Surprisingly incoherent and boring

Strictly average movie

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

THE WITNESS FOR THE PROSECUTION is another dead-headed drama from the BBC, who seem to have lost the plot when adapting classic fiction for the screen. This one's a two-parter version of the Agatha Christie short story, featuring the acceptable Toby Jones as a lawyer who takes on the case of a young man accused of murdering his female employer. It's a dingy and dismal-looking production, subdued throughout, with poor lighting and mumbled dialogue.Even worse, the performances are nothing to write home about, and that includes Kim Cattrall who seems to be channelling SEX AND THE CITY in her early scenes. Jones is the only one who comes out of this with his reputation intact, and even he's been better elsewhere. The choicest dramatic parts of the story feel rushed through and the emotion rings hollow, particularly at the climax which veers into melodrama.

If you are going to produce an Agatha Christie play - at least have the decency to keep some resemblance to the original. This was so way off the mark it could have been called The Murder of Madame X or maybe A Month in the life of John Mayhew - and probably no one would have watched it. I hope that Sarah Phelps who adapted this abomination never again gets the chance to destroy what could have been an excellent production. This mini series (as they billed it) seems to go on and on and on - and in almost every scene we are tortured by the hacking cough of Toby Jones. (Mayhew) The scenes get darker and darker, there is no 'build up to a climax' and when the climax should happen the dreary thing drags on for another half an hour. There are no surprises, no courtroom repartee, there is nothing. I thought the performances were also mediocre. I usually like Toby Jones - but he seemed to be almost 'reading his script' as he went through - the other cast members were really no better. And the direction - well the less said the better. But really 90% of the blame goes to Sarah Phelps for her atrocious interpretation of an excellent story.I have given this more thought since writing my original review and am now convinced that this has got to be the most disappointing piece of television I have ever seen. It has also got to be one of the worst BBC shows I have ever had the misfortune to watch.

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.

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