of My Thumbs and Nemesis were worse out of this set of Marple adaptations, but this is a long way from being the best. It is lovingly filmed, with nice scenery, photography and costumes, and I liked the music. Also helping elevate are a stellar cast, Geraldine McEwan is above decent as Miss Marple, and Jane Seymour is suitably nasty as the victim, while Juliet Stevenson, Denis Lawson, Burn Gorman and especially Alison Steadman turn in great work. Lisa Stansfield is also surprisingly good. Plus the direction was okay. The rest of the acting is dull however, Tom Riley is one-note and Richard Armitage, normally good at being brooding, has little to do. Hester got on my nerves and Julian Rhind Tutt comes across as too awkward and heavy on nervous mannerisms, even for Calgary Also on the other hand, the adaptation is spoilt by poor pacing(the final solution is much too rushed and the middle really does plod), a weak script and a lack of coherence in the storytelling or suspense. Plus I was indifferent to the characters as some of them are so badly written, especially Bobby's and Hester's, in fact only Mary has any real sparkle. The build-up to Rachael's character was unconvincing, we know she is resented but it could have been much more strongly depicted with more focused writing. And people are right, it does deviate from the book, and I was expecting that, but Gwenda's murder especially I felt was unnecessary. Overall, disappointing but not absolutely unwatchable, thanks to the production values and the cast. 4/10 Bethany Cox

I am sorry that some people cannot find the new artistic interpretations of the Miss Marple series refreshing. I have always enjoyed the novels of Agatha Christie as well as most of the movies/television productions based on her work. But I especially enjoy the new Miss Marple portrayed by Geraldine McEwan. I find them new and fresh and proof that these stories, though based in a bygone era, can be reinterpreted in a newer age and with a bit more color. I find Ms. McEwan's portrayal of the aging sleuth to be above reproach and I give her top marks. How boring life would be if we didn't have the freedom to re-interpret or re-invent. But I suppose those that oppose this new series also didn't appreciate "Kiss Me Kate" as it wasn't the original Shakespeare, or the miniseries "Pride and Prejudice" because new aspects to old stories had been added.