Why Didn't They Ask Evans? (2022)

Watchseries; I started this late last night, thinking it would be good for a distraction and found myself yanked in. Casting is brilliant, the direction is quite fine -Laurie handles the task quite capably with what is usually light hand - and I was eager to wrap it up this Saturday morning and luxuriate as the story unwound. This isn't a fussy whodunit and I loved it.

To the person who dissed the Bobby character: Pooh!! He was brilliant!

I started this late last night, thinking it would be good for a distraction and found myself yanked in. Casting is brilliant, the direction is quite fine -Laurie handles the task quite capably with what is usually light hand - and I was eager to wrap it up this Saturday morning and luxuriate as the story unwound. This isn't a fussy whodunit and I loved it.

To the person who dissed the Bobby character: Pooh!! He was brilliant!

Why Didn't They Ask Evans? watchseries. I was wary of watching this version of Agatha Christie's story after recent dreadful Sarah Phelps' penned dramatisations. Fortunately this screenplay was written by Hugh Laurie and he did a tremendous job. There is not a wasted line, every word, while not essential to the plot, adds humour and colour, and brings the characters to life. The drama is beautifully shot, and the character acting is top drawer.

... but unfortunately, this isn't a good Agatha Christie. I wish Hugh Laurie had chosen another story than this one for his foray into the murder mystery genre. It's just a weak plot - it was always a weak plot. So why choose this? I felt Laurie's hand in the witty dialogue, but I agree that Will Poulter was miscast and there's little chemistry between the two lead characters. What I did enjoy was the camera work and the period detail - it was certainly beautiful to look at. But for plotting and coherence... meh.

A Christie that hasn't been done to death--and no rampant CGI! Your young romantic leads are lovely, your script's grand, and Mr. Angel is particularly creepy. That's a lovely combo, you and Britbox. Let's hope this is the beginning of yet-another beautiful relationship. Thanks, laddie!

I don't understand the complaints here. I found this one of the most satisfying Christie adaptations. In fact I watched it twice, more or less back to back. There's a lightness of touch and a wry amusement that I find refreshing compared to the older versions, which take themselves, and the story, so seriously. This is just a delightful caper.

Again, contrary to others, I think the leads have great chemistry and Lucy Boynton is particularly charming. Daniel Ings is a deliciously seductive villain and Jonathan Jules a great cheeky partner-in-crime. Can't really fault any of the other casting either. Would have been nice to see more of Emma Thompson and Jim Broadbent. One gets the feeling everyone had fun making this! And the sets, costumes and locations are stunning.

Agreed, the plot of WDTAE is contrived and overly complex - but, hey, people it's AGATHA CHRISTIE. Sheesh. And agreed, the confession/resolution at the end does feel rushed. But the excellent dialogue helps rise above the heavy plotting. The throwaway lines and asides, especially, are a ton of fun, and I had to skip back several times to catch them. Some of them - "Good breakfast, was it?" - feel like adlibs.

All in all, a brilliant adaptation.

... with the look of someone could be ten years older & possibly even that much younger, Lucy Boynton really helps make thus short miniseries what it is... truly capturing the period, all actors fit in exceptionally well to the storyline... would it be turned into a running series it could easily go on for several years... anyway, now we've at least got three enjoyable episodes.