It's been ages since I read Peril at End House, but apparently, this filmed adaptation has been changed only slightly from the actual story.While staying at a Cornish resort, Poirot and Hastings meet a beautiful young woman, Magdala "Nick" Buckley (Polly Walker). She tells them that she's had a series of strange accidents lately. Poirot has reason to believe that someone is trying to kill her. When she leaves, she forgets her hat, and Poirot notices a bullet hole in it -- while sitting with them, she had been annoyed by a bee. Poirot points out to Hastings that it was a bullet, and actually finds it.Concerned, Poirot becomes concerned with protecting Nick. One night, when she returns to her home to get something, her cousin, who was wearing Nick's coat, is killed. Nick tells Poirot that she doesn't care if she lives or dies, which Poirot finds a strange statement. She is put in a nursing home for her own protection.Poirot then realizes that an aviator, whose trip has been followed by the media, is lost at sea, and that Nick was engaged to him. In the interim, his uncle has died -- meaning that Nick has probably come into a huge fortune. With the motive for the attempts on her life, Poirot sets out to find the will and the killer. He uncovers a lot more than that.Really excellent, entertaining story, lushly produced, with Suchet perfection as Poirot. Hastings is pretty dumb in this one. Miss Lemon, as played by Pauline Moran, is a delight.I figured this story out for the most part, but it's because my subconscious remembered it. It is a very intriguing mystery and you will be entertained by it.

The adaptation is fairly good and mostly faithful to the book, but for some reason the resolution part is way too condensed and unsatisfactory. It leaves many questions unanswered and make them seem like "loop- holes", as some reviewers here called them. The book, however, gives most of the answers to these questions. Some answers make more sense than others, but they're still there, and I feel obliged to at least mention some of them here for those who watched this episode without having read the book.If you haven't watched the episode yet, this article is naturally not for you. SPOILERS START HERE:1) The cousin that was invited upon the insistence of Poirot - This bit has been altered a bit from the actual occurrences and timings mentioned in the book. In the book Nick writes a letter to Maggie after Poirot suggests it, and Maggie arrives a day before the fireworks party. We later learn though that Maggie was supposed to come to End House for the party ANYWAY, and after Poirot's suggestion, Nick's devilish lying mind quickly uses this remark for her benefit. She says she'll arrange for her cousin to come and stay with her, and then goes and writes Maggie asking her to come a day earlier. We learn this when Maggie's parents show Poirot a letter they got from Maggie upon her arrival to End House where she states she still doesn't know why she had to come earlier. This action by Nick goes hand-in-hand with the idea that Nick is liar of big calibre, perhaps a pathological one. She is fast to think of a lie that would benefit her plan perfectly, when opportunity knocks. In the adaptation Maggie gets there the day of the party (if I recall correctly). By the logic of the book, I would assume Maggie was supposed to come to the party anyway, and Nick simply lies to Poirot about her writing to Maggie upon his request, as saying she'll invite Maggie benefits her immensely and make her seem even less guilty and renders the whole murder as a sure-fluke.2) The bullet - Well, there was obviously no bullet shot. I'm not sure the explanation given in the book makes PERFECT sense, but there is still an answer. We have to start with a fact which is not mentioned in the adaptation - Nick knew very well who Hercule Poirot was and he was a part of her plan all the while. It's not by chance that she ends up sitting on that terrace with him. She needs him to watch her little performance. There is already a prearranged hole in the hat when she sits next to Poirot and Hastings (I don't remember exactly how she pulls this one off - but I would assume the hole is in the back of the hat, where it can't really be witnessed). She waits for an opportunity when a plane passes by (or any other thing that would make a noise), gets the used Mauser bullet she conceals in her pocket and throws it behind her while mentioning a bee passing by. She then takes off her hat and put it on the table for Poirot to see the hole. She leaves the terrace, but leave the hat with Poirot. Now, I'm not sure whether Poirot is supposed to be witnessing the bullet fly off as she throws it, or hear the clanking sound of its falling to the ground (both variations are a bit iffy), but, well, at least there is some attempt to explain it.3) The poisoned chocolate - That's quite simple. Nick has the Cocaine with her (in her watch). She calls Freddie, alters her voice just a bit (so later she can claim she wasn't the one calling) and asks her for a box of chocolates. She gets the box, and when she's alone she puts the Cocaine in the chocolates (not enough for her to die, of course). That way it seems someone is still trying to kill her, proving that without a doubt, she was the one who was the target when Maggie died. The second box is brought by Lazarus and has no part in her plan or real significance to the story (other than to complicate things a bit more).I also saw a question about the love letters and how Poirot realized they weren't meant for Nick. This one does gets answered in the adaptation though - The pilot wrote a letter a day after Nick's big surgery, and yet he doesn't mention it. Moreover, in the book it is mentioned that by the dates on the letters, and their contents, it is quite clear these aren't the entire bunch of letters, which makes Poirot think why would a girl choose to keep just a small selection of the love letters written by her fiancé.I will disclose that this is definitely not one of my favorite Poirot books, but still I felt it deserves to be explained. Hope this helps to clarify things a bit.

Usually you get a few noticeable clues in each Poirot episode which enables you to solve some (if not most or all) of the puzzle before Poirot reveals all.Not so in this exciting tale (the clues are extremely subtle) but "Peril At End House" is still great fun. There are several twists which will leave you guessing till the end.It is also worth mentioning the scenery in this episode, which is simply marvellous! Fans of Hastings, Japp and Miss Lemon certainly won't be disappointed as they all have significant roles in "End House".

The 'Suchet' Poirot series is wildly uneven because they bring in a different creative crew for each one. This time they used Rennie Rye and company and got the best production values of the lot. And they have the striking Polly Walker, someone with amazing film presence, what they used to call glamor. See her in '8 1/2 Women.'Though they shift the production artists from Poirot to Poirot, they repeatedly use Clive Exton as the adapter. He performs murder on these lovely story-games. He insists on jettisoning all clues so we can play the game. Instead, he follows the 1930's B-movie convention of surprising us at the end. And he has transformed Hastings into the same buffoon the Rathbone Sherlock Holmes series created with the similarly maligned Dr Watson.Shame. An entire collection of stories ruined, because who will do them again after this? Oh well, you can see our enchanted Polly here and an equally beguiling location.Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.