28 reviews
I haven't read the book Dead Man's Folly, and this TV movie is the only one of the 6 movies Peter Ustinov did as Poirot, where that is the case. Now Dead Man's Folly I found to be very entertaining, with very good performances and a fine denouncement. However the script was weak and underdeveloped in places, the music didn't really stand out unlike Death On the Nile(the music was absolutely superb in that movie) and I found the overall film to be a tad too broad. I don't think it is as good as Death on the Nile or Evil Under the Sun, which are the best of the Ustinov outings. On a positive note, for a TV movie, it looks beautiful, with wonderful period detail, pleasant scenery and very nice photography. And the clothes were lovely to look at too. The denouncement is very unexpected and cleverly done, and I wouldn't have guessed it in a million years. But what makes the film so enjoyable is the cast. While I still consider David Suchet to be the definitive Poirot, Peter Ustinov was still a joy to behold and is clearly enjoying himself. Jean Stapleton positively brings life to the proceedings as Ariadne Oliver. Both Kenneth Cranham and Tim Piggott-Smith give good performances, if playing it safe. Jonathan Cecil is very entertaining as Hastings and Nicollette Sheridan is lovely as Hattie. But other than Ustinov the standout was indeed Constance Cummings as Amy, a truly delightful performance. All in all, while not the best of the Ustinov Poirot outings, it is a glossy and entertaining one, and actually one of the better ones. 7.5/10 Bethany Cox
- TheLittleSongbird
- Oct 19, 2009
- Permalink
Hercule Poirot, Agatha Christie's Belgian sleuth, is brought up to modern times in Dead Man's Folly. Normally Christie stories are better set in the period that they were written, but in this case no harm is done. Her detectives are quite eternal.
Peter Ustinov returns as Poirot with Jonathan Cecil as the ever dependable Captain Hastings and he's been invited to another one of those English estates by American mystery writer Jean Stapleton. She's giving one of those mystery hunt games at the estate and the invited guests are going to be the contestants.
It gets really out of hand when three real murders are discovered in the course of this film. A young girl from the village, an old estate caretaker and the wife of the Lord of the Manor Tim Pigott-Smith. And they are connected though how you will be surprised.
I will give you two clues the former owner of the estate Constance Cummings knows a lot more than she is revealing and the arrival of Jeff Yagher from America upsets a lot of well laid plans.
You'll enjoy figuring this one out if you can.
Peter Ustinov returns as Poirot with Jonathan Cecil as the ever dependable Captain Hastings and he's been invited to another one of those English estates by American mystery writer Jean Stapleton. She's giving one of those mystery hunt games at the estate and the invited guests are going to be the contestants.
It gets really out of hand when three real murders are discovered in the course of this film. A young girl from the village, an old estate caretaker and the wife of the Lord of the Manor Tim Pigott-Smith. And they are connected though how you will be surprised.
I will give you two clues the former owner of the estate Constance Cummings knows a lot more than she is revealing and the arrival of Jeff Yagher from America upsets a lot of well laid plans.
You'll enjoy figuring this one out if you can.
- bkoganbing
- Dec 13, 2013
- Permalink
There's plenty to admire in the costumes and settings for DEAD MAN'S FOLLY, most of which takes place at a handsome English villa in the countryside where a murder party game is being prepared by mystery writer Ariadne Oliver (JEAN STAPLETON). Unfortunately, Stapleton plays her role as broadly as she did Edith Bunker and there are times where her strident voice and manner becomes almost unbearable.
Elegant settings aren't enough to bring this one up to the standard of PETER USTINOV's theatrical movies DEATH ON THE NILE or EVIL UNDER THE SUN. However, the color photography is impressive and everything looks worthy of a theatrical showing--except that none of the cast members have roles that are really fleshed out. As a result, the identity of the murderer is one of those "it could have been anybody" sort of things because, as is usual with Christie, there are almost too many red herrings among the suspects.
Never a favorite of mine, this version has the heavily overweight Ustinov strutting around and putting Hastings down with some blunt remarks--mostly for comic value. JONATHAN CECIL plays Hastings with a humorous slant--far different from the Hastings in the David Suchet series--but his contribution is an entertaining one. NICOLETTE SHERIDAN as Hattie is delightful as the dim-witted lady of the manor.
Not the best of the Ustinov TV adaptations, but it's good enough entertainment to pass the time.
Elegant settings aren't enough to bring this one up to the standard of PETER USTINOV's theatrical movies DEATH ON THE NILE or EVIL UNDER THE SUN. However, the color photography is impressive and everything looks worthy of a theatrical showing--except that none of the cast members have roles that are really fleshed out. As a result, the identity of the murderer is one of those "it could have been anybody" sort of things because, as is usual with Christie, there are almost too many red herrings among the suspects.
Never a favorite of mine, this version has the heavily overweight Ustinov strutting around and putting Hastings down with some blunt remarks--mostly for comic value. JONATHAN CECIL plays Hastings with a humorous slant--far different from the Hastings in the David Suchet series--but his contribution is an entertaining one. NICOLETTE SHERIDAN as Hattie is delightful as the dim-witted lady of the manor.
Not the best of the Ustinov TV adaptations, but it's good enough entertainment to pass the time.
This made-for-TV movie is a good adaptation of Agatha Christie's story of the same name. Peter Ustinov again plays Hercule Poirot with aplomb as he unravels the mystery surrounding the Fair at Nass House and the architectural Folly. Dead bodies begin to pile up and no one is sure who they can trust among the many diverse guests at the Fair.
The biggest asset of this film is that it was shot on location in Great Britain at one of the Treasure Houses of England (Wilton House, I believe), which adds greatly to the period feel of the film. If shot anywhere else, it would have been a routine TV movie.
None of the performances truly stand out, but everyone plays their part with vigor and conviction. Most of the cast are English and they are much better than the American actors, who seem to be playing stock characters and don't quite fit in. However, it is a pleasant way to spend a few hours and revel in the grandeur of an authentic English estate.
The biggest asset of this film is that it was shot on location in Great Britain at one of the Treasure Houses of England (Wilton House, I believe), which adds greatly to the period feel of the film. If shot anywhere else, it would have been a routine TV movie.
None of the performances truly stand out, but everyone plays their part with vigor and conviction. Most of the cast are English and they are much better than the American actors, who seem to be playing stock characters and don't quite fit in. However, it is a pleasant way to spend a few hours and revel in the grandeur of an authentic English estate.
This is not one of the best movies based on a Agatha Christie novel but i have seen worse. As for Ustinov as Poirot well...i'm getting tired of all those "fans" who claim that Suchett is the "definitive" Poirot, or that Ustinov is the better one. I enjoy both of them as i think both put their own stamp on the part and both have made Poirot movies that were either good or mediocre. This one is not as good as Evil under the sun or Death on the Nile but it still provides you with 90 minutes of entertainment. Most of the acting is so so. I did like Jean Stapleton as Ariadne Oliver but Ustinov has done better in the other Poirot movies i mentioned. Good for a rainy Sunday afternoon.
- rmax304823
- Sep 23, 2014
- Permalink
Thank God that at least ITV will soon remake this film with David Suchet-the REAL Poirot. Ustinov like always plays Poirot as the untidy, overweight and sloppy Columbo type character, and Clive Donner seems to be directing a comedy at times. The TV Poirots made with Ustinov are a bit more comedic (unlike the way Christie wrote them) than the cinema versions he appeared in. Unfortunately this film was made as a UK/US co-production and CBS TV was involved, hence the casting of Jean Stapleton-one of the worst performances ever-screaming hysterically at times and calling Poirot "Her-cu-lee." (Near the end of this film Ustinov says her instincts at times are "excessive and stupid," and later says to her "You irritate me."-like she irritates the viewer!!!).
However in spite of these flaws, Dead Man's Folly has a good many things going for it-the filming in England at the stately home, a decent script, fine camera-work and editing, and very good performances by Constance Cummings, Tim Piggot-Smith, Susan Wooldridge, Kenneth Cranham, Nicolette Sheridan, and Jimmy Gardner in the smallish role of Old Murdell.
However in spite of these flaws, Dead Man's Folly has a good many things going for it-the filming in England at the stately home, a decent script, fine camera-work and editing, and very good performances by Constance Cummings, Tim Piggot-Smith, Susan Wooldridge, Kenneth Cranham, Nicolette Sheridan, and Jimmy Gardner in the smallish role of Old Murdell.
- scott-palmer2
- Sep 1, 2009
- Permalink
- tabacblond
- Sep 12, 2021
- Permalink
A good adaptation all thanks to the original book with 80s attention to details, but not having and lacking the atmosphere and 50s timeline specific to 'Dead Man's Folly',
Peter Ustinov is less Hercule Poirot in this one, playing an imaginary adaptation of the famous detective. Worth noting were the play and acting of the drunken man, George's mother and a young and talented Nicollette Sheridan.
Above-average, but still satisfying.
Above-average, but still satisfying.
- Screenplay/storyline/plots: 7
- Production value/impact: 6.5
- Development: 7
- Realism: 6.5
- Entertainment: 6
- Acting: 6.5
- Filming/photography/cinematography: 7
- VFX: 7
- Music/score/sound: 4
- Depth: 6
- Logic: 4.5
- Flow: 6
- Mystery/crime/thriller/drama: 6
- Ending: 5.5.
Yet another one of Peter Ustinov's made-for-TV Hercule Poirot mysteries. These movies are a far cry from his theatrically released "Death on the Nile" and "Evil Under the Sun" in almost every way (cast, production values, scripting, etc.), but taken on their own they have their moments. "Dead Man's Folly" doesn't have too many of those moments, though. As the music score (which would be more appropriate for a slapstick comedy) quickly signals, this movie is played too broadly. Ustinov takes the comedic aspects of Poirot just a step too far in this one - he does a lot of mugging and even some double-takes. Hastings is not as idiotic here as he was in "Murder in Three Acts", but Hugh Fraser is much better in the David Suchet series. Jean Stapleton is OK as Mrs. Oliver, but again, Zoë Wanamaker was better in Suchet's "Cards on the Table". The cast on the whole is not bad, and there are a couple of real stunners in it (Nicolette Sheridan, Caroline Langrishe). But the direction is bland, and the result is a murder mystery more trivial than thrilling. (**)
- gridoon2024
- Jun 3, 2008
- Permalink
This installment of Agatha Christie's adaptations features none other than Jean Stapleton! This is a clever adaptation, directed by Clive Donner (Arthur the King, 1985; A Christmas Carol, 1984; Oliver Twist, 1982; and What's New Pussycat, 1965) with a near-slick production quality (especially for its time!) and a great cast! This one was a tad more difficult to puzzle, but more's the fun when you're talking about an Agatha Christie murder mystery and Peter Ustinov! (Far and away my favorite Poirot.)
Nothing silly, not a single moment of wasted film, and a fantastic contribution by each and every one. I highly recommend this one to anyone with a love of mystery.
All in all? This is great fodder for the younger teen in assisting in the development of their analytical mind.
It rates a 7.6/10 from...
the Fiend :.
Nothing silly, not a single moment of wasted film, and a fantastic contribution by each and every one. I highly recommend this one to anyone with a love of mystery.
All in all? This is great fodder for the younger teen in assisting in the development of their analytical mind.
It rates a 7.6/10 from...
the Fiend :.
- FiendishDramaturgy
- Dec 7, 2007
- Permalink
Based on one of Christie's weakest books this movie doesn't have much to offer. The updating of the movie to the 80's hurts , not as much as in "Murder in three acts" , but still. I usually don't mind hairstyles and clothes typical for a certain decade ( In few years people will be laughing how we dress now, the fashion changes so quick) , but to see Poirot standing next to a guy looking like an 80's rock star is simply embarrassing. There is serious lack of 50's atmosphere.
I can accept Peter Ustinov as Poirot. He doesn't look like him at all and makes him look like a clown on more than few occasions , but overall he does an adequate job. Jonathan Cecil is once again awful as Captain Hastings. He is simply idiotic and unlikable , not like Hugh Fraser in Poirot TV series. Jean Stapleton is OK as Mrs. Oliver , but Zoë Wanamaker was much better in Suchet's TV series.
The rest of the cast is mediocre at best or simply awful like Nicolette Sheridan and Tim Piggot-Smith.
The whole movie has a bland feel to it. Starting from the production design through music and direction. The whole mystery isn't thrilling , but more rather trite. There is no pacing or structure to it , it just goes from one commercial break to another.
The story itself has few very odd details. It takes only about 8 minutes to figure out who kills and that there is something suspicious about certain character. I did read the book first , long time before watching this movie , however I believe that even retarded chimpanzee would notice the not-so-subtle clues that the movie is giving to the viewer. Hastings is simply a pointless character , until the end of movie where he out of the blue appears to have important connections. What's with the Russian and Poirot ? Why inspector Bland allows Mrs.Oliver and Amanda Brewis to join the investigation and they walk with him EVERYWHERE. The way how Poirot comes to his solution of the mystery seems very forced and lucky.
Anyone not familiar with Agatha's Christie writing would never pick up one of her books from viewing this film (or the other Ustinov TV movies). I give it 1/10.
I can accept Peter Ustinov as Poirot. He doesn't look like him at all and makes him look like a clown on more than few occasions , but overall he does an adequate job. Jonathan Cecil is once again awful as Captain Hastings. He is simply idiotic and unlikable , not like Hugh Fraser in Poirot TV series. Jean Stapleton is OK as Mrs. Oliver , but Zoë Wanamaker was much better in Suchet's TV series.
The rest of the cast is mediocre at best or simply awful like Nicolette Sheridan and Tim Piggot-Smith.
The whole movie has a bland feel to it. Starting from the production design through music and direction. The whole mystery isn't thrilling , but more rather trite. There is no pacing or structure to it , it just goes from one commercial break to another.
The story itself has few very odd details. It takes only about 8 minutes to figure out who kills and that there is something suspicious about certain character. I did read the book first , long time before watching this movie , however I believe that even retarded chimpanzee would notice the not-so-subtle clues that the movie is giving to the viewer. Hastings is simply a pointless character , until the end of movie where he out of the blue appears to have important connections. What's with the Russian and Poirot ? Why inspector Bland allows Mrs.Oliver and Amanda Brewis to join the investigation and they walk with him EVERYWHERE. The way how Poirot comes to his solution of the mystery seems very forced and lucky.
Anyone not familiar with Agatha's Christie writing would never pick up one of her books from viewing this film (or the other Ustinov TV movies). I give it 1/10.
Peter Ustinov is an absolute joy to behold in the role of Hercule Poirot. He played Poirot in three theatrical films: Death On the Nile, Evil Under the Sun, and Appointment With Death. He also played Poirot in three TV movies: Thirteen At Dinner, Murder in Three Acts, and Dead Man's Folly. It's always a delight to spend time with Ustinov's Poirot. He's so much fun! The three Poirot TV movies starring Ustinov are now available in a three DVD set. I've had a great time watching these with friends and family and all of Ustinov's Poirot movies are worth watching and re-watching. My deep affection for Ustinov's Poirot grows with each viewing. He's brilliant and each of his Poirot movies are fantastic fun.
Now, it may come as a surprise to most people when you see the rating that I have given this TV-movie (10 out of 10), especially when you read most of the other comments on this movie. But I will explain, and you'll see that there is some method to my madness.
Firstly, I'm a huge Agatha Christie fan, especially of the Hercule Poirot mysteries. I had read the book Dead Man's Folly and had enjoyed it immensely, thus making me search out this movie. When I discovered that it was Peter Ustinov who was starring as Poirot I was over the moon, as I consider him by far the best Poirot. In my opinion, Ustinov is the definitive Poirot.
I managed to find the movie and then watch it. It was excellent. Ustinov was brilliant as the detective gifted with "the little grey cells". It was not as good as Evil Under The Sun or Death On The Nile, however my mark reflects the closeness of the movie to the text. I couldn't believe how close the movie was. As I was sitting there watching the film I was uttering the lines in my mind from how they were seen in the book. It was a terrific film and deserves every bit of my 10 marks.
Firstly, I'm a huge Agatha Christie fan, especially of the Hercule Poirot mysteries. I had read the book Dead Man's Folly and had enjoyed it immensely, thus making me search out this movie. When I discovered that it was Peter Ustinov who was starring as Poirot I was over the moon, as I consider him by far the best Poirot. In my opinion, Ustinov is the definitive Poirot.
I managed to find the movie and then watch it. It was excellent. Ustinov was brilliant as the detective gifted with "the little grey cells". It was not as good as Evil Under The Sun or Death On The Nile, however my mark reflects the closeness of the movie to the text. I couldn't believe how close the movie was. As I was sitting there watching the film I was uttering the lines in my mind from how they were seen in the book. It was a terrific film and deserves every bit of my 10 marks.
- peter_smith_17
- May 3, 2005
- Permalink
I love Peter Ustinov as Hercule Poirot. Forget all those other phonies who've tried to fill his shoes! Including that ridiculous Murder on the Orient Express, or that laughable David Sachet!
His sly, lovable demeanor rivals any of the great actors playing detectives- Peter Falk as Columbo, etc. He has a wonderful way of gaining the confidence and trust of each of his suspects, while probing them for information. You never really know who he suspects, and that's the fun of the mystery. He guides you through the maze like true detective.
I have seen each of his delicious portrayals as the great, Belgian detective several times, and they just get better with age.
His sly, lovable demeanor rivals any of the great actors playing detectives- Peter Falk as Columbo, etc. He has a wonderful way of gaining the confidence and trust of each of his suspects, while probing them for information. You never really know who he suspects, and that's the fun of the mystery. He guides you through the maze like true detective.
I have seen each of his delicious portrayals as the great, Belgian detective several times, and they just get better with age.
- JackStallion
- Dec 20, 2004
- Permalink
Ustinov going thru the motions one time too many as Poirot seems bored here. And adding Hastings to the plot really makes you feel like you're watching a cheap adaption. I loved Stapleton as Edith Bunker but as Miss Oliver the daffy mystery writer, she seems out of place. And by God is the killer easy to spot or what? Nicolette Sheridan gives an awful performance and may hold the title as worst actress ever to star in an Agatha Christie movie. She's really hard to take. Even in silence, which alas is never long enough.
- Movie_Man 500
- Jan 10, 2002
- Permalink
- mark.waltz
- May 13, 2013
- Permalink
There has been (so far) only one definitive screen Poirot and that is David Suchet. As much as I admired the art of the late Sir Peter Ustinov, he was always completely miscast in this role. He was nothing like the character that Agatha Christie envisaged, i.e. an over-fastidious dapper little man who had a mincing walk, a bald egg-shaped head and a dark waxed moustache. Peter's rotund shape, with crumpled clothes and a crumpled moustache to match, would make her, and indeed Poirot himself, turn in their graves. However, Ustinov, as he usually does in this role, and probably deliberately, hams it up (likewise the entire cast) with enthusiastic gusto, but again I suspect, not entirely as Miss Christie would have imagined it.
Jonathon Cecil plays Capt Hastings as if he was a complete moron. Although not blessed with the same "little grey cells" as his companion, Hastings was not written as a fool, and in fact had supposedly been in Military Intelligence, which (although suggested in the film), is not a place for idiots.
Overall this movie (as with all Ustinov's portrayals of the character) is to Poirot, as burlesque is to the legitimate theatre, but so what? It's enjoyable to watch, and that's what entertainment is all about.
Jonathon Cecil plays Capt Hastings as if he was a complete moron. Although not blessed with the same "little grey cells" as his companion, Hastings was not written as a fool, and in fact had supposedly been in Military Intelligence, which (although suggested in the film), is not a place for idiots.
Overall this movie (as with all Ustinov's portrayals of the character) is to Poirot, as burlesque is to the legitimate theatre, but so what? It's enjoyable to watch, and that's what entertainment is all about.
Anyone not familiar with Dame Agatha's writing would never pick up one of her books from viewing this film. I think it very arrogant when screenwriters think they know better than the original author or when stories are "updated". Ustinov as Poirot is ludicrous, plays the part as a buffoon. I have not really enjoyed any of his portrayals of Poirot. And Hastings may as well not even be there. Jean Stapleton is too shrill, Zoe Wanamaker's Mrs. Oliver is way better. Good thing Angela Lansbury did Murder She Wrote. Would not have lasted one season with Ms. Stapleton. Hope PBS airs Dead Man's Follow with David Suchet very, very soon.
Belgian sleuth Hercule Poirot investigates an intriguing case of foul play during a game of murder hunt at a village fete, in which a woman supposedly playing the victim is found to be genuinely dead.
The rather low-key yet brilliant novel is turned into a highly entertaining TV movie starring Peter Ustinov, my favourite Poirot. His Poirot is far from dull, and you feel are with him all the way as he uses his little grey cells to nab the suspects, which are plenty. Some of the characterisations are good such as Nicolette Sheriden's as the dim-witted wife of sir George ( well played by Tim Piggot-Smith). Jean Stapleton playing Ariadne Oliver ( really Agatha Christie!) is brilliant.
The plot and mystery is spot on, though it can be complicated but the denouement at the end, as explained in detail by Poirot, fits the puzzle pieces together. The locations of the river, the boat and the folly adds atmosphere to a brilliant mystery.
The rather low-key yet brilliant novel is turned into a highly entertaining TV movie starring Peter Ustinov, my favourite Poirot. His Poirot is far from dull, and you feel are with him all the way as he uses his little grey cells to nab the suspects, which are plenty. Some of the characterisations are good such as Nicolette Sheriden's as the dim-witted wife of sir George ( well played by Tim Piggot-Smith). Jean Stapleton playing Ariadne Oliver ( really Agatha Christie!) is brilliant.
The plot and mystery is spot on, though it can be complicated but the denouement at the end, as explained in detail by Poirot, fits the puzzle pieces together. The locations of the river, the boat and the folly adds atmosphere to a brilliant mystery.
Of the three TV movies in which Peter Ustinov starred as Hercule Poirot (the other two being "Thirteen at Dinner" and "Murder in Three Acts"), in my humble opinion "Dead Man's Folly" is the most entertaining and suspenseful one; the script is marvelously close to Agatha Christie's novel, the cast is quite good for US TV standards, and the setting is a real old British manor, elaborately decorated, which tries to give the film a feeling of 'Old England'. BUT unfortunately, just like in the other two TV adaptations I mentioned, the producers obviously refused to create a REAL 1950s' atmosphere (the novel was written in 1956), and instead let the actors wear contemporary clothes and hairstyles of the 80s (and even use mobile phones!) - probably because that was what the audience wanted...
Anyway, as far as you can overlook those anachronisms (or in case you don't even notice them), this movie has got a very high entertainment value - mostly thanks to the protagonists, Peter Ustinov, Jean Stapleton as Poirot's highly imaginative writer friend, and Jonathan Cecil as Hastings. There's some nice humor in it (probably also for the sake of the TV audience; because in tone, the novel was quite a bit darker...), and it's a REAL murder mystery: the complicated plot unfolds slowly, and if you pay good attention to every detail and every word that's being said, you may be able to guess the murderer before Poirot presents the solution. If you're not too particular about the authenticity of the wardrobe, hairstyles, cars and music, this is an enormously enjoyable crime puzzle for every fan of the genre!
Anyway, as far as you can overlook those anachronisms (or in case you don't even notice them), this movie has got a very high entertainment value - mostly thanks to the protagonists, Peter Ustinov, Jean Stapleton as Poirot's highly imaginative writer friend, and Jonathan Cecil as Hastings. There's some nice humor in it (probably also for the sake of the TV audience; because in tone, the novel was quite a bit darker...), and it's a REAL murder mystery: the complicated plot unfolds slowly, and if you pay good attention to every detail and every word that's being said, you may be able to guess the murderer before Poirot presents the solution. If you're not too particular about the authenticity of the wardrobe, hairstyles, cars and music, this is an enormously enjoyable crime puzzle for every fan of the genre!
- binapiraeus
- Nov 5, 2014
- Permalink