I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Absolutely the worst movie.

It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

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

Pursuit of a spy ring brings Lt. Colin Race comes to Wilbraham Crescent, where he happens upon a woman fleeing in terror from a house containing the blind owner, and a dead man. The house contains clocks all stopped at the wrong time – which the owner insists are not hers, and nobody seems to know who the dead man is. The police get involved in the shape of Inspector Hardcastle, but so too does Race's family friend of Hercule Poirot. The potential for witnesses to the crime in the small contained Crescent, means a door to door investigation, during which time the many odd characters are revealed – but what does it all mean? Does it link to the suspected spy ring? What do the clocks mean? And where did one of them go? And was it really Mr Tinkles who wee'd on the sofa? Poirot investigates.The play that this film opens with is noted for containing many red herrings (or whatever it is called in Finnish); I thought this was maybe a reference to such a scene in Appointment with Death, but the author Ariadne Oliver was not in that story. Anyway, what this reference does link to is the rest of this film, because it is noteworthy for how convoluted it is, but yet how (comparatively) simple the actual solution is. Indeed my own experience with it rather fits with this since I spent most of the film trying to align the many, many moving parts and red herrings, but yet at the same time I always suspected Martindale on the simple basis that she was the gate- keeper to one of the key events that put Webb into the house at the right time (the supposed phone call requesting her services); so all at once I had one of the perps but yet nothing by fog as to how it all would work out.There is a certain amount of pleasure in this mess of clues and irrelevant detail, and it helps that the residents of the Crescent are colourful – it is nice to have some comedic touches back in the film after the rather more brooding Orient Express. However, at the same time it is difficult to fight your way through any of it since there is a lot going on. This limited how engaged I was in the mystery, even though I was still interested enough to keep up and keep fighting to put things into the right slots. The colourful characters are ell delivered by the colourful cast, with Sharp, Winstone, Massey, Wicks and others all do good work, with plenty of energy and intrigue; special mention to Edney's cat woman for comedy effect. The period delivery continues to work, although it does not feel as precise and focused on period detail as maybe it once did, but it is broader and more sweeping in scale than the original episodes. Suchet is on good form and, even though he lacks any of his usual companions, he works well with Daniels (even if personally I found Burke to be a bit dull).The Clocks is a double-edged sword then; the convoluted and colorful nature of the mystery and characters manages to both engage by virtue of its complexity, but yet also make it harder to really be engaged since it is so deliberately filled with the famous red fish. So as a mystery I did not find it to be as rewarding or intriguing as the stronger films in the series, but as entertainment it still very much worked for me.

I gave this an 8 because it does keep you guessing.While investigating a spy ring for MI6, Lieutenant Colin Race is walking on a street when a young woman races out of house and starts screaming that there is a dead man in the house. Race enters to investigate.The typist is Sheila Webb. She was asked by her boss to go to this particular home and assist the woman living there. She lets herself in as instructed, and finds a dead man on the floor. There are four clocks in the room, all of which say 4:13. When the owner of the home, a Miss Pebmarsh, comes home, she says she doesn't know the man and never asked for a typist. Sheila becomes a suspect.Poirot, working with the local investigators and a friend of Colin's, comes in to investigate. He thinks one of the neighbors had a secret worth a murder, and that Miss Webb was set up.I thought this was good episode if filled with some bizarre coincidences. Poirot as played by David Suchet is perfection, and Poirot himself was very funny as he annoyed the chief inspector with what the inspector considered really dumb questions. Of course, they weren't at all.Enjoyable, set in a time when England was on the brink of war with Germany.

*** This review may contain spoilers ***The adaptation is well done, the acting is excellent, but the solution to the murder is laughable. Without giving too much away, Christie would have us believe in the most absurd series of coincidences in history. The show does a good job of building up the suspense but the last half an hour is a massive let-down if you haven't read or do not remember the novel.It's worth a watch if you enjoy the series as well as to see Anna Massey's last performance, but you will roll your eyes at the conclusion.

I am a big fan of the Poirot adaptations with David Suchet and of Agatha Christie's books, so of course I was going to see The Clocks. The series has had a few masterpieces(After the Funeral), a number of solid adaptations(Cat Among the Pigeons) and the odd disappointment(Taken at the Flood). I have to say I was very impressed with this adaptation of The Clocks, and put it between the masterpiece and solid categories.My only real complaint of The Clocks was the spy subplot, which came across as rather old-fashioned and predictable. Other than that, it was very well done and highly entertaining right from the beautifully shot prologue to the intriguing final solution. The book wasn't my favourite of The Queen of Crime, but it was a very fun read with a good story and interesting characters.I feel The Clocks is one of the better-directed recent episodes. There are times when the direction is taut when it needs to be, and there are other times when like in the prologue where it is quite elegant. The adaptation as is the case with all the Poirot episodes is very well made, the period recreation is sumptuous and the photography is consistently excellent. I feel often that music helps to enhance the mood in a film, TV adaptation or cartoon, and that's what the music does here. The music here is beautiful and haunting and never feels over-bearing or overly-grandiose.The story is faithful and interesting and it is helped by the solid pacing and the wonderful array of characters, while the dialogue has the odd wry moment while maintaining its thoughtfulness. I was highly impressed by the atmosphere too, in some ways the adaptation is quite dark and suspenseful but there is always room for some humour without it jarring too much. The acting is excellent, David Suchet doesn't just play Poirot, he actually becomes Poirot. He is brilliantly supported by Phil Daniels, Anna Massey and especially Lesley Sharp, and it was nice to see the late John Thaw's daughter Abigail here too.Overall, a solid adaptation and one of the better recent episodes. 9/10 Bethany Cox