8 out of 10 for the story. I liked the novel. But the role of Mary and Roddy, oh it was so bad. No emotions shown. So stiff. It's so different from the characters in the novel, I wonder if the director meant to change the way Mary and Roddy portrayed. Mary and Roddy were supposed to be a really nice person and they favored Elinor so much, but in this series they look like they hate Elinor. Aside from the characters, there is a slight change in the story plot. The murderer didn't supposed to poison Poirot. Of all episodes I watched, I personally think this one might be the farthest from the original story... But it's still fun to watch.

"Sad Cypress" is an absorbing Poirot mystery, and features some familiar names to those of us who love British mysteries.The story begins at the trial of Elinor Carlisle (Elisabeth Dermot Walsh) at which Poirot is present. She has been accused of murdering her rival, Mary Gerrard (Kelly Reilly). Her aunt's doctor (Paul McGann) insists to Poirot that Elinor could not have done it and begs Poirot for help. He goes to the house to investigate, but finds himself at a disadvantage. Everyone seems to be lying to him, including the doctor.Elinor, Mary, and Elinor's fiancée, Roddy (Rupert Penry-Jones) were all childhood friends. Elinor receives an anonymous letter indicating that her expected inheritance from her aunt (Diana Quick) is in danger thanks to an interloper. She and Roddy go to visit their aunt and find that Mary has returned after being away from some time. The aunt is very ill and being attended to by a nurse and Mary.After being at the house for several days, it becomes apparent to Elinor that Roddy and Mary are not only attracted to one another but acting on it. Elinor breaks off the engagement. While at the house, Elinor's aunt dies, and Elinor, knowing had she not died, her aunt wanted Mary to have some money, gives her some money from the estate.Later, she has a luncheon for Mary and the nurse (Phyllis Logan). Mary is found dead of poisoning later on. When her aunt's body is exhumed at Poirot's insistence, it turns out she was also poisoned. Elinor is accused and put on trial. She admits to wanting Mary dead.I thought Rupert Penry-Jones looked familiar, but his hair is very blond in this so I didn't realize he was Carter on MI-5 and the star of so many other British shows. Phyllis Logan was a mainstay on Lovejoy. Beautiful Kelly Reilly had her own series for a time, Above Suspicion, and has also had a recurring role on True Detective and the series Black Box.Very absorbing, with the usual high production values. There were comments of Suchet slowing down as Poirot. Perhaps - in this program, he appears less than usual, but he is excellent. I do miss Japp, Hastings, and Miss Lemon, and I frankly don't understand why they weren't used in later episodes.The plot is a little contrived, but watch and enjoy.

You know, some of these Poirot adaptations are palatable. And some are dreadful. This is one of the dreadful ones. I'll concede one thing: the casting is near perfect, considering the limits of TeeVee. The faces and bearing of the characters are apt, though Suchet bothers me more as his years in to role dragged on.It had already been more than a decade by this one, and you can see that where Christie's character was playing with aggressive intelligence a character imagined in his home land, Suchet is merely copying motions he made before that were vaguely comic.(Its part of the joke. Sherlock Holmes cared not a whit about how he looked or whether his mental feats were ever known. Indeed, in several stories he hides his accomplishments. But Poirot is obsessive about his appearance, his food and how he is perceived. He is motivated to solve crime not because of an inner conflict with evil, but in how he can best evil in order to advance in the battle against himself.) But what kills this is the script. It takes away the magic of the standard final confrontation where Poirot confronts all the suspects and explains how each of them "did" it, settling on one who really did. In that instant, we are supposed to see how all we have seen now makes sense.But in this case it doesn't. Little of it makes sense. We don't discover why any of the characters acted as they did, and surely not the murderer. We don't know why the elevator went up and down mysteriously, nor why "sandwich paste" figures in at all.Its the least complete of any I have seen. The whole room of viewers I was with had no idea what had happened after it was over. You need to avoid this one.Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

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.