Agatha and the Curse of Ishtar

Channel 5 make another original Agatha Christie mystery movie featuring Agatha Christie turned crime investigator. This way they do not have to deal with any copyright issues relating to Marple or Poirot.

Agatha Christie (Lyndsey Marshal) has divorced her husband and gone to an Iraqi archaeological site to seek inspiration to write romance stories.

Instead she finds love with a younger man. Max Mallowan (Jonah Hauer-King) an archaeological assistant is found by Christie after he is shot. The real life Mallowan actually ended up marrying Christie.

Christie also stumbles into murder then a monkey who has been poisoned and later found hanged.

Of course this could easily be a Poirot mystery. The desert, Babylonian artefacts being looted, a tablet containing a curse, an arrogant American tycoon and oodles of death, but that character is under copyright.

So Christie and Mallowan try to unearth the killer and also find time for some hanky panky. At times it comes across as Carry on Follow that Camel with a randy couple on the excavation site and some double entendres.

This looks more expensive than last year's Agatha and the Truth of Murder. It has been filmed in Malta. It was also more playful and lighter in tone in than the previous movie. I am not convinced that it actually made it a better film. I think Marshal fitted the part better than the previous actress.

Lyndsey Marshal has a history with Agatha Christie adaptations and I believe she was a good fit for the character of Agatha in this film. However the character itself was a bit too bland. Also the story was showing random people getting killed without telling us anything about them. Agatha's lack of emoting combined with the overall care free reaction to murder of just about everybody made the film feel implausible.

Now, the acting was decent for all, without it being stellar in any way, but it was really difficult to empathize with any of the characters or feel for the history or culture of Iraq. And to top it all off, they added the artificial character of Pearl, whose only reason for existence seemed to be being an educated and attractive Black young woman who had a few scenes to complain about not being taken seriously, then proceed to be irrelevant to the story.

Bottom line: the storytelling felt amateurish and failed to compel me in any way. Too bad, because the acting was good.

Penned by the same writer who wrote last year's surprise package Agatha and The Truth of Murders, but a different actress in the lead role. Lynsey Marshall steps in to replace Ruth Bradley, and does a fine job.

It's a very slick production, it looks great, it's well filmed, and very well written. It was a good old fashioned mystery. I love the way they penned a situation for Christie. Stunning location work.

It more then made up for the lack of Agatha Christie drama on the BBC this Christmas. If only this had been transmitted on Christmas Eve or Boxing Day.

Is this a trend? Will there be another one next year? On this evidence I hope so.

I had some expectations for this, largely due to Ms Marshal's presence, and it does indeed have several high values.

But it has three features which spoiled it for me: the weirdly soporific sound quality; the dismal pacing; the, let's face it, dreadful script; the cringe-inducing stabs at romance for the lead character; these four chief weapons; -- yes, after watching it, one feels one has been entertained by the Spanish Inquisition.

This was slow and plodding. It managed to make 95 minutes feel like 3 hours. The main actress playing Agatha lacked charisma and it had a bit of an amateur feel to it, although it was made as a TV movie. On the plus side, the production values were very good, so it was a shame that it wasn't a better script with a bit more drama and played less flat. This is probably the dullest Agatha Christie related movie that I have ever seen. At least the ones made in the 80s were entertaining.