Still Life: A Three Pines Mystery (2013 TV Movie) User Reviews

Most enjoyable

[claudiab-87584 · 7/10 · 25 January 2022]

Critics need to remember this movie is based on one novel, not 11! I thought it was a treat to see Penny's characters come to life, even though they didn't exactly meet my expectations. Her Gamache novels are murder mysteries, after all, and while the movie doesn't have the books' atmospheric quality, it does a fine job with the characters and the plot. Looking forward to another!

Not as good as I'd hoped

[dotsyschild · 5/10 · 19 September 2013]

I was so looking forward to seeing the adaptation of the Inspector Gamache series set in the fictitious town of Three Pines somewhere in Quebec. I have read every book in Louise Penny's series and I have enjoyed Nathaniel Parker's acting in several different works. Somehow, though, the TV-movie of "Still Life" just fell flat. I think maybe a one and a half hour TV movie just wasn't enough to fully develop the characters and some of the acting was just so-so. Whatever it was, it was certainly not up to the caliber of Inspector Morse or Inspector Lewis, however beautiful the cinematography. I would say that if another episode is filmed, I would have to watch it.

Casting is just part of the problem

[jadewalsh · 5/10 · 15 September 2014]

I love the Gamache books and was so excited for the movie. What a painful disappointment. Nathaniel Parker is definitely not the Gamache I imagined, but the most astounding miscast is Clara. Louise Penny's descriptions are closer to Helena Bonham-Carter than the beautiful blonde actress playing the character. Clara is unkempt, always has crumbs in her hair and paint smudges on her face, has no fashion sense and frizzy hair. By contrast, the Clara in the movie is straight out of a Hollywood red carpet.

Don't even get me started on Myrna (who is not only about 100kg off, but never has a chance to say a line and is not even referred to by name).

Yet, I feel that (mis)casting is not the complete issue here. Someone needs to tell the screenwriter that book adaptations to screen are not required to use the book dialogue word for word. What works in a book sounds clunky and is difficult to deliver in a movie, no matter how good the actors may be. Adaptations are tough, yes, but the name says it all - take the essence and create your own dialogue! Meryl Streep and Anthony Hopkins couldn't deliver those lines with straight faces!

Just for fun, here is my Hollywood, award-winning dream cast, dead or alive:

Inspector Gamache - Geoffrey Rush or Jean Reno | Jean-Guy - Jean Dujardin | Clara - Rachel Weisz or Helena Bonham-Carter | Peter - Christian Bale | Gabri - Phillip Seymour Hoffman :-( | Olivier - Jared Leto | Ben - Adrien Brody | Ruth Zardo - Judy Dench | Myrna - Octavia Spencer

Fair Day

[nogodnomasters · 7/10 · 29 April 2018]

Beloved school teacher Jane Neal (Bronwen Mantel) takes an arrow through the chest in the first scene. The murder mystery in the small community of Three Pines gives us lots of suspects and twists in what appears to be an old fashion mystery.

This is a made for TV film made in the part of Quebec where a community of poets, artists, and gays all speak English and nothing as vulgar as French. Once I got over that part, I noticed the characters were rather bland. They had good lines and roles, by the acting and directing was second rate. The guy I had pegged for the killer, wasn't it...but I was close. The clues lead us everywhere like a good mystery.

The film had potential. Worth a view for fans of TV mysteries.

Whodunnit

[kosmasp · 6/10 · 23 March 2021]

I am a sucker for police and crime stories ... also Westerns, Science Fiction, Horror, Comedy ... well quite a lot of things I like, which sometimes does not make it easy to decide what to watch next. I almost envy those who say things like "I've seen it all". That statement of course is quite wrong, but we know what that means. I've seen everything that interests me. Even that might not be entirely truthful, but how can one person know everything they like? It is rather impossible.

But back to this, which is quite by the numbers and feels like a longer episode of a crime tv show. For better or worse I reckon. I think it is quite predictable, but still can be fun to a certain degree. Which is a testament to the main actor in this.

The intelligence of the books is completely lost in the movie

[douglasscarol123 · 4/10 · 9 September 2014]

I wanted to like this movie, having read all of Louise Penney's atmospheric, intelligent, introspective books featuring Armand Gamache. How disappointing to find that all that has been reduced to soap opera standards. There is in the movie none of the sensitivity, insight, philosophizing that makes the books so compelling. The cast is impossibly good looking, with that plastic, every-hair-in-place, perfect make-up at all times look so common to made-for-TV movies. The characters, instead of being complex and unpredictable, are stilted, their utterances short, too fast, emotionless--a sign of poor direction and/or poor acting. The use of that husky, almost-whisper voice (who talks like that?) also betrays the cookie-cutter approach to this movie. Scenes are very short, pushing the plot ahead in only the barest, least thought-provoking manner. It's a shame to see Penney's deeply thoughtful works reduced to such shallowness. It was peculiar, as well, to see what Penney describes as the surreal, provocative artwork of murder-victim Jane,(thus killing off a main and recurring character in the books) represented as poorly-rendered American Primitive. Have the producers/director no loyalty to the books at all? If Penney is one of the executive producers, as referred to in other reviews, I cannot imagine that she feels the movie faithfully represents her literary work. I doubt, too, that she had much to say about it.

Dreadful

[jjwoodcock-97-828820 · 3/10 · 3 September 2014]

This picture was not a disappointment -- it was a travesty. If I were Louise Penny I would be on a rampage. This picture was miscast, stilted and perfunctory. How the charm and sensuality of the book could be intentionally reduced to this abomination is a testament only to the consistency of a lackluster effort. Maybe a mini series could manage the subtleties and nuances of the books. Really this could have been filmed anywhere - New England, the North Carolina mountains -- there was no flavor of a Canadian village so carefully created in the books. Gamache was reduced to a bilious sort of sourpuss and Jean Guy was more Miami Vice than Sûreté Du Québec.

Casting errors galore

[swklmpc · 2/10 · 26 April 2020]

When I was working as an assistant editor in television, one of my bosses told me that a director only makes one casting error. For example, Tom Cruise in "Legend" - a beautiful film, but Tom Cruise is NOT Jack.

Which brings me to Still Life. Having read all of Louise Penney's Gamache novels, so far, I have to say that the people responsible for this made-for-TV film could not have picked someone less suited to play Armand Gamache. An Englishman? And someone at least ten years younger than Gamache is in the first novel on which this film is based?

And don't even get me started on the actress playing Ruth Zardo. Plus Jean Guy, and Myrna? The less said about this disastrous attempt, the better. I sincerely hope someone else tries their hands at filming these outstanding character-driven mysteries. They couldn't do worse than this flat disappointment.

I Liked It

[carolynocean · 8/10 · 12 October 2021]

I think that maybe I might be in the minority here ! Having read all the reviews before me , I did think twice about writing mine, but decided to go ahead , even though I think I might get a lot of thumbs down.

I have not read any of the books, so these characters are new to me.

I really enjoyed the whole film, the plot, the characters , the setting , and the fact that I did not have a clue as to who the murderer was !

Usually , these type of movies are fairly predictable and boring , but I found this one very interesting and mysterious!

The location was absolutely beautiful , maybe that drew me in also .

So, for me it worked , but I can appreciate that fans of this author's work do beg to differ !

Hoping for so much more

[lrdblock · 2/10 · 27 July 2018]

So poorly cast. Armand Gamache and Jean Guy Beauvoir are Francophones not an Anglos. Armand Gamache is much warmer, refined, and compassionate. And Jean Guy is so much more intense, clipped, analytical and impatient. Agent LaCoste is not a pretty white blond woman, but is from the islands. Olivier is so much more delicate than portrayed. Ruth Zardo is never smiling, but she seems so pleasant in this movie. Whoever cast Myrna obviously never read the book. Agent Nichol is just about the closest character to the book, eye rolls and all.

I love this series and had hoped for so much more. You would barely know that this was set in the Eastern Townships of Canada other than the beautiful photography. I would be happy to see the next book made into a movie with better casting or the cast more authentically portrayed.

And, by the way...WHERE ARE THE THREE PINES THE VILLAGE IS NAMED FOR?

Very disappointed to say the least

[giselamoll · 2/10 · 13 August 2015]

How can a movie be so terribly miscast? Not one character even remotely resembled the characters in the books. How could Ms. Penny allow such a travesty? Maybe she should influence a movie like J.K. Rowling, who most certainly can give her a lesson on influence casting and bringing characters to life. Why does a movie like that need to look as it was just made for the Lifetime channel? I was truly hoping for getting to know the book characters, however they were just pretty people (except for Ruth Zardo, who was the only one I would say OK) speaking to stiff and to flat. There was no life in any of them. Nathaniel Parker, I really liked in the Inspector Linley series, is just not a French Canadian inspector. This would have (with the right cast) been better as a mini series, where all the quirkiness of the Three Pines Characters could be better flushed out.

A let down!

[coucoukatchou4 · 4/10 · 9 October 2013]

Boy was I looking forward to seeing that rootless Ruth! Where was that mean machine in the movie? The characters lacked character all together. Way too reserved! And I could barely make out what Gamache was mumbling. Thanks for trying! I know it is a hard task to make a movie from a book especially when their are so many great characters. And Penny's writing gives us many opportunities to feel each one of them. This could be hard to achieve in one TV movie based on one book of her Gamache series. But I know that I would watch a Gamache TV series if they promised to dig deeper into the characters. Show some expressions and presence on that TV screen!Lets see that rootless Ruth in action!

Completely missed the characters of Three Pines

[nesskris · 4/10 · 22 March 2014]

Storyline was fine, but there are amazing characters in these books, and their witty repertoire is key to capturing the heart of Three Pines. Instead, they looked like a bunch of crazy (and thinner than expected) extras.

There was also lack of character development in Armande's team. Beauvoir and Lacoste were bland background characters.

This, and other Louise Penny mysteries could (AND SHOULD) be made into a series.

There is enough wit and mystery to carry a single novel through a short season, and allow for the long term characters to grow on you.

Great entertainment

[dkramerlevien · 9/10 · 16 December 2019]

Loved this movie. Good mystery. Love the actors. Highly reccomend

Not great

[ogier-94935 · 4/10 · 14 July 2015]

If I had never read more of Louise Penney's books than Still Life, it might have been okay. As most of the reviewers have already said, casting was terrible. Not one of the characters (most especially Gamache and Clara) was right for the part, except Susanna Fournier as Agent Nichol. She actually got the part right. Too bad her role was so pathetic. The locale was terrible. The village was too big, the roads too well kept. Three Pines isn't even on a map, and no way would such a large village be as inbred as depicted in the books. My husband and I often joke about roles actors are offered by their agents. Patricia McKenzie's agent must have said "you'll be the only Black in the movie and you'll get to say 3 words, but oh honey, it's a great role". Why even put Myrna in the movie? Nathaniel Parker is about 20 years too young to play Gamache. Also too tall. Kate Hewlett was just very wrong as Clara. My husband kept asking why she was happy so quickly after her best friend was murdered. I could go on, but why torture myself remembering?

Let's Hope This Doesn't Poison All Possibilities

[Hitchcoc · 4/10 · 7 May 2015]

I have read all the books. Louise Penney has created a fascinating subculture in Quebec. The characters, starting with Inspector Gamache, are as well developed as any that I have read in this genre. It's sad that the first effort to dramatize this author's work is such a weak effort. Let's start with the fact that books and movies are different media. To compare them isn't always fair, but good movies made from good books are quite possible. History shows that (e.g. "To Kill a Mockingbird"). To start with, the movie is just plain dull. The script has no sparkle, no oomph. It seems like nothing ever comes to a point. Penney's characters are marvelous. Not only do they not look the part (bad casting) but the lines they deliver are lacking in breadth. Ruth is one of the most precious, almost frightening of the residents of Three Pines. She would never let Gamache push her around like he does in this film. There is no tension at all. Even when they go to the archer's house, the discovery is ho hum. I hope at some point, this author who has found herself atop the New York Times best seller list will get her due.

Unfortunately, completely miscast

[sugarqueen2 · 3/10 · 16 September 2021]

I am a huge fan of Louise Penny. It was disturbing to see this great story cast, essentially, as a Hallmark movie. Everyone is thin and non-descript. Even the lead (a venerated actor), who is supposed to be French Canadian, has only an English accent, and none of the thick, middle-aged body we expect from Ganache. Everyone else has an American accent. I have heard that there is a change coming. Ms. Penny, and her beloved characters, deserve better.

Read the books

[ttsiotkids · 1/10 · 31 December 2016]

So disappointed by the movie. Whoever wrote the screenplay never read he books. Not one character matches those described in the books. The dialog were painful to hear, which is a shame because the actors (although miscast for the parts) are very talented people. Nathaniel Parker, for example, is an excellent actor. He was not, however, the right choice for the part. He was unable to portray Inspector Gamache's sense of humor, brilliant deductive skills, and kindness. Kate Hewlett was lovely but did not resemble Clara Morrow at all. Clara Morrow is over 45, with graying dark hair (which sometimes looks like it was styled by Einstein) and has a "middle-age" spread. If another movie is attempted, I hope that the screenwriter(s) will read the books and choose more appropriate actors of the correct sizes, ages, and coloring, and include more internal and external scenes that are presented in the books. I also hope that Ms. Penny does not allow another movie of her books without being able to choose the actors who will portray her lovely characters.

A Very Nice Adaptation

[sethdanzante · 8/10 · 7 October 2014]

I've been eagerly awaiting the release of this in the US, and I was certainly not disappointed by the result. I'm a huge fan of mysteries, both in books and film, so I've sampled a wide array of material, some great, some terrible. Given that experience, I really don't know why some other reviewers didn't enjoy it.

I absolutely love Louise Penny's novels, and it was great to see the characters brought to life so believably (particularly by Nathaniel Parker, who's one of my favorites). Like many others, I would certainly have enjoyed to see more scenes involving characters like Ruth and Myrna, but I understand that only so much could be fit into one TV movie, and so some sacrifices had to be made. Also, it's worth noting that some of these characters really began to develop more in the ensuing novels anyway, so there's still time.

What I would respectfully ask of everyone who didn't enjoy this film is to reserve full judgement in hopes that a sequel or two can be made, giving the writers and actors more time to fully draw out the depths of the story. After all, many shows have improved significantly after the pilot episode, and I see no reason why that couldn't be the case here.

All in all, I consider this a very successful adaptation of a great novel, and I sincerely hope we'll see more from this cast and crew in the world of Three Pines!

Inspector Lynley goes to Quebec

[caruda2 · 1/10 · 13 October 2013]

What a disappointment, Inspector Lynley goes to Quebec and is still having problems with his wife.

Having read most of Louise Penny's books based in the Province of Quebec I expected the dialogue to be in English but English as spoke by a Francophone in Quebec. I have grown weary of Inspector Lewis, Miss Marple, Poirot, etc. based in upper class English settings. The Chief Inspector Gamache series is much more interesting based in Quebec with all of the Francophone influences. Surely there are enough English speaking Francophone actors in Canada to fill out the roles. Even the actor playing Inspector Jean-Guy Beauvoir is apparently fluent in French, wow, couldn't come up with an accent.

What a shame that none of the Quebec atmosphere survived the film making. Just another English who done it.

not good

[blanche-2 · 5/10 · 7 February 2016]

Unlike other reviewers, I haven't read any of the Inspector Gamache series. But I love Nathaniel Parker, so I watched this.

Have to say it was a big bust.

It was directed in a static fashion and moved slowly. Also, the acting was pretty bad.

Even the mystery wasn't impressive, at least the way it was set up.

An elderly woman is killed in the woods by an arrow; she was beloved in the community, so who could have killed her and why?

Inspector Gamache (Parker) investigates. Someone called this "Inspector Lynley Goes to Quebec." I didn't find Parker like Inspector Lynley, who had quite a temper and wasn't anywhere as near as quiet as Gamache.

The characters were not well fleshed out.

All in all, kind of a waste. Reminded me of the Canadian films of Mary Higgins Clark movies - not well done.

Also disappointed

[cindy-itzo · 2/10 · 5 July 2016]

I was also disappointed with this movie adaptation of Louise Penney's Still Life. I love her books and have read them all - twice! I was especially disappointed with the way all the characters ages were lowered by about 20 years. I kept envisioning Michael Gambon (Dumbledore) as Gamache. Also, I see Meryl Streep as Clara, Richard Gere as Peter and Angela Lansbury as Ruth Zardo! To sum it up, This movie was badly cast and not the first class effort that the novel deserved. I hope a better version will be made eventually. I agree with many of you who wrote reviews that the actors should better represent the French-Canadian heritage of many of the characters. Here's hoping someone in Hollywood will take notice and do something about it!

A Terrible "Still Life Three Pines" Adaptation

[cbraxton-21726 · 1/10 · 20 December 2020]

I was appalled at the depiction of Ms Penny's amazing series. I realize I did not make my living as a casting person, but I also think a person with no experience at all could have done better. I absolutely agree with the reviewers who have questioned the method here. To the investors and studio's who participated in this flagrant failure, I regret however much money was put forth to create this gargantuan failure and, conversely, that other studio's won't be too turned off to participate in a better effort. Ms. Penny's books are nothing short of some of the best ever written. Her stories deserve better. Much better.

Bring back this cast to the TV series

[judych-70243 · 10/10 · 28 January 2023]

Bring back Nathaniel Parker, cast and director of the movie for the TV series! Series misses the charm and accuracy of the movie and books. Nathaniel Parker was superb as Gamach as were the rest of the cast. The movie showed the pines! Just watched the movie. If you've read the books its spot on. I loved it! The TV series just doesn't do the story justice. Parker was brilliant. Clara's character in the movie was casted well. The TV series adapted the story to meet their need for thrill. Molina is a great actor but this part doesn't come near Parker. Parker was perfect. The landscape in the movie was stunning!

Not Especially Good

[ccfrancis-99105 · 4/10 · 1 October 2020]

This mystery was poorly acted and the story line did not move along very well. I would say this is a poor attempt at a mystery drama. Characters were shallow and not well developed. Don't waste your time.