The Sittaford Mystery
- Episode aired Apr 30, 2006
- TV-14
- 1h 40m
IMDb RATING
6.8/10
2.1K
YOUR RATING
The death of the presumptive future Prime Minister is predicted during a séance in a snowbound country hotel, and he is found stabbed to death in his room the next morning.The death of the presumptive future Prime Minister is predicted during a séance in a snowbound country hotel, and he is found stabbed to death in his room the next morning.The death of the presumptive future Prime Minister is predicted during a séance in a snowbound country hotel, and he is found stabbed to death in his room the next morning.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Having read the book several times, I know the story well, but knowing ITV, this is going to be a complete reworking, so my review is based purely on the drama.
Captain Clive Trevelyan war hero, top Sportsman and touted to be the successor to Winston Churchill as PM is murdered, all possible suspects and Jane Marple are trapped in a hotel, she has to work out whodunnit.
It's a very tongue in cheek production, it could almost have been written for Margaret Rutherford and filmed in black and white. It's one not to be taken too seriously. It looks really good, and I think the snow helps build up a degree of claustrophobia, the escaped prisoner also adds to the story.
Good turns from Patricia Hodge and Rita Tushingham, both are fun. The best performances come from Zoe Telford and Paul Kaye I thought. Laurence Fox looks like he had fun. I can't help feeling Geraldine looks like Andy Capp at times, all she needs is a leather jacket.
I don't think the part Timothy Dalton was given was big enough for him to get his teeth into, he felt a little clunky at times.
Hugely over the top in all ways, but if you take it for what it is it's an enjoyable if flawed 90 minutes. 7/10 (I'm a little biased I associate this story with an amazing day.)
Captain Clive Trevelyan war hero, top Sportsman and touted to be the successor to Winston Churchill as PM is murdered, all possible suspects and Jane Marple are trapped in a hotel, she has to work out whodunnit.
It's a very tongue in cheek production, it could almost have been written for Margaret Rutherford and filmed in black and white. It's one not to be taken too seriously. It looks really good, and I think the snow helps build up a degree of claustrophobia, the escaped prisoner also adds to the story.
Good turns from Patricia Hodge and Rita Tushingham, both are fun. The best performances come from Zoe Telford and Paul Kaye I thought. Laurence Fox looks like he had fun. I can't help feeling Geraldine looks like Andy Capp at times, all she needs is a leather jacket.
I don't think the part Timothy Dalton was given was big enough for him to get his teeth into, he felt a little clunky at times.
Hugely over the top in all ways, but if you take it for what it is it's an enjoyable if flawed 90 minutes. 7/10 (I'm a little biased I associate this story with an amazing day.)
I have a major problem with these particular Miss Marple mysteries in that I don't remember - or don't recognize - the actual stories because I read them so long ago. I think possibly the only way to watch these is if one forgets they are supposedly adapted (and apparently, all they take is the title) from the Christie novels.
The production values for this series are quite high and the casts are very good. In this one, we have such stars as Timothy Dalton, Rita Tushingham and someone who reminds me of Zac Efron in ten years, James Murray. Miss Marple herself (Geraldine McEwan) never seems to be the main character; they manage to turn the footwork over to someone else, and then Miss Marple solves the crime. Now, in the books, Miss Marple solved the crimes by being an excellent observer of human nature, based on the people she knows or knew in her town of St. Mary Mead. This Miss Marple very rarely mentions St. Mary Mead or compares any characters or incidents to the people she knew there. She is also a little too sly for the Miss Marple in my mind.
It seems a shame to upset so many people by trashing the books, renaming the characters, and redoing the plot.
I'll take issue with one thing that was complained of - the fifty minutes it took to get to the murder. Years and years and years ago, there was such a thing as a story buildup. If you watch the movie San Francisco, the earthquake doesn't happen until the last half hour or thereabouts. One got to know the characters and their interpersonal relationships first. Of course, this type of storytelling has gone out of style. If you're going to have an earthquake, a ship sinking, or a murder, it has to happen in the first five minutes. Since I didn't know this story from Adam, I have to admit the buildup didn't bother me. It's done so rarely.
All in all, one star as an Agatha Christie story, five stars for the production values, the acting, and the mystery. It just has NOTHING to do with anything Dame Agatha wrote. What's the point?
The production values for this series are quite high and the casts are very good. In this one, we have such stars as Timothy Dalton, Rita Tushingham and someone who reminds me of Zac Efron in ten years, James Murray. Miss Marple herself (Geraldine McEwan) never seems to be the main character; they manage to turn the footwork over to someone else, and then Miss Marple solves the crime. Now, in the books, Miss Marple solved the crimes by being an excellent observer of human nature, based on the people she knows or knew in her town of St. Mary Mead. This Miss Marple very rarely mentions St. Mary Mead or compares any characters or incidents to the people she knew there. She is also a little too sly for the Miss Marple in my mind.
It seems a shame to upset so many people by trashing the books, renaming the characters, and redoing the plot.
I'll take issue with one thing that was complained of - the fifty minutes it took to get to the murder. Years and years and years ago, there was such a thing as a story buildup. If you watch the movie San Francisco, the earthquake doesn't happen until the last half hour or thereabouts. One got to know the characters and their interpersonal relationships first. Of course, this type of storytelling has gone out of style. If you're going to have an earthquake, a ship sinking, or a murder, it has to happen in the first five minutes. Since I didn't know this story from Adam, I have to admit the buildup didn't bother me. It's done so rarely.
All in all, one star as an Agatha Christie story, five stars for the production values, the acting, and the mystery. It just has NOTHING to do with anything Dame Agatha wrote. What's the point?
Let's get one thing straight: I couldn't possibly care less that these ITV mysteries don't bear any resemblance to the Christie novel. I've never read more than a couple of chapters of an Agatha Christie mystery, and I never intend to. I don't read *any* mysteries, for that matter, and so the reviewers' constant harping that these adaptations aren't true to the writer's "vision" carries little weight.
What I *do* enjoy are these English murder mysteries adapted for the stage and screen, and I think these ITV mysteries are good fun. Geraldine McEwen is a delight. I have never liked previous interpretations of Miss Marple, where she has come off as nothing but a dried-up, prunish, humourless busybody, but McEwen plays her with an amused twinkle in her eye.
That could characterize the entire production. They're witty and tongue-in-cheek, complete with bad "special effects" and cheesy music and title credits. The actors appear to be having the time of their lives, and it makes for a fun and fizzy mystery. There are worse ways to spend two hours on a Sunday night.
Faithful Shmaithful. Who cares? If you want Christie, read the book. If you want a fun evening, you could do far worse than these Marple mysteries.
What I *do* enjoy are these English murder mysteries adapted for the stage and screen, and I think these ITV mysteries are good fun. Geraldine McEwen is a delight. I have never liked previous interpretations of Miss Marple, where she has come off as nothing but a dried-up, prunish, humourless busybody, but McEwen plays her with an amused twinkle in her eye.
That could characterize the entire production. They're witty and tongue-in-cheek, complete with bad "special effects" and cheesy music and title credits. The actors appear to be having the time of their lives, and it makes for a fun and fizzy mystery. There are worse ways to spend two hours on a Sunday night.
Faithful Shmaithful. Who cares? If you want Christie, read the book. If you want a fun evening, you could do far worse than these Marple mysteries.
This is a review of the first installment in a two-part version of THE SITTAFORD MYSTERY on TV. Once again, although there is no Miss Marple in the original story, the writers have planted her in the midst of all the characters staying at an old inn. That's not the objection most of the comments here have to make. What IS resented is the fact that story elements have been drastically changed by the writers of the teleplay, even changing the identify of the murderer in the original story.
This is the kind of thing bound to upset purists who want their Agatha Christie stories told without all the unnecessary changes. What upsets me is that, first of all, GERALDINE McEWAN does not make a plausible Miss Marple. She's much too mild-mannered and lacks the intelligent inquisitiveness that Joan Hickson displayed so well in her interpretation of the role on the former British series.
But secondly, not having read the original recently, I was totally unaware of all the changes when viewing the first hour and I found it an engrossing kind of story, if a bit confusing in the way the narrative unfolded, especially with regard to the opening scenes at the Egyptian tomb. But TIMOTHY DALTON gave a compelling performance, using his personality to put some life into the role of Captain Trevelyan (whom I later found out dies in the first chapter of the Christie story). It took a whole hour for his death to take place here.
But that was a minor change, according to all these other comments, and at this point I have no idea what awaits in the second installment.
I can only say that despite all these "flaws" in the presentation, I thoroughly enjoyed the story with its ingredients of a fierce blizzard, an old country inn, a seance where a death is predicted, an assortment of strange guests, and a bevy of competent British players, some of whom (Rita Tushingham in particular) I never would have recognized without reading the cast list. It was nice to recognize JAMES WILBY as Mr. Kirkwood, proprietor of the hotel.
So, while I confess I did enjoy the first segment, I can understand why many were disappointed in the drastic changes to the story. The writers did the same thing with several other Christie "adaptations," including one of my favorites, EASY TO KILL (even the title was changed to "Murder Is Easy" and it ruined a perfectly good Christie story by changing the emphasis to the romantic leads and practically leaving the murderer out of the story).
Personally, I enjoy all of these Christie stories but do not think Miss Marple or Poirot should be injected for the sake of whatever following these kind of things have on TV.
This is the kind of thing bound to upset purists who want their Agatha Christie stories told without all the unnecessary changes. What upsets me is that, first of all, GERALDINE McEWAN does not make a plausible Miss Marple. She's much too mild-mannered and lacks the intelligent inquisitiveness that Joan Hickson displayed so well in her interpretation of the role on the former British series.
But secondly, not having read the original recently, I was totally unaware of all the changes when viewing the first hour and I found it an engrossing kind of story, if a bit confusing in the way the narrative unfolded, especially with regard to the opening scenes at the Egyptian tomb. But TIMOTHY DALTON gave a compelling performance, using his personality to put some life into the role of Captain Trevelyan (whom I later found out dies in the first chapter of the Christie story). It took a whole hour for his death to take place here.
But that was a minor change, according to all these other comments, and at this point I have no idea what awaits in the second installment.
I can only say that despite all these "flaws" in the presentation, I thoroughly enjoyed the story with its ingredients of a fierce blizzard, an old country inn, a seance where a death is predicted, an assortment of strange guests, and a bevy of competent British players, some of whom (Rita Tushingham in particular) I never would have recognized without reading the cast list. It was nice to recognize JAMES WILBY as Mr. Kirkwood, proprietor of the hotel.
So, while I confess I did enjoy the first segment, I can understand why many were disappointed in the drastic changes to the story. The writers did the same thing with several other Christie "adaptations," including one of my favorites, EASY TO KILL (even the title was changed to "Murder Is Easy" and it ruined a perfectly good Christie story by changing the emphasis to the romantic leads and practically leaving the murderer out of the story).
Personally, I enjoy all of these Christie stories but do not think Miss Marple or Poirot should be injected for the sake of whatever following these kind of things have on TV.
This is a big budget Miss Marple. Casting went for unusually handsome males like Timothy Dalton, Laurence Fox and James Murray. (Their unusual good looks turn out to be necessary for the plot.) The females are delightfully eccentric, including Rita Tushingham whom baby boomers will remember fondly. There are realistic looking Egyptian treasures, and two delightfully creaky English houses.
Miss Marple starts out a bit nuts. Then she disappears while others do the sleuthing. Then she comes in at the end to sort out who murdered who. That is not the usual formula. Everyone has motive to commit murder, or at least some crime. It all sorts out in the most implausibly complicated way. I think you would have to watch perhaps five times before you were sure you had all the motives and murders sorted out, including the raptor's. Can you spell coincidence?
The cinematography is done with just candles and firelight. It gives a very snowed in cosiness. The music is wonderfully spooky, not just the standard theme repeated.
This is probably my favourite Miss Marple episode.
Miss Marple starts out a bit nuts. Then she disappears while others do the sleuthing. Then she comes in at the end to sort out who murdered who. That is not the usual formula. Everyone has motive to commit murder, or at least some crime. It all sorts out in the most implausibly complicated way. I think you would have to watch perhaps five times before you were sure you had all the motives and murders sorted out, including the raptor's. Can you spell coincidence?
The cinematography is done with just candles and firelight. It gives a very snowed in cosiness. The music is wonderfully spooky, not just the standard theme repeated.
This is probably my favourite Miss Marple episode.
Did you know
- TriviaFor the fifth time in twenty-five years, Robert Hardy once again plays Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill. Needless to say, Sir Winston is not a character in the original novel.
- GoofsThis film is set in 1952. In the cottage at Exhampton, Miss Marple is seen speaking in an Ericofon single-piece telephone. But this phone wasn't put in production until 1954, and was adopted by the British Post Office as late as 1974.
- Quotes
Emily Trefusis: If I were the nervous sort, I'd say there's evil in this house.
Miss Jane Marple: The house is bricks and mortar. If there's evil, it's in somebody's heart.
- Crazy creditsFollowing the credits, there is an in memoriam title card for Michael Attwell who played Archie Stone. Attwell died in 2006, the year this film was released.
- ConnectionsReferenced in Hard Quiz: Episode #3.4 (2018)
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Miss Marple: el misterio de Sittaford
- Filming locations
- Dorney Court, Dorney, Buckinghamshire, England, UK(Sittaford House interiors)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content