Patience Watson One of those movie experiences that is so good it makes you realize you've been grading everything else on a curve.

Hayleigh Joseph This is ultimately a movie about the very bad things that can happen when we don't address our unease, when we just try to brush it off, whether that's to fit in or to preserve our self-image.

Brooklynn There's a more than satisfactory amount of boom-boom in the movie's trim running time.

Justina The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Prismark10 Sad Cypress has a great cast ranging from Diana Quick, Paul McGann, Rupert Penry-Jones and Kelly Reilly.However despite framing the episode by having the suspect Elinor Carlisle found guilty of murder at the beginning of the episode, it has a leaden pace. The actual murder happens way into this film when the previous shorter episodes of Poirot would had revealed the murderer by then and Hastings and Poirot would be cracking a joke before the end credits roll.Elinor visits her wealthy ailing aunt living in a mansion. She has bought her fiancé Roddy who is smittened by a young blond lady, Mary who is a friend of the aunt. Doctor Lord visits Poirot because Elinor has received some anonymous letters. Doctor Lord carries a torch for Elinor but she gets heartbroken as Roddy carries on with Mary.However after her aunt's death Elinor becomes a the sole heir of her estate. Later when Mary is found poisoned, Elinor is the main suspect and she made her bitterness towards Mary rather plain.I think this adaptation would had worked better in a shorter format. It was just too slow to get going and the reveal was rather messily done and rather contrived. It only livens up when Poirot springs into action to save Elinor from the gallows.

henry-plantagenet-04 From reading the reviews I gather that this is a great favorite for many fans of the Poirot series. It pains me then to say that I agree with the two lower reviewers and say that I find to be a bit overrated. I'll start with the good things. The cast as usual is outstanding. Elizabeth Dermot-Walsh wavers beautifully and I completely felt for her. Kelly Reilly gives Mary Gerrard a potentially nasty streak under her apparent innocence. I understand this one of the few gripes, that fans had, but I personally thought it made her more interesting. She reminded me a little bit of Lucy Punch's spectacularly bitchy performance in "Midsomer Murders: Tainted Fruit", an awkward comparison, I know, and I'll actually go further in pairing the two episodes. The costumes, sets, and cinematography are top-notch as they are in many of the feature length films. But what I can't help being bugged about is the plot. The motive for murder is money, but we are never given a good reason why the culprit should be in such financial need to commit double murder, particularly since the victims were her sister and her niece. (Neither of whom recognized her?) In fact, the murderer just generally very interesting. And to sasha99, assuming no one has answered your question since 2007, the murderer is Nurse Hopkins (Phyllis Logan), who is actually Mary Riley, the aunt from New Zealand. Which brings us to the biggest problem that the solution comes entirely out of left field. It really feels like one of the episodes of Midsomer where they had a set up and then chose the culprit out of a hat. There is no way the audience will be able to figure out who did it, and the motive is insubstantial and uninteresting. (The motive in "Tainted Fruit", mentioned above is actually better.) I do not think this episode is a waste of time. There are good things in it. Also Poirot's war against British sandwiches which I forgot to mention earlier. But on the whole, I would have to say, this is one of the weaker entries in the cannon.

hlarrauri11 David Suchet is a wonderful actor, he represents Hercule Poirot as anybody. I love Agatha Christie's novels. I never lose a movie with David Suchet, I saw him in Henry the VIII too, as cardinal Wolsey, very good performance. I like Peter Ustinov's performances too, of Poirot I mean, but David Suchet is insuperable. I am reading now The sad cypress and is very interesting as all the work of Agatha Christie, in a Spanish version. I enjoy the novels where Hercule Poirot is the protagonist. Miss Marple is very smart too but I prefer Poirot.Congratulations for Mr. David Suchet and I can not wait to watch on TV his last movie.Sincerely,Helen LarrauriLima,Perú

gee-15 I was pleasantly surprised to come across the adaptation of another Agatha Christie novel starring the inimitable David Suchet. He really IS the definitive Hercule Poirot.While pleasantly surprised, I was mildly dismayed to realize that it was an adaptation of "Sad Cypress", one of Christie's "minor" Poirot mysteries and certainly not her best. However, I couldn't have been more wrong. This has to be one of those rare cases where the movie is better than the book. In the book, much of the action is discussed within the context of Elinor's trial, making it come across as a sort of Britishized Perry Mason mystery. The movie, while narratively framed by the trial, wisely jettisons most of it to focus on the characters and, of course, Poirot.The actors are all very good with special kudos to actress Elizabeth Dermot-Walsh as the wrongly accused (or is she?) Elinor Carlisle. Her performance is heart-breaking. And it doesn't hurt that she's one of the most interesting-looking women I've seen in a long time.The only weakness comes in the middle of movie as the shift of Roddy's affections from Elinor to Mary seem to be rather rushed and not well-explained. But overall, the movie is time well-spent.