HotToastyRag A Miss Marple mystery with an all-star cast—what could go wrong? A lot, actually, and I'm not just talking about the murder.The story isn't the best whodunit out there, but it's the acting that's the real problem. I don't know what kind of direction Guy Hamilton gave his cast, but everyone overacted like they were in a bad dinner theater performance. It's just sad to see Elizabeth Taylor, Rock Hudson, Tony Curtis, Kim Novak, Geraldine Chaplin, and Angela Lansbury giving horrible performances. If this was the first movie someone saw of them, they'd probably hate them. Liz's and Kim's performances are particularly over-the-top; they play fading movie stars who hate each other, and it's just heartbreaking to watch.The only bonus is if you look at the full cast list on IMDb, you'll see Pierce Brosnan listed as "Actor playing 'Jamie' (uncredited)". But don't watch the entire movie hoping to spot him. I'm sure he'd give you the same advice.

Jonathon Dabell Following the all-star Agatha Christie extravaganzas Murder On The Orient Express and Death On The Nile, a similarly impressive cast is assembled for The Mirror Crack'd. The difference this time is that the story is not one of the many Hercule Poirot entries that Christie wrote; instead, it features her 'other' celebrated creation, Miss Marple. One of the main problems with the film is that Miss Marple doesn't really feature enough in the action. She is confined to her home for much of the film, meaning there are long stretches where she is absent from the screen (worse, this makes her ability to solve the murder by piecing together second-hand information, descriptions and accounts very hard to swallow. It's like asking us to believe Sherlock Holmes figured out the Hound of the Baskervilles mystery without going to Dartmoor, without leaving London... heck, without even setting foot outside 221b Baker Street!)A film crew descends on the small English village of St. Mary Mead. They are there to shoot a costume picture about the times of Queen Elizabeth 1st and Mary, Queen of Scots. The lead role is to be played by Marina Rudd (Elizabeth Taylor), once an international superstar and multi-Oscar-winning actress, now a forgotten face (she gave birth to a mentally retarded baby after contracting German measles during her wartime pregnancy, and subsequently suffered a severe nervous breakdown). Another key role is to be played by Lola Brewster (Kim Novak), a bitchy diva who revels in engaging in a war of words with Marina. Others present include the director, Marina's husband Jason Rudd (Rock Hudson); the producer Marty Fenn (Tony Curtis); Jason's production assistant and possible adulterous partner Ella Zielinsy (Geraldine Chaplin); and a whole entourage of actors and crew. During a pre-shoot party, a local busybody named Heather Babcock (Maureen Bennett) approaches Marina and bores her with a story about how much of a fan she is of her career. Later Heather dies after drinking a poisoned cocktail, possibly intended for Marina. Scotland Yard policeman Dermot Craddock (Edward Fox) arrives to find out whodunit. He calls upon his injured, housebound aunt, Jane Marple (Angela Lansbury), who lives locally, to seek her expertise in uncovering the killer.Lansbury is great as ever as Miss Marple, though she needed way more screen time than she is given. The verbal sparring between Taylor and Novak is enjoyably done, while Hudson plays Taylor's husband pretty well. Perhaps the best of the supporting performances comes from Fox as the Scotland Yard detective - a deceptively canny policeman who also happens to be a movie buff. Some of the actors are a little wasted, like Curtis, Chaplin and Charles Gray as a butler. The resolution to the mystery is decent enough, with sufficient red herrings thrown in to keep the killer concealed, but the closing scene is rather confused. John Cameron's score has a habit of launching off into an ill-fitting 'sexy' saxophone style which rarely fits the mood of the film, while Guy Hamilton directs it all in ploddingly efficient fashion. Not the best Christie adaptation ever made; nor the worst. A passable entry, but, given the calibre of the talent involved, it could and should have been much better.

Roedy Green This is my least favourite Agatha Christie movie. It has lots of well known actors, Angela Lansbury, Elizabeth Taylor, Kim Novak, Charles (Rocky Horror) Gray, Tony Curtis, Rock Hudson, Geraldine Chapman, but only Elizabeth Taylor gets a juicy role.Taylor and Novak vamp and camp about like a couple of drag queens or like Vera and Mame in Mame insulting each other. I did not find it amusing, just embarrassing and boring.Miss Marple smokes! Heavens. Talk about out of character.It is all just too overblown and melodramatic. The score is similarly overblown and Gone With The Windish. It is just not believable. I have a pretty low bar. I can even handle Margaret Rutherford as Miss Marple.

misctidsandbits I always want to see any production of Agatha Christie, and usually enjoy it overall. Her stories are that good. To me, the classic interpretation so far is the BBC television series with Joan Hickson as Ms. Marple and David Suchet as Poirot. They were so authentic and true to the books, while being very well done. The 80's and 90's seemed to yield the best of the crop. But, I even enjoy Margaret Rutherford's series, though they are so loosely adapted. This decade's offerings give the heartburn, even the newer ones with Suchet. They have taken the stories much farther afield than I can swallow, stellar production and casting notwithstanding.But here's Rock and Liz together again - in Agatha Christie. This is one of the more glamorous of the Marple stories, and there is plenty of glamor here. My goodness, the superbly correct butler was the wonderful Charles Gray. All these people together - Kim Novak, in an over-the-top Lola Brewster. Everyone loves the vitriolic exchanges between the two actresses in the story, which they knew would be the case. That's why they indulged in much license with that aspect. Edward Fox is interesting in his reaction to Marina (Lizzie) in the interview, calling her on her pulling out a scene from one of her movies when his questioning got too close. Then, she immediately switches back to near serendipity. Side note - realized how small a figure Fox is, while next to the very full sized Rock Hudson. And with Angela Lansbury, again appearing quite diminutive in contrast. Tony Curtis as the producer follows the more outrageous type. This really was quite a mix of British and American actors. It was interesting seeing a number of the local characters showing up later in the BBC series in different roles.Of course, Miss Marple with the Lansbury talent brought to it. Miss Marple seems to be the hardest to define. She is varied from the first book treatment, and some in the BBC series as well. It seems hard to land on a persona for her. Personally, I prefer what Joan Hickson did with her, overall presenting a balance of the proper old lady of older times who has developed a depth of understanding of human nature and genuine caring for people. She is an atypical old lady, with her perky persistence when she's really onto something. Unfortunately, most have taken that aspect and run with it, ignoring her foundational substance. The newer ones especially seem to make her out to be a liberated know-it-all. With that, she has become a very vapid, shallow character. The treatment here has her starting out as the know-it-all at the local movie night, but she becomes more biddable as it goes along. She demonstrates the life experience correlations, which are so pivotal in her sound assessments. Geraldine Chaplin is the secretary, holding herself very tightly, with all sorts of complications going on beneath her surface. The Heather Babcock character was effective, that being an important one. They really had the vicar fuddled up in this. And the location and sets – quite wonderful, but other versions are too. There's a lot of the old world charm still intact in the British isles. They cleverly carried out the story with overall accuracy, adding and subtracting with an eye to please modern viewers and the run time of the film. It seemed to work. Everyone, including myself, note the variances, but forgive them. You usually find that British productions of Christie and anything really, have a way of stereotyping Americans rather unflatteringly. It's funny that in this American production, they made it even worse. But, it's about film personalities, and I guess they are fair game. A line from another Christie movie comes to mind. Ms. Marple is having tea with a crony, who mentions a recent trip to America where she asked for muffins and got tea cakes with raisins. Ms. Marple responds, "Americans have a lot to answer for." That one's funny; some others, not so much. If this film has piqued your interest, you might find the book enjoyable. You'll not be disappointed, I think, with its wider scope and development. Also, if you have opportunity and are enough of a fan of Christie, you probably have seen the BBC Marple series. If not, I think you would really love it. Personally, I consider the BBC Marple/Poirot stories to be the defining version, just as the 1995 Pride and Prejudice film version is to all the others. Hey, this film has the usual Hollywood treatment, but it's actually a jolly good show and all that.