Sparkling Cyanide (2003)

Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

Sparkling Cyanide is an Agatha Christie tale brought into the modern world. Unfortunately this take doesn't quite work. A football chairman's wife is murdered and there are several potential suspects. Unlike many Agatha Christie adaptations this one has a curious lack of suspense. The characters are mainly lifeless which is surprising given the quality of the cast. This can only be put down to a poor script. Like another reviewer mentioned, this film could have been done within the hour but is instead dragged out too long. The reveal is no real surprise and all in all I was quite pleased when it ended. Although not terrible this is a disappointingly dull adaptation. Not recommended unless as a time filler.

After watching this 2003 version of "Sparkling Cyanide", I dug up and watched parts of the 1983 version, to see how closely the stories resembled each other; taking into account the updated computer technology, the CCTV footage, etc. they're very close. Anyone who has not read the book and not seen the earlier adaptation will probably be surprised by the plot turns here. The direction lacks style and atmosphere, and the film often plays like a plodding police procedural that could be an extended episode of a TV series, but Christie's story is enough to pull you through. Besides, having two grandparents as the detectives is an unusual concept for a Christie film; Oliver Ford Davies and Pauline Collins make for agreeable leads. And Chloe Howman (Iris) is gorgeous from head to toe; her character has been changed to a fitness trainer, and with a body like that, you can believe it! **1/2 out of 4.

Sparkling Cyanide is a very good story if perhaps not one of Agatha Christie's masterpieces. The 1983 film is dated but there is something enjoyable about it, and while not necessarily a good adaptation The Yellow Iris Poirot mystery was interesting. This modern-day adaptation does look good and while both have given far better performances Oliver Ford-Davies and Pauline Collins try hard, but on the whole is very disappointing. And this is not just as an adaptation, where it is lacking both in detail and spirit to the book, this is on its own terms as well. The rest of the acting is poor(even from a talented actor like Kenneth Cranham who ends up overdoing his gruff patriarch role), nobody really being able to give credibility to their sketchily-written characters, Rosemary faring worst. The script is also very clunky, and the story is often confused, dragged out and flabby with things vaguely mentioned but rarely elaborated upon. The pace just drags with little momentum, I know most Agatha Christie adaptations and books unfold slowly but in a modern setting this approach just doesn't work, and the solution is largely unsatisfying with at least two things that don't make that much sense(that I can't mention really without spoiling it for people). So overall, a modern day Agatha Christie adaptation but without the sparkle. 3/10 Bethany Cox

After reading the book years ago and seeing the 1983 film version, (which was very dated), I was looking forward to this adaptation. I really thought that this film version would do all the right things and be set in the proper 1940s era. However, I was wrong and very disappointed at the modern take. It just did not work. The film tried to combine the traditional British aspects of the book with a modern setting, and the modern clothing really detracted from the whole atmosphere and elegance presented in the novel.It might have been to do with the scene of Iris in the shower that put me off, which was completely unnecessary or the fact that it was too similar to the modern mysteries nowadays (like "Lewis" and "Midsomer Murders") and lacking the clever old fashioned Agatha Christie touch.I can't remember the specific things about the cast - I do remember thinking how different Aunt Lucilla was portrayed in this version compared to the 1983 one. My advice: if you watch this do not associate it with the ingenuity of Agatha Christie, but rather see it as just another modern murder mystery. Even the 1983 version seems to succeed this in the end, despite its 1980's touches.