Rijndri Load of rubbish!!

YouHeart I gave it a 7.5 out of 10

Breakinger A Brilliant Conflict

Iseerphia All that we are seeing on the screen is happening with real people, real action sequences in the background, forcing the eye to watch as if we were there.

whitesheik One word sums it up - terrible. I don't know what's more shocking - the silly "reviewers" here who have never seen or read any iteration of Witness for the Prosecution, i.e. the people who like this monstrosity because they have no history and don't even know what the story, play, or subsequent film versions were about, or the fact that legitimate British reviewers heaped praise on this thing.So, let's just start at the beginning. You want to have the chutzpah to call something Agatha Christie's The Witness for the Prosecution, then don't make up the majority of the movie so that it has nothing to do with Agatha Christie. Sarah Phelps, shame on you - Ms. Christie doesn't need your dreary help and you can't even walk in her footsteps let alone her shoes. The teleplay is dreadful - all the additions are moronic. You know, I have no problem with this soap opera story but don't call it Agatha Christie or The Witness for the Prosecution just because you keep Ms. Christie's central plot element. This isn't going back to the short story, this is a whole NEW story and it's not a good story at that. The only thing that works is the twenty minutes or so of the trial. It just goes on and on, one dreadfully dull scene after another, filled with whispery acting and the awful coughing of Toby Jones (bronchitis we finally learn) - I don't blame him for coughing, mind you, given the amount of smoke they're pumping into every single shot and scene. It's not the 90s anymore, kids. And yes, the green - it's like watching Saw or something. Agatha Christie didn't write horror stories, you know. It's so dark and ugly and ineptly directed. Kim Cattrall is embarrassing in this as is her character, which has little to do with Ms. Christie's Emily French. The big finish doesn't happen where it should, the courtroom, because once the verdict happens the film goes on and on for yet another thirty minutes. The big finish occurs in France and then after that the film goes on and on for another fifteen minutes because this movie isn't about Leonard Vole or Emily French or Romaine Vole, it's about John Mayhew - sorry, does not compute, I don't care about the character and all his and his wife's angst - this is not Agatha Christie, this is Days of our Lives. I got the Blu-ray of this because of the reviews - fool me once, but never again.

cosmax10 The actress who played the maid reminded me of Norma Shearer when she stepped out of silent movies into talkies, a lot of over acting, wide crazy eyes and hand gestures She was totally unbelievable. The story line was bizarre at best. I am sure most people would of guessed who was faking it and who wasn't. THe endless coughing by one of the main characters had me coughing along with him. The scene in the dark dwelling was so obviously a set up, but all that coughing must of dislodged some of his brains cells and they flew out of his ears. I mean, really, something like that happening to anyone would of been all over the newspapers, especially to this particular character. I don't know, I have some old male relatives that look like the old coughing guy and all they want to do is sip on coffee or beer and read newspapers, and certainly are in no desperation to rip off the depends from their old withered wives for an attempted roll around. The hotel scene and ending was silly, and so was his long walk out to the ocean. He was short enough to drown in a deep bathtub. Was very disappointed in this, However, luckily there is Poirot still on Netflix.

tr91 I haven't read the original from Agatha Christie, nor have I seen any other adaptations there might have been before this so I had no idea how the story was going to play out. Following the success last year of And Then There Were None, I was very much looking forward to this years BBC adaptation. I find that when shows like this are shown over consecutive nights rather than weeks, it's much easier to follow. It's easier to get more involved in the world on screen whereas sometimes when a show is weekly you may forget key parts (especially, if like me you watch a large variety of different things). I had read a few reviews and comments from various sources of social media and there seems to be a lot of complaints about the sex scene and also the green mist, with people claiming they struggled to see what was going on. I personally found the picture to be perfect and the green mist gave the show a real gloomy atmosphere. The story was intriguing with plenty of twists and turns over the two episodes. The acting from all the cast was very strong also, Andrea Riseborough in particular was impressive yet again. The 1st episode was excellent and really set up the 2nd episode nicely. It kept me guessing all the way through. There was a slight lull in the 2nd episode but towards the end when the main reveal happened I was left satisfied with how it all turned out. Overall a strong mini series that is well worth catching up on if you missed it. Highly recommend and I'm hoping that there is more of this type of drama to come in the near future.

carollaw51-41-56256 I found this version rather gloomy and a bit depressing to say the least.Agatha Christie adaptions are usually quaint ,classy and clever this lacked any of that.And i couldn't see the point in adding unnecessary sex scenes,swear words and hints of lesbianism to do with the maid,what was the point of that other than to try and appeal to a modern audience in which case it fails,as we all prefer Christies original style of writing. Other than that i found the acting very good especially from Toby Jones who like the maid deserved a better ending like in the original 1950s and 1980s versions.These earlier versions were more true to Christies style. After watching this two part series i came away thinking that this has to be an anti-capital punishment version where miscarriages of justice could so easily have been prevented in the past if courts hadnt just relied on circumstantial evidence If this is the point the director was aiming at then it works,other than that i didn't find it comfortable viewing