User reviews

There are a few references throughout the reviews to ' Edwardian England' . As Edward the Seventh died in 1910, thus ending the Edwardian Age and as Edith and her husband didn't marry until 1916 ,these are obviously misleading .It is more a picture of English society undergoing a social transformation after the War , in the so-called 'roaring 20's '.

As to the film , it had very solid performances from all concerned although I felt that the conclusion (especially the trial scenes ) was rather too rushed . I always find Ms Little a magical screen presence .Her ability to play confident but vulnerable women is particularly suited to the role .

I hope to see this film one day. I don't even recall it being released in the U.S.

The Thompson - Bywaters Case of 1922 - 23 was one of the great disgraces of British Justice. Edith Thompson was accused of instigating her boyfriend, Frederick Bywaters, in stabbing her husband Percy on a street in London at night. To his credit, Frederick denied her involvement - he claimed he killed Percy for mistreating Edith. Unfortunately for Edith (a woman with a big imagination) letters she wrote to Bywaters were preserved by him, and they suggested that she had tried to poison Percy on several occasions. Problem was that the crown pathologist, Sir Bernard Spilsbury, never found traces of the so-called poisons. The solution by the prosecution: ignore Sir Bernard (normally trotted out at every major criminal prosecution at the time) and concentrate on the evidence that Edith and Frederic were committing adultery. Although ably defended by Sir Henry Curtis Bennett, Edith made the mistake of going into the witness box, and she suddenly panicked inside it. It sank whatever chances she had. The jury found her and Frederick guilty, and they were executed.

The judge at the trial, Mr. Justice Shearman, had been junior to Edward Marshall Hall in defending the notorious wife murderer George Joseph Smith, and yet he made comments about how sickened he was by Ms Thompson - more sick than at any other killer he came across. The prosecutor was Sir Thomas Inskip. Whatever one says of his ability in railroading Mrs. Thompson, Inskip would mis-serve his country in the late 1930s when he purposely slowed down the rearmament programs of the Baldwin and Chamberlain governments in the face of growing Nazi aggression. These two were the defenders of English hearth and home in this case.

The play A PIN TO SEE A PEEP SHOW is based on a novel by F. Tennyson Jesse, an noted criminal historian (and descendant of the poet Alfred, Lord Tennyson). It is a retelling of the Thompson tragedy.

Good performance, good production quality . even Plot is not that new, its same as most typical domestic relationship problems.

there are some drawbacks n little flaws but its ok because its early 2000 movie.

a jolly british girl marries her bf , which she likes him in start but later, the marriage is passionless, (especially sex n feelings). so later wife gets acquaintance her young sister ONE TIME bf, he is handsome also better job than husband. later she falls for him , and she fall hard. Even she sarcastically insulted husband at lunch or dinner about his job. thats really bad example of wife.

the affairs continues , but anyhow , cheating /adultery is bad thing , which this movie shows perfectly in the end.

----------------spoilers------------------

As the movie based in true story , i think its kinda little harsh but really good punishment , as Wife cheated and she actually feeds hate n violence in terms of imagination to her lover. so basically she is guilty. she could divorce husband n go for another guy . but early 90s , family dont want divorce so she stuck. british people..pfff.

The conviction and execution of Edith Thompson is now generally considered to be a miscarriage of justice. I rather thought that that would be the focus of this film. It's not. It's mostly about a failed marriage and an adulterous affair. The murder and the aftermath of it are skimmed over. It is fairly apparent in this depiction that Thompson had no part in the murder but, since the investigation and trial are barely portrayed, it's rather hard to see how she ended up getting hanged for murder. It happened, as far as I can see as a consequence of a weak jury who were unduly influenced by the prejudiced summing up of a rotten old misogynistic judge. Even with that judge she might have survived if she had been properly represented and this dim jury had had the law, and the burden of proof properly explained. That's the story that the film should have concentrated on.

An excellent British Cast in a film bafflingly overlooked at Cannes. Natasha Little in particular deserves the highest praise for the emotional range of her acting. In fact the whole cast gelled exceptionally well in a film that encompassed touches of light humour and extreme emotional pain.

Costume, set design and make up painstakingly recreated the era of the 20's and 30's. A modern day tragedy.

I bloody well HATED this mess of a film. Slow, stupid, melodramatic in the shrillest and most tasteless fashion. Everybody in it is a crashing bore. Edith and, what's his name ... oh, you know, her lover ... are the most unlikeable people I ever had to endure. We're to think Edith is an original, imaginative woman, but she merely comes off as flighty, silly, tiresome and annoying. As for Nick Moran's and Ioan Gruffud's acting, the less said, the better. I couldn't care less whether the lovers were guilty or not. I just wanted the two wretches to be put out of their misery. And mine.

Anyway. Watch this dud, if you absolutely must. But, as Dante said on a similar occasion: 'Abandon all hope ...' and all that.

This is an interesting picture for several reasons. It is primarily a tale of jealousy and murder, but there is virtually no blood. English mysteries are like that. The film forces you to follow the story in order to understand it. You will have no choice but to develop conflicting feelings about the protagonist.

Edie is the younger daughter of a typical English family at the turn of the century. Unlike her parents, younger brother, and older sister, she is what we might describe as a free spirit. She is extremely intelligent. She smokes, she drinks, she plays the coquette with boys, and she eventually lures a hapless weakling into marrying her by providing him with outrageous sex before marriage. This marriage sets the scene for the murder mystery to come. She comes to despise her husband Percy after dallying with a family friend. Her affair with Fred becomes obvious to her husband, her Mum and Dad, and her sister Avis (who is also in love with Fred). Edie doesn't care. Free spirits are willing to leave a trail of broken hearts in their paths.

The story is often told in the first person, and it's this introspection that gives us insight into her character and creates the mixed emotions we have about her. Is she just a self centered dreamer with no thought for the pain she causes those around her? Or is she a calculating narcissist who is willing to sacrifice anything or anyone who gets her way. Is Fred the driving force in this tragedy, or is he just a tool she uses to get what she wants? We come away from this movie wondering, and that is what makes it worth watching.

Words cannot describe how awful this movie is. From the beginning to the end, repetitious, miserable, stupid and beyond belief.

I was interested to see this film as a relative of mine shared a flat with one of the Thompson family and my family remember the case as we came from the same area. Another connection is that I was an extra on the film. The clothes we had to wear weren't Edwardian at all it was definitely twenties. The film seems to have vanished and having searched on Amazon I found it is on DVD so I am looking forward to seeing it at last. As it was made in 2001 I would like to know where it has been hiding all this time. In the court scenes that I was in Natasha Little and Ioan Gruffudd were excellent. It seems a shame that it didn't publicised further because it definitely should have been seen far and wide.

The sound track virtually destroyed a great film. Cast and

and acting are brilliant. However, the music is enough to turn a great film into a farce. I had to force myself to watch it through to the end.

Very unfortunate. Music absolutely awful. I would have preferred reading subtitles to a silent version of this film rather than the inane music which accompanies it. Compositions in the sound track make a mockery of the music of the time period.

This is a sad instance where everything great about a film has been negatively overcome by a single elemental factor.. the "music". If you can get past that, or better yet, if you can read the lips of the actors, the acting, visuals and story are interesting.. but the music is so awful it distracts one's attention from the positive elements of the film.

What were the makers of this film thinking with that SOUNDTRACK???

Performances are fine but there is something that is not quite working and I caught myself wondering away a few times during the film. Good reconstruction of the middle class edwardian England and different to see in compare of nobility and high class that is usually portrayed in edwardian stories. Applause to Little for the variety of emotions but Ioan Gruffudd is focused and passionate, giving a certain rhythm that is often generally lacking.

I remember watching a 70's TV film called A Pin To See The Peep Show based on this case, starring Francesca Annis. At least I'm fairly sure they were about the same case. Oddly enough when you look up APTSTPS on IMDb it recommends that you watch a Doctor Who Special. Now as much as I love Doctor Who I can see no comparison!!! Anyway, I would love to watch that again to compare the two productions.

All in all I thought this one was superbly acted by all involved, but especially by Natasha Little. The props and sets seemed authentic enough. I would have preferred if they had included more of the actual trial and less of the build up to it. But all in all well worth watching.

Unwatchable because the aspect ratio was 4:3 and it had been shot on videotape making the quality such like an 80s tv drama. It was not an opulent period drama but a cheap tv episode. Because of the ratio all the actors looked like the egg head aliens. Creepy and cheap. Wishy washy videotape and silly soundtrack.

First, a comment. Edith was the eldest sister in the family. Let's start with a truth. So, finally I got around to watching this film and it took me quite by surprise. For I had previously read some reviews which were, perhaps not necessarily positive. However, I had reservations, mostly about the many technical inaccuracies of so many parts of it. (Far too many to go into) However, bringing the immensely sad story of Edith, Percy and Freddy to the big screen was done with sensitivity.

I am pleased to count as one of my friends, Professor Rene Weis, who wrote Criminal Justice, Edith's life history, and our aim is one of justice, to eventually force the government to offer a posthumous pardon to Edith. To this end, we work very hard. Even eighty-five years after her death.

It therefore quite astonished me that Rene was not mentioned or thanked in the end titles. Certain details in the film clearly showed that the writer/director had read his book and that saddened me.

However, I have to thank him for bringing this subject to a wider audience. If you seen, Let him have it or Dance with a Stranger, similar types of British film (an execution at the end) they were done so much better. Better actors I think. And music. And screenplay. Anyway, seen it at last. I think it must be very difficult to write a great screenplay.

Molly Cutpurse