Being a fan of Agatha Christie, I searched for this rare TV movie for quite some time. All of the VHS copies I found were in PAL and as I live in America, I was unable to view them. When I located a DVD copy of this film I pounced on it and wasn't horribly disappointed. Anne Beddingford has purposely put herself on the wrong plane and ends up in Cairo. She encounters an accident when a man runs in front of a taxi to get away from someone. All that she has as a clue now is a small bit of paper and a glimpse of the "man in the brown suit" who has been linked to a beautiful night club singer's murder. The plot thickens and Anne finds herself in a sea of suspects and, later, on the killer's hit list. While the plot line has been changed quite a bit, this film still has the undeniable touch of Christie to it. Many of the characters are a bit phony (the heroine Anne) and others were almost unbearably BAD (Tony Randolff), but they are overshadowed by Rue McClannahan, whom I thought stole the show. The plot is far more exciting than other Christie books. There are a couple killings, a couple attempted killings, a love story, and a kidnapping sequence. I enjoyed the film, it had a campy edge to it which made it kinda fun.
Reviews
12 Reviews
A Unique and eerie take of Stoker's novel
23 June 2005
I have just received a copy of this VERY rare film and was Very pleased with it. This film, while not sticking entirely to the book was the first Dracula movie that actually gave me chills. Perhaps it was the primitive picture which gives one the slight feeling of claustrophobia or the vampires themselves who all sport Nosferatu like fangs, but this movie is actually scary.
SPOILERS! The film begins in an asylum in England; by now Dracula has already arrived in England and has attacked Lucy at least once. Rather than the character of Reinfield, Jonathan Harker is the deranged madman who eats flies. He recounts to Dr. Seward (now our hero in this version) some of what he has seen in Transilvania, including a disturbing attack by Dracula's brides. Like the Bela Lugosi film, Dracula befriends all of the characters just so he can get closer to their jugulars, so to speak. He turns Lucy (played wonderfully by Susan George)into a vampire and she is, in turn, attacks Mina (Harker's wife. Dracula's attack on Lucy is EXTREMELY erotic and it shocked me that it was actually shown on TV; also shocking was the not very discreet lesbianistic (if that's a word) scene when Lucy attacks Mina. Van Helsing quickly dispatches of Lucy and uses Mina as bate to lure Dracula into a trap. Dracula is destroyed in a cemetery, but Mina, unbeknown-st to her friends remains under Dracula's spell and the ending is left ambiguous.
This film returns many scenes from the novel left out by other film: Mina and Lucy's discussion with Mr. Swales about the young man who committed suicide, whose grave is beside their favorite retreat; and the character of Mrs. Weston is also returned. I quite enjoyed this film and it is actually tied with the 1977 version starring Louis Jordan as my favorite take on Stoker's tale.
SPOILERS! The film begins in an asylum in England; by now Dracula has already arrived in England and has attacked Lucy at least once. Rather than the character of Reinfield, Jonathan Harker is the deranged madman who eats flies. He recounts to Dr. Seward (now our hero in this version) some of what he has seen in Transilvania, including a disturbing attack by Dracula's brides. Like the Bela Lugosi film, Dracula befriends all of the characters just so he can get closer to their jugulars, so to speak. He turns Lucy (played wonderfully by Susan George)into a vampire and she is, in turn, attacks Mina (Harker's wife. Dracula's attack on Lucy is EXTREMELY erotic and it shocked me that it was actually shown on TV; also shocking was the not very discreet lesbianistic (if that's a word) scene when Lucy attacks Mina. Van Helsing quickly dispatches of Lucy and uses Mina as bate to lure Dracula into a trap. Dracula is destroyed in a cemetery, but Mina, unbeknown-st to her friends remains under Dracula's spell and the ending is left ambiguous.
This film returns many scenes from the novel left out by other film: Mina and Lucy's discussion with Mr. Swales about the young man who committed suicide, whose grave is beside their favorite retreat; and the character of Mrs. Weston is also returned. I quite enjoyed this film and it is actually tied with the 1977 version starring Louis Jordan as my favorite take on Stoker's tale.
Henry VIII and His Six Wives
(1972)
Wonderful (SPOILERS!)
23 December 2004
Warning: Spoilers
I was fortunate enough to locate a copy of this very rare drama on ebay. I was entranced by the beauty of the sets, costumes, and acting. The film begins with Henry on his death bed. He begins to look back on his rather... productive marital career. First we meet Catherine of Aragon, who is tragically unable to give Henry a son; she is divorced so that Henry can wed the sexy Anne Boleyn. Anne's portrayal is not flattering as it makes her look guilty of the crimes she is accused of later in the film. She is quickly beheaded (off screen, we only hear talk of the execution)after she fails to provide an heir. Next comes plain Jane Seymour; she is the image of goodness and trust, and it breaks the viewer's heart to see her mistreated by Henry. Jane would be the wife that would give birth to a son, but unfortunately she died after child birth, leaving Henry to locate a new spouse. Heads begin to roll when Henry is talk into marrying Anne of Cleves; Henry believed her to be attractive and was told by many people (most of whom gained something if the two were to marry) of her beauty. When he meets the new queen, he is appalled by her looks and outraged that he should be forced into this marriage, so he beheads those who got him into this mess and divorces Anne. He sets his eyes on the VERY young Catherine Howard(the most pity-able of the wives). After a whirlwind romance, Henry learns that Catherine is not all she claims to be and, begrudgingly tries her for treason. She is beheaded. He then meets up with Catherine Parr, who outlived him. This is an absolute MUST for anyone studying Henry VIII or his wives.
The Six Wives of Henry VIII
(1970)
Pretty Good. - SPOILERS
23 December 2004
Warning: Spoilers
Having been introduced to the absorbing history surrounding Henry VIII and his ill-fated spouses, I decided to try this 9 hour long mini series. THE SIX WIVEs OF HENRY VIII is actually quite entertaining despite its length. The movie its self is made up of six installments, each dealing with a wife.
CATHERINE OF ARAGON: Boring and drawn out, I was not at all impressed by this film. The film follows Catherine through her first marriage to prince Arthur and the struggle she goes through to marry Henry after Arthur's death. After all she goes through, Catherine is forced into a divorce when Anne Boleyn shakes her tail at Henry. Finally, she dies a lonely, saddened old woman. Annette Crosbie plays a rather ludicrous Catherine, complete with phony cries of anguish when Henry divorces her.
ANNE BOLEYN:
I enjoyed this installment a great deal better than the first. Many knows the story of sexy Anne Boleyn who manages to catch King Henry's eye and persuades him into a divorce, only to be tried and beheaded when she fails to produce a son. Dorthy Tutin makes a rather sensual, but not very attractive Anne. We follow her from her life in the palace all the way up to her execution. The audience does not know how to perceive this queen, as she is a trollop, but also, very sympathetic and innocent of the crimes she is accused of committing.
JANE SEYMOUR:
While many praise this as the best movie out of the series, I found it to be very trying to sit through. Jane is the perfect wife for Henry, she even manages to produce a son, even though it costs her her life. While I agree it is refreshing to have some outdoor scenes in this film, Anne Stallybrass's insipid performance as "Plain Jane" is extremely dull. There is an overabundance of talk and a lack of action. I also found the symbolic dream sequences to be very out of place and utterly odd.
ANNE OF CLEVES:
I actually quite enjoyed this section, which is based on the relationship between Henry of England and Anne of Germany. Anne is a German princess whom is engaged to the "handsom and dashing" Henry VIII. She is disappointed to find that Henry is a fat, overbearing, old man; to hide the fact the the queen refuses to let him "touch" her, Henry claims that he is disgusted by her looks. This eventually brings about their divorce a few months later. Elvi Hale shines as the "ugly" princess who's personality would outshine all of Henry's previous wives. It is very relieving to have some comic relief in the series, and this segment provides it (especially the wedding night scene where Henry chases an unwilling Anne about the room).
CATHERINE HOWARD:
My personal favorite of the series. Catherine Howard tells the story of the beautiful, spoiled, promiscuous cousin of Anne Boleyn, who, with the help of her looks and wiles, becomes queen of England. One begins to hate Cate right from the start of the production; she is sly and mean spirited. After feigning virtue, she is married to Henry, only to break his heart later when her infidelity is proved. She and her lovers are sentenced to death and are beheaded. This installment is slightly similar to the fatal love affair between Lancelot and Guenevere; Angela Pleasence is splendid as the bratty Catherine, perhaps the most extraordinary thing about her performance is the change that she shows. At the beginning, she is childish and cruel, and towards the end, right before her execution, she shows great maturity.
CATHERINE PARR:
I have little to say about this film as I could barely keep awake during it. I found it to be the worst of the films and it seems to me that it left a lot of loose ends
CATHERINE OF ARAGON: Boring and drawn out, I was not at all impressed by this film. The film follows Catherine through her first marriage to prince Arthur and the struggle she goes through to marry Henry after Arthur's death. After all she goes through, Catherine is forced into a divorce when Anne Boleyn shakes her tail at Henry. Finally, she dies a lonely, saddened old woman. Annette Crosbie plays a rather ludicrous Catherine, complete with phony cries of anguish when Henry divorces her.
ANNE BOLEYN:
I enjoyed this installment a great deal better than the first. Many knows the story of sexy Anne Boleyn who manages to catch King Henry's eye and persuades him into a divorce, only to be tried and beheaded when she fails to produce a son. Dorthy Tutin makes a rather sensual, but not very attractive Anne. We follow her from her life in the palace all the way up to her execution. The audience does not know how to perceive this queen, as she is a trollop, but also, very sympathetic and innocent of the crimes she is accused of committing.
JANE SEYMOUR:
While many praise this as the best movie out of the series, I found it to be very trying to sit through. Jane is the perfect wife for Henry, she even manages to produce a son, even though it costs her her life. While I agree it is refreshing to have some outdoor scenes in this film, Anne Stallybrass's insipid performance as "Plain Jane" is extremely dull. There is an overabundance of talk and a lack of action. I also found the symbolic dream sequences to be very out of place and utterly odd.
ANNE OF CLEVES:
I actually quite enjoyed this section, which is based on the relationship between Henry of England and Anne of Germany. Anne is a German princess whom is engaged to the "handsom and dashing" Henry VIII. She is disappointed to find that Henry is a fat, overbearing, old man; to hide the fact the the queen refuses to let him "touch" her, Henry claims that he is disgusted by her looks. This eventually brings about their divorce a few months later. Elvi Hale shines as the "ugly" princess who's personality would outshine all of Henry's previous wives. It is very relieving to have some comic relief in the series, and this segment provides it (especially the wedding night scene where Henry chases an unwilling Anne about the room).
CATHERINE HOWARD:
My personal favorite of the series. Catherine Howard tells the story of the beautiful, spoiled, promiscuous cousin of Anne Boleyn, who, with the help of her looks and wiles, becomes queen of England. One begins to hate Cate right from the start of the production; she is sly and mean spirited. After feigning virtue, she is married to Henry, only to break his heart later when her infidelity is proved. She and her lovers are sentenced to death and are beheaded. This installment is slightly similar to the fatal love affair between Lancelot and Guenevere; Angela Pleasence is splendid as the bratty Catherine, perhaps the most extraordinary thing about her performance is the change that she shows. At the beginning, she is childish and cruel, and towards the end, right before her execution, she shows great maturity.
CATHERINE PARR:
I have little to say about this film as I could barely keep awake during it. I found it to be the worst of the films and it seems to me that it left a lot of loose ends
Ten Little Indians
(1965)
Not Christie!
6 November 2004
This version of Agatha Christie's novel Ten Little Indians is rather a disappointment. It is updated from the forties to the sixties, complete with the leather mini skirts and bitchy movie stars. Ten people are invited to a remote mountain top castle for the weekend, when they are confronted with an eerie tape recording of their "host" accusing them of murders committed in their pasts... Then they begin to die. This adaptation has the characters dying in very different and violent ways, until there are two "guests" left.
The acting is rather dated and the whole production cries "B movie thriller", it changes many character names and ALL of the personalities, and the intense mood of the whole book has been made into a sort of comedy. This movie may not be the worst movie in the world, but it may be the worst Christie film made.
The acting is rather dated and the whole production cries "B movie thriller", it changes many character names and ALL of the personalities, and the intense mood of the whole book has been made into a sort of comedy. This movie may not be the worst movie in the world, but it may be the worst Christie film made.
Not bad...
20 September 2004
Warning: Spoilers
This review contains spoilers!
I was so excited when I learned that A&E were airing a new version of Death on the Nile with David Suchet; it is the best of the Poirot novels in my opinion. This movie, while not at all a bad movie, disappoints, especially to fans of the older film. This movie starts out with a passionate love scene between Simon Doyle and Jackie de Bellfort... We learn right away of their financial problems and it seems all too neat when Simon dumps Jackie for the rich beauty, Linnet Doyle. I was rather disappointed in the characterization of Linnet... I simply didn't imagine her as a platinum blonde... Anyways, Jakcie hounds the newly weds during their honeymoon... then, while on the nile, Linnet is shot while sleeping.
I have to admit that this was a good made-for-TV-production, however there are too many give aways to who the murderer was... in the old movie, Jackie and Simon were the last ones we suspected, as they had a cast iron alibi... In this one, one knows right away that they were in it together. Prolonged camera shots on facial expressions, reactions to certain incidents, and the fact that Poirot all but said that the fake shooting scene that gave the murderers their alibi had to have been planned! The one thing that I liked about this production, more than the older one, is the ending, which has a Romeo and Juliet quality to it... After being found out, Jackie and Simon (on a stretcher because of a gun shot on his leg) exit the boat, Jackie kneals down to kiss Simon muttering "I Love yous" and so-forth, when she pulled out a gun and shot him and herself. Poirot admits having known the gun was in Jackie's possession and was almost as if he was finally letting them escape to find peace together... We see their bodies laying on the pavement, and then a flashback to them dancing, happily and lovingly, in Jackie's thread bare flat.
I was so excited when I learned that A&E were airing a new version of Death on the Nile with David Suchet; it is the best of the Poirot novels in my opinion. This movie, while not at all a bad movie, disappoints, especially to fans of the older film. This movie starts out with a passionate love scene between Simon Doyle and Jackie de Bellfort... We learn right away of their financial problems and it seems all too neat when Simon dumps Jackie for the rich beauty, Linnet Doyle. I was rather disappointed in the characterization of Linnet... I simply didn't imagine her as a platinum blonde... Anyways, Jakcie hounds the newly weds during their honeymoon... then, while on the nile, Linnet is shot while sleeping.
I have to admit that this was a good made-for-TV-production, however there are too many give aways to who the murderer was... in the old movie, Jackie and Simon were the last ones we suspected, as they had a cast iron alibi... In this one, one knows right away that they were in it together. Prolonged camera shots on facial expressions, reactions to certain incidents, and the fact that Poirot all but said that the fake shooting scene that gave the murderers their alibi had to have been planned! The one thing that I liked about this production, more than the older one, is the ending, which has a Romeo and Juliet quality to it... After being found out, Jackie and Simon (on a stretcher because of a gun shot on his leg) exit the boat, Jackie kneals down to kiss Simon muttering "I Love yous" and so-forth, when she pulled out a gun and shot him and herself. Poirot admits having known the gun was in Jackie's possession and was almost as if he was finally letting them escape to find peace together... We see their bodies laying on the pavement, and then a flashback to them dancing, happily and lovingly, in Jackie's thread bare flat.
Ten Little Indians
(1987)
Ten Little Indians went out to dine... One choked himself...
2 August 2004
I must say first off that I am a HUGE Christie fan; Ten Little Indians was the first Christie novel I had read and I was just blown away! The story was so complex and the resolution so brilliant that I was left speechless. What made this story so great is the fact that everything one usually suspects to happen in a book... for instance, one realises early in to tha book that everyone on the island is marked for death... but almost always there are usually two heroic characters who fall in love and overcome the antagonist. When one thinks that, one tends to look at Miss Claythorn and Lombard as the two who likely fit the bill... but this is not so, for they never fall in love, nor are they by any means likable people (they both were murderers and one even killed a little boy). Then, of course there is the fact that they both die.
One would think that this would be the subject of a thousand wonderful adaptation... Well, it's almost right. There were many film versions but none matched up to the book's splendor. Then I finally get my hands on this (not easy) and I was stunned at how good it was... it follows the book all the way down to the original ending. The characters were well played, the plot was quick, and the scenery was beautiful.... all in all I I've this film a 9/10.
One would think that this would be the subject of a thousand wonderful adaptation... Well, it's almost right. There were many film versions but none matched up to the book's splendor. Then I finally get my hands on this (not easy) and I was stunned at how good it was... it follows the book all the way down to the original ending. The characters were well played, the plot was quick, and the scenery was beautiful.... all in all I I've this film a 9/10.
The Hunchback of Notre Dame
(1956)
It has one thing in its favor...
25 July 2004
Warning: Spoilers
This version of Victor Hugo's TRAGIC tale of the poor deaf bell and deformed bell ringer's love for a kind and virginal gypsy is brought to life yet again. This adaptation suffers from poor acting and bad dubbing while keeping painfully faithful to the book. Now, don't get me wrong, I wish MORE adaptations of Notre Dame de Paris were closer to the book... but it's a shame a shabby film like this is the only one that even touches the book... Gina Lollabrigida (sp?) tries her darndest to capture the allure of the little dancing gypsy girl; she fails utterly... not saying she isn't sexy, but the allurement of Esmerelda is her innocence and youth (she was 16). Gina is far from being either innocent or 16; her whole performance cried "trollip". Antony Quinn (the retarded acting hunchback) is put on the back burner as Gina struts her stuff the whole movie. The guy who played the poet also contributed to the down fall of this movie. This film also has its own way of destroying my favorite scenes in all the other films. My favorite scene of all time is the rescue of Esmerelda from the gallows. In this version, there is no dramatic music, or near death escape, nor a dramatic swing from the bell tower. Esmerelda wasn't even at the gallows... she is knelling before the cathedral while the hunchback slides down a rope, clumsily swoops her up and carried her inside.
SPOILER! Now the one area that this film succeeds is the ending... In the novel, Esmerelda is captured and hanged as the hunchback watches from the bell tower... Well, in this version she is shot, but the guards take her body to the gallows anyway. I think the fact that this film used the original ending as opposed to a happy ending was a clever idea and it is the only thing that saves it in my opinion.
SPOILER! Now the one area that this film succeeds is the ending... In the novel, Esmerelda is captured and hanged as the hunchback watches from the bell tower... Well, in this version she is shot, but the guards take her body to the gallows anyway. I think the fact that this film used the original ending as opposed to a happy ending was a clever idea and it is the only thing that saves it in my opinion.
And Then There Were None
(1945)
Not as great as everyone makes it out to be!
22 July 2004
This old school murder mystery written by Dame Agatha Christie was based on her novel "Ten Little Niggers" (which, of course, had to be re-named to Ten Little Indians, which in turn was changed again to And Then There Were None.) You have the normal Christie crew; a cast of suspects and victims with rotten pasts. These characters are lured to an island where they are picked off one by one. Closterphobia sets in as the remaining people realizes that the killer could be one of them. Now, this sounds like the makings of a wonderful movie, full of suspense, drama, horror, and perhaps romance? Sadly the seriousness of the plot is diminished as the whole thing is played up like a parlor game. There really is no suspense at all for the whole thing is made into a sort of comedy. Key elements of the book had been changed in this movie (and almost all others) as well. Many key characters had their names and character traits changed... for example: In the book, we are introduced to Anthony Marston, a shallow, suave, good looking fellow. To take his place in the movie is a Russian prince who cannot act for beans... There is also the gripe about the ending... The ending was supposed to follow the title And Then There Were NONE! They don't even make the climax exciting... just a bunch of talk and a suggestion of suicide... While this one is the only one (Out of the original 4 successful English/American versions) to get the setting right maybe one of the reasons it has been called the best of the versions. The only thing that I could find in this movie praise worthy was June Dupres's interpretation of Vera Claythorne whom I thought was wonderful... I am told the Russian version is great, but I have yet to see it.
My personal favorite versions are:
Ten Little Indians 1989 ( many consider this the worst, but I enjoyed it... at least it had an exciting ending!)
Ten Little Indians 1959 (this is a hard to find one... It stars Nina Foch... I think that's her name.)
Ten Little Indians 1975 ( another version the critics condemned, but I found it to be the only one to treat the plot seriously and give it suspense.)
And Then There Were None (yes, this version)
Ten Little Indians 1965? ( The poorest adaptation in my minds eye... every thing has been changed!)
My personal favorite versions are:
Ten Little Indians 1989 ( many consider this the worst, but I enjoyed it... at least it had an exciting ending!)
Ten Little Indians 1959 (this is a hard to find one... It stars Nina Foch... I think that's her name.)
Ten Little Indians 1975 ( another version the critics condemned, but I found it to be the only one to treat the plot seriously and give it suspense.)
And Then There Were None (yes, this version)
Ten Little Indians 1965? ( The poorest adaptation in my minds eye... every thing has been changed!)
Count Dracula
(1977 TV Movie)
The Ultimate "Dracula"!
5 June 2004
Having been a fan of Bram Stoker's "Gothic Romance" for years, I made it a quest to collect every Dracula movie I could get my hands on. I had practically every version , when I heard about this one. I had given up hope on finding it because I had been told that it was out of print etc. Then, by complete accident, I located a VHS copy on Ebay. When I finally received this, I was left speechless. This is the BEST Dracula movie I had ever seen. It kept so true to the novel and the actors were picked so perfectly. The movie captures the atmosphere that was in the book very well... Especially the sleep walking in the grave yard scene... The sets were kind of "shotty" but still realistic enough. This is also one of those movies that has the "one actor." You know what I mean, the one actor that just makes the whole movie... In COUNT Dracula, that actor is Judi Bowker. She personifies the character of Mina to a T... her beauty, innocence, and powerful will makes Count Dracula the great movie it is... So, I stress this, if you like vampire movies, then FIND a copy of this movie!
Ten Little Indians
(1959 TV Movie)
Pretty Good
28 November 2003
Warning: Spoilers
This rare version of Agatha Christie's book/play TEN LITTLE INDIANS is probably the movie version that is the closest to the actual book. The movie starts with ten strangers arriving at an island. After a strange voice accuses each character of murder, the people start dying off one by one. The movie only lasts an hour, so all the event happening in the movie happen in one night. Nina Foch plays the heroine, Vera Claythorne, very well, though she seems a little old for her part. TEN LITTLE INDIANS also contains rare 50's commercial clips. The movie is highly enjoyable and pretty thrilling compared to the other versions, for example:
SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER!
In the other film versions, when the killer is reavealed, He merely explains his motive, tells Vera to hang herself and kills himself. In this version, however, the killer chases Vera around the room and cries, "I must have my hanging!" Then the hero, shoots the killer and saves the girl. The one problem with this picture is that EVERYBODY was supposed to die! Oh well, none of the other versions have this ending either(except the Russian version, which I have not seen.) so we'll just let that detail slip by. I'm not saying this is the best version of TEN LITTLE INDIANS, but it's not bad!
SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER!
In the other film versions, when the killer is reavealed, He merely explains his motive, tells Vera to hang herself and kills himself. In this version, however, the killer chases Vera around the room and cries, "I must have my hanging!" Then the hero, shoots the killer and saves the girl. The one problem with this picture is that EVERYBODY was supposed to die! Oh well, none of the other versions have this ending either(except the Russian version, which I have not seen.) so we'll just let that detail slip by. I'm not saying this is the best version of TEN LITTLE INDIANS, but it's not bad!
Ein Unbekannter rechnet ab
(1974)
An underrated film
28 November 2003
I don't really understand why nobody likes this movie... I personally think it's awesome! I mean sure there is some bad acting, but I have not seen a version of TEN LITTLE INDIANS or AND THEN THERE WERE NONE that didn't have some bad acting. this movie is kinda like a well made B movie and a wonderful Version of Agatha Christie's book. I recommend this film to anyone who can find it (It took me years to find it and cost me fifty dollars.)
Tell Your Friends