Murder Is Easy

Whilst travelling to London on a train, Luke William encounters pensioner Lavinia Pinkerton, who explains that a killer is at large in her village of Wychwood, only the locals believe the deaths are all accidents, if nobody thinks it's murder, murder is Easy.

After the likes of And then there were none, ABC Murders and Witness for The Prosecution, Christie at Christmas is back.

Well publicised, I'd been looking forward to it, I don't think it's a brilliant adaptation, but it's a good one, it's a great story, one of my favourite Agatha Christie page turners, definitely one of these more bloodthirsty texts, there are plenty of murders.

The main talking point seems to be the casting of David Jonsson, several people seemed to be upset by the change, for me, he was the best thing about this production, he's excellent throughout.

Sinead Matthews, Tom Riley, Douglas Henshall, lots of talent to enjoy.

Very nicely produced, it looks great, those scenes of London looked amazing, some wonderful costumes.

Dear BBC, can we please have more next Christmas?

7/10.

Agatha Christie has a chequered history with Tv and Film adaptations, from early Poirot characterisations that made him French, yes French. Margaret Rutherford was a fun but hardly faithful to the source Miss Marple. The recent ITV adaptations of Marple have played fast a loose with the narratives and even changed murderers at points. So, it's true to say that adapting Christie can be fraught with difficulty when it appears 'easy'.

This adaptation was a mess on many levels. From a sub Wes Anderson approach to texture and editing rhythm, strange close ups, wobbly camera work and a script that clanked along pouring exposition on top of the imposition of a post-colonial narrative - it just didn't mesh.

The ideas were bold, and in many ways could have been brilliant, just so many choices at once going away from the source material began to stress the story so much that it became vague and confused, an original piece about colonial attitudes in the 20th Century or a straight down the line thriller would have been much more effective and a much stronger choice from the BBC.

The problem with BBC commissions at the moment is their lack of vision to make original drama, they appear to want to be commercial whilst trying to service what is current and hotly debated. This leaves the BBC feeling confused and only concerned with issues that trend in London and liberal media outlets.

ITV have delivered Christie stronger, better and more radically than the BBC over the last two decades. So perhaps it would be nice to see this 'tradition' of a bbc Christie at Christmas knocked on the head, until they begin to understand how to produce drama that doesn't betray the source.

This was just a real dud.

I confess to being a lover of Agatha Christie. Having read every book and seen every ITV Poirot and all renditions of Miss Marple.

I found the beginning of this plot really gripping thanks to Miss Pinkerton aaand was looking forward to how things developed. I did not like the decision to introduce a black Nigerian character with the odd confusing vision on top of an already busy plot. I also found the pletherer of well known actors playing characature roles distracting.

The bright colours had my eyes straining and desperately reaching for the contrast adjustment on my remote.

The plot was plodding but at least it was so confusing it took me a while to work out which of the books I was watching. I realised in enough time to recall who did it and why.

I found the acting wooden throughout but to be fair it reflected the stuffy English class system of the period. The setting, costumes and cars was excellent.

I felt Fitzwilliams character out of place yet deserving of an entirely different production.

Without giving the plot away this is one of Christies more disturbing plots with a cold blooded murderer who really does find Murder is Easy witb weight added being based on more than a little truth to there being some people, such as Dr Shipman, who hide among us capable of such awful deeds. .

Well, the scenery and locations didn't disappoint. They're absolutely gorgeous (filmed in Scotland I believe).

Agatha Christie stories are pretty rote so the bar isn't too high, but this two-parter didn't manage to clear it.

The body count was really too high for Our Hero (Luke Fitzwilliam) to sink his teeth into any one murder and frankly while he did ID the killer in the end ... he was one step behind the whole way, unlike say Miss Marple.

About the casting and the plot line:

I was very distracted by the fact that David Jonsson's left eye is much smaller than his right. There are many many closeups of his face where this affected my ability to focus on the plot.

Apparently in order to justify casting a Black actor in the lead role, they gave him a back story as being from a rich Nigerian family and coming to London to work in a diplomatic post as an attache to some British muckymuck. He speaks with a posh accent and there is almost no relevance to his African background in terms of the plot.

We get some stereotypical racist comments about "mud huts" from the local high and mighty lord of the manor, but almost everybody else in the film basically just accepts him and appears virtually color-blind. In 1954 rural England? I dunno about that.

Also, he's not given much to do, other than to wander around snooping, and then give a knowing smile in almost every scene.

The dialogue he was given to say didn't help at all.

I couldn't help feeling, this would have been a much better production if they'd just stuck with a snoopy old maid like Miss Marple as the detective.

Putting a new spin on an old story is nothing new, and occasionally produces real gems, so ignore the people who were always going to hate anything that places brown faces in roles they grew up seeing white ones on TV. Despite the racism of the past, there were a good number of notably successful black and Asian people in Britain and the US (going back a couple of hundred years) - they just weren't in the films and TV shows the people complaining watched as children, and they weren't taught about in schools.

All that said, there are many more legitimate reasons to swerve this adaptation. It just lacked any real sense of jeopardy or tension. The pacing was off. Many of the characters came across as caricatures. There were too many ideas and unfinished / unexplored red herrings and other dramatic devices. All in all, it just felt like it was executed by people who don't love or understand the genre. Worth dozing on the sofa to one Sunday afternoon, but not much more than that, I'm afraid.