User Reviews

Sly vixen that she was, Agatha Christie had other arrows in her quiver besides her usual crew of detectives.

For instance, "The Seven Dials Mystery" is a beautiful filmed production set among the magnificent houses of the great if not so good between the two World Wars, far from the tranquil world of Miss Marple.

There is no middle-aged Belgian detective or village busybody here, but a pert girl with impeccable breeding and a nose for adventure.

In "The Seven Dials Mystery," originally written in 1929, and produced as a British TV film in 1981 (directed by long-time "NCIS" director Tony Wharmby) , Christie's sleuth is a young noblewoman named Lady Eileen "Bundle" Brent (Cheryl Campbell) . Just a few years older than Nancy Drew, this delightful daughter of a marquess (Sir John Gielgud!) engages in some very clever (and very dangerous) detective work.

Set in a gorgeous old pile, and involving a whole House of Lords of wealthy aristocrats, including several very rich and (sigh!) very stupid gilded youth, "The Seven Dials Mystery" has plot enough for a dozen mystery movies.

During the day, Bright Young Things screaming, "By Jove!" and "I say!" play away the hours. But as mysterious gunshots ring out at night, to the grim accompaniment of ancient clocks tolling away the hours, the bodies begin to add up.

As the cute "Bundle" Brent tries to figure out what's going on, Dame Agatha adds still more layers of mystery to the puzzle, and what started out as almost a day trip to the Fun House becomes a terrifying excursion into the unknown.

Along for the ride is the great Sir John Gielgud, in a charming, often hilarious performance as an eccentric peer of the realm (he easily steals every scene he's in), and the marvelous Harry Andrews, as, of course, a Detective-Superintendent from Scotland Yard.

Christie doesn't let you off lightly, and there are nuances and subtleties that you might miss on your first viewing. So watch "Seven Dials Mystery" over and over, and don't look at the clock while the movie's playing, because Dame Agatha has a surprise for you every minute of the film.

Personally, I rather enjoyed the whole film put together. The beginning was relatively confusing to people who are not familiar with the British style of doing things, as well as the numerous characters which popped up without proper introductions... There were also several misleading moments whereby the character's portrayal of themselves caused you to wonder if this character is important to the whole plot, yet the character disappears after a while. I rather liked Bundle Brent... She added much mischief and fun to the mystery, which seemed distinctive of an Agatha Christie mystery - the element of witty characters added into the story. The ending is really surprising though. All in all a good mystery, though i do agree that the film is not very well directed.

I saw this version of one of Agatha Christie's earliest, and fluffiest, stories when it was first broadcast in 1982, and remembered it so well as an adult that I was delighted to find it in a video store.

The plot doesn't recount well - basically, several outrageously wealthy young aristocrats amuse themselves by chasing after a secret society called the Seven Dials. But the pace moves right along, and the oh-so-British styling is wonderful, including discreet foreign policy dealings amid cards and cocktails at country house parties (populated by perfectly-coiffed young ladies in flapper dresses, of course).

Not for everyone, but British mystery buffs will eat it up. 1920's obsessives will also want to see this one just for the gorgeous costuming and a series of stunning vintage cars that look as though someone raided a Concours d'Elegance just for this film.

I recently saw the DVD of this film and i must say I Loved It ! Campbell and Warwick are great and John Gielgud is funny. The joy of movies like this is that you can actually understand everything that 's been said because they don't use background music as soon as things become more quiet. As i am from The Netherlands and only could get a copy with no subtitles this is a very great plus. If you like the Partners in crime series or the A C TV movies Secret Adversary or Why Didn't They Ask Evans ? Then you'll like this one as well ! Of course it also provides the things we have come to expect from an Agatha Christie movie. There are several twists in the plot that will leave you guessing who the killer is.

Long, slow running "New Romantic" adaption of an early Agatha Christie novel written by Pat Sandy and made for "ITV on the week end" to tie with a series concurrently shown.

James "anyone for tennis ?" Warwick and a group of bright (silly) young things are up in the country at a manor when they put eight clocks in a friends room so they can get him up early. He is found dead the next morning.

A confederate called "The Seven Dials" is eventually suspected. A formula is attempted to be stolen – why didn't they just copy it ? Sir John Gielgud in a few scenes shows up the mediocrity of the rest of the strictly made for TV cast.

The early novel was fairly ordinary and the script sticks strictly to that. The early parts of the film (which remind me of that Monty Python sketch a bit) are quite jolly but then it drags quite a bit later on.

Unbelievable adaptation! Completely and utterly faithful to the novel, except for 2 things: 1) The climax is slightly altered to make it more "scary" 2) During the climax, #7 explains the purpose of the Seven Dials before revealing him/herself

The acting was fantastic! (Bundle's dad is portrayed so perfectly, it's almost scary!) You could watch this while reading the book, that's how faithful it is! The humorous scenes are still there, Bundle and her dad providing most of them. Some people complain that it is too long. Not at all, the length is just right! A long and drawn-out adaptation is WHY DIDN'T THEY ASK EVANS?.

An overall summary: One of those rare "perfect adaptations" which you'd like to watch over and over again. It deserves more than 10/10, but that is not allowed.

Apart from the usual lovely British scenery, period costumes, and beautiful antique cars, this adaptation confused me somewhat. There was a lot of 'wink-wink' type of acting, especially the over-the-top type from James Warwick, who was doing his Tommy/Tuppence routine again. Not exactly high-brow thriller or mystery here, but enjoyable enough. Fairly predictable and the acting was either very wooden or too 'fluffy', especially the female stereotypes. John Gielgud alone makes it worth watching and if you remember when this production was made, you can forgive some of the more obvious shortcomings. The whole secret society thing was almost silly and the premise thin. It's not one of the better remakes, but not the worst either. Still more entertaining than some of the darker, violently graphic shows currently being on offer. Agatha Christie stories can always fill a gap.

Even hardcore Whodunnit fans will probably be disappointed in this one, a slow, confusing and badly directed tv film, based on an Agatha Christie novel. Cheryl Campbell is sometimes irritating as Lady Brent, while James Warwick is adequately convincing as Jimmy Thesinger. The story is dated and lacks credibility, but this is probably due to the aforementioned poor direction; more interest was shown in recreating the late 30s era (which was achieved, by the way), which resulted in nervous editing and bad acting. Only to pass the time.

3

At almost two and a quarter hours, it's a very long drama, but it's worth watching, as it is absorbing, fun and intriguing. It's a slow, ambling mystery, full of espionage and intrigue. Don't expect great drama or sudden shocks, it's all very subtle.

I quite like the book, it's worth noting that this is a very accurate adaptation, the one thing I would point out is that here you're given subtle clues as to who the killer is, whereas in the book you're given hardly any. The solution always baffles me.

I love the style of it, it looks terrific, nice sets and lovely costumes. It is a production of its time, sometimes it looks more like a stage play.

Cheryl Campbell and James Warwick are excellent together, they work incredibly well, although producers were guilty of casting Mr Warwick too frequently, in all fairness he's perfect for them. Sir John Gielgud adds the humour, he's wonderful.

I like that we have references to Chimneys, Inspector Battle appeared in a few novels, including Chimneys.

Long, but lovely for a wet Sunday afternoon.

Intriguing. 9/10

I should probably say nothing, but I don't recommend this. I've read a lot of Agatha Christie, and have watched and like such a wide range of productions. Something with this is a real turnoff. It may be the production or direction, like other people mentioned, but for me it's the acting! Cold, rushed, cheesy. Gave up after 25 minutes.

Lately I have been watching Agatha Christie stories that have been made into movies. Some of them, like Murder on the Nile, and Murder on the Orient Express, are great films. This one is not. I would suggest you pass on this film and watch either version of 10 Little Indians instead. This film suffers from unimaginative directing, poor acting, and poor writing. Some of the plot devices were so bad I could have done better. This is a very poor film, I would recommend avoiding it.

I found this movie to be quite an enjoyable mystery, and very true to the early Agatha Christie style in its plot device of British state secrets being stolen and sold to foreign enemies. Although some of the interior scenes, especially right at the beginning of the film, have that slightly claustrophobic "soundstage" feel, this is quickly forgotten as the characters become more familiar and the mystery gets underway. The acting is very good, and Cheryl Campbell brings a lot of energy to the part of the flapper-heroine, Lady Eileen Brent, and James Warwick, as Jimmy The singer, joins her in playing upper-class amateur sleuth with a great deal of humour. Sir John Gielgud, as usual, steals every scene he appears in, and Harry Andrews is terrific as the stolid, slow-spoken Inspector Battle. The story follows the usual pattern of complicated twists and red herrings, but the conclusion came as a complete surprise to me, which I take as the mark of a good mystery.

Agatha Christie television two-parter starring Cheryl Campbell and James Warwick

After the huge popular success of "Why Didn't They Ask Evans?" The production company London Weekend Television was able to release this film adaptation of Agatha Christie's ninth crime novel on March 8, 1981. This was published in the UK in 1929 and was also known in German as "The Last Joker". Some characters from the novel "The Secret of Chimneys (The Count's Memoirs)", which was published in 1925, reappeared.

A weekend break at the country estate of the Marquis of Caterhan (John Gielgud) was supposed to be just for fun. His friends secretly place eight alarm clocks under the bed of a notorious late riser (Robert Longden). But the next morning the good guy is dead. Murdered! When yet another murder occurs, Lady Eileen Brant (Cheryl Campbell), the Marquis' flighty daughter, and the super-rich Jimmy Thesiger (James Warwick) do everything they can to solve this tricky case. They get help from the pretty Lorraine (Lucy Gutteridge), the sister of the first victim, and from Bill (Christopher Scouler), an admirer of the spirited Lady Eillen, also known as "Bundle". What role does the mysterious union of the seven dials play? Can Superintendent Battle (Harry Andrews) assist the amateur investigators? It soon becomes clear that it is about secret state dealings with weapons and the invention of a German scientist. The events come thick and fast...

And again the focus is not on Miss Marple and Hercule Poirot. Once again, amateur detectives get to work and - just like the audience - they experience many surprises.

Almost the same actors and the same creators (director: Tony Wharmby, screenplay: Pat Sandys) make this film adaptation of a lesser-known novel by Agatha Christie a great pleasure. James Warwick in particular knows how to inspire once again. After that, the actor was just ready to shine together with Francesca Annis in the series PARTNERS IN CRIME as Tommy and Tuppence Beresford.

Nostalgic, playful and adorable! And told very slowly! Great!

Not the best Agatha Christie adaptation, but one of the better ones. The direction could've been more taut at times, but this is a treasure for any Agatha Christie fan(I have been for almost 9 years). It is beautifully made, handsomely shot with splendid locations/settings and evocative period detail, particularly those cars. If you haven't seen the film yet and are wondering about faithfulness or lack of it, Seven Dials Mystery is very faithful(with one or two subtle changes), like the Russian version of And Then There Were None it is like the pages of the book and prose come to life. And to me it doesn't suffer from being too faithful. Seven Dials Mystery is slow in pace, but considering that Christie's mysteries take time to unfold this approach was appropriate. The length I also thought was fine. The dialogue is very good if talky, true in detail and spirit to Christie's style, and the story even with the pacing and that the second half is more suspenseful than the first is engrossing and keeps us guessing until the ending, which is a surprise. Of the acting, John Gielgud steals the show and Harry Andrews is similarly terrific. James Warrick and Cheryl Campbell(though I can see her character is going to divide viewers) bring great humour and charm to their characters. All in all, a classic Agatha Christie mystery. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Fans of Agatha Christie's novels will be pleased with this 1981 TV film, which nearly exactly sticks to the original 1929 written work. A good period atmosphere with nice outdoor filming, as well as good casting also helps.

Harry Andrews is as always great, here he plays Superintendent Battle (one of the rare times we see the character on film)and also Sir John Gielgud. Cheryl Campbell is fine as Lady Eileen and James Warwick-soon to appear as Tommy in the Partners in Crime series, is also winning in the role of Jimmy Thesiger. Representing the older generation Terence Alexander, Leslie Sands, and Noel Johnson are excellent, and the younger crowd is well-played by Lucy Gutteridge, John Vine, Robert Longden, and Christopher Scoular.

Agatha Christie's house in Devon-Greenway-was used in this production. The period costumes are excellent, as are the tech credits. It is obvious that a lot of care on all fronts went into the making of this production. Most of the same people were responsible for making the TV film Why Didn't They Ask Evans? the previous year.

In my opinion, "Seven Dials Mystery" is one of the best works of Agatha Christie, dynamic, lively and quite unexpected. This adaptation is the only film adaptation of the novel and I can't say that it is as good or even almost as good as the original source. Let's start with the good stuff. James Warwick and Cheryl Campbell are very good in the roles of Thesiger and Bundle, although both are not quite the same as in the novel, in my opinion, and John Gielgud is just great as Caterham, while Harry Andrews is quite good in the role of Battle. The atmosphere is quite good, and the script is very true and close to the text of the book. However, for me, the film adaptation is too tedious, the exposure is rather chaotic, and the character of the killer is something nightmarish compared to the book. All in all, good, but not brilliant. 8/10

Since this TV movie was made every story Christie ever wrote has been reworked into a Marple story, with only the plot, characters, and setting altered. What this Seven Dials Mystery has going for it is that it sticks quite closely to the original novel. Alas, that is about all that can be said in its favour. The old quip, "less than the sum of its parts" sums up the effect of a good cast, excellent locations, some really classic 30's cars, feeble script, evident lack of rehearsal, "don't follow me I'm lost" direction, and clumsy editing aimed more at fitting in the commercial breaks than generating a sense of drama.

John Gielgud gives us a splendidly vague yet canny Marquis of Caterhan, while the acclaimed Cheryl Campbell does her best to interpret Lady Eileen 'Bundle' Brent, with little help from the script and presumably none from the director, as the character never really emerges. Stalwarts Harry Andrews, Leslie Sands, and Terence Alexander have easy two dimensional characters to work with and need no direction to be convincing. James Warwick's Jimmy Thesiger bears a disturbing resemblance to a Michael Palin Monty Python character.

The standout for me was Lucy Gutteridge, who made Lorraine Wade the only character who I cared about.

Checking out the future careers of the actors was far more fun than watching the film itself. Some of the names you only see on the Full Cast and Crew page, such as Roger Sloman, ended up with bigger careers than some of the principals.

I have an all-encompassing quest to experience films in a lucid, coherent way. Within that are several little projects that have become hypnotic vortices of their own. One of these, in a sort of self-referential way is the quest for the best film of a Christie novel.

This comes close in terms of Christiness. That's because it is a pretty faithful rendering of the book. As such, it follows her nice form of introductions. In these novels, it is all a game of defining people that sew into each other. The people come first and we find of course that by the end we have sewn them together incorrectly because of the simple order in which they were introduced.

Christie (and others, Sayers) have this game of limited watching. Everything we see is true, but we don't see everything we need to in order to weave a coherent narrative until the end. That's when we revisit many scenes, which we "see again." Its all about seeing, really. And that's especially so when she writes book without her regular detectives. With the detectives, there is some internal sight, some mental perspectives, but with these it is purely about what is seen physically.

Here's the interesting part. Movies, and especially these puzzle movies are also about what we see and what we don't. That's the root of the cinematic experience. But Christie didn't write with a cinematic imagination. So the two conventions of visual trickery are close but not the same.

That's why I'm so fascinated by films of Christie stories. It is a wonderful cinematic challenge for the filmmaker, and in a way — because all this is collaborative construction — one for the viewer as well.

This adventure plays with secrets in three ways (signage, association and "state" secrets) and allows us to confuse them by natural assumptions that prove false. It is clever. As a book it is clever, I mean.

As a film, it goes on too long and asks us to accept some rather extreme portrayals.

Even with its length and observance of the story, there is a pretty jarring discontinuity between the first part of a large group of young, silly people. We need this large number to justify the eight clocks. But managing so many red herrings in a movie isn't feasible so all the girls are dropped.

Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

The era 1920s plays a country house where diplomats are staying. Soon a mission to evaluate a new material that is vital to aviation.

Gerry Wade (Robert Longden) seems to be a late sleeper it makes one thing that he may be dead when the story starts. Well, his friends with the help of an extraordinarily smart Rupert 'Pongo' Bateman (James Griffiths) bring in eight alarm clocks to help Gerry wake up. Looks like they may have been a tad late with their scheme.

People are starting to die. Marquis of Caterhan (John Gielgud) wants to know why his daughter Lady Eileen 'Bundle' Brent (Cheryl Campbell) ran over a man Ronny Devereux (John Vine) and shot him. As the man is dying he mentions "the seven Dials" and Jimmy Thesiger (James Warwick). She assumes that she is meant to tell Jimmy of the something or someone called the seven dials. From there the plot thickens.

The seven dials theme plays throughout the whole story. We see it in clocks and clock towers; it turns up on paper and dying breath. Is it a location or a cabal and does it really have something to do with the mystery?

As with many of Agatha Christies' stories, there are so many characters that you need a scorecard. Also, there seem to be plotted inside plots. Everyone could have done it and yet it is always the last person you suspect; or should I say usually the last person you would suspect. The film was adapted from the Novel by Pat Sandys, has the added benefit of the feeling that it is a play.

The film is packed with well known British actors and sometimes it is hard not to think now where have I seen this person before. Noticeably absent is Francesca Annis, yet the main female character player Cheryl Campbell is well remembered for her role in The Murder at the Vicarage (1986). John Gielgud excelled in his part as Marquis of Caterhan.

This is the sort of production that gives Agatha Christie a bad name. It doesn't know what it is trying to do. Part of it is played like a farce, part like a spoof, some of it straight; the direction is all over the map.

Harry Andrews struggles through it manfully, but sinks under the strain. The leads are awful and totally confused.

There are only two good things: the production itself, in terms of scenery and use of lovely old vehicles, is super. Finally, the only actor to really shine is John Gielgud. He plays his part superbly well, with a delicate touch that shows why he is such a great actor.

Worth watching for Gielgud and the cars, but be prepared to watch a lot of awful acting and directing in the meanwhile.

All the acting, all story, aside - I found this movie technically annoying to watch and admittedly I may be the only person who has viewed this "movie" that thinks so. I abhor the mixing of two different art forms into one production. Video tape is one form of artistic expression and celluloid film is another. The playback look is obviously different for each and I can spot the difference in an instant. This movie mixes video taped interiors with filmed exteriors. Video tape and live theater are too in-your-face real and take away from the escapism of film.

That said, I enjoyed Cheryl Campbell's acting, as always, and vote the acting ensemble a 10. The fast-passed dialog made it difficult to comprehend each word uttered by the actors at the beginning with their bantering back and forth before placing the clocks under the bed but again I blame the use of video tape for that problem. There could be a faint echo in the studio that accounts for this.