Murder Most Foul

source: Murder Most Foul

Despite my later comments below I very much like this film and indeed all the Margaret Rutherford/Miss Marple canon. They are well acted and directed and time has certainly lent a nostalgic, black and white enchantment to the view with their depiction of a cosy, tea and cakes England which never actually existed but which we like to imagine did. And the murders, while hardly cosy, are interesting too. Indeed, and if one forgets such inconveniences as Agatha Christie's 'real' Miss Marple, on their own merits all four films, while hardly classics of the cinema, are most enjoyable and an excellent way of passing the famous wet Sunday afternoon. However, although none include the words 'Miss Marple' in their titles, they are all marketed as featuring her, presumably for fairly obvious commercial reasons, and thus I think there is a case for invoking the Trades Descriptions Act as they bear precious little resemblance to the Marple world of the books, viz:- 1. Margaret Rutherford was a brilliant actress and good in this role but she was physically so unlike Agatha Christie's description of Miss Marple that it is difficult to take her characterisation seriously. Miss Marple is variously described in the books as fluffy, delicate and, I believe, like Dresden porcelain and those words, ungallant though it must sound, cannot possibly be applied to Miss Rutherford. I believe that Mrs Christie shared this view. 2. Only one of the films is based on a true Marple story (Murder She Said - 4.50 from Paddington). Two are actually Poirot stories and the other has no Christie connection at all. (The ITV Marple is guilty of much the same). 3. Miss Marple has been moved from St. Mary Mead to Milchester. If there is a point to this it escapes me. 4. The famous Marple method of solving cases by comparing them with past events and characters from her village has unforgivably been ditched completely. 5. Jim Stringer appears in all four films but in none of Christie's stories. Of course the reason for this was to provide a role for Miss Rutherford's husband, Stringer Davis, who, she insisted, must be cast in any film she was in. (To digress slightly, while I much admire and respect the couple's devotion to each other, I feel that this was wrong. Although it probably does not apply in the Marple films, the character having been created specifically to provide a role for him alone, if Mr Davis was the best available for a particular part he would have got it anyway - if not it unfairly deprived another actor). His part here is in any case not really essential, being largely confined to fetching and carrying and acting as a sounding board for Miss Marple's thoughts, all of which could have been accomplished by other means. 6. Perhaps slightly irrelevant but it still irritates me - despite all the help he receives from Miss Marple, even gaining promotion on the strength of it at one point, Inspector Craddock persists in regarding her as an interfering old busybody who should stop bothering him. With that kind of stupidity he should be back on the beat at least. This is of course all a matter of opinion and I have already seen the view that any story is open to interpretation in any way. I agree with this to an extent but it depends,IMHO, on how far it can go before it makes a nonsense of the piece in question. For example Shakespeare in modern dress can be quite valid except in the historical plays (they simply did not wear suits, jeans and T shirts in 1483). And if Miss Marple can solve a Poirot case how long before we see Iago whispering in Hamlet's ear? Or Dr Watson chronicling the adventures of Sexton Blake? Just one more comment, of no relevance whatever to the above. Did you know that Margaret Rutherford is an anagram of Target for Murder? Well, almost. There's a rogue A,H and R which I can't fit in anywhere. Any (printable) suggestions?

Jane's on jury duty and is the only one to find NOT GUILTY to a murder charge so she is off to find the real killer. She auditions to join the cast of a traveling players group in a get-up with a huge hydrangea blossom plunked in her bosom and recites "The killing of Dan McGrew". It's wonderful. The rest of the film is entertaining and the finale typically ironic and comical. These films are great, easy to watch and very light hearted.

Margaret Rutherford makes an amusing Miss Marple in this all-English version of Agatha Christie's "Mrs. McGinty's Dead". With an outstanding supporting cast she manages to solve the murder mystery after joining the cast of a local theater group. A quiet but very english film; filmed in black and white it looks as if it is an older film than it is, but also has a modern feel to it since it was filmed in 1964. Ron Moody is wonderful as the theatrical Clifford Cosgood, who tries to convince Miss Marple to invest in his next play. Charles Tingwell plays the police inspector who gets all his clues from Miss Marple and seems always to be three steps behind her.

In this, the third of a series of four films of Margaret Rutherford depicting Miss Marple, we are lavishly entertained by a witty whodunnit which is set, most appropriately, within and around a travelling theatre troupe. In my view, this is the best of Rutherford's renditions of this character - and, as ever, she is massively supported by a rock-solid cast which merges mirth with menace in adequate proportions. The decent, yet slightly inept, Inspector Craddock (Charles Tingwell) is ably assisted, in a needy negative way, by the clearly less able policemen, Wells and Brick (Scott and Davies) in trying to convict an 'obvious' criminal for a heinous murder. Adding to this, the ineptitude of a firm and forthright judge (Andrew Cruickshank) alongside an evidently incapable jury, leads us once again to the necessity of 'our Jane' solving the crime for us. To do so, she must join a theatre group which is riddled with a relevant variety of seemingly good suspects - but which is led by an over-the-top character, Driffold Cosgood (played to perfection by the brilliant Ron Moody). The bit where Cosgood changes his mood and his mind in mid-sentance (..."Dear Lady...") is a piece that is worthy of Shakespeare as a refusal is turned into a plea - but there are plenty of other endearing and engaging moments throughout the rest of an accomplished production. With your port, or a nice bottle of wine, wait until it's dark and raining outside, then snuggle up to this wonderful jaunt through the curious backdrop of a theatre and its performers presenting a different kind of 'playing' than one would normally expect.

To me Rutherford simply IS Miss Marple even though she seems light years away from the placid, if insightful knitting couch potato from Agatha Christie's novels. In this adaptation of Mrs. McGinty's Dead, Rutherford's Jane Marple is part of a jury that refuses to find a man guilty of murder and then goes on to investigate and follow a trail of clues to a troop of actors, led by the delightfully hammy impresario Ron Moody. Rutherford is a joy to watch whether auditioning with a dramatic rendering of a popular poem or sneaking about trailing various suspects. The delight in watching her stems from seeing a vital and active older actress take such demand and physical participation in the effort to right wrongs. Thanks to Rutherford's performance, the films seem as delightful today, decades later, as they did when they became popular features in both the UK and the US.

What a pleasure to see Agatha Christie movies on TCM. Name Margaret is just slightly askew, but just enough to give us the impression that she has always been the inspiration for Miss Marple. The supporting cast is wonderful in the filming is excellent. The music stinks. I feel like I am watching an Austin Powers movie about hippie London. Basically ruins almost every scene in which it intrudes. However, the movie is still a fun romp.

This is the third of four Miss Marple films starring Margaret Rutherford. And, like the rest of the movies, it has the incredibly catchy harpsichord musical score that is a bit hip and mod. However, of the three I've so far seen, it's my least favorite. The story begins with a police constable noticing a dead woman hanging in a window! When he enters the place, he finds a man trying to save her...but the stupid officer thinks the man's just killed the lady. While it seems pretty obvious the man is NOT the murderer, soon he's on trial. And, it's an odd trial as the judge assumes the guy is guilty and tells the jury as much!! Fortunately, Miss Marple is on the jury and she is the lone holdout who refuses to vote guilty. After the case is complete, Miss Marple naturally decides to investigate the case. It takes her to an acting troop and she soon is convinced to join them. Soon other bodies start piling up...and so it's pretty obvious Marple is on the right trail! Can she solve the crimes before she's the next victim? While Rutherford is excellent as usual, the motivation for the murders seemed a bit limp...hence my scoring this one a 7 instead of 8 like the previous two.

How great is Margaret Rutheford in this? As aging amateur sleuth Miss Marple, who investigates a theatre company where a murderer may be hiding, Rutheford is shrewd, eccentric, likable. It's the kind of memorable performance which elevates a droll movie into a fine one. In fact, everyone was plainly having fun on set, from Charles Tingwell as the Inspector torn between annoyance and reverence for Miss Marple to Ron Moody as a hilariously smarmy, hammy thespian. As much as I enjoy Christie and respect her seminal influence on the genre, not all her plots have aged well - some of the mysteries, like this one, could be solved by a modern investigator with a Google search. However, her detectives and their quirks are still vivid and entertaining. 8/10

Enjoyed this Agatha Christie murder mystery and especially with the great acting by Margaret Rutherford, (Miss Jane Marple). Miss Marple sticks her nose into another murder mystery of a woman and manages to enter the murder victims apartment under the pretense of looking for old clothes and things for a church benefit. Miss Marple even joins a theatrical group and volunteers her so-called talents as an elderly British lady. There is a strange bunch of actors in this theater, one girl walks in her sleep and acts like she is in a trance and even tries to kill Miss Marple with a knife. There is a great deal of comedy through out the film and Miss Marple always seems to give the Police Inspector valuable information which he takes complete credit for himself. Nice old scenes from England and a very enjoyable classic film from 1964.