I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

one of my absolute favorites!

Best movie ever!

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Based on one of Christie's weakest books this movie doesn't have much to offer. The updating of the movie to the 80's hurts , not as much as in "Murder in three acts" , but still. I usually don't mind hairstyles and clothes typical for a certain decade ( In few years people will be laughing how we dress now, the fashion changes so quick) , but to see Poirot standing next to a guy looking like an 80's rock star is simply embarrassing. There is serious lack of 50's atmosphere.I can accept Peter Ustinov as Poirot. He doesn't look like him at all and makes him look like a clown on more than few occasions , but overall he does an adequate job. Jonathan Cecil is once again awful as Captain Hastings. He is simply idiotic and unlikable , not like Hugh Fraser in Poirot TV series. Jean Stapleton is OK as Mrs. Oliver , but Zoë Wanamaker was much better in Suchet's TV series. The rest of the cast is mediocre at best or simply awful like Nicolette Sheridan and Tim Piggot-Smith. The whole movie has a bland feel to it. Starting from the production design through music and direction. The whole mystery isn't thrilling , but more rather trite. There is no pacing or structure to it , it just goes from one commercial break to another.The story itself has few very odd details. It takes only about 8 minutes to figure out who kills and that there is something suspicious about certain character. I did read the book first , long time before watching this movie , however I believe that even retarded chimpanzee would notice the not-so-subtle clues that the movie is giving to the viewer. Hastings is simply a pointless character , until the end of movie where he out of the blue appears to have important connections. What's with the Russian and Poirot ? Why inspector Bland allows Mrs.Oliver and Amanda Brewis to join the investigation and they walk with him EVERYWHERE. The way how Poirot comes to his solution of the mystery seems very forced and lucky.Anyone not familiar with Agatha's Christie writing would never pick up one of her books from viewing this film (or the other Ustinov TV movies). I give it 1/10.

There's plenty to admire in the costumes and settings for DEAD MAN'S FOLLY, most of which takes place at a handsome English villa in the countryside where a murder party game is being prepared by mystery writer Ariadne Oliver (JEAN STAPLETON). Unfortunately, Stapleton plays her role as broadly as she did Edith Bunker and there are times where her strident voice and manner becomes almost unbearable.Elegant settings aren't enough to bring this one up to the standard of PETER USTINOV's theatrical movies DEATH ON THE NILE or EVIL UNDER THE SUN. However, the color photography is impressive and everything looks worthy of a theatrical showing--except that none of the cast members have roles that are really fleshed out. As a result, the identity of the murderer is one of those "it could have been anybody" sort of things because, as is usual with Christie, there are almost too many red herrings among the suspects.Never a favorite of mine, this version has the heavily overweight Ustinov strutting around and putting Hastings down with some blunt remarks--mostly for comic value. JONATHAN CECIL plays Hastings with a humorous slant--far different from the Hastings in the David Suchet series--but his contribution is an entertaining one. NICOLETTE SHERIDAN as Hattie is delightful as the dim-witted lady of the manor.Not the best of the Ustinov TV adaptations, but it's good enough entertainment to pass the time.

I love Peter Ustinov as Hercule Poirot. Forget all those other phonies who've tried to fill his shoes! Including that ridiculous Murder on the Orient Express, or that laughable David Sachet! His sly, lovable demeanor rivals any of the great actors playing detectives- Peter Falk as Columbo, etc. He has a wonderful way of gaining the confidence and trust of each of his suspects, while probing them for information. You never really know who he suspects, and that's the fun of the mystery. He guides you through the maze like true detective. I have seen each of his delicious portrayals as the great, Belgian detective several times, and they just get better with age.

This made-for-TV movie is a good adaptation of Agatha Christie's story of the same name. Peter Ustinov again plays Hercule Poirot with aplomb as he unravels the mystery surrounding the Fair at Nass House and the architectural Folly. Dead bodies begin to pile up and no one is sure who they can trust among the many diverse guests at the Fair.The biggest asset of this film is that it was shot on location in Great Britain at one of the Treasure Houses of England (Wilton House, I believe), which adds greatly to the period feel of the film. If shot anywhere else, it would have been a routine TV movie.None of the performances truly stand out, but everyone plays their part with vigor and conviction. Most of the cast are English and they are much better than the American actors, who seem to be playing stock characters and don't quite fit in. However, it is a pleasant way to spend a few hours and revel in the grandeur of an authentic English estate.