Watch Peril at End House For Free

Truly Dreadful Film

Good concept, poorly executed.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

I really liked this adaptation of Peril At End House, actually it's one of my favourites. In fact, my only complaints are some slow moments, and they seemed to have left out the character of Frederica Rice's husband. Although the latter is forgivable, seeming as in the book Frederica's husband is only treated as a suspect, and you don't meet him properly until the denouncement. That said, this is one of the more faithful adaptations of the Queen of Crime's brilliant books. Visually it is a marvel to look at, the Cornish coast was like looking at a work of art, and the music is absolutely beautiful. The script and plot are both solid and complex in construction, and so is the acting, with David Suchet impeccable as Poirot and Hugh Fraser and Phillip Jackson sterling as Hastings and Japp. Everyone else was fine as well, but I have to mention the debut of Polly Walker. What a debut it was! Polly looked stunning beyond words, and was a revelation as Mademoiselle Nick Buckley. The part when Nick "comes back from the dead" was one of the most dramatic scenes in the entire adaptation, perhaps even the most dramatic, and it was such an effective scene. Here, there are plenty of poignant moments and some laugh out loud ones too, making this along with Five Little Pigs and Sad Cypress one of the better Poirot adaptations. 9/10 Bethany Cox

David Suchet as Poirot, and Hugh Frazer as Captain Hastings, take a vacation at a resort in Cornwall, where they meet Magdalena "Nick" Buckley, the beautiful young woman with the startling gray eyes (Polly Walker) who lives in the mansion called End House next door. The three are having tea al fresco when Nick, waving her fingers, complains about the bees that fly right in front of your face. She seems to be having a run of bad luck lately because she's barely escaped two accidents (runaway car, falling boulder) that would have been fatal.After she leaves, Poirot reveals that he has copped her bonnet. It has a bullet hole through it. It wasn't a pesky bee after all, it was a bullet, and to prove it Poirot produces the bullet, identifying it as having come from a Mauser.This initiates a quiet investigation by Poirot and his sidekick. Nick had recently written a will before her appendicitis operation. Could the motive be money? Ah, but not. Nick may be living in End House but she is almost penniless and will soon have to move out. Except that her derring-do fiancé now dies in a plane crash and leaves her millions.At Poirot's urging, Nick invites her cousin Maggie to stay with her in End House, along with a few friends already there. But, helas, Maggie borrows a dress from Nick and is shot one night and killed, evidently by accident.Then it gets more complicated and I don't want to go on about it. You know how Agatha Christie's plots work -- everybody seems to be a suspect. And, as often happens, there is some subsidiary or embedded criminal activity involved too -- such as forging a will or trafficking in cocaine -- which tends to throw off the pursuit of the murderer.In the end (and hereabouts there be spoilers), Poirot reveals that both "Nick" and her cousin "Maggie" had the same first names -- Magdalena -- a family tradition. And Poirot reveals that the love letters from the derring-do aviator, as well as his will leaving everything to Magdalena, were intended NOT for "Nick" but for the now defunct cousin "Maggie," whom Nick herself deliberately murdered. The atrociously good-looking Nick sneers, calls everyone stupid, admits the murder, and goes off to snuff herself.This is one of those stories that has holes you could drive a Peterbilt 18-wheeler through.Question. Okay, they're sitting outside having tea and a bullet whizzes through Nick's bonnet. Who fired that shot? She's been faking all those attempts on her life, so who shot at her? And how does Poirot, without ever getting out of his chair, produce the pristine Mauser slug that barely missed Mlle. Nick's noggin? Magic? Or magnets.Question. At the end, Poirot produces the love letters addressed to Magdalena, and the aviator's will leaving everything to Magdalena. How does he know that they were really addressed to the other DEAD Magdalena, the cousin with whom the aviator was in love? Poirot and the police don't have a shred of evidence. (Evidence always comes in "shreds" and is a dichotomous variable -- you either have a shred or, more often, you don't have a shred. Nobody ever has half a shred.) It's all conjectural. Yet, as in a Columbo episode, the real murderer throws up his hands on such flimsy speculation and says, "Okay, you got me." The location filming is splendid and the acting is professionally competent and Polly Walker is so succulent that she should have done a gratuitous nude scene, but this plot won't hold water. Usually we can ignore holes in the story but in this case they are so in-your-face that they thrust themselves into your awareness. Or maybe not. I don't know. But I don't think of this as one of Dame Agatha's better-built narratives.

Hercule Poirot and Captain Hastings travel to a small seaside English town for some "restful vacation". But that is not exactly what they get, when they meet a young woman who owns a large house near their hotel, and whose life seems to be in danger.This is a 100-minute-long episode of the Poirot series, and I'd be lying if I said that the pacing never lags - it does. At the same time, I wish the post-climax had gone on a bit longer, to allow Poirot to make some further explanations. As it stands, the plot has some unclear points (the bullet....the poisoned chocolates....the cousin that was invited upon the insistence of Poirot....obviously I can't go any further without spoiling things), and it is possible that it doesn't stand up 100% under scrutiny. On the other hand, there's plenty to like here: the wonderful locations and production design, the exceptional acting, the cinematic direction, the small clues planted here and there ("Oh, how I like them!", says Poirot), some laugh-out-loud moments (the scene where Hastings tries to explain who Poirot is to Nick is a small masterpiece of writing and acting, as is the one of Inspector Japp on the beach).As for another reviewer's remark, "how beautiful is Polly Walker!", the answer is: more beautiful than words can explain. (***)

I love the Poirot movies! There's something about England in the 1920s that I find especially appealing. These movies have a way of transporting me to that time and place. The attention to period detail in this series is remarkable (at least to my untrained eye). Clothing, set decoration, cars, and even mannerisms seem spot on. I'm amazed that in the 1990s, locations could still be found that look as they did 70 years previous.The Poirot "regulars" give their usual wonderful performances. It's taken me awhile, but David Suchet has grown in my eyes to become the definitive Hercule Poirot. He nails the character. In many of these movies, the supporting cast can leave something to be desired. That's not the case with Peril at End House. They're quite good. Polly Walker is especially a standout. She gives her character real life.But if you're really going to enjoy a Poirot movie, I think it helps to be a fan of Agatha Christie's books. I say it helps because those familiar with her work seem to be more forgiving of the plot holes, 2-D characters, and other problems with her plots. Fortunately, I have been a fan as long as I can remember. Peril at End House is classic Christie with red herrings, clues, and intrigue at every turn. As Hastings might say, "It's an all around good show."