BroadcastChic Excellent, a Must See

Ketrivie It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

Casey Duggan It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Bene Cumb Agatha Christie is a certain token, she is still popular, but that has also brought along lots of bad imitations. We have seen Poirots and Marples of different looks and ages, speaking different languages and acting in environments vaguely resembling the real Christie... But in the series in question there is no "fixed" detective at all (atypical to Christie); thus there is a real need that all characters should be equally important and distinct. In my opinion, Phelps/Viveiros have captured the roots artfully (mood, flashbacks, suspense), and the selection of performers is excellent as well - all are up to their task, in spite of their age and experience, there is no such thing that more famous actors' characters last up to the end, etc. And again, I did not guess who the murderer was (I can't remember reading the book or seeing other versions of it); although, wise after the event, I could have. So, in any angle, a great miniseries, to them fond of British style and "old-school" relations, communication and outfit.

tinyfrecklegirl I did not enjoy this mini series. The first part was alright. Intriguing plot, good actors, good mystery, slightly spooky but that's kind of the point.Fast forward to the second installment which just plummeted. I found it unnecessarily gory and all the characters were just sick people. Not one of them was redeemable. Well, maybe the one played by Aidan Turner (his name escapes me, actually all of their names escape me because it is a memory I am trying to repress) simply because he's played by Aidan Turner. But all of the characters are just sick murderers. Sure the twist may have been a good one and I actually didn't see it coming but it still ended terribly. They all died in end making it feel like a complete waste of time. Frankly I hated it and I wish I hadn't watched it. I realise that there are other people who enjoy this sort of thing and that's good for them but I definitely do not. To be fair maybe I should have researched Agatha Cristie before watching this.

gevshek Everything was marvelous - acting, casting (except for Blore; actor was magnificent, but Blore has to be somewhat more fat indeed), decoration, costumes...Except, some little, yet crucial details:1) Scotland Yard phase, together with a small footage of Judge killing all others without being detected, can be shown in the end, also without forgetting the letter-and-bottle scenery. Therefore, they could stick to the real ending. Also, for making it a little fancy, the maintenance boat (Narracott) could bring police force to the island after "X" days, as a pre-order by Owens in the beginning. Due to the fact that Narracott was ordered to stop delivering goods after a while will definitely make the police force to search the killer inside the house - as there won't be any U.N. Owen at all, despite the invitation letters. This was missing in the original books also.2) Judge's suicide is really messed up. He has to be found in the alleged/assumed death place of his, which was his bedroom, just like in the real book. Not only the aiming and the distance can be both figured out by policemen easily in this series' version, but also the wine setup was a poor one, considering that no one else had touched that glass other than Wargrave. However, instead, there was a hint given by Emily Brent - one of her knitting wool ball was missing, which could be used for the elastic mechanism for the final suicide of the Judge just like described in the original book edition.3) Addition of "cocaine mayhem", sexual intercourse of Vera and Lombard and enhancing Marston's role were really good additions. "Bear clock - bear attack" and U.N. Owen/A.N. O'Nyme alterations were both nicely done. But Judge was giving the hint in the second episode: He was supposed to be unable to walk or act in quick motion, but in order to preserve the pre-fixed death que, he ran to save Vera's life when she threw herself desperately to the sea in episode 2. He ran. And acted quicker than before for a certain amount of time after that. He couldn't really keep it in low profile perfectly. That put him into Blore's and Lombard's suspect list, actually to the head of that list. He was considered as being able to commit all those crimes, maybe due to such physical action of him in the second episode.4) Making Brent a potential lesbian and child abuser was well thought. However, her being a nurse was a factor that drove Armstrong more crazy as she could be the nurse in his failed famous surgery. Also, if she was in fact an abuser, she didn't confess her true guilt before dying. 5) Letters of each and every "Soldier" had to be shown to other Soldiers at some point in a crime scenery of this magnitude. That was clearly missing. Additionally, Blore has to possess a gun, just like in the original series, in order to make the potential "assumed alive Armstrong - Blore" confrontation more unbalanced in favor of Blore. 6) No diaries were kept by either of the Soldiers. Scotland Yard was supposed to determine the death row by those up to Wargrave's presumed death.7) Unlike the book edition, accordingly cyanide incidents from Marston and Mrs. Rogers were not revealed in the end by the Judge. None of the other murders were explained in an aspect, either. Other than these, everything was perfect. This series is still a masterpiece adaptation, even in spite of these facts. One of the best adaptations from Agatha Christie saga, and furthermore, one of the best of all time.Definitely worth to see..

devinemandate *SOME SPOILERS, none of the biggest stuff* A large part of the intrigue in Agatha Christie's original novel is that the crimes committed by the ten victims are not direct murders, untouchable by the law. MacArthur sends the underling sleeping with his wife on a mission sure to kill him; Blore sends an innocent man to prison, where he dies; the Rogers couple withholds a drug which would have saved their former employer. In this film/miniseries, MacArthur shoots the underling in the back, Blore stomps the innocent man's head to pulp, and Mr. Rogers suffocates his elderly employer while his wife watches. This is sort of fine, taking the movie on its own terms, and ignoring the changes from the novel. The same goes for Emily Brent's repressed lesbian tendencies, Rogers being physically abusive of his wife, Vera and Lombard having sex, and the significant number of delusions/visions/hallucinations that aren't present in the book.But I will NOT accept some of the utterly ridiculous things that happen in the latter portion of the story. The revolver is hidden in more or less plain sight in the mouth of a bearskin rug? The same bearskin rug appears to roar and attack one of the victims during one of the final murders? The last four victims have a cocaine and alcohol party binge? In what universe does that last make ANY sense when you'd want your wits about you? Stupid. Needless. Laughable. Literally unbelievable.The Soviet film adaptation (Desyat negrityat, 1987) remains the only one worth watching for the Christie novel enthusiast, IMO. I'd call this effort on par with the one from the 40's: sort of cute on its own terms, but a pale regurgitation of the original work. Some bonus points for keeping the novel's ending and for the somewhat interesting (non-canonical) discussion between murderer and final victim.