Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Taha Avalos The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

Delight Yes, absolutely, there is fun to be had, as well as many, many things to go boom, all amid an atmospheric urban jungle.

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

slavapolina I have to say that if you like the novel, you need to see a Russian version year (1981) of four part TV series of " The Mystery of Edwin Drood". The movie is great and explores in depth Dickens' characters. The cast of actor cannot be better! The music composed by the Russian Composer, Eduard Artemiev is absolutely enchanting. To watch the sample episode and listen to Mr. Artemiev music , please go here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WG5N7J9kJbwI am sorry the movie is on Russian language. However, you will be very surprised how well it is made.If you would like to see a full version of four parts of the movie, please click here, for the part one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLW_3ESsZIgAs for this BBC production, I find it somewhat hard to watch. The entire story seems to be very compressed for the time allotted. The cast of actors are mediocre, except for Matthew Rhys. Perhaps, I am coming from a standpoint of someone who has a comparison of the two different productions.

Murray Morison Usually BBC adaptations are outstanding; this one lacked something. As it is Dickens unfinished work it is hard to know if it was a failure on his part in the overall conception or whether the writer and director of this version just was not able to intuit where Dickens was taking this story.The acting is good and Mathew Rhys (Brothers and Sisters) is suitably menacing as the opium raddled John Jasper. Freddie Fox is also good as the eponymous Drood, spoiled and totally self absorbed.The arrival of the Ceylonese brother and sister provides one of the more interesting plot possibilities, but somehow the anger of the brother is never that convincing.In the end, watching the final climax, it was possible to see exactly how it was going to end, and it ended as predicted. There was a feeling of, 'oh is that it?' A missed opportunity or maybe the book was never really worth finishing.

flaming_nora I haven't read The Mystery of Edwin Drood yet and it has now moved up the list of Dickens books that I want to read. I'd love to see where he left off and where the screenwriter had to fill in the gaps. From that standpoint, I have nothing to say about how this production was adapted.This was a brilliant production, however. Matthew Rhys was astounding - at the beginning of the first part his character had some moments of charisma (well, one, perhaps when he was singing to the choir and demonstrating flat and sharp keys) but this didn't last when he spiralled downwards into his obsessions and became a truly awful character but very sympathetic at the same time. Truly rounded.On an aesthetic note, some costume dramas have distractingly bad hair (I loved Sandy's Welch's Jane Eyre but Toby Stephen's hair was not good for example) - 'Drood' has none of this - I completely believed everyone's appearance and was not distracted by poor hairpieces for once (minor point but I wanted to praise that aspect!).Another notable point about this production was the sound. It was more creative than any other costume drama I can remember - some of the audio had me guessing whether they were original sound recordings from the church or a post-production echo chamber - I really couldn't tell the difference. Then the audio-montages that accompanied the more drug- induced scenes were creatively mixed and really took me into the aural world of 'Drood'.I absolutely loved this. Thank you once again, BBC.

Leofwine_draca THE MYSTERY OF EDWIN DROOD is the second of two Dickens adaptations that the BBC showed over the New Year 2011/2012. The good news is that it's a damn sight better than GREAT EXPECTATIONS, being noticeably more 'Dickensian' in feel, with plenty of amusingly monkeyed supporting characters. The hilarious scenes involving churchyard urchin Deputy are alone better than anything in that other awful production.My viewing of this one benefited from not having read the famously incomplete story that Dickens died during writing. It's split into two instalments, and the first does admirably well in setting up the chessboard of characters: Matthew Rhys (BROTHERS AND SISTERS) is great as the sweaty and sinister Jack Jasper. Kudos too for the familiar character actors fleshing out more minor roles: Julia McKenzie, Ian McNeice and Alun Armstrong all acquit themselves well, and Rory Kinnear (FIRST MEN IN THE MOON) seems to be going from strength to strength.What a shame, then, that the second part just doesn't hold up. It's clear that this segment wasn't written by Dickens, instead completed by the scriptwriter. The ending is particularly bad, hinging around one massive plot hole/contrivance (a character appearing from nowhere at just the right time) that it's impossible to ignore. Way too many twists are attempted in this latter part so that it feels muddled and ludicrous, nothing like Dickens at all.