"Original Sin" is an almost 3 hour British t.v. miniseries "old school" mystery which centers on a murder at a waterfront publishing firm, numerous clues, and equally numerous suspects with the inscrutable Commander Dalgliesh (Marsden) and his trusty sidekicks hot on the trail. A rather convoluted mess of a story which is not particularly engaging given its length, viewers may find the conclusion to be too little too late. Recommended for those who have viewed the other films in this series, preferably in chronological order. Those unfamiliar with P.D. James' novels or this series of films should begin with the oldest first and work forward from there. The DVD I watched had no subtitles or CC and I did have some trouble with the audio and the dialects. (C+)
8 Reviews
Very intriguing story.
Sleepin_Dragon31 March 2021
Tragedy strikes as Peverell House, a classy publishers situation on The Thames. On the case is Adam Dalgliesh, together with an old, and new colleague.
Slightly different to the earlier adaptations, in that it's only 3 parts, as opposed to 6, but it's just as good.
Some nice production values throughout, it's very well made, the building itself looks grand, and there's some really nice music.
An intriguing mystery, with some very bizarre crimes,lots of red herrings, and a very surprising, but revealing conclusion.
I loved the characters in this scenario, and there were some really fine performances, I especially liked Sylvia Sims, Ian Bannen and Cathryn Harrison.
Very good, 8/10.
Slightly different to the earlier adaptations, in that it's only 3 parts, as opposed to 6, but it's just as good.
Some nice production values throughout, it's very well made, the building itself looks grand, and there's some really nice music.
An intriguing mystery, with some very bizarre crimes,lots of red herrings, and a very surprising, but revealing conclusion.
I loved the characters in this scenario, and there were some really fine performances, I especially liked Sylvia Sims, Ian Bannen and Cathryn Harrison.
Very good, 8/10.
Good but not the best Mystery Series
VRBC28 January 2000
The story is interesting and educated with some good character development. My biggest disappointment is weak development of the lead detective. What saved the detective investigation aspect of the film was his two assistants.
It could be they intended the film to focus on the employees of the publishing house. All of which were suspects. It's worth watching but if you are new to the Mystery Series I suggest Prime Suspect, Touching Evil and Heat of the Sun.
It could be they intended the film to focus on the employees of the publishing house. All of which were suspects. It's worth watching but if you are new to the Mystery Series I suggest Prime Suspect, Touching Evil and Heat of the Sun.
Wait a minute...
El Cine27 December 2001
Warning: Spoilers
[Vague spoiler]
I just finished watching this on PBS, which has been showing it as a repeat. I was kind of disappointed with the direction it took in part three, when it chose to examine heavy themes of war and racism rather than provide an involving mystery and the appropriate clues. The lack of such nuts and bolts of a good mystery gives the show the tone of a bland TV drama on commercial television. The build-up of the previous episodes regarding the theme of original sin and sins of the fathers was promising, with the stuffed snake toy suggesting intriguing possibilities. But the third part takes this theme to a melodramatic letdown of an explanation.
But what I'm most disappointed with is the absence of a climactic revelation, in which the detective pieces together how things really happened and explains it to other characters (and thus to the audience as well). In mystery shows of this sort, flashback is often used, and it's fun to watch and see what took place and how. Not only did this episode dispense with flashbacks, but also with any sort of explanation, period. Not even a denouement to wrap up loose ends. Apparently the filmmakers didn't want to bother, and instead thought that the histrionics involving the killer's suicide would leave viewers satisfied.
A fatal decision, since they left behind a giant plot hole --- the killer actually had an alibi for the second murder! The person who turns out to be the killer tells the police that he/she was at a public institution at the time the victim was being strangled and dumped in the river. This story is then verified for the police by other nameless witnesses off screen, a common device in murder stories meant to erase any doubt about the character whatsoever. But there is no attempt made to account for this alibi, no revelation that a witness was lying, mistaken, etc. We are left confused, with the knowledge that the character had an alibi and couldn't be the culprit, yet did indeed commit the crime somehow. Very sloppy on the part of the filmmakers.
I just finished watching this on PBS, which has been showing it as a repeat. I was kind of disappointed with the direction it took in part three, when it chose to examine heavy themes of war and racism rather than provide an involving mystery and the appropriate clues. The lack of such nuts and bolts of a good mystery gives the show the tone of a bland TV drama on commercial television. The build-up of the previous episodes regarding the theme of original sin and sins of the fathers was promising, with the stuffed snake toy suggesting intriguing possibilities. But the third part takes this theme to a melodramatic letdown of an explanation.
But what I'm most disappointed with is the absence of a climactic revelation, in which the detective pieces together how things really happened and explains it to other characters (and thus to the audience as well). In mystery shows of this sort, flashback is often used, and it's fun to watch and see what took place and how. Not only did this episode dispense with flashbacks, but also with any sort of explanation, period. Not even a denouement to wrap up loose ends. Apparently the filmmakers didn't want to bother, and instead thought that the histrionics involving the killer's suicide would leave viewers satisfied.
A fatal decision, since they left behind a giant plot hole --- the killer actually had an alibi for the second murder! The person who turns out to be the killer tells the police that he/she was at a public institution at the time the victim was being strangled and dumped in the river. This story is then verified for the police by other nameless witnesses off screen, a common device in murder stories meant to erase any doubt about the character whatsoever. But there is no attempt made to account for this alibi, no revelation that a witness was lying, mistaken, etc. We are left confused, with the knowledge that the character had an alibi and couldn't be the culprit, yet did indeed commit the crime somehow. Very sloppy on the part of the filmmakers.
Quality production
stewart7864-672-66250013 April 2020
A real filmatic quality to this one, not least the opening scene. We have Dalgliesh reading poetry to some music and beautiful cinematography from a boat on the Thames with the backdrop of the Houses of Parliament. A quality cast too, Ian Bannen in his later years and the much under- rated Amanda Root in her prime particularly worthy of mention. A good plot, if slightly confusing opening , that is nevertheless worth sticking with.
Beware the snake...
gingerninjasz28 August 2023
After two feature length mysteries P. D James returned to the screen in a sort of multi episode format again with Original Sin in 1997. Here it is in 3 parts and is somewhat of a return to form (of sorts) after the disappointment of the last two adaptations. It also goes back to one of P. D. James' recurring themes, the setting in an institution or closed workplace, and here it is set at Innocent House, a book publishers where staff have to travel across the river by boat just to get to it. Needless to say, being trapped at their workplace until clocking off time creates a rather tense workplace, so it's no surprise to find that not everyone gets along with each other - if at all!
Indeed, when this story starts off Dalgliesh turns up at Innocent House on the invitation of an old friend, poet Gabriel Dauntsey (Ian Bannen), who is one of many working at Innocent House. It turns out that Gabriel hasn't called up Adam just for a social chit chat but because he and a number of colleagues have been receiving anonymous spiteful letters that are becoming worrying. But before Dalgliesh has even had time to digest this bit of news, his attention is diverted to a commotion upstairs, where the body of one of the employees, a Sonya Clements, is found dead on a bed in a sparse grimy room. Seemingly she has committed suicide, but if so, why? And if not, why was she killed? As the inquest takes place, Dalgliesh takes somewhat of a back seat as life continues at Innocent House, which has been taken over by young upstart Gerard Etienne (James Wilby) from his respected predecessor and proceeds to make himself very unpopular indeed with the staff. The letters progress to more sinister methods when Gerard's car has acid poured over it and by the end of the first episode another body is discovered in the same said room (I'll give you three guesses who it is). Intriguingly he is half naked and with a toy snake stuffed in his mouth, and is such a startling sight that it also adds to some amusement when one characters suggests it could of been an accident, only for the dead man's sister to point out "What - with a toy snake stuffed in his mouth?" (It might pass as misadventure, I suppose...).
Naturally, there are a number of suspects and Dalgliesh has to decide who would wish to kill him (anyone who knew him, perhaps?), such as his sister Claudia, who now takes over the business and needs the money for her lover; former lover Frances who objected to his attempts to sell Innocent House; James De Witt, who secretly fancies Frances (despite hints at first that he might be gay, due to the young flatmate he has in another recurring P. D. James theme); secretary Miss Blacklett, whose snake was used to stuff Gerard (not literally, you understand) and who was facing the sack, plus novelist Esme Carling, whose works Gerard had decided to drop after 30 years and who was none too pleased about it. Or could it be new girl Mandy Price, who has only just started working at the establishment after turning up on her bike, who may have a dark secret to hide? Helping Dalgliesh in the case is new boy Daniel Aron, plus the return of Kate Miskin (hurrah!). Sadly it isn't Penny Downie in the role (boo!) but Lizzie McInnery, who plays her as a humourless and rather robotic character who tries too hard to be tough and be "like the men." They've not even bothered to match up the actresses, with Lizzie blonde to Penny's brunette, and as such invites unfavourable comparisons to Downie's performance in A Taste For Death. And speaking of that, this also features Matty (aka Gabrielle Lloyd), here playing a nun and the sister of Sonya Clements, the dead woman found upstairs at the beginning. Don't worry if you'd forgotten her, because at times so does this adaptation.
There are flaws in this adaptation and some crucial ones at that. As mentioned, the original death of Sonya Clements is often forgotten and it's never really gone into why (or if) she committed suicide. It also never explains why the murder room was vacuumed, while there is the point mentioned by one of the reviewers on here about one of the murders where the killer is clearly given an alibi for the time it was committed. How then could they of done the murder? Was Hissing Sid the snake also in on the act? It also doesn't help itself in maintaining the mystery when a recurring theme pops up throughout the adaptation in conversation. Once that is mentioned, you just know it has to have some connection with the deaths, and from that point on the murderer's identity looks almost obvious.
Despite it being a 3 part mystery, it could of done with setting the scene more before the first death, as Sonya is just reduced to a corpse in an attic, with no real impact of the effect of her death on her work colleagues or what she was like. Indeed, it might of be wiser to establish the characters first to get to know them better, as few of them have any depth to them - except maybe Gabriel Dauntsey and Frances Peverell, who is haunted by her past and a tunnel that disturb her dreams from her childhood. But that is because this adaptation does canter along at quite a speed to prevent any real analysis of character, and despite it's flaws it cannot be said to be dull. It keeps interest throughout it's 3 episodes and there are enough incident and murders to keep the average viewer gripped. It also has some humour, such as the moment when Dalgliesh asks if the dead man was liked, only to be told by a sparky Rowena Cooper as Mrs Demery "Well, he wouldn't be carried out in a body bag if he was a little ray of sunshine now, would he?" Cooper is amusing but rarely used in this, as is Samantha Edmonds as the bright and chirpy Mandy Price, while other performances range from poor (Carolyn Pickles) to going through the motions (James Wilby - do you think he yearns to play a nice character for once?). More fun is Sylvia Syms as the peeved rejected novelist Esme Carling, who adds life into all the scenes she has. Ian Bannen is always good value, while Amanda Root adds some depth to her troubled character Frances Peverell. There is even an appearance by a young Brooke Kinsella, who may be an important witness for Dalgliesh.
It's conclusion is bound to have an impact on all who watch it and also leave some a little angry too. As the last intended victim is confronted about the reason, their attempts to justify it with the usual lazy argument and retaliation accusations grated with me as there was no remorse whatsoever from this rather unpleasant character. Nor did Dalgliesh pull them up on it, as it became clear he was going to keep a very impartial attitude to proceedings and how sympathy was only reserved for them. The shock twist revelation for the murderer did little to dampen feelings that you wished the killer had managed to succeed at the job before being caught, and although a killer has been caught it left you feeling that justice had not really been done. That aside, and despite the many plot flaws that dog this adaptation this was still an enjoyable watch. It goes along at a great pace for modern viewers and has enough incident and deaths to make sure it is never less than compelling. It isn't in the same vintage as the 1980's adaptations, but after the disappointment of the feature length failures that followed it, this marks as a decent return to form. Not outstanding perhaps and it would of benefitted from more depth in the characters. But it still remains an interesting mystery that maybe plays it's hand a bit too open for the reason behind the kiilings.
Indeed, when this story starts off Dalgliesh turns up at Innocent House on the invitation of an old friend, poet Gabriel Dauntsey (Ian Bannen), who is one of many working at Innocent House. It turns out that Gabriel hasn't called up Adam just for a social chit chat but because he and a number of colleagues have been receiving anonymous spiteful letters that are becoming worrying. But before Dalgliesh has even had time to digest this bit of news, his attention is diverted to a commotion upstairs, where the body of one of the employees, a Sonya Clements, is found dead on a bed in a sparse grimy room. Seemingly she has committed suicide, but if so, why? And if not, why was she killed? As the inquest takes place, Dalgliesh takes somewhat of a back seat as life continues at Innocent House, which has been taken over by young upstart Gerard Etienne (James Wilby) from his respected predecessor and proceeds to make himself very unpopular indeed with the staff. The letters progress to more sinister methods when Gerard's car has acid poured over it and by the end of the first episode another body is discovered in the same said room (I'll give you three guesses who it is). Intriguingly he is half naked and with a toy snake stuffed in his mouth, and is such a startling sight that it also adds to some amusement when one characters suggests it could of been an accident, only for the dead man's sister to point out "What - with a toy snake stuffed in his mouth?" (It might pass as misadventure, I suppose...).
Naturally, there are a number of suspects and Dalgliesh has to decide who would wish to kill him (anyone who knew him, perhaps?), such as his sister Claudia, who now takes over the business and needs the money for her lover; former lover Frances who objected to his attempts to sell Innocent House; James De Witt, who secretly fancies Frances (despite hints at first that he might be gay, due to the young flatmate he has in another recurring P. D. James theme); secretary Miss Blacklett, whose snake was used to stuff Gerard (not literally, you understand) and who was facing the sack, plus novelist Esme Carling, whose works Gerard had decided to drop after 30 years and who was none too pleased about it. Or could it be new girl Mandy Price, who has only just started working at the establishment after turning up on her bike, who may have a dark secret to hide? Helping Dalgliesh in the case is new boy Daniel Aron, plus the return of Kate Miskin (hurrah!). Sadly it isn't Penny Downie in the role (boo!) but Lizzie McInnery, who plays her as a humourless and rather robotic character who tries too hard to be tough and be "like the men." They've not even bothered to match up the actresses, with Lizzie blonde to Penny's brunette, and as such invites unfavourable comparisons to Downie's performance in A Taste For Death. And speaking of that, this also features Matty (aka Gabrielle Lloyd), here playing a nun and the sister of Sonya Clements, the dead woman found upstairs at the beginning. Don't worry if you'd forgotten her, because at times so does this adaptation.
There are flaws in this adaptation and some crucial ones at that. As mentioned, the original death of Sonya Clements is often forgotten and it's never really gone into why (or if) she committed suicide. It also never explains why the murder room was vacuumed, while there is the point mentioned by one of the reviewers on here about one of the murders where the killer is clearly given an alibi for the time it was committed. How then could they of done the murder? Was Hissing Sid the snake also in on the act? It also doesn't help itself in maintaining the mystery when a recurring theme pops up throughout the adaptation in conversation. Once that is mentioned, you just know it has to have some connection with the deaths, and from that point on the murderer's identity looks almost obvious.
Despite it being a 3 part mystery, it could of done with setting the scene more before the first death, as Sonya is just reduced to a corpse in an attic, with no real impact of the effect of her death on her work colleagues or what she was like. Indeed, it might of be wiser to establish the characters first to get to know them better, as few of them have any depth to them - except maybe Gabriel Dauntsey and Frances Peverell, who is haunted by her past and a tunnel that disturb her dreams from her childhood. But that is because this adaptation does canter along at quite a speed to prevent any real analysis of character, and despite it's flaws it cannot be said to be dull. It keeps interest throughout it's 3 episodes and there are enough incident and murders to keep the average viewer gripped. It also has some humour, such as the moment when Dalgliesh asks if the dead man was liked, only to be told by a sparky Rowena Cooper as Mrs Demery "Well, he wouldn't be carried out in a body bag if he was a little ray of sunshine now, would he?" Cooper is amusing but rarely used in this, as is Samantha Edmonds as the bright and chirpy Mandy Price, while other performances range from poor (Carolyn Pickles) to going through the motions (James Wilby - do you think he yearns to play a nice character for once?). More fun is Sylvia Syms as the peeved rejected novelist Esme Carling, who adds life into all the scenes she has. Ian Bannen is always good value, while Amanda Root adds some depth to her troubled character Frances Peverell. There is even an appearance by a young Brooke Kinsella, who may be an important witness for Dalgliesh.
It's conclusion is bound to have an impact on all who watch it and also leave some a little angry too. As the last intended victim is confronted about the reason, their attempts to justify it with the usual lazy argument and retaliation accusations grated with me as there was no remorse whatsoever from this rather unpleasant character. Nor did Dalgliesh pull them up on it, as it became clear he was going to keep a very impartial attitude to proceedings and how sympathy was only reserved for them. The shock twist revelation for the murderer did little to dampen feelings that you wished the killer had managed to succeed at the job before being caught, and although a killer has been caught it left you feeling that justice had not really been done. That aside, and despite the many plot flaws that dog this adaptation this was still an enjoyable watch. It goes along at a great pace for modern viewers and has enough incident and deaths to make sure it is never less than compelling. It isn't in the same vintage as the 1980's adaptations, but after the disappointment of the feature length failures that followed it, this marks as a decent return to form. Not outstanding perhaps and it would of benefitted from more depth in the characters. But it still remains an interesting mystery that maybe plays it's hand a bit too open for the reason behind the kiilings.
'Original Sin' is a complicated story of murders at a prominent publishing house in London.
wimsattm23 April 2009
The novel 'Original Sin' is perhaps P. D. James' longest and richest book. Its many characters are fully and interestingly developed. Even the murderer is a fairly sympathetic figure. The book has multiple interesting narrative strands. It cannot be praised too highly.
The film, by contrast, is AWFUL. It should have been at least 4 hours long in order to do the complicated narrative justice. The casting is poor, and the acting for the most part is wooden. In the book, Frances Peverell and James de Witt are attractive young people. In the film, they are middle aged and are considerably less attractive than in the book. Roy Marsden's acting is uninspired, as is that of the actress who plays Kate Miskin. The murderer is a more stalwart figure in the film than in the book, which makes him less sympathetic in the film.
The themes of war and racism that one reviewer dislikes are central to the book. Without giving too much away, I will merely remark that the roots of the murders go back to World War II and that the alleged racism is connected to the horrors of the Holocaust. The young Jewish man on Dalgliesh's team understands the motives for the murders and as a result understands what the murderer was trying to do.
Finally, the excellent ending of the novel is cheapened by the different, sensationalized conclusion in the film. All in all, I'd say read the book, and don't bother with the DVD.
The film, by contrast, is AWFUL. It should have been at least 4 hours long in order to do the complicated narrative justice. The casting is poor, and the acting for the most part is wooden. In the book, Frances Peverell and James de Witt are attractive young people. In the film, they are middle aged and are considerably less attractive than in the book. Roy Marsden's acting is uninspired, as is that of the actress who plays Kate Miskin. The murderer is a more stalwart figure in the film than in the book, which makes him less sympathetic in the film.
The themes of war and racism that one reviewer dislikes are central to the book. Without giving too much away, I will merely remark that the roots of the murders go back to World War II and that the alleged racism is connected to the horrors of the Holocaust. The young Jewish man on Dalgliesh's team understands the motives for the murders and as a result understands what the murderer was trying to do.
Finally, the excellent ending of the novel is cheapened by the different, sensationalized conclusion in the film. All in all, I'd say read the book, and don't bother with the DVD.
Remarkably poor
Laight17 July 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Perhaps because so many good English mysteries come to America, we're used to seeing some terrific stories with great acting, directing, and story lines. This is a rather strangely bad piece of work. Roy Marsden plays Inspector Dalgliesh as a somewhat nasty and whiny man; the rest of the characters are all extremely unpleasant, and the one good person in the story ends up making a completely inexplicable decision at the end of the interminably long show (the other police sidekick is a terrible actress who seems to only be able to squint and wheeze at the camera). The writing is very poor quality, with constant speeches explaining what characters are doing or what they should be doing, and the direction is bafflingly amateurish. All in all, given that the people involved, including PD James, are for the most part talented professionals who have done far better work, this seems as though it were put together in a few weeks and then thrown onto television. Just not up to the standards of a Foyle, a Morse, a Lynley, etc.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
