Murder Is Easy (2023) User Reviews

David Jonsson

[CTap96 · 6/10 · 2 March 2024]

My husband and I are impressed with David Jonsson, whom we are watching for the first time. His character is classy, like old school acting we haven't seen in a while.

I am no more a fan of revising classic works than the next Marple fan. I've seen "4:50 to Paddington," with Joan Hickson, more times than I can count. When it was remade some years later, there were some tweaks to the story, but I enjoyed that version too, especially with Highclere as the filming location. As far as other retellings after Joan Hickson's time, I felt some were good and some not.

They never did "Murder is Easy," with Joan Hickson. In my opinion, Benedict Cumberbatch made the version he was in, as he assisted Miss Marple ("not a Miss Pinkerton" - no offense to the wonderful Penelope Wilton) because, frankly, the subject was particularly distasteful.

I am reviewing this before I see the second part of this new "Murder is Easy" because I already know my opinion of what makes watching this version worth at least one viewing: the lovely filming locations, Penelope Wilton, Douglas Henshall, Mark Bonnar, Matthew Baynton, and the old-style charm of David Jonsson, which is why I'm being generous with my rating.

I doubt the BBC cares what fans of British mysteries think of their revisions. There have been some pretty awful re-re-re-retellings of classic titles this past decade, to be sure. The best we can do is not watch what isn't good - but then we can't always know it isn't good until we watch. And maybe that's why the BBC keeps the bad revisions coming? No, they'll do what they want anyway.

Agatha would have said, 'meh'

[djcolzz · 5/10 · 29 December 2023]

Miss Pinkerton boards a train, making her way to Scotland Yard. On the train, she meets Luke Fitzwilliam, whom she tells her tale of murder in her village. Fitzwilliam, an investigator himself, frustrated at a delay in starting his new job, heads to Miss Pinkerton's village to investigate her claims. His eagerness is likewise inevasible by the death of Miss Pinkerton, soon after disembarking their train.

To be honest, I found this one a bit tedious. It felt like everyone was going through the motions. The level of acting was monotonous and prosaic.

Although David Jonsson carried the lead well enough, I couldn't help but think the political decision to make Fitzwilliam Nigerian was ill-conceived. It made it difficult to believe the setting where the story takes place. Penelope Wilton's brief appearance is brilliant as always. Matthew Baynton was also a stand-out ( in my opinion, he should have been Fitzwilliam and David Jonsson as the doctor may have been better).

The story itself is told in boring fashion with very little to hold your attention. I was distracted a lot and had to restart a couple of times, which, as a big Agatha Christie fan, is unusual for me. The BBC adaptions in this format have run its course. It's time for some Marple reworks.

Ignore the people moaning about black leads in period drama

[djalexblanco · 5/10 · 2 January 2024]

Putting a new spin on an old story is nothing new, and occasionally produces real gems, so ignore the people who were always going to hate anything that places brown faces in roles they grew up seeing white ones on TV. Despite the racism of the past, there were a good number of notably successful black and Asian people in Britain and the US (going back a couple of hundred years) - they just weren't in the films and TV shows the people complaining watched as children, and they weren't taught about in schools.

All that said, there are many more legitimate reasons to swerve this adaptation. It just lacked any real sense of jeopardy or tension. The pacing was off. Many of the characters came across as caricatures. There were too many ideas and unfinished / unexplored red herrings and other dramatic devices. All in all, it just felt like it was executed by people who don't love or understand the genre. Worth dozing on the sofa to one Sunday afternoon, but not much more than that, I'm afraid.

A solid, fresh adaptation.

[Sleepin_Dragon · 7/10 · 28 December 2023]

Whilst travelling to London on a train, Luke William encounters pensioner Lavinia Pinkerton, who explains that a killer is at large in her village of Wychwood, only the locals believe the deaths are all accidents, if nobody thinks it's murder, murder is Easy.

After the likes of And then there were none, ABC Murders and Witness for The Prosecution, Christie at Christmas is back.

Well publicised, I'd been looking forward to it, I don't think it's a brilliant adaptation, but it's a good one, it's a great story, one of my favourite Agatha Christie page turners, definitely one of these more bloodthirsty texts, there are plenty of murders.

The main talking point seems to be the casting of David Jonsson, several people seemed to be upset by the change, for me, he was the best thing about this production, he's excellent throughout.

Sinead Matthews, Tom Riley, Douglas Henshall, lots of talent to enjoy.

Very nicely produced, it looks great, those scenes of London looked amazing, some wonderful costumes.

Dear BBC, can we please have more next Christmas?

7/10.

Messy BBC confusion.

[Njs2016 · 4/10 · 30 December 2023]

Agatha Christie has a chequered history with Tv and Film adaptations, from early Poirot characterisations that made him French, yes French. Margaret Rutherford was a fun but hardly faithful to the source Miss Marple. The recent ITV adaptations of Marple have played fast a loose with the narratives and even changed murderers at points. So, it's true to say that adapting Christie can be fraught with difficulty when it appears 'easy'.

This adaptation was a mess on many levels. From a sub Wes Anderson approach to texture and editing rhythm, strange close ups, wobbly camera work and a script that clanked along pouring exposition on top of the imposition of a post-colonial narrative - it just didn't mesh.

The ideas were bold, and in many ways could have been brilliant, just so many choices at once going away from the source material began to stress the story so much that it became vague and confused, an original piece about colonial attitudes in the 20th Century or a straight down the line thriller would have been much more effective and a much stronger choice from the BBC.

The problem with BBC commissions at the moment is their lack of vision to make original drama, they appear to want to be commercial whilst trying to service what is current and hotly debated. This leaves the BBC feeling confused and only concerned with issues that trend in London and liberal media outlets.

ITV have delivered Christie stronger, better and more radically than the BBC over the last two decades. So perhaps it would be nice to see this 'tradition' of a bbc Christie at Christmas knocked on the head, until they begin to understand how to produce drama that doesn't betray the source.

This was just a real dud.

I wanted to love it but - meh. By Christie standards it's below par

[Hannah955 · 17 March 2024]

Well, the scenery and locations didn't disappoint. They're absolutely gorgeous (filmed in Scotland I believe).

Agatha Christie stories are pretty rote so the bar isn't too high, but this two-parter didn't manage to clear it.

The body count was really too high for Our Hero (Luke Fitzwilliam) to sink his teeth into any one murder and frankly while he did ID the killer in the end ... he was one step behind the whole way, unlike say Miss Marple.

About the casting and the plot line:

I was very distracted by the fact that David Jonsson's left eye is much smaller than his right. There are many many closeups of his face where this affected my ability to focus on the plot.

Apparently in order to justify casting a Black actor in the lead role, they gave him a back story as being from a rich Nigerian family and coming to London to work in a diplomatic post as an attache to some British muckymuck. He speaks with a posh accent and there is almost no relevance to his African background in terms of the plot.

We get some stereotypical racist comments about "mud huts" from the local high and mighty lord of the manor, but almost everybody else in the film basically just accepts him and appears virtually color-blind. In 1954 rural England? I dunno about that.

Also, he's not given much to do, other than to wander around snooping, and then give a knowing smile in almost every scene.

The dialogue he was given to say didn't help at all.

I couldn't help feeling, this would have been a much better production if they'd just stuck with a snoopy old maid like Miss Marple as the detective.

Better than other reviews make out.

[clivejenner-77520 · 7/10 · 31 December 2023]

This quite village murder mystery was pitched just right. Is there a serial killer in their midst or is it just a bizarre series of accidents? Sometimes it takes an outsider to see through to the truth. The outsider being David Jonsson who is solid as the Nigerian finding his way in post war britain. What connects these victims and who has a motive for their murder. All these are answered but not before the body count is increased. This is a period Mid Sommer style of mystery. I have not read the book, but was certainly entertained by the two part drama. A solid seven. See for yourself on iPlayer before dismissing.

Anemic

[paul2001sw-1 · 4/10 · 30 December 2023]

Agatha Christie wrote many dozens of murder mysteries, some famously ingenious; but either 'Murder is Easy' was a dud, or this adapatation is badly screwed up. People start dying in a small English village, but everyone still alive is remarkably unperturbed and several seem not to care if they're suspected to be the killer. Eventually, the real culprit is unearthed, and explains exactly how they've done it, although our amateur detective hero has identified the villain without in fact piecing any of it together for themselves. I've seen Christie adaptations that were fun, preposterous, or anachronistic; but none as anemic as this.

Agatha Adapts

[spouns · 9/10 · 1 March 2024]

While some mention disappointment with this "to parter" and may say the effect is "embarrassing" they fail to appreciate Agatha Christie's contemporary commentary on issues such as class and race, which she hardly shrouded in mystery. Rather, her mysteries always commented on "class and colonialism and the bad treatment of certain ethnic groups." I suppose you'd have to pay attention, however, and read beyond a certain ghoulish appreciation of a cleverly revealed cadaver.

Like this well-written new screenplay, her mysteries held up the glass, so to speak, to British society, showing how human nature and psychology touched each and every level of society. I think Agatha Christie would have admired the characterization of an elderly auntie, connecting with a Nigerian on a train to London. This supposition is based on her novels set in such far-flung locations as Egypt, Jerusalem, and Iraq.

This adaptation highlights the incisive perception of the author and her characterizations of the English country town. I highly recommend it as a modern adaptation completely aware of its storied history. It not only comments on the hierarchy of the society but also illustrates how such hierarchies lead to murder and dissolution of moral integrity.

Twisty Christie!

[DoctorStrabismus · 7/10 · 31 December 2023]

With more murders than Midsomer, this one was a very twisty bit of Christie.

I am going to buck the trend of other reviewers, the people who simply can't be happy without lots of computer effects and guns, and even the low IQ commenter who condemned it as 'woke' because of the Nigerian lead, and say that we enjoyed the couple of evenings we spent watching this slow-paced story.

Now why would I do that?

Well, episode 1 drew us in, with plenty of speculation on what was going on, and in episode 2, even though we looked for the regular Christie touch of the person you least suspect, even the person you barely notice, there were lots of clues pointing to the major characters, which were hard to ignore.

And a very good ending.

7/10.

Disappointing

[malynch1974 · 4/10 · 29 December 2023]

My wife and I were really looking forward to this, it should have been right up our street as we live this sorry of things, but it was very disappointing. Just felt very tedious, disjointed and a bit of a chore to watch. Good cast and basis of a good story but it really, really dragged.

Maybe it was the script that was the problem, and having. Also we found the excessive colours jarring, almost cartoonish. Some of the characters were just caricatures and the "reveal" felt forced. A real opportunity missed as it probably cost a lot to make. The romance felt unconvincing and some very good actors came across like they were in panto. Not recommended.

Great 2 episode mystery!!!

[walteredwardashley · 10/10 · 4 January 2024]

On my movie site I noticed many poor reviews, and they are wrong!!! I don't know if it is possibly a racial thing or what, but I thoroughly enjoyed this, and hoped there would be more episodes!

I almost didn't watch because of the idiotic low ratings, but am very glad that I didn't listen.

A fantastic miniseries, and after a bit I will watch again!!!

I Completely Love all good mysteries, books or otherwise, and this was extremely well done. The cast was great, the locations brought every scene to life, as if another character itself. There seems to be a bit of low key racism in the background here and there, probably from the same type of folk giving this excellent show bad reviews. I'm sorry if ya'll feel that way. You weren't raised right. I'm a middle aged white southern guy, that has read since I was 3 years old, and discovered the joys of classical and current mysteries at 7, devouring the Agatha Christie books, everything with Sherlock in it, and noticing people will often dance around what they want to say by saying something else.

Just because something doesn't fit in with what you're used to, bad reviews. That's a personal problem with you, not this great show!!!

uneven but clever and excellent cast

[sntierney · 7/10 · 6 March 2024]

First, I absolutely loved the twist of Luke Obiqke Fotzwilliam as a Nigerian British man, and how that reflects the major theme of class and discrimination. That was managed brilliantly.

The lead was incredible as the smart, elegant sleuth.

Excellent supporting cast. Nicely filmed. A bit uneven in pacing and exposition, but that's also classic Christie. Pointed exam of small town dramatics.

Why are reviews required to be so long? Silly really. I've made all the points i need to make. Loved the red dress but the jewelry struck as paste. Funny how they put the redhead in red after the thing about the hat.

Murder is boring

[adamsmith-51004 · 4/10 · 29 December 2023]

Firstly I'm a big fan of the whodunit period drama. From Miss Marple to Poirot etc. When I saw this advertised on the BBC over the Christmas period I was hoping for a good watch.

This starts off intriguing with Miss Pinkerton boarding a train, making her way to Scotland Yard. On the train, she meets Luke Fitzwilliam, whom she tells her tale of a murderer in her village. Fitzwilliam, an investigator himself, who is frustrated at a delay in starting his new job and so goes to Miss Pinkerton's village to investigate her claims.

To be honest, I found this one a bit boring. The way it played out and was acted it almost felt like a parody of Agatha Christie rather than a serious drama.

Although David Jonsson carried the lead well enough it didn't really suit the story to have Fitzwilliam's character changed to Nigerian. It made it difficult to believe the setting where the story takes place and that it was 1950s Britain.

I would recommend spending two hours doing something better than watching this. There are much better adaptations of Agatha Christie's work than this and time would be better spent watching them. Sadly yet again another Christmas and another sub par BBC adaptation.

Bleh

[drednm · 1 January 2024]

The name actors in the 2-part miniseries that you might tune in to see are hardly in it at all and play tangential characters to the main plot.

If you're hot to see Douglas Henshall, Mark Bonnar, and Penelope Wilton, blink and you'll miss them. What you WILL see is a lumbering adaptation that has been "updated" to allow for odd casting.

A Nigerian (David Jonsson) comes to England in the 1950s (?) to work for the government but gets sidetracked into investigating a series of murders in a small village. There's also a post-Colonial plotline that clumsily ties into this racial narrative.

Otherwise it's the usual Christie stuff. The rest of the cast is blah (and with bad teeth to boot) and we get some outlandishly bright costumes and the usual impeccably clean cars driving on dirt roads. There's also some ugly statuary added for no reason to the entrance of the country manor.

Not the worst, but it's not very compelling.

Much promise but disappointing

[charmainemorgan · 6/10 · 4 March 2024]

I confess to being a lover of Agatha Christie. Having read every book and seen every ITV Poirot and all renditions of Miss Marple.

I found the beginning of this plot really gripping thanks to Miss Pinkerton aaand was looking forward to how things developed. I did not like the decision to introduce a black Nigerian character with the odd confusing vision on top of an already busy plot. I also found the pletherer of well known actors playing characature roles distracting.

The bright colours had my eyes straining and desperately reaching for the contrast adjustment on my remote.

The plot was plodding but at least it was so confusing it took me a while to work out which of the books I was watching. I realised in enough time to recall who did it and why.

I found the acting wooden throughout but to be fair it reflected the stuffy English class system of the period. The setting, costumes and cars was excellent.

I felt Fitzwilliams character out of place yet deserving of an entirely different production.

Without giving the plot away this is one of Christies more disturbing plots with a cold blooded murderer who really does find Murder is Easy witb weight added being based on more than a little truth to there being some people, such as Dr Shipman, who hide among us capable of such awful deeds. .

One of the worst claimed adaptations of Agatha Christie to date

[nathanhogan-58651 · 1/10 · 29 December 2023]

Sat through all 2 hours of this despite serious misgivings early on, (a racing post available 3 decades before they were printed) the cast appear to be trying their hardest to work with the terrible script and direction so it can't really be blamed on them.

The show lacked violence or even a sense of darkness or foreboding that has already been achieved before in better Agatha Christie adaptions, the colours appeared overly heightened with the contrast turned up 100% which often became distracting.

The point of a good murder mystery is trying to figure it out with the characters as you watch, this was impossible in this show due to none of the clues being revealed until the end, even the lead character stated at the end they hadn't figured it out.

Very disappointing, hopefully this writer isn't allowed "adapt" anymore of Agatha Christies fantastic mystery books.

Confused

[trivium105 · 7/10 · 3 January 2024]

Other reviewers keep mentioning Agatha Christie, this really confused me as I thought I was watching the latest episode of Midsomer Murders.

I wondered why it was on bbc.

I joke of course, but in all seriousness this was the latest episode of Midsomer Murders except slightly more ludicrous and with endless political preaching stuffed in.

The latest vehicle for the bbc to stuff its politics down our throats. Nothing to do with the casting, mind. That was decent enough. Some good if not great performances. Good variety.

I still fairly enjoyed it, Midsomer always has been one of my favourites.

Dear BBC, please stop

[spencerone · 1/10 · 2 January 2024]

This is just an abysmal adaptation of a classic story. Who on earth in the writing and production team thought this script was any good/ How did it get funded (obviously its the beeb, so they dont care how they spend the publics money). And who gave the green light for this to go out on air. It is a travesty. You might as well have called it star wars for all the connection it had to its original story. Why not let these people wander around with mobile phones, as they clealry have no idea how to act like someone living in 1950s England. Truly, truly awful. Everyone involved, from the person who made the tea, to the director general of the bbc, should be taken outside and shot.

An entertaining and modern take

[theobooker · 9/10 · 8 January 2024]

I really enjoyed this. There were several bold moves, not least the first black lead, who was extremely believable and carried the role well.

There were enough twists to keep us guessing and entertained.

It seemed to me to be close enough to the older television adaptations to be appropriately and respectfully adherent to the indiosyncrasies that will satisfy fans of the genre.

There was a slightly irreverent air to the production at times (other reviews have mentioned "pantomime") but this ensured a light-hearted theme.

Certainly worth a watch and we're looking forward to any more that follow on.

Poor Adaptation

[crumpytv · 3/10 · 1 January 2024]

Although sticking fairly close to the original storyline it just looks all wrong, from the casting to the hammy acting and over the top attire and beyond pristine cars.

Similar to The Larkins, this production portrays a social demographic and attitudes of mid 1950s English country life that simply did not exist.

Who is making these decisions on culture correction to align with contemporary attitudes? I would also love to hear the dialogue used when casting these productions.

It was family friendly, no profanities, a blessing these days, but I am concerned that current generations are being deliberately educated to believe in an alternative social history.

This hardly aligns with a democratic society, more like Orwellian mind control.

A good watch

[ruthyw-61948 · 9/10 · 2 January 2024]

Maybe not one of the best Agatha TV adaptations but the twists, village intrigue and characters are a great (if slightly subdued) and easy watch.

All really fantastic actors and feel it could easily have stretched to 3 episodes which would've helped the viewer connect and care more for the characters. Some were easily forgotten with too few lines, other great characters played by great actors (Dougie Henshaw!) weren't given enough time (but still managed to shine). I enjoyed seeing the connections between them all but again it was just hard to remember as moved so fast.

It's a fun, easy watch for a festive time when we all needed a bit of Agatha. I liked the bright and summer light, but again there was a great potential to show much of the darker side of the village as well for added depth.

It just needed filling out a bit in terms of story/characters. This potentially could've been amazing.

The main hero and heroine were a joy to watch but again we needed a bit more.

Felt like Agatha Christie in slow motion

[pburrellmail-53500 · 3/10 · 28 December 2023]

I realise that this was Agatha Christie's first novel so she hadn't hit her stride, but my sense of disbelief had to leave the country let alone just the room. However my main issue is that they have taken what feels like a forty minute drama and stretched it to two hours by having the actors silently stare at each for long periods during each conversation. I think it's supposed to look brooding, pensive or intelligent whereas I think it just makes them look constipated.

After all that, British tv this Christmas has been fairly appalling, so even given the above I still sat through the whole two hours.

A hapless, helpless, bastardisation adaptation of an Agatha Christie story

[Info-340-323067 · 1/10 · 1 January 2024]

A hapless, helpless, hopeless, bastardisation adaptation of an Agatha Christie story. The race/colour issue is so strong and deluded that is utterly ruins the viewers' entertainment; it is faux, false, anachronistic and just plain political posturing which we expect from the producing company. Race/Colour issues are so prevalent that the politics pervade to the extent that the story is lost, even within he first 25 minutes. The whole 120 minutes are like a teaching lesson, it is awful. I fear that my fee was used to create this detritus, what a load of old tosh. Avoid this rubbish to save yourself 2 hours.

A pantomime more than a Chistie

[sammiller-79508 · 3/10 · 28 December 2023]

I was looking forward to this and really expected to enjoy it as I've liked other BBC TV adaptations of past. However, this one just fell well short of expectations unfortunately. Let's break down why: 1. The acting is not good by and large, even the respectible actors pull in a below than average performance.

2. The budget seems really low, even for the BBC. Everything looks cheap and amateur.

3. The story. It really felt more of a pantomime than a murder mystery and apparent social commentary. There were some scenes that were genuinely laughable for all the wrong reasons.

All in all, very disappointing, such a shame as was expecting much better.