Watch The Clocks For Free

People are voting emotionally.

Let's be realistic.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

There are two plots into one here, plenty of coincidences and a lot of red herrings offered here as well. At least there is enough plot to justify the longer running time which I felt was not always the case with the longer Poirot stories.Lt Colin Race is investigating a spy ring when he finds a distraught young woman who has come across a stabbed man in the home of a blind lady, a home with lots of clocks showing the wrong time.Lt Race's father was an acquaintance of Poirot and he asks for his help and Poirot comes down to Dover to investigate with Inspector Hardcastle who is a little out of his depth. The young woman worked for a company providing secretarial services. The Crescent where the dead body was found contains a host of colourful but slightly sinister characters.It is nicely shot and for the later Poirot adaptations it contains more humour.

As with Jeremy Brett's "Sherlock Holmes"; Peter Davison's "Campion"; and Joan Hickson's "Miss Marple" stories, "Poirot" started out with a big budget and good intentions, to faithfully reproduce Agatha Christie's Poirot stories for a society too lazy to open a book.Naturally, "Poirot" had to be altered in places in the change from one medium to another. Unfortunately, as the series moved into novels, it made unnecessary changes. For instance, "Peril at End House" from the early days did an admirable job (with slight alterations) and while it's one of my favorite Christie books it is also one of my favorite "Poirot" dramatizations. Unfortunately, the series grew darker and even changed some of the endings, using different characters as the murderers! However, the producers of "Poirot" made one improvement over Christie. Dame Agatha's Poirot stories started in 1920 and ended in 1975, a span of 55 years where society changes but Poirot doesn't, even though he started out as a retired police detective! When his last mystery appeared he must have been more than 100! Wisely, the "Poirot" series remains set in the 1930s. "The Clocks"--set in 1963--is now given the more exciting setting of Dover on the verge of the second world war, with Hitler across the channel.Another improvement is this: in the original book, Poirot proves his adage that with all the facts one can find the solution without leaving one's chair. This leaves most of the foot slogging to an MI-5 agent (here, altered to be the son of Poirot's old pal Col. Race) and Poirot rarely showing any life. Here, Poirot is summoned from his chair in London and has to go to Dover and interview all the people himself.Apart from these cosmetic changes, the story remains remarkably faithful for a later Poirot. Furthermore, it's beautifully shot in a way almost reminiscent of the earlier Poirots, when he bumbled around with Hastings and Japp. Also unlike some of the later Poirots, the gratuitous swearing is reduced to one "bitch." If there's anything more I didn't hear it.It even has fascinating shots that are supposed to be the secret tunnels dug beneath Dover Castle. Whether they are or not, it's still interesting to think that existed during the war.

Pursuit of a spy ring brings Lt. Colin Race comes to Wilbraham Crescent, where he happens upon a woman fleeing in terror from a house containing the blind owner, and a dead man. The house contains clocks all stopped at the wrong time – which the owner insists are not hers, and nobody seems to know who the dead man is. The police get involved in the shape of Inspector Hardcastle, but so too does Race's family friend of Hercule Poirot. The potential for witnesses to the crime in the small contained Crescent, means a door to door investigation, during which time the many odd characters are revealed – but what does it all mean? Does it link to the suspected spy ring? What do the clocks mean? And where did one of them go? And was it really Mr Tinkles who wee'd on the sofa? Poirot investigates.The play that this film opens with is noted for containing many red herrings (or whatever it is called in Finnish); I thought this was maybe a reference to such a scene in Appointment with Death, but the author Ariadne Oliver was not in that story. Anyway, what this reference does link to is the rest of this film, because it is noteworthy for how convoluted it is, but yet how (comparatively) simple the actual solution is. Indeed my own experience with it rather fits with this since I spent most of the film trying to align the many, many moving parts and red herrings, but yet at the same time I always suspected Martindale on the simple basis that she was the gate- keeper to one of the key events that put Webb into the house at the right time (the supposed phone call requesting her services); so all at once I had one of the perps but yet nothing by fog as to how it all would work out.There is a certain amount of pleasure in this mess of clues and irrelevant detail, and it helps that the residents of the Crescent are colourful – it is nice to have some comedic touches back in the film after the rather more brooding Orient Express. However, at the same time it is difficult to fight your way through any of it since there is a lot going on. This limited how engaged I was in the mystery, even though I was still interested enough to keep up and keep fighting to put things into the right slots. The colourful characters are ell delivered by the colourful cast, with Sharp, Winstone, Massey, Wicks and others all do good work, with plenty of energy and intrigue; special mention to Edney's cat woman for comedy effect. The period delivery continues to work, although it does not feel as precise and focused on period detail as maybe it once did, but it is broader and more sweeping in scale than the original episodes. Suchet is on good form and, even though he lacks any of his usual companions, he works well with Daniels (even if personally I found Burke to be a bit dull).The Clocks is a double-edged sword then; the convoluted and colorful nature of the mystery and characters manages to both engage by virtue of its complexity, but yet also make it harder to really be engaged since it is so deliberately filled with the famous red fish. So as a mystery I did not find it to be as rewarding or intriguing as the stronger films in the series, but as entertainment it still very much worked for me.

I own the British ITV Collection 8 (which is nothing else than the collection of episodes of Season 12 divided onto 4 DVDs and lasting 89 minutes each).In "The Clocks", which has been excellently directed by Charles Palmer, we are being served with a double mystery, but this is only revealed toward the very end of the episode.It is so well concocted that we are led to think that this is a normal Poirot's "whodunnit" with your usual murder, but wait... Not that easy this time.The episode starts in 1938 at Dover Castle, in a Secret Base set up for MI6. It all starts there. At first one is convinced to be watching a normal Spy Thriller, but then something happens, that changes the facts completely and here come "The Clocks" to the foreground as the main subject of the Mystery.I stop here, since it would really be a crime to reveal the plot. Suffice it to say that all the cast plays their relative roles at their best and seem very natural in this setting.David Suchet cannot be judged anymore. Every time he slips into Poirot, he simply is Poirot.It is a very dark tale, not as funny as many other previous ones, but because of this, it gains in suspense and grittiness. The pace is adequate for such a Mystery/Thriller, but make no mistake, you will have to keep your eyes and ears well open, because nothing is what it seems to be in this one.