Marple (TV Series) By the Pricking of My Thumbs (2006) User Reviews

Miss Marple, the babysitter

[Coventry · 6/10 · 2 January 2021]

Even though I can easily call myself a massive (my dear wife has even used the word "obsessive") fan of Agatha Christie, I never read one of her novels or short stories revolving around the sleuth-couple Tommy and Tuppence. They are obviously not as colorful or lovable as Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple, but they have appeared in a handful of allegedly very solid stories, including this "By the Pricking of my Thumbs".

The plot of this whodunit was found good enough to be included in Granada's "Agatha Christie's Marple" TV-series, but since the clever old spinster from St Mary Mead is the one and only heroine here, Miss Marple reprises the role of Tommy Beresford and simultaneously acts as guardian of Tuppence. Seriously, neither Tommy nor Tuppence is portrayed as a good detective, let alone a good person. Tommy is an arrogant and self-centered brute, whilst Tuppence is an insecure alcoholic. Miss Marple has more work babysitting her than solving the crime.

In spite of the intriguing opening sequences, set in a retirement home, and a truly absorbing third act with brilliant and unforeseeable plot twists, this episode is one of the weaker in the series. The middle section, with Miss Marple and Tuppence snooping around in the little town without really making any progress, is quite dull and the red herrings are too transparent. As said, the denouement is great, though.

Counsel for the defense

[steen-just · 7/10 · 5 January 2015]

Most reviews of the adaption seem to be counsel for the prosecution in the murder case against ITV. I'd rather be witness for the defense. I read my first Christie, "Endless Night", in the late sixties and was fascinated. Fortunately I read some of the old crime novels before I had the newest Christie, "By the Pricking of my Thumbs", as a present. It began rather well but declined into endless conversations of nonsense and the plot was bad structured with many loose ends. So I was about to give up Christie, but offered her a second chance, read "Five Little Pigs" and fascination turned into addiction. Most of her novels I've read 4-7 times and except for Bobby Jones and Frankie Derwent ("Why didn't They ask Evans?"), T&T must be the most bumbling amateurs, Christie ever created. In the adaption they're at least living people, not pieces from a cupboard. Tuppece is performed with sympathy and affection and has a perfect alibi for her drinking problem. Her husband, as a MI6 colonel, is spending most of his time travelling around the world doing "business", but in the end rediscovering her existence. Sounds pretty much like late Christie and works better than the novel.

I guess the Christie estate only has eyes for the bottom line

[blanche-2 · 7/10 · 28 November 2011]

Dame Agatha must be rolling in her grave.

"By the Pricking of My Thumbs" is one of the Geraldine McEwan as Miss Marple series, filmed in Australia with excellent production values and scripts that veer wildly from the source material.

Christie wrote a very good mystery here, which is intact, and that's what saves this thing. The writer has seen fit to make this a joint mystery. Originally, the story was a Tommy and Tuppence story (here played by Anthony Andrews and Greta Scacchi), but now Miss Marple is also involved, working with Tuppence to solve the crime.

The plot concerns Tommy's feisty Aunt Ada (Claire Bloom), whose biting tongue drives Tuppence from the room in the nursing home where she lives. While waiting for Tommy, Tuppence meets a strange woman, Miss Lawrence, who talks of a child dying behind a fireplace and makes other strange statements. Aunt Ada dies, but beforehand, she sends a note to Tommy hinting of some chicanery at the nursing home where she lives. A post-mortem reveals that Aunt Ada was poisoned. Plus, the mysterious Miss Lawrence has disappeared.

The writer has added some unnecessary subplots and fooled around with a few of the characters, but nothing compares with what is done to poor Tommy and Tuppence. Tommy is now an important government man who is out of town a lot, and Tuppence is a drunken, lonely housewife. Give me a break. Andrews and Scacchi are both top-notch actors, and these roles are beneath them. I much prefer the series I saw on PBS with Francesca Annis as Tuppence.

Geraldine McEwan is a bit too worldly for Miss Marple, but this series isn't one that sticks to the novels.

If you like your Christie pure and unadulterated, I'd skip this.

Good Overall Series BUT ...

[gardeniapalms · 4 October 2019]

These stories with Geraldine McEwan & Julia McKenzie as the determined sleuth are truly enjoyable & charming. Between the novels & short stories there is no shortage of source material, so to choose s "Tommy & Tuppence" story then write in the character of "Miss Marple" is a bit baffling. That aside, the real problem I had with this story is the treatment of "Tuppence Beresford".

Granted that "Tommy & Tuppence" were the only Agatha Christie characters that aged in real time with Dame Agatha Christie, but one thing "Tuppence" wasn't was a sloppy, rude drunk as she was written in this story.

"Tommy" loved her and had a lot of respect for her talents, yet in this story he treats her as if she is incompetent, insinuates she is drinking too much again, and gets in the way of the investigation she & "Miss Marple" started.

The saving grace is that "Jane Marple" is consistent and helps to wrap things up as only she can. To watch adaptations of "Tommy and Tuppence" that portray them close to what Dame Agatha Christie wrote and intended, check out both "Partners In Crime" series.

Watchable but disjointed

[martin-intercultural · 6/10 · 20 July 2023]

A reasonably entertaining story suffers several setbacks straight from the get-go. Among them, in all the previous Tommy and Tuppence stories I had watched, the two were the epitome of Art Deco cool. Joie de vivre personified. To see them now as a greying, exhausted couple who can barely recall their sleuthing days immediately deflates the episode, knocks the wind out of the viewer and bodes ill for what's to come. Similarly, June Whitfield the comedy legend is unrecognizable. Although normally I'm not a fan of one-trick-pony acts, in this case I was wishing she had reprised her dotty character from AbFab. The list goes on: The scenes where Tuppence and Marple are disguising their true intentions while visiting a village pub just screamed for some wicked humour, comedy-of-error style, which never materialized. Overall, a production where even formidable acting talent chooses to play it safe, thus rendering the outcome quite forgettable.

A flat novel is given a soul

[Sleepin_Dragon · 10/10 · 5 October 2015]

My review is at odds to most of those on here, I actually think it's a brilliant adaptation. I'm not a lover of the original text, I find it rather flat and a bit boring, I always thought that the book leads you up a blind alley. They managed to bring this production to life, with a fantastic screenplay, some wonderful dialogue, and a very dark undertone. Jane Marple is very cleverly inserted into the story, it doesn't feel contrived as it has done in one or two others. It's fast paced, full of mystery and intrigue. It looks great too, Greta Scacchi wears some great clothes, and that car is awesome. I love the music used too, although the opening music was changed on the DVD release.

A totally fabulous cast at work here, Charles Dance is totally superb, he fills the screen when he's on, Greta Scacchi, Lia Williams, Lesley Phillips are brilliant, but what a stunning performance from June Whitfield, she shows us she can do simply anything, I've never seen her in a role like this before. The ending was truly amazing, what a shocker, one of the best Marple endings.

Great humour provided by Bonnie Langford and Brian Conley, I absolutely loved the line 'no he comes from Luton,' hilarious. I like O.T. Fagbenle very much, he's a good guy, his American accent was a little bit dodgy.

Even in 2020 I still love it, 10/10.

Charming, slightly edgy adaptation. I liked the Tuppence/Jane detective duo

[lovemydesignergenes · 7/10 · 30 August 2016]

I liked this adaptation. No, Miss Marple is not in the original story. But to me...the Marple/Beresford duo basically works! Now I don't remember about the local clergyman...and all that. It seems a bit far-fetched...a clergyman carrying on with another woman for years and years and no one... in a small village...figures it out? (Wonder if the adapting writers lived in a small village. Not too many secrets...and clergy are scrutinized especially closely.) It does strike a wrong note...Perhaps the writers were unfamiliar with clergy. If such an affair were happening it's likely either the clergyman would have voluntarily left his post...or the affair would have been discovered. Gossips are blood hounds.

Other that that false note, the adaptation is, to me. a realistic post World War 2 view of The Beresfords as an empty nest couple, who must adjust once more to each other.

My favorite scenes are when Tuppence and Jane are running around...solving the puzzle...in a village where lots of people have their secrets.

A Fun Escape

[topazcat · 8/10 · 26 June 2006]

I loved it, plain and simple. I liked the chemistry between Tommy and Tuppence and understood the reason for her drinking - it becomes clear as the movie went on and adds a bit of pathos to her storyline. Meeting Miss Marple just added fun to the mix, almost making this a "buddy" flick.

My sons are 11 and 13 and they became so wrapped up in the mystery that when the first half was over, they got upset thinking they might have to wait a week to see the ending. (To their (and my) relief, the second half followed the first.) When the movie was over, they sat up for almost an hour talking about it and now they want to read Agatha Christie! Honestly, can you ask for more than that from a book turned into a movie? To have it excite someone to the point where they want to find more of the same to read? I think not.

NOTE: The other reviewers might have some good points about the movie's creators adding Miss Marple into a mystery that she was never in, but I did not know and give my review based upon that. (I have read one or two Miss Marple mysteries, but I was more of a Hercule Poirot fan and have never read a Tommy & Tuppence mystery, much less watched on on TV.)

Hansel & Gretel a la Christie

[gridoon2024 · 6/10 · 4 July 2011]

"By The Pricking Of My Thumbs" is most notable for its fairy-tale-like quality: the village where most of the action is set is a sinister, otherworldly place, away from modern civilization, complete with its own secrets and legends, and there are references to both "Hansel & Gretel" and "Little Red Riding Hood". There are also cryptic clues in a painting. Miss Marple and Tuppence Beresford make a good team (although this was originally a Tommy & Tuppence novel, Marple is inserted into the story pretty naturally, while Tommy's role is reduced). The pacing lags a bit in the middle, but the solution is actually one of Agatha Christie's cleverest and most chilling - and lines like "Mrs. Lancaster is not safe" or "It wasn't YOUR poor child, was it?" acquire a wonderful double meaning. **1/2 out of 4.

Excellent!

[shanty_sleuth · 10/10 · 6 March 2006]

I was skeptical about Miss Marple being entwined into a Tommy & Tuppence Beresford mystery, but she was woven into the plot beautifully in the movie. Geraldine McEwan is a great Miss Marple, and she was particularly eccentric in this move (maybe a little too much coffee?) Tuppence Beresford is a middle-aged, drinking housewife who spends most of her time alone. Her husband, Tommy, is usually away on business with the Military Intelligence Service. One day, Tommy and Tuppence go to the Sunny Ridge Nursing Home for Ladies to visit Aunt Ada, Tommy's quick-witted aunt. Tuppence befriends the dotty old Mrs Lancaster, who tells her about a murdered child behind a fireplace. This bugs Tuppence, but Tommy thinks it's the talk of a crazy old "biddie." A few weeks later, Aunt Ada is dead and Mrs Lancaster is missing. Tuppence receives a painting of an old cottage which she believes didn't belong to Ada. Miss Marple, visiting an old friend, decides to help Tuppence put together the mystery. It takes them to Farrell St. Edmund, a Norfolk village holding a barricade of secrets. That's where the Witch's House, the house in the painting, was presumably painted. Marple and Tuppence believe that Mrs Lancaster was taken to that house by one of her relatives. But first they must find out who the relative is... is it Mrs and Mr Johnston, a twittery couple who have the habit of repeating each other? Is it Nellie and Septimus Bligh, the vicar and his wife? Or Rose Waters, a pregnant bartender? The ending is truly a delightful shocker! If you like Miss Marple, this is an enjoyable mystery to watch. It has humor, suspense, and lots of drama. It makes me think how they'll do "The Sittaford Mystery"... Truly an excellent, yet awkward adaptation!

Nothing like the novel, but not too bad, actually

[duntrune · 6/10 · 29 May 2008]

The good: It was still suspenseful, MacEwan was pretty solid & seeing Tommy bust some chops was pretty cool. The bad: Tuppence is a lush? WTF? And if we're going to have a Tommy & Tuppence story, where the hell is Albert???? OK, the changes to the storyline I've come to accept in these new ones, and the main changes (other than putting Marple in) weren't too bad. They CAN make some changes and still keep the tone of the novel, as they showed in Towards Zero and The Moving Finger. I thought the intro of Miss Marple was well done here, she fit into the story nicely, and yeah, it became a "buddy" flick, but it was entertaining. I don't know why everyone slams MacEwan so badly for her portrayal, she plays it a bit lighthearted, but that's another dimension of the character that Hickson simply didn't go for. In MANY of the novels Jane Marple is willing to appear to be a batty old biddy, and then she comes right out with a razor sharp observation or question that blows you away. So MacEwan plays that aspect of the character up with a bit of a twinkle in her eye. BFD. There CAN be some middle ground between Rutherford's over the top goofiness and Hickson's rather deadpan appearances. And she doesn't always play it goofy, as she shut Tommy up and had him vouch for her quite effectively! Now....heck, age-wise, Tommy and Tuppence are still more than capable, and I'd love to see JUST them in N or M, their second best adventure after their first.

Worth seeing, but don't worry about the source novel!

[AnnieLola · 8/10 · 4 July 2006]

The quite good Christie novel on which this was based has been radically altered and expanded, so it's really an almost entirely new story, and really not bad, though bewildering at times. Red herrings abound! Anthony Andrews, as Tommy, really hasn't enough to do; this is Tuppence's story, and she's quite an unusual sort of sleuth. Interesting to put Miss Marple with Tommy and Tuppence; now let's bring in Poirot and Mrs. Oliver and have a proper mystery mob! Apropos this, Christie herself did remark that Poirot's ego wouldn't tolerate sharing the spotlight with Miss Marple, as I recall. One can always enjoy the settings and period detail of these tales, and of course Geraldine McEwan is a charmer; I'm sure that Dame Agatha would have approved of her as the wily Marple. I had a little issue with the supporting casting, though; the very handsome O.T. Fagbenle, playing the romantic American G.I. Chris Murphy, was detectably English passing for American, and seemed to be imitating John Malkovich's voice. There were just a few inflections that gave him away, though overall he did quite well. At least he hadn't been coached by whoever was making many British actresses play Americans who all sounded like Midwestern farmwives, whatever the character's station in life. Also the sense of period is compromised by the fact that no one seems to notice that Fagbenle plainly has some African blood (father Nigerian), and in fact looks a great deal like Harry Belafonte (gorgeous). Bearing in mind the attitudes of the time and place, someone would have commented on the interracial nature of his romance with an English girl, unless we're to assume that he's passed for white. Or are we to assume he actually IS white in this role? They do make a beautiful couple, at any rate. Colorblind casting works for stories in modern settings and onstage, but to be really faithful to a period one must allow for some limitations, though this can regrettably exclude a lot of fine performers-- it's a problem, and where's the correct balance to strike? But then this isn't real history; it's fiction, so one can make a bit free with Fact, I suppose. Just how free, though? Casting should be credible. Anyway, this production does make for an intriguing mystery, whatever minor points one cares to consider worthy of fuss!

The books don't matter!

[darkdementress · 7/10 · 13 September 2020]

Tv and movies adaptations are completely different then novels and i don't care what you read in the book, the books don't matter! I quite enjoyed this story and i do like miss Marple and the actress is quirky and great. I'm not sure why it's a meme that all the women are bad drivers but it's pretty sexist! That's the only down side

All a bit of a yawn!,

[benbrae76 · 3/10 · 28 August 2006]

I had reservations about the combining of Tommy & Tuppence with Miss Marple, and wondered how it would be achieved. It was really rather clever at first. However the transformation of Tuppence Beresford into a bored housewife with a drink problem, is somewhat at odds with the character that Agatha Christie created. If anything Tuppence was always the brighter and more forthright of the married couple, and there was never ever a suggestion by Dame Agatha that such a weakness existed.

The Beresfords visit Tommy's Aunt Ada at the nursing home in which she is living, where they hear of a supposed murder of a child in bygone years. A week or so later Tuppence is told of said Auntie's sudden death and treats the news with suspicion. Then she learns that Ada's friend Mrs Lancaster (June Whitfield, the BBC radio Miss Marple) had suddenly disappeared that same evening. Whilst Tommy is away on MI6 business, Tuppence and Jane Marple (who had also been a-visiting at the home) join forces to solve the mystery.

I read this Tommy and Tuppence tale years ago, but it's storyline has faded from my memory, so I can't tell (apart from the fact that Jane Marple wasn't in the novel) how much this production has veered from the original. Plot-wise, "By the Pricking of my Thumbs" is not a bad whodunit, but the under-played performances from the top stars on display here were sadly lack-lustre. It was only a yawn or two that actually kept me awake. Overall this production is only slightly better than "Sleeping Murder" (which was nothing but utter carnage).

I just cannot understand why there is a pathological insistence, particularly in this series, of wanting to change something purely for the sake of change? Will there next be an attempt to have Poirot solving Marple mysteries, and vice-versa, or will Superintendent Battle solve the lot? And will someone then come up with the idea of the collecting together Hercule Poirot, Jane Marple, Supt Battle, Parker Pyne, Mr Quinn, Tommy & Tuppence, and calling them "The Seven Scanner Eyes"? Why can't they leave Dame Agatha alone? Would they have the gall to treat Charles Dickens in such a scandalous way? Can I suggest Wilkins Micawber to solve "The Mystery of Edwin Drood"? I don't think that anyone can deny Dame Agatha Christie's place in classical literature, even if most of her works are "only" murder mysteries. (Let's face it, one of the founders of the "whodunits" genre was Wilkie Collins, a contemporary and close friend of Charles Dickens, and even the latter dabbled.) I'm sure Christie worked out her plots in precise detail, which is probably why they've stood the test of time, whereas lesser authors' works have been forgotten. Which is all the more reason why they should not be taken apart and tarted up. Especially by screen writers who couldn't hold a candle to her, and are not fit to hold her pen.

Really poor delivery of an average product

[bob the moo · 8 January 2007]

Tommy and Tuppence Beresford go to visit Tommy's aunt Ada in a retirement home. While there Tuppence gets talking to the batty old Mrs Lancaster who tells of murderers and a dead child hidden behind the fireplace. A few days later and Tuppence gets a call to say that Ada has passed away. With Tommy away on business Tuppence goes to collect Ada's stuff and learns that Mrs Lancaster has been taking away by relatives. In Ada's possessions, Tuppence finds a painting that didn't belong to her and a letter from Ada talking about discoveries and how Mrs Lancaster is at risk. Tuppence confides her fears in an old woman visiting a friend in the home and together she and new friend Mrs Marple set off to follow a trail of clues deeper into mystery.

It must be said that this film does have some enjoyable parts to it and that generally the bright colours, pacey plot and simple delivery suited my dull and lazy brain when it screened on a Sunday evening. However that is about as forgiving as I feel like being because generally the film isn't very good and seems to ham it up at every chance with flamboyant touches in a frantic attempt to cover up how very average the whole thing is. The mystery is intriguing at first but gradually lost my interest by not building on the interesting aspects early on. The general delivery is a bit too light, supposedly in an attempt to try and make the whole film feel "fun", but in practice all it does is undermine the story. I wasn't too fussed about the source material but this was a mismatch of books and the whole film certainly is not what I think of when I think of Miss Marple.

The cast match this by producing a load of ham that even a butcher would struggle to sell. The performances are mostly OTT and unconvincing – obviously they have been directed to do this but it didn't pay off. Having earlier been concerned about McEwan in other films, here I was in no doubt that she is poor and unsuited to the role. Here she overdoes her facial expressions and at no point showed any sign of a sharp mind; in fact at times she is a shopping trolley and a smell of urine away from being a bag lady. Scacchi is no better, overdoing things and not convincing as the woman behind the man. Andrews is OK but is barely in it. This leaves the rest of the film to be populated by uninterested and hammy famous faces. The great Leslie Phillips delivers his lines with the vocabulary skills of Muhammad Ali (as he is now); Dance is such a ham that I kept expecting him to climb on a spit and stick an apple in his mouth; Whitfield is dotty; Lawrence has nothing to do and Berkoff is simply off his t1ts for no discernible reason.

Overall this just about suitable for a Sunday night because it moves along, is mindless and will not bother you much. However even ignoring the disrespect it shows to Christie, the film is still a fairly average affair with a poor "fun" delivery, so-so plot and performances that range form being pigs to being pure ham. Worth a look if you are seeking a refuge from thought but if you are an Agatha Christie fan then my advice would be to avoid this like the plague.

Not great, but an enjoyable mystery

[triumph_of_the_bugle · 7/10 · 2 April 2007]

Though Miss Marple wasn't in the original novel, I enjoyed this mystery all the same. While I would've preferred not to have seen Miss Marple (especially considering what a bad entry into the episode she has) I thought Tuppence (played to absolute perfection by Great Schacchi) took my mind of her.

I hope that more Tommy and Tuppence episodes are planned (without Miss Marple, please!) and that Miss Marple will just stick to her own mysteries, as we know that you have plenty of novels left to adapt.

(PLEASE don't change any Poirots like this because it would be a disaster!)

I recommend this for anyone who feels they can sit through Miss Marple being awfully similar to 'Midsomer Murders'

Christie purists should avoid

[Iain-215 · 8/10 · 5 April 2008]

There has been a great deal of blustering over the impertinence of injecting Miss Marple into stories where she should never be. Margaret Rutherford did it many moons ago and now ITV have done it with Geraldine McEwen in their Marple series. Its a long time since I read the book and so I'm not qualified to talk about changes made (although changes there will certainly have been). Taken on its own merits I enjoyed this adaptation. I particularly loved Greta Scacchi as Tuppence - yes I know she shouldn't be a frustrated alcoholic but given that that was the slant put on the role on this occasion, she played it very well indeed and I for one would not object if she were to team up with Miss Marple again in the future.

For me, the charm of this series does not lie with McEwen who is OK as Miss Marple but not outstanding. I love how they look and the mischievous dash of humour that is often injected (and Christie frequently has a lot of humour in her books) and the often excellent supporting casts. In this episode it is Scacchi who runs off with the honours and there is no one else to match her. June Whitfield plays a dottier version of Edina Monsoon's mother, Charles Dance overdoes it a bit as the drunken vicar and Leslie Phillips is - as always - Leslie Phillips.

So if you have an open mind, you will probably enjoy this. If the Christie canon is untouchable in your eyes then you will absolutely hate it.

Better than the Book

[sanddragon939 · 8/10 · 19 April 2009]

By the Pricking of my Thumbs is hardly one of Christie's better novels. That's not to say its completely boring or a waste of time. Its quite interesting actually and there are parts which will keep your eyes glued firmly to the page. However, though the premise of this novel is pretty good in an eerie sort of way, it suffers from a mediocre plot structure, too many confusing and meandering sub-plots and clues which don't quite make much sense until they are explained in the end (something which is a strict no-no as far as whodunits are concerned). The novel significantly deviates from the conventional detective story format that Agatha Christie herself perfected. However, a major redeeming factor in this novel are its two likable and lively protagonists, Tommy and Tuppence Beresford.

Basically, I have just listed down the reasons why the film adaptation is better than the book (quite a rarity as far as film adaptations go!) The film, in contrast to the novel is somewhat more linear and structured in its story-telling. The inclusion of new, varied and interesting characters adds on tremendously to the background. A useless and confusing subplot from the novel is erased and as such there is greater focus on the central macabre plot. However, one aspect of the film which pales in comparison to the novel are the portrayal of the two protagonists Tommy and Tuppence. The actors may have played their parts to perfection and look about the same age the characters must have been in the book, but frankly, I always viewed Tommy and Tuppence as being a bit more youthful and fun in the book, regardless of their chronological age. Instead, in the film, Tommy is portrayed as tough authority figure and cold and distant husband, while Tuppence is the neglected wife who drinks away her sorrows. Furthermore, both characters are largely overshadowed by Miss Marple (who did not appear in the novel). However, one understands as since this film is no more than an episode in the 'Marple' TV series and that Tommy and Tuppence are not really that big brand names to have their independent adaptations, one doesn't mind so much.

Intriguing and engaging

[grantss · 8/10 · 6 July 2016]

Tommy and Tuppence Beresford visit their aunt Aida in a nursing home. Aida cryptically mentions to Tuppence about a murdered child. The next day Tuppence is found dead in her bed. Causes appear to be natural but Tuppence's suspicions are aroused when a note from Aida mentions that fellow-nursing home dweller Mrs Lancaster is not safe. Coincidentally, Mrs Lancaster has just checked out, accompanied by Mr and Mrs Johnson. While pondering all this at the nursing home, Tuppence runs into someone who is intrigued by her musings - Miss Marple. Together, and aided by a painting, they set off to find the Johnsons and Mrs Lancaster, as they are sure they are key to a mystery and potentially a murder, or two.

Quite intriguing and engaging. Once again, the central character is not Miss Marple, but someone else. In this case, Tuppence, played by Greta Scacchi. Tuppence's sleuthing is very intelligent and interesting, though her conclusions are rushed (amateur!). Her character is an interesting one too, increasing the engagement.

Some fairly interesting sub-plots, including a love triangle, and you have an enthralling drama.

Conclusion is quite interesting and plausible too.

I actually liked this

[Jake-46 · 9/10 · 7 April 2009]

I wasn't too thrilled with Geraldine McEwan in the first movies of the Marple series, but I've gradually come to slightly enjoy her. I feel like they made her part smaller which works great, at least to me. I was also very excited to see Tommy and Tuppence being portrayed for the first time. I absolutely loved Greta Scacchi. She was fantastic, and giving Tuppence an alcohol problem worked fine. The chemistry between the two main actresses was also great. I know there are changes from the book, and accept them. I've read the book several times, and when watching it on TV, it's kinda nice to see some changes. Good acting from the rest of the cats, especially June Whitfield and Lia Williams. Hope to see more of Tommy and Tuppence in the future :)

Something rotten in Agatha Christie land

[jimsimpson · 3/10 · 24 February 2006]

Aren't there enough Miss Marple stories still to be filmed without grafting her on to a Tommy And Tuppence mystery. Tuppence, quite unlike her character in the original novels, is now a bored fortyish housewife with a drink problem! Yet again liberties have been taken with the original source. Why does the vicar have to be an alcoholic and the husband of (formerly single) parish worker Nellie Bligh. There are other ridiculous subplots involving an obnoxious child actress and a village girl pregnant by a G.I which add nothing to the story whatsoever. To make way for this a perfectly good part of the original novel involving organized crime has been jettisoned. The executors of Mrs Christie's estate should be ashamed of allowing her work to be butchered in this way. As for Geraldine McEwan's 'revisionist' interpretatrion of 'Marple' God Help Us!

Ambitions Fail

[tedg · 26 April 2008]

Generally, Christie picked what sort of narrative tricks she wanted to play, and then that mystery device led her to pick her detective.

If it was an evil mastermind, Poirot was called in. If it were a series of opportunities and accidents with perhaps a genius, well then that's Marple territory. If its a tragic or sinister conspiracy, or anything else, then Tommy and Tuppence were our entry into the story, one watching the other. Its a pretty hard and fast rule if you diagram the mysteries, so its a strange thing to see Marple placed in a world not hers. This is sort of a detective adventure, a quest, even in the book. So our biddy is very passive and not particularly insightful as she has to be.

In this case, there's a second difficulty. A clue in the story is a painting. Christie was no schooled in narrative dynamics. There's no evidence that she ever read the theories of the times. But its clear that she thought about different elements of narrative and was aware that popular literature was growing toward cinematic devices. I believe this is affected this book and the painting is something of a movie within the movie. Its why she references Macbeth's witches, being a sort of play within the play.

The adapter knew this and emphasized the movie within this movie: a film of "Jane Eyre."

The plot revolves round predictions and shifting identities. And metaphoric witches.

The production tries to be snappy, somewhat screwball in places, and sometimes dipping into personal tragedy. It doesn't work for me.

Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

Wow!

[tml_pohlak_13 · 10/10 · 16 October 2007]

I read "By the Pricking of My Thumbs" and it is my favourite Tommy & Tuppence novel. This adaptation was completely different. The canal house was changed to the witch's house, the boat was changed into "cryptic clues" for Tommy. Tuppence was suddenly an alcoholic, and Nellie Bligh was married to the vicar. Not only that, they changed the murder victim and added another death. But it was absolutely amazing. The music was great, the acting awesome, the tension unbelievable and the conclusion startling. Despite feeling that my favourite Tommy and Tuppence novel was being destroyed on screen, I found it a thoroughly enjoyable experience. (By the way, I actually loved the novel. Many of us are just looking for a cheap excuse to condemn the MARPLE series further.)

I haven't read the book, but loved this!

[safenoe · 8/10 · 16 June 2021]

I'm new to Miss Marple and this was episode was a real treat, especially seeing Greta Scacchi and Charles Dance cast, as they appeared nearly 20 years prior in White Mischief. I haven't read the book, but still the Tuppence and Tommy element was worth watching for me at least. I was kept guessing until the end that's for sure. It's a shame Tuppence and Tommy didn't appear again in the Miss Marple series.

A good director creates atmosphere but jarring touches annoy

[raymundohpl · 8/10 · 20 June 2006]

The superb director of the chilling THE CHANGELING and the witty and iconoclastic THE RULING CLASS has imbued BY THE PRICKING OF MY THUMBS with several John Dickson Carr-like eerie supernatural touches. Despite some awful mugging by Geraldine McEwan as Miss Marple and a faded beauty Greta Scacchi as a tippling Tuppence Beresford, the overall mood and quality of this Dame Agatha Christie adaptation make it the BEST so far in this series. I saw Claire Bloom's name in the credits and wondered where she was until I saw her unmade-up features as the victim, Tommy Beresford(Anthony Andrews)'s Aunt Ada, in a wheelchair, yet!!! Amounted to a mere cameo, but a nice one. June Whitfield(the dotty mother in ABSOLUTELY FABULOUS) as Mrs. Lancaster is also a must watch. Charles Dance as the nasty boozing vicar Septimus Bligh(any relation to Captain Bligh?) is also nice to have around. The rest of the cast is above average, and if Geraldine McEwan could restrain her exuberance and curb her enthusiasm a bit more, she would make a good Miss Marple--AND STOP SMILING or is that leering, so much!!! I am very disappointed at Andrews and Scacchi's Tommy and Tuppence--James Warwick and Francesca Annis, where are you when we need you!!! The excellent direction, photography, mood and most of the actors save this adaptation, however.