User reviews

I have to disagree with one of the other reviewers comments on the actresses playing Ms. Marple. First of all, comparing it with the Poirot series featuring David Suchet is quite unfair since Suchet's character as a famous detective is always on the forefront of the stories, as in the books. Ms. Marple, on the other hand, is an amateur and an old lady, a more overlooked person who works in the background.

Geraldine McEwan is by far the better of the two actresses playing Ms. Marple in this series. She has the right wit and looks as if she is enjoying every moment, her eyes sparkle when she has an idea. Who ever decided to have Julia McKenzie succeed her, when McEwan decided to drop out of the series (probably for health reasons), must have been out of his mind. They are completely different personalities, and while McEwan looks mischievous, McKenzie looks as if she has terrible toothache., which makes it painful to watch her.

Both actresses suffer from the fact that, contrary to the strict way of doing the Poirot series, much tampering with the original stories has been done for most episodes. That did not much good to the plausability of the plots.

well, I haven't really read any books of Agatha Christie (except The Death on the Nile) and as a viewer, I found this series so enjoyable! and my favorite Miss Marple is Geraldine McEwan because i thought she amused me kind of sad she didn't continue but it's understandable! when the plot was sometimes didn't really work on me, I thought it's something that made me want to watch it more and ended up wanting to watch more. It's one of the first British TV series that I watched, and it's something that I wouldn't regret. Ms. Marple is such an unique and authentic character, and it's kind of unfortunate she didn't as popular as Poirot.

I read and enjoyed all the Agatha Christies when I was a teenager. Despite this I love these adaptions, and I enjoy the new twists we get in the screenplays.

I have to say that Geraldine McEwan for me is the consummate Miss Marple, as envisaged by Agatha Christie, managing to combine the ideas of sweet little old lady, knitting pink woollies for babies, with intelligence, humour and determination. 'Just passing were you, Miss Marple?' 'Oh, Mr Burton!'

Julia McKenzie is not nearly as successful - have you noticed that her garb is far more severe, with jackets, stiff collars and plain hats rather than the cardigans, and flowery hats of McEwen? Even Joan Hickson, in the earlier series filmed in the 80s and early 90s, does not match EcEwan for authenticity.

I was absolutely gutted when the BBC regained the rights of Agatha Christie from ITV, there were still a few stories that could have been done to feature Miss M, The Seven dials mystery being one.

It's a very difficult series to rate, because the productions ranged from awful to wonderful. Why didn't they ask Evans and The Sittaford Mystery being the low points, with brilliance coming from the likes of The Blue Geranium, A Murder is announced and The Moving Finger.

Adaptations ranged from fairly accurate, A Pocket full of Rye and A Murder is announced, to wildly re written, Nemesis perhaps being the most altered.

They weren't afraid to add Jane Marple to Christie books where she hadn't appeared, in some cases it worked brilliantly, The Pale Horse and Greenshaw's Folly being about the best.

Initially we had Geraldine McEwan, pretty different to the character from the book, but cheeky with a sparkle, and a spry sense of humour. McEwan was unable to return for series 4, so Julia McKenzie was cast to take over. McKenzie was more accurate to the character in my opinion, and when the writing was good, she shone, wonderful in both The Pale Horse and Blue Geranium.

They seemed to take a few risks when it came to casting, we had Elaine Page, Griff Rhys Jones, Harry Enfield, Lisa Stansfield, all actually worked brilliantly, cast against type. The performance highlights came from Zoe Wannamaker, Sharon Small, Shirley Henderson and Fiona Shaw. The only time I felt the acting was in question was during 'Evans,' for that one I blame the script and poor direction.

Glorious scenery throughout, I loved the house that was used as Miss Marple's residence, such a pretty place. The period detail was spot on so many times, in terms of outfits and styling they nailed it, Bertram's wasn't my favourite adaptation but it's a beautiful looking episode, the sets and clothes are sumptuous.

The music was a little overdone at times, more so in Series 1, but a lot of the time it was enjoyable and melodic, The Body in the Library and Murder is Easy being better examples.

You need to watch these adaptations with an open mind, purists of Christie's work are likely to watch with unease. The acting throughout the series was excellent, it was the writers and producers that made the episodes great or poor.

People will always compare these adaptations to the BBC's, I did myself, but try to enjoy them without the comparisons, there'd have been no point making them identically, so plaudits for trying something different, sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't.

I am an Agatha Christie scholar, who has researched her work for years. Does that make me a better viewer? Not necessarily, but a more attentive one. I can honestly say this is one of the best TV adaptations and definitely worth of 10 stars. It's got everything and more. Please give it a chance and stop comparing it against other productions.

'Agatha Christie's Marple' is a fantastically directed, wonderfully filmed, all-round SUPERB TV series that retains both the atmosphere and irresistible charm of the author's source material, even when it deviates from the strict plots. As Joanna Lumley says in the 'Behind the Scenes on Series 5', as long as people will read and enjoy things, they will read Agatha Christie, and as long as people watch things, they will enjoy productions of her work. She is one of the best authors to have ever lived. I think it's something of a shame that BBC have regained the rights to her work because ITV and Agatha Christie are a match made in heaven. They nailed it with David Suchet's Poirot and they nailed it with Miss Marple too.

Geraldine McEwan and Julia McKenzie are both phenomenal as Miss Marple. Miss Marple generally has been very well-served by performers over the years. I loved it when the character was played by Margaret Rutherford in the '60s, as I did when she was played by Angela Lansbury in 'The Mirror Crack'd' (although they are incredibly different interpretations!). Every actress brings something different. Geraldine McEwan is our pixie-like, eccentric, but oh-so-loveable Miss Marple (probably the closest to the books) and Julia McKenzie is like your lovely grandma down the road. Whenever I watch one of them, I think, "no, THIS is the best Marple," and then I change my mind when I watch the other.

As I have now finished every single episode, here's a very brief breakdown:

The Body in the Library - amazing. Fantastic. Brilliant. It retains the novel's atmosphere superbly (even after they changed a killer).

The Murder at the Vicarage - wonderful.

4:50 From Paddington - very good.

A Murder is Announced - another good one, with Zoe Wanamaker (or Ariadne Oliver, as I know her) playing Letitia Blacklock.

Sleeping Murder - this film's great! It makes a few creative changes to the novel - maybe the writers wanted to play around? - but they don't feel out of place. Even as a fan of the novel, the changes meant I could be surprised by the twists too, which was wonderful. It has great dialogue and vivid characters.

By The Pricking of my Thumbs - Miss Marple meets Tommy and Tuppence! Perfect for Halloween, very creepy, and lots of fun, if you're willing to overlook some minor plot contrivances.

The Sittaford Mystery - this is an eccentric, weird but still unique film which makes a great watch if you're in just the right mood. It bears no resemblance whatsoever to the novel.

The Moving Finger - an eccentric and slightly bonkers production. James d'Arcy is wonderful, as is Frances de la Tour. The back projection is appalling in the 'cycling' scenes, but if you don't mind that, it's a great watch.

Towards Zero - BRILLIANT. Surprisingly faithful to the source material, even with the addition of Miss Marple.

Nemesis - NO. This is pretty much Geraldine McEwan's only rubbish one. It botches the novel and makes the whole thing ridiculous.

At Bertram's Hotel - my favourite episode in the whole series. It stays fundamentally true to the book's murder plot - even if everything else is different! I didn't mind the alterations because the new plot still comes together perfectly.

Ordeal By Innocence - good film, with a brilliant performance from Juliet Stevenson, though not one I return to again and again.

A Pocket Full of Rye - Julia McKenzie shines in her debut, one that translates the novel almost verbatim. A masterpiece with a very moving ending!

Murder Is Easy - this is nowhere near as good as A Pocket Full of Rye, but is still satisfying Christie comfort food.

They Do It With Mirrors - this one's rubbish. Only watch it if you're a completist: dull, convoluted, and makes no sense. (Although maybe it's a tad better than Nemesis.)

Why Didn't They Ask Evans? - Again, rubbish! This was such a brilliant book and they botched it. This could have made a wonderful Marple episode had the writers stuck more to Christie's plot. What makes it doubly annoying is that it starts deceptively well. By the end, it's gone downhill.

The Pale Horse - fantastic! Julia McKenzie and J. J. Feild are superb, as well as pretty much every other actor.

The Secret of Chimneys - despite bearing no resemblance to the novel whatsoever, this is a truly phenomenal film which ranks very highly. It still feels very Christie-esque...just a different plot altogether from the original Secret of Chimneys. :)

The Blue Geranium - an effective and highly enjoyable embellishment of the short story.

The Mirror Crack'd From Side to Side - one of the very best episodes; a true and emotionally heartfelt adaptation of the novel.

A Caribbean Mystery - fine. This story works better as a book, but it's certainly a decent film.

Greenshaw's Folly - massively convoluted but still good. Again, it's great Christie comfort food, and McKenzie is always fabulous.

Endless Night - a horribly bleak and disturbing one, but then that's not out of keeping with the book. Superb performances and a great adaptation.

Bravo! Nemesis, They Do It With Mirrors, and Why Didn't They Ask Evans? Are the only truly awful ones. The question now is...having loved ITV Marple...do I now need to watch its rival: BBC Marple with Joan Hickson?

Atleast first few season , cast always had one or two quirky choices. People taking on role which is opposite of type of character they are famous for

I too read the Agatha Christie books as a teenager, especially the "Miss Marple" books, and I can honestly say that Miss Geraldine McEwens version of Marple is the epitome of everything I envisaged Marples character to be. She is Fabulously Intriguing, Mystifying, and Spot-On.! I love her facial expressions when she is deliberating her calculations,queries and suspicions, it really does make one excited and intrigued...🤔 How any reviewer could ever state Geraldines version is not a Spot-On performance is in a daydream, and watching another channel or programme, or either they must be upside down...😶 I was so disappointed when Geraldine left the series and was replaced by Julia McKenzie, it was a disappointment! Her version was so far less effective and an inferior outlook with regards to Miss McEwans, and her attire was confusing; a far cry to what Marple had been potrayed as previously (by Mckewan) I know each actress likes to incorporate their own take on a character, but Julia McKenzies version of Marple is of a much more cold and disconnected Marple; not at all like the homely, warm and a comforting Marple character played by Geraldine McEwan. A less connective performance I would say. One would believe she had forgotten her lines mostly, due to each of her performances taking too long to materialise. Those unflattering suits were so unappealing and drab, and those awful hats...unlike McEwans lovely cardigans, cosy flowery hats and knitting bag; well, what more can you say...😊 I just didn't think McKenzies Marple worked. I really didn't enjoy the Marple series after Mckewan left, other than the episode "Endless Night" which was one of the better episodes of the last three series. My favourite episodes are " 'Bertrams Hotel' 'The Sittaford Mystery' 'Sleeping Murder' and 'By the Pricking of my thumbs'. loving the re-runs of 'Miss Marple' on Itv3, I never tire of watching them...😊 I Recommend anyone and everyone who loves mystery and suspense, to watch at least the first three series of 'Marple' then follow-it-on until the end of the six series.. then, judge for yourself... you'll really enjoy them all and be in for a remarkable treat.! 🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟

A series of adaptations of Agatha Christie novels, with Miss Jane Marple as the central character. A seemingly innocuous elderly woman with no background in criminal investigation, she has a knack for solving crimes, particularly murder.

Not in the same league as Agatha Christie's Poirot (the series starring David Suchet), but generally quite watchable. Miss Marple herself is quite bland, and certainly does not have enough colour or presence to carry an entire episode, let alone a series of 23 episodes. This is regardless of whether we are talking about the first 12 episodes, when Geraldine McEwan played Marple, or the final 11 episodes, when she was played by Julia McKenzie. McKenzie was the better of the two, having more gravitas and presence than McEwan, but neither inject much colour or engagement into proceedings.

To compensate for Marple's dullness, the main secondary characters are given depth, and are often made the focus of the episode. This includes some potentially interesting sub-plots and backstories. Marple is a fringe character for much of the episode and then swoops in towards the end to solve the crime. This strategy is not always employed, unfortunately, and, when it is, is not always done well, depending largely on the writing for the episode and the quality of the performances.

The mysteries themselves are generally quite intriguing. In some ways, this is where the Marple series is better than Poirot. Poirot mysteries were often highly complex, to the point of implausibility, with far-fetched back stories. Marple mysteries are more relatable and plausible.

My best advice for viewers of this series, especially for diehard Christie fans? Let everything you know about Miss Marple GO. Let it go, forget what you've read, what you've watched. Give up on comparisons. Let the 30's become the 50's. Let the artistic liberties override the canon. Stop being the Christie aficionado, expert, fanatic. Put your expectations in the bin and relax.

I basically learned to read with Christie novels...she introduced me to a lifetime obsession with detective stories, especially British-based adventures. I grew up loving Poirot, Tommy and Tuppence, and Miss Marple. I read and reread all of the stories. I also watched all the PBS/BBC adaptations over the years and yep Hickson was, in my mind and obviously in the minds of the majority of the raters here, the best personification of Jane Marple.

But in letting go of what I expected to see, and in allowing myself to NOT compare McEwan to Hickson and canon to plot changes, I was able to enjoy this series for what it is: a delightful, campy, visually wonderful entertainment opportunity. If you have any questions about how the look and feel of this series is, just watch the introductory titles.

Just. Let. GO. And allow yourself to enjoy the fun. If you can't, well, you're definitely going to be disappointed, which in and of itself is....disappointing.

I'm a lover of all A C's works,and enjoyed this with the exception of the portrayal of Miss Marple by Geraldine Mcewan. For me she brings absolutely nothing to the wonderful character that is M M. She succeeds only in making everybody else in the play seem exciting and interesting. So many actresses have bought their own particular take on Miss Marple. e.g Julia Mackenzie- warm,humorous, Joan Hickson-stern,forthwright. But you could be forgiven for assuming that Miss Mcewan is the deceased! And yet does seem to never receive any criticism for bringing nothing to what is a wonderful character that a lot of actresses would delight in playing.Sorry to speak ill of the dead but that is my overwhelming feeling. I've never seen Miss Mcewan in anything else to pass judgement on and do not have a grudge. But needed to say this as almost in a state of disbelief about this.

Updating and altering A C is well warranted given this follows Joan Hickson's excellent Marple. So, great guest stars, well written adaptations with sensitivity to the original tone plus high production values make this easy to rewatch and enjoy. Lesbians! OMG. "Political correctness has gone too"...oh please shut up! Review the entertainment, not your cliched social outrage. I'm a little less annoyed by AC devotees since theyve earned some proprietary rights and I'm interested in plot and character changes. But I think her creations are open to script and character exploration. Strict adherence to text....tiresome.

The key for taste this serie , in my case, was to ignore the portrait of Miss Marple created by Agatha Christie. because each actress in this role, gives her nuances and colors and accents to it. so, the war was between Geraldine Mc Ewan and Julia McKenzie. both are admirable. the difference - maybe the manner to define the character. in the case of lady McEwan , the good intention was the lead aspect. the hard try to give to her character consistence. the result was decent and honorable. Julia McKenzie propose, maybe, a more familiar version. more comfortable. and , at first sigh, more inspired.

Agatha Christie is a marvel. One of her best her legacies, Marple will outlive us by far. In this new series, the suspension of disbelief wraps you until the the end. The actors are splendid. The plots are so well-developed, the acting so human yet precise, I feel as if I am there with them, more suspension of disbelief. This latest series is light years ahead of all other Agatha Christie's. Result: it is an absolute favorite of anything else to ever come down the pike.

The characters are so well-developed, one feels as if they know them. Well-rounded murder mystery, and yet the humour will make you out loud. I believe that every one should see it just once; I think you will be hooked.

This British television series adapted all the tales and novels where Agatha Christie included, as the main character, Miss Marple, an elderly lady, who never married, and who lives alone in a village house. She's particularly gifted as the subject is to solve complicated puzzles, which allows her to almost always solve crimes and find murderers when the police don't know what to do. I didn't do an exhaustive research to know, but I think there may be a connection between this series and "Agatha Christie's Poirot", which did the same work with novels of the same writer, but with another main character. It would not be something extraordinary.

In fact, it's very difficult not to compare both series. Marple is played by two notable actresses. During most of the series, the character was incarnated by Geraldine McEwan, replaced at the time of her death by Julia McKenzie, for the last two seasons. I confess that I liked much more the performance of the first actress, very elegant in what would become one of her last works. However, Marple is a character who lacks Poirot's charm and charisma. Poirot has much more impact, strength and presence than this little lady, who is of such quality and intelligence as he is, but never delights us or give us the humorous touch present in the manias of the Belgian detective. This kills the series at birth, partially.

The performance of the cast is reasonably good. I would not say that it's extraordinary, but it complies with what it should and doesn't disappoint the public. Unsurprisingly, the costumes, scenery and film locations aren't to be missed either. Technically flawless, the series only loses by comparison with Poirot, and by the lack of charisma and strength of the main character.

I decided to rewatch both the Marple series. I had originally given this series nine stars because I am a fan of all things Agatha, but in viewing the entire Hickson oeuvre, then this one, I found it far less attractive. I gave it five stars because the pantheon of acting talent appearing in these episodes is impressive and largely successful in their portrayals.

BUT-

One of the greatest strengths of the British producions of programs like those based on the novels of iconic writers has been the attention to period detail and faithfulness to the original source material.

That was so last century. Increasingly, the efforts to make things more exciting, attract younger viewers and impose artificial quotas to demonstrate diversity has resulted in far less credible and compelling viewing. This series is one of the first that ventured off the original mission that made Masterpiece, Mystery and other programming a cut above most television. Sadly, these productions have only become more ridiculous in pandering as of 2024.

But let's focus on this bitter disappointment.

First, these versions are utterly disrespectful of Christie's vision for Jane Marple. Dithery does not mean unkempt and McEwan's Marple lacks the genteel and proper facade disguising a mind like a cleaver. Instead, she dresses like an eccentric with color blindness and is a bit too knowing and wink, wink, nod, nod , not to mention she is more blatantly interfering than Christie's creation. The only portrayal more obnoxious is Margaret Rutherford's overbearing one in films.

The most appealing facet of Marple is how she innocuously floors people with her abilities because she appears to be the unlikeliest detective. McEwan, much as I love her in other roles, simply lacks the innocent diffidence that continually disarms people into revealing all. Julia MacKenzie looks and acts more like Christie's Marple, but seems far too matronly for the elderly spinster so brilliantly embodied kin Joan Hickson.

Second - and this truly annoys me - forcing a ludicrous backstory of an affair with a married man during the Great War is utterly awful. Jane Marple would NEVER do such a thing, regardless of the strength of her feelings. Her generation and social position was one that did not engage in selfish and destructive behavior. The aristocracy might have done so, but not the gentry- not without severe repercussions. Jane Marple developed her strong sense of right and wrong, and what is proper, tempered with deep empathy and rectitude, precisely because she understood the consequences of bad choices and selfish behavior - not because she indulged in it.

Third - the changes made in order to promote a more exciting or salacious narrative are utterly puerile and are insulting to the meticulous care in which Christie plotted her stories- particularly in A Body in the Library and Pocketful of Rye. Agatha Christie did not write sex scenes- subtlety and an assumption that the reader was bright and sophisticated enough to understand that there is sex, but that we are not horny schoolboys slavering for a bit of porn in our stories, kept the focus on the story and people. The sex scenes in these versions truly are crude and gratuitous- revealing the immature and desperate attitude of the producers. The idiots fail to understand that it is the avoidance of such unnecessary sex and violence in the programming that viewers flock to these programs. People watch PBS because they are tired of its dominance on network and cable TV and want adult stories without it and without the cloying wholesomeness of family programming.

Applying 21st century sensibilites to earlier periods in history is always foolish and insulting- particularly when it involves making drastic changes to iconic works. It is lazy and cowardly to disrespect an artist's vision (which is usually revered when something that repels much of society is crticized, like Piss Christ) by changing characters to something so divergent from what the author described. It also disparages the viewer- are we too stupid to understand context or do they assume that everyone is a victim of the excreble history curricula spewed in most public schools? Are they incapable or writing original stories taking place in the past from the point of view of marginilized members of society? Or that viewers won't be interested? Or are the bean counters far too terrified to take a risk- preferring to continually insult the intelligence and sensitivity of the viewers by bastardizing well-known works that wind up pissing us off?

The last blow to the enduring genius of Christie's work is that there is a sense of parody and mockery in many of the characters. The almost campy performances by some of the most talented actors in Britain sends a smug message of disdain for the values that have helped England endure for centuries and suggest that standards of behavior, judgy gossips, obsequious staff and prejudice are relics of the past- particularly in Murder at the Vicarage. They completely ignore that one of the reasons that Christie, like Shakespeare, was a master of the universality of human nature, and that people are essentially going to behave certain ways in certain situations, whether it's March 15th 44 BC or Stardate 43997.

Lest anyone sneer at this statement because my examples are Anglocentric- I suggest reading stories, - especially religious and mythological works as those are the foundations of any society- from all over the world and be amazed at the consistency of commonality in stories and behavior amongst diverse cultures, society and eras.

No one will ever replace wonderful Joan Hickson as Jane Marple, but Julia McKenzie is pretty darn good. I really liked the episodes with her, not so much the Geraldine McEwan ones. Whilst she very much looked the part, I found her continual smirking rather irritating.

Quite why Marple was written into the last episode, "Endless Night" I have no idea. This would have made a good stand alone Christie film, as it was when made in the 70s with Hayley Mills and Howell Bennet.

Anyway, having said all that, not a bad series, and frankly, even McEwan is preferable to Margaret Rutherford imho.

I would score it higher, but our viewing revolves in great part with close captions.

We are quite enjoying the series but I cringe over and over at how bad the close captions are. I am watching with someone who is hard of hearing and has to mostly read the script. Last night they were talking of furniture in the French Louis XV style. It is always read as Louis the fifteenth or often in French Quinze (pronounced cans - and that is exactly what the close caption said in the style of Louis cans - I had to explain that one to my mom!) Then a few moments later, Miss Marple talked about the problem of yarn balls vs skeins, except the close caption said yarn scans. So confusing for the reader. There are mistakes and horrible scripting throughout almost every episode.

Miss Marple, as written by Agatha Christie, was not proactive or aggressive. She was written to seem very fluffy-headed. Hercule Poirot had his "little gray cells"; Miss Marple's ability came from her ability to see patterns in events and people's behavior. She did so while watching events from a distance.

Really should be called miss marple and friends as itv had no faith in the viewers watching a pensioner based show and younger people now do a lot of the leg work, having said that I actually felt they were more enjoyable than the bbc faithful production

I watched this after having seen the 1980's series with Joan Hickson, that remained largely true to the original stories, and is well worth watching not only for the plot, but also for Ms. Hickson's portrayal of the main character.

But in the case of this series It would seem that the script writers used the following simple template for generating every single episode of this garbage: 1. Mangle and water down the original plot & characters beyond recognition.

2. Select 2 female characters from the original, or introduce 1 or 2 new ones, and make sure that they are in a lesbian relationship.

3. If any script writer is afflicted by a bout of inspiration or a desire to stay true to the original, banish the thought and follow steps 1 & 2 above.