Am a huge Agatha Christie fan. Have been since the age of 11 after reading 'And Then There Were None', one of my favourites to this day, and watching the Joan Hickson and David Suchet adaptations of 'A Murder is Announced' and 'Sad Cypress'. 'Ordeal By Innocence' may not be one of her very best, but it is expertly and splendidly crafted with an unexpected and very clever ending. One can see why she herself apparently thought highly of it.
Certainly there are worse Agatha Christie adaptations around. Examples being the 'Partners in Crime' series from a few years ago, 'The Alphabet Murders', the 1989 'Ten Little Indians' and the worst ITV Marple adaptations, (so 'At Bertram's Hotel', 'A Sittaford Mystery' and 'Why Didn't They Ask Evans'). That doesn't stop 'Ordeal By Innocence' from being a disappointment though . It is the weakest of Sarah Phelps' Agatha Christie adaptations. Loved 'And Then There Were None' and was mixed on 'Witness for the Prosecution'. None of the adaptations do 'Ordeal by Innocence', a great book, justice. Judging it by which one's best and worst (a hard choice), at a guess the ITV adaptation for best and the 1984 film worst.
That it is a poor adaptation of the book is not where my disappointment with 'Ordeal By Innocence' lay, not completely at least. It for me had far more issues on its own terms, which for me has always been a fairer way to judge. The first part of the three episodes is definitely the best though it's still heavily flawed. This second part feels like a step down, but is the second best. At least it didn't have a disappointing ending that badly marred the final episode but it doesn't have as memorable or attention-grabbing a scene as the opening sequence in the first one.
There are good things. The best thing again is the production values. Gorgeously shot, sometimes imaginatively edited, sumptuously costumed, atmospherically lit and evocative in period detail with well chosen locations, visually it is exceptional.
Parts of the story do intrigue and there is enough to keep one guessing with nothing being too obvious.
Acting is an improvement here than in the first part. Bill Nighy does underplay with dignity and is sometimes affecting, he is the character that one feels most for in the source material so this was an ideal way to approach him. It may come over as phoning it in to some but that is only when comparing it to the rest of the acting, which was quite broad, someone had to take things seriously as ought and Nighy does that. Morven Christie, looking luminous, and Luke Treadaway, quietly understated, also do very well. Do have to agree too that Matthew Goode's vindictive Phillip comes off very well, his acting in the role actually on reflection has grown on me.
On the other hand, the rest of the cast are still either too broad or bland. Instead of feeling much empathy for the characters and what they go through which one is meant to considering that in the book there is more emphasis on the family ordeal, one is irritated by that most of them do not come over as real people and more stale archetypes.
Unfortunately, the mystery continues to be unengaging. Tonally, it is little more than overblown melodrama too often and there is a lack of tension and suspense. Some of the episode feels padded out by overlong scenes, not all of them necessary, and repetition, making the not very long running time of the episode feel further over-stretched.
Like the first part, the dialogue has too much soap, camp and ham, also not doing a particularly good job fitting the period (much of it takes one out of it). The music again is too brash and intrusive. Anything included to seemingly bring more grit or appeal to a wider audience instead comes over as mean-spirited and out of kilter as well as unnecessary.
In conclusion, didn't do it for me and this is being said with a heavy heart. 4/10 Bethany Cox
Certainly there are worse Agatha Christie adaptations around. Examples being the 'Partners in Crime' series from a few years ago, 'The Alphabet Murders', the 1989 'Ten Little Indians' and the worst ITV Marple adaptations, (so 'At Bertram's Hotel', 'A Sittaford Mystery' and 'Why Didn't They Ask Evans'). That doesn't stop 'Ordeal By Innocence' from being a disappointment though . It is the weakest of Sarah Phelps' Agatha Christie adaptations. Loved 'And Then There Were None' and was mixed on 'Witness for the Prosecution'. None of the adaptations do 'Ordeal by Innocence', a great book, justice. Judging it by which one's best and worst (a hard choice), at a guess the ITV adaptation for best and the 1984 film worst.
That it is a poor adaptation of the book is not where my disappointment with 'Ordeal By Innocence' lay, not completely at least. It for me had far more issues on its own terms, which for me has always been a fairer way to judge. The first part of the three episodes is definitely the best though it's still heavily flawed. This second part feels like a step down, but is the second best. At least it didn't have a disappointing ending that badly marred the final episode but it doesn't have as memorable or attention-grabbing a scene as the opening sequence in the first one.
There are good things. The best thing again is the production values. Gorgeously shot, sometimes imaginatively edited, sumptuously costumed, atmospherically lit and evocative in period detail with well chosen locations, visually it is exceptional.
Parts of the story do intrigue and there is enough to keep one guessing with nothing being too obvious.
Acting is an improvement here than in the first part. Bill Nighy does underplay with dignity and is sometimes affecting, he is the character that one feels most for in the source material so this was an ideal way to approach him. It may come over as phoning it in to some but that is only when comparing it to the rest of the acting, which was quite broad, someone had to take things seriously as ought and Nighy does that. Morven Christie, looking luminous, and Luke Treadaway, quietly understated, also do very well. Do have to agree too that Matthew Goode's vindictive Phillip comes off very well, his acting in the role actually on reflection has grown on me.
On the other hand, the rest of the cast are still either too broad or bland. Instead of feeling much empathy for the characters and what they go through which one is meant to considering that in the book there is more emphasis on the family ordeal, one is irritated by that most of them do not come over as real people and more stale archetypes.
Unfortunately, the mystery continues to be unengaging. Tonally, it is little more than overblown melodrama too often and there is a lack of tension and suspense. Some of the episode feels padded out by overlong scenes, not all of them necessary, and repetition, making the not very long running time of the episode feel further over-stretched.
Like the first part, the dialogue has too much soap, camp and ham, also not doing a particularly good job fitting the period (much of it takes one out of it). The music again is too brash and intrusive. Anything included to seemingly bring more grit or appeal to a wider audience instead comes over as mean-spirited and out of kilter as well as unnecessary.
In conclusion, didn't do it for me and this is being said with a heavy heart. 4/10 Bethany Cox