Agatha and the Midnight Murders (2020 TV Movie) User Reviews

Not any Agatha Christie I know.

[jdhb-768-61234 · 5/10 · 8 October 2020]

Weak and lacking any real punch. A collection of highly unlikely characters brought together in a highly contrived situation with a rather daft storyline and mediocre script. The claustrophobic atmosphere did add a degree of tension but overall there was little in the way of real suspense, just dead bodies everywhere.

The characters were paper-thin and demanded little attention although the performances of Helen Baxendale, Blake Harrison and Jodie McNee were fair enough; the rest had little more than walk-on parts and were eminently forgettable. I watched it without enthusiasm and consider it time not well spent.

The best I can offer is 5 out of 10, mainly for the central performances, and that's being generous.

Predictable

[kris-gray · 5/10 · 14 October 2020]

This would have made a better stage production with it's minimal set.

Helen Baxendale and Blake Harrison (who was so good in Prime Suspect 73) made the best of a not so good script. Jodie McNee as the 'Police Woman' over acted and made her character unbelievable so I was suspicious of her from the start. Another give away was the so called air raid, sirens only go before and after a raid, not during a raid as happened when both the the policewoman and Travis were out of the room. It was also a very quiet air raid, even in a cellar it would have been heard, especially if you hear the siren, which would be a lot quieter.

Another give away was when Jun was murdered and Travis was left alive, why would the killer leave a witness? So he had to be in on it.

I still found it enjoyable even if it was a bit predictable

Visually good, but the story was jumbled.

[Sleepin_Dragon · 6/10 · 8 October 2020]

Tom Dalton strikes again, giving us another installment of Agatha Christie, albeit another work of fiction.

First point, without there being an Agatha Christie scheduled for Christmas, it's a shame they didn't save this one up until the festive season, a miserable Wednesday night in October was bizarre scheduling, meaning this drama will perhaps go unnoticed.

In truth, I think it may have been a bit more enjoyable, had I been three sheets to the wind with Christmas port.

The story was a bit odd, but it was Agatha Christie herself who was so off, we've had two different interpretations of her previously, Marshall and Bradley, this time Helen Baxendale.

Baxendale is an excellent actress, and performs particularly well, it was a very good performance, the problem was more so the material she's working with, Christie was portrayed as a somewhat devious, conniving character, I'm not sure anyone believes that about her.

I'm glad they're still making them, I enjoyed the last two, this one is pretty good, I thought the first half was pretty poor, but the second half was much, much better.

If you can stick with it, the ending is rewarding, it's better with a second watch. 6/10.

4 stars for getting some fool to air this!

[keithfmanaton · 4/10 · 8 October 2020]

If this wasn't badged as an Agatha Chistie, it still would be a rambling poorly acted mish mash. We were actually looking forward to the ad breaks. Plodding along with a scattering of swear words, 3rd rate jokes and violent deaths doesn't make an Agatha Christie murder 'mystery'.

This is an Agatha Christie story?

[scottibailey-997-291611 · 25 November 2020]

This is an Agatha Christie story. Must be one of her less favourite ones. It's a collection of highly unlikely characters brought together in a contrived situation with a rather silly storyline. Overall there was little in the way of real suspense, just lots of dead bodies (we have all seen those). The characters were shallow and of little interest although the performances of some actors were fair enough; the rest of the day players were forgettable.

Not all together terrible...

[sml_photogger · 6/10 · 18 October 2021]

Well, it's easy to see why the world wants more and more Agatha Christie - and here we have some fairly good fan fiction. Good acting and fairly good dialog. Though, here I have a slight problem with F-bombs being dropped here and there. Fortunately beeped out on PBS. Not really the sort of language one would expect Agatha Christie to use. At least the graphic set scenes that seem all to common in New adaptations has been left out. Though there is one or two scenes of some gore, but, seriously, if you've called Agatha Christie's novels "cozy" you haven't been paying attention. Pretty good plot twist. It'll pass in the dark if you give it a shove. OR, you could return to David Suchet as Poirot.

Abysmal

[zenjunkie · 2/10 · 8 October 2020]

Somehow I got a third of the way through this debacle of a movie before I realised I may totally lose the will to live if I watched a second more. Helen Baxendale, totally miscast, did the best she could with the abysmal script, but could do nothing to improve it. The rest of the characters did nothing but annoy, and the acting in general was amateurish. The supposed comic moments were unfunny and embarrassing and the suspense was conspicuous by its absence. The occasional bad language seemed way out of character and the actual story was about as interesting as fishing. I regret every second I wasted on this - even the time spent writing this frigging review! What a waste of effort. I have been generous giving it 2 stars. Watch this at your own peril.

Why are they using the Agatha Christie name for this?

[mariannes-113-522492 · 6/10 · 14 February 2023]

Cruder than Agatha Christie and without the class and style that usually comes with an Agatha Christie story. A shame to see her name associated with something like this.

It is a very average B movie that doesn't manage to hold your attention or provide much entertainment. It feels like someone sat down with a list of bullet points of what makes a Christie story. They then tried to make it edgier and managed to remove any charm that may have existed. Characters are shallow and the performances match which is a shame as there are many decent actors in it. Reruns of the Poirot and Marple series are infinitely better.

No, just no

[bangel3322 · 2/10 · 7 January 2021]

I'll give points for the idea, because they could have actually gone somewhere with this storyline. Instead what we got was an uninspiring mess with flaccid characters and an uneven plot. It made it far too obvious who the villain was, you didn't even have to guess. It was just awful. Poor Agatha, they did her dirty. Poor woman must be turning in her grave.

Disappointing

[pmde · 4/10 · 14 October 2020]

More than a little muddled, poorly acted and with rather a lot of bad language not typical of the period in which it is set.

A wartime murder mystery with a theatrical feel

[Tweekums · 8/10 · 9 October 2020]

This fictional story features real life authoress Agatha Christie caught up in another murder mystery. She, and a man she has hired as a driver/bodyguard, are in a London hotel where she is to sell the rights to her latest 'Poirot' story to a wealthy Chinese businessman. When the air raid siren is heard a police woman ushers them, and other guests into the building's cellar. Tensions rise when Agatha realises that somebody has stolen the manuscript of her new novel... that is the least of their worries though; soon a fight leaves one man dead and then another man dies... Agatha suspects foul play. If she is right one of the people in the cellar is a killer and nobody is being allowed to leave till the all clear sounds.

This, the third of Channel Five's films imagining Agatha Christie in a murder case, has a somewhat theatrical feel due to the limited locations. This isn't a problem as having a confined location gave the story a good sense of claustrophobia. The people stuck in the cellar were nicely varied, giving us an interesting group of suspects/potential victims. While it is mostly a drama there are humorous moments; I particularly liked difference between what the Chinese man said, in subtitles, and what his translator said he said. The cast does a solid job, notably Helen Baxendale, who has taken over the role of Agatha Christie. The resolution contained some decent twists and turns so only a few are likely to work everything out before the reveal but most are likely to work out some details. Overall a solid murder mystery that fans of the genre are likely to enjoy.

Oh dear!

[mike-1804 · 1/10 · 13 October 2020]

It is said that no one goes out to make terrible television drama, but Channel 5 has managed to do it. I feel sorry for all the talented cast and crew who have done their best to try and make this a great programme; alas to no avail. It reminded me of a low budget stage play. Channel 5's foray into original drama needs to produce something better than this. Better luck next time.

Utter Dross

[rodblakeman-82930 · 1/10 · 23 November 2020]

I seriously think that the release of this film should be regarded as a crime, I wonder how many people wasted 90 minutes of their life watching this utter dross.

So boring I feel asleep

[lynnsimpson-33438 · 1/10 · 31 October 2020]

I love all Agatha Christie's tv shows and most of the movies and was so excited about watching this but is so bad I fell asleep. There is no real story and the dialogue is just awful also didn't like any of the characters.

Dreadful

[brian-85466 · 1/10 · 17 October 2020]

I gave this one star for the actors just turning up for filming!

I appreciate all actors, the good and the bad, as getting up there and performing, it's not the easiest job a person can chose to do, especially when the material they have to work with is just dreadful!

This is the third Agatha Christie outing for this writer, and frankly he should leave well alone, the story is an insult to the memory of Ms Christie.

The best of the three films was the first one, if the producers wanted a series then they should have continued with that creation of Agatha Christie, I saw real potential in that formulae of Agatha investigating the crimes, and the actress who portrayed her was brilliant, can't recall her name but she has an understated star quality, purist fans of Agatha Christie will have hated it, but I think it gave us the other side of Ms Christie's personality.

The second outing, it was okay, as boys own story, but the third outing, shame that script wasn't nicked, destroyed along with all stored versions and the writers memory!

It was just too painful for this viewer!

Dreadful

[hardrockster-92006 · 1/10 · 17 November 2020]

Anachronistic dialogue (e.g. "Never rub another man's rhubarb" from Batman (1989)), poor acting and accents, ridiculous plot twists and character changes, an unbelievable background - Agatha Christie selling a manuscript to a gangster businessman because she's bankrupt - and, finally, Agatha herself finishing off by finishing someone off. I remember seeing plays in the 70s which were 'provocative' and had wild 'modern' dialogue and people sneering at other people to show dominance. These stories also did not belong in the real world. Swearing isn't clever, funny, strong, necessary or shocking. Basically unbelievable characters in an unbelievable plot saying unbelievable things. Stage a Christie story in modern, or wartime, setting and you'd potentially have a classic. Putting Christie in this is an insult to fans and family. If you have an opportunity to see this, miss it.

Agatha Christie put through the wringer.

[felixtoots · 9/10 · 8 October 2020]

I haven't seen the other two films but this was superb. It was tense, surprising, upsetting and occasionally very funny. It looked great, the music was excellent and despite having a contemporary feel was a proper old fashioned whodunnit. Also the ending dropped everything into place with a bombshell, which given the setting was very satisfying. I didn't guess what was going to happen and how often can you say that?

Helen Baxendale was excellent, as was Blake Harrison but my favourite was Jodie McNee, I've never seen her before and she was great. The film mostly took place in a single space and could have easily become boring, but what we saw always changed and there was such a mix of characters and personalities it was always alive.

So often British drama spoon-feeds us the same paste we've had a hundred times before, and although this no doubt relies on Christies coattails to get made, it grabs the opportunity to do something different. For anyone who thinks an Agatha Christie film isn't for them, give this a go. It's a brilliantly made film with big ambition.

Awful

[joan-389-855364 · 1/10 · 13 June 2021]

I love Christie's work and almost all shows about her. This was an awful, nonsensical, boring mess. I gave up before the end. Poor Agatha must be spinning in her grave to see such drivel associated with her name.

Ttttturkey!

[dave-bell45 · 1/10 · 26 November 2020]

Awful! I'd have thought the estate would have had to have given permission for Christie's name to be used, but clearly not. Can't even say it was so bad that at least it gave me a laugh. It was torture. OK I watched it recorded on TV, so could fast forward a few bits to see if it improved any, but after 2/3rds scrolled through till last 5 minutes. Helen Baxendale - I hope you got very well paid. Plot - dialogue - phony accents; it portrayed several different nationalities in pretty horrific stereotypes, (including English toffs) but not it seemed in comic fashion a la Borat. Aaaahhhhh!

Just awful

[tardis-61803 · 2/10 · 10 October 2020]

The acting was awful, the only suspicion character that was acting really weirdly was obviously the killer and there was no big twists. Wasted an hour and a half of my life!

Not Agatha Christie

[Impman2 · 1/10 · 16 October 2020]

Confusing mish mash of odd characters with a woke/PC angle. Awful and boring.

Found it meh then interesting

[rgarciabreton · 4/10 · 16 October 2020]

Found the beginning a bit meh, then towards the middle, found it interesting. The end was disappointing.

Fine murder mystery loosely based on Agatha Christie's life

[jagough49 · 8/10 · 15 March 2022]

In an earlier review, djalloyingj-7365929 August 2021 asks how a film set in 1940 can have a rude song about Hitler's balls set to "The Bridge on the River Kwai" march theme, when "The Bridge on the River Kwai" was made many years after 1940 and the end of World War II. What djalloyingj-7365929 does not realise is that the march theme used in "The Bridge on the River Kwai" is actually a much earlier military march, written by a British counterpart to America's military march king, John Philip Sousa. The original march is called "Colonel Bogey", and a little web-searching can add much detail to this, although "Colonel Bogey" seems to be a fictitious character. The naughty words, very popular with the British army, and naughty little boys, tell us that "Hitler had only one brass ball, Goering had two, but very small, Himmler was somewhat sim'lar, but poor old Goebels had no balls at all!" This may not have been historically correct, but was very satisfying to sing very loudly. The idea that Agatha Christie, in real life, might find herself in a real murder scene, and be able to use her fictionally honed mystery-solving skills to solve the mystery is sufficient to motivate "Agatha and the Midnight Murders", and other (fictional) murder mysteries that do not involve Christie's usual sleuths, such as Poirot and Marple.

Something of a triumph

[therealzombienomicon · 2/10 · 24 December 2020]

From the African MI5 agent to the blood libel against Max Mallowan as an adulterer, the witlessly foul mouth dialogue and the actress portraying Christie, this effort manages to get every salient point not just inaccurate but willfully wrong. Mallowan and Christie were MI5 contact agents. Christie herself was the godmother of Ian Fleming, and she provided the name "James Bond" in a story he enjoyed reading, years before he came up with his own explanation for where he came up with the name. Reading those factoids you have now achieved a level of accuracy and research the makers of this peculiarity have never broached. The murderer in this story is so transparently easy to guess it verges on the theatre of the absurd. The characters are as cod and stock as any 1930s stereotypes except they are the modern equivalent- right-on portrayals of the usual modern Netflixian sort. Agatha Christie, never a petite lady and never a fool, is portrayed if that is the word as a sort of desperate middle class conniver, stumbling along before suddenly turning brilliant at the last moment. Ham fisted story telling but then this is less about telling a story and more about the same sort of subtle persistent character assassination of Agatha Christie that afflicted the latter years of what was still called Poirot and (Miss) Marple despite being nothing of the sort. Christie was a conservative, and a Conservative, a defender of the monocultural ethnic England that was under assault already by the 1930s and she was a shrewd observer of the sinister forces staging the "managed decline" of a country she passionately loved despite its many faults. As usual with modern Christie of all types, what we get is a crude attempt at deconstruction and a high school level "mystery" that is on a par with the disastrous later years of Doctor Who. And has the same odious not-so-subtle politics behind it. Read a Christie novel instead, and marvel again at the sharp eye she possessed. She invented "signature" as a concept in criminology (unacknowledged), the idea of profiling, and she was also an acute observer of human relationships. All of that goes out the window in favour of cartoon pastiche. And the same can be said of Poirot and Marple of recent decades.

A swing and a miss

[ebates-940-563974 · 4/10 · 25 September 2021]

The opening credit/scene was so unnecessarily gruesome, I nearly turned it off right then and there. But I needn't have worried about that...it had absolutely nothing to do with the rest of the movie. I can't imagine what they were thinking it achieved.

Mind due, if I had turned it off I might have saved myself a few hours of watching mediocre nonsense.

It had the standard formula for a Christie, but that's where the similarities ended. There was very little in the way of mystery, clues or detection and rather just sudden murders, finger pointing and an ongoing manhunt.

I didn't mind some of it, but it the twists were a bit wild.