Martin's Close (TV Movie 2019) Poster

(2019 TV Movie)

User Reviews

Review this title
15 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
A pretty good watch.
Sleepin_Dragon26 December 2019
John Martin is up before a Judge, and twelve good men and true, for the murder of Ann Clark, a poor woman and easy target.

Nicely made, very well acted, just a bit on the slow side. In the same style as the great stories from yesteryear, just lacking the depth and shock factor of say, The Signalman.

Peter Capaldi was of course a big draw, and does indeed have star quality, Wild Scolding I thought was terrific as the man on trial.

I did enjoy it, if I'm honest I would say it was just a little dull, they could have added some horror, or even a few minor scares.

Enjoyable though. 6/10
12 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Martin's Close
Prismark1029 December 2019
Mark Gatiss has adapted another M R James ghost story for Christmas. Although BBC4 has had its budgets slashed and they announced several years ago they would make no new dramas.

Gatiss ensures that BBC4 do make new dramas even if it is on a micro budget. He even coaxes Peter Capaldi to make an appearance as the trial prosecutor.

There is a present day narrator who tells a story of the hanging judge Jeffreys. However in 1684 he was once involved in a trial of John Martin that had people spooked.

Martin was accused of murdering an innocent Anne Clark. Innocent is a loose word for slow. It is unclear why Martin was attracted to Clark. He was engaged to a pretty woman with prospects. He would get a large dowry and would be set for life. Yet he wooed the frumpy Clark and met up with her several times. Pretty soon, his engagement ended and Martin blamed Clark for his misfortunes.

However although Martin is accused of killing Clark, her spirit remains. There has been some kind of sightings of her. Even Martin sees a strange vision in the courtroom.

Gatiss only uses a few sets, he keeps it sparse. A small room acts as the courtroom very much in keeping with the period. It is more eerie than chilling. There is very little by way of jump scares but there is an unsettling atmosphere.
9 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Better than last years offering.
mr_mega_drive24 December 2019
Warning: Spoilers
After last years poor offering by Mark Gatiss, I'm glad to say that this years Ghost Story for Christmas was much better.

What spoiled this version for me was the touches of comedy with the modern story teller and Judge acting out of context with jokes or silliness, which broke the atmosphere of the story.

Also why does every BBC production have to include minorities even when there would have been none in England at this time in English history. The actor is question was very good when he gave evidence, but it breaks the emersion for the viewer as you know he has only been cast so people don't conplain. It's perfectly fine to have an all white cast if the source material and historical period calls for it. That's not discrimination.

Last years film had a Gay relationship for example, people just want a good ghost story, not more political correctness, infact if you're willing to inject political messages into these ghost stories then why make them at all, as it disrespects both the author and the audience.

In short please stop the S.J.W stuff Mr Gaitiss. Honour the author not your own ideas. You claim to love his work, well then show us how much, the old M.R James adaptations are loved because they are by and large faithful to the original short stories. Emulate them.

To improve any future adaptions and build a darker atmosphere I'd have set the narrator/story teller in the past, as Christmas ghost stories are more effective if set in times gone by. Christopher Lee's M.R James ghost stories had exactly the right tone in this respect, that future versions should copy as I think having a narrator/story teller is a good idea, just as many of the original stories do.

I would also suggest keeping future adaptions in a period setting and having a darker tone overall. M.R James stories are about atmosphere and foreboding at least in part, so I think staying closer to the source material going forward would be wise. People want M.R James at the end of the day, so be as faithful as possible.

On the plus side the end reveal of the ghost was better this year and the period scenes were effective. Decent job overall Mr Gaitiss.

Please keep them coming as it's still better than anything else on the BBC at the moment.

6/10
11 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Mark's mistakes
daniewhite-129 December 2019
Another installment of 'A Ghost Story for Christmas' and an ultra low budget, low production scale, low production values adaptation of a lesser short ghost story from M.R. James.

I think that the intention was to use a plainly small budget and minor production to tell a smaller story in an understated, reductive manner in an effort to create an effective drama from very short measures.

Regrettably I found this adaptation to be the least engaging of all the BBC's "direct" versions of M.R. Jame's tales, both from either the original 70's run and the intermittent 21st century series; discounting the ill judged 2010 version of 'Whistle and I'll come to you' as a far looser and unfettered effort; albeit one with redeeming features.

The scenes were not at all convincingly written or directed, with basic background as well as foreground inadequacies.

The antagonist was ably acted in most scenes but everyone else seemed to be under-directed or overacting or playing their part very broadly.

I found the ghostly elements to be weaker than I could sustain faith in....particularly the appearance of the phantom itself.

The best part in terms of my enjoyment was the one well crafted and well performed scene whereby the murderer and murdered first meet and strike up and 'relationship'. I liked that little set up.

I didn't like the framing/narration device of a modern perspective provided by a contemporary character. It seemed to me to be less believable than a failed effort at a period one would have been. Although it probably has the grain of a good idea behind it: something of a reflection of M.R. Jame's own way of telling his ghost stories in a contemporaneous manner at the time that he first told them to his select audiences, I couldn't ever get engaged with the idea here.

Overall personally I can commend the effort but not the product which simply left me bored and disbelieving for far too much of its run time.

In this instance, of such a under-nourishing story, casting a black actor in a key witness role made me think of how much more interesting a brief story would of been about his character in 1680's England rather than what was actually being offered and I actually preferred to mull this effect in my mind than be engaged by the creative vision offered here.

The morale of my tale is: if you are making a limited little story don't add something far more striking and distracting and interesting than your actual story as a minor cogg in the wheel of your narrative.

3 out of 10 from me
13 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Could be daytime TV
PendletonBrooks25 December 2019
Martin's Close is one of the weak M.R James stories. I've not found any of the Mark Gatiss adaptations to be of the same standard as the Lawrence Gordon Clarke productions. Despite having today's production technology, it fails to capture any atmosphere of the story.
13 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Was that the 'Vicar of Dibley' I just saw ?
jdhb-768-6123425 December 2019
Warning: Spoilers
"Martin's Close" is 30 minutes of wasted time. It has a messed up story that really makes little sense and, as a ghost story, there is nothing very ghostly or scary in the production. The 'ghostly' appearances of the deceased victim bring to mind scenes from the 'Vicar of Dibley' rather than anything else.

The attempts at bringing in some light-hearted and comedic moments are simply misplaced and don't belong. The main characters are weak, particularly the eponymous Martin and ludicrous Judge Jeffreys, and the script is pretty mundane, even banal.

The actors seem to be more 'going through the motions' than being very interested in their parts, Peter Capaldi, as the prosecutor in an ill-fitting wig, being wooden and wholly lacking in any sense of realism. Altogether, it's pretty dire and does no justice whatsoever to the writing of M R James.
15 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Like a goose. Warning: Spoilers
I liked how instead of jumpscares they played the ghost as a bit of comedy. I thought it was funny, and honestly well made on such a small budget. Many people seem to moan about this being low quality but I see nothing of the sort, I thought it was well made and a very intriguing story which fit nicely in thirty odd minutes.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Neighbourhood Ghost-Watch
southdavid10 January 2020
I like the idea that ghost stories and Christmas are intertwined and I was looking forward to this version of M.R James' story written and directed by Mark Gatiss. I watched "The Dead Room" last year and found that a passable short - but this one didn't work for me.

John Martin (Wilf Scolding) is on trial for the murder of village girl Ann (Jessica Temple) with whom he's being spending his time, at the expense of his reputation. Up before Judge Jeffreys (Elliot Levey) and already fearing the outcome, his case take a turn for the bizarre when the Prosecutor (Peter Capaldi) professes that the victim has been seen, since the murder.

What can I say, the performances were fine and the setting was OK. But I don't feel like the story was scary, funny or clever enough to warrant its telling. I assumed the meta element of having Simon Williams telling the story contemporarily was going to pay back into it somehow, but it didn't..

Nothing technically wrong, just a little underwhelming.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
It let's the side down
glennhyde7 January 2020
I don't often post my views on IMDB because I know how difficult it is to make a halfway decent drama. This one is so strangely bad that I feel I have to flag it up. It's so dud that it has the feel of a student movie and apart from the performances of Peter Capaldi and Sara Crowe there's a distinctly amateurish air throughout (Simon Williams is good but wasted as the unnecessary modern commentator). Any courtroom drama should have plenty of coverage plus a few unique angles to give the editor (and the audience) a sporting chance of a stimulating ride. In this case there's far too much in close up - you could be watching Eastenders for goodness sake! The real curse is the script which has its own spoilers built-in, no surprises anywhere and, crucially for a ghost/horror story, none at the end. That such a remarkably bad production has Mark Gatiss's name on it is plain weird. There is so much brilliant drama on British TV (often written by Moffat & Gatiss) that this is definitely an oddball orphan. Over the years the BBC has made several half-hearted attempts at Christmas ghost stories. Even the better ones seem to lack conviction, 'going through the motions' almost. Come on BBC, it a great genre, give us a cracker for 2021!
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
The worst ghost story yet
Leofwine_draca27 December 2019
Warning: Spoilers
MARTIN'S CLOSE is the latest in the BBC's long-running GHOST STORIES FOR CHRISTMAS series, and once more an adaptation of a short story by M.R. James, one of his less well-known ones for a change. Sadly, writer/director Mark Gatiss has really let himself down this time around. This cheaper-than-cheap production looks like a sketch from a sketch show or alternatively a segment from a historical documentary. The editing is choppy and the scenes all over the place, with not one but two narrators and a distracting Peter Capaldi thrown in for name value alone. The simplistic story feels padded out to half an hour length with random comedy which puts you off, and the ghost, when it does finally show up, does look good but acts in a ridiculous fashion that had me ready to burst into laughter. While I did enjoy THE TRACTATE MIDDOTH of a few years back, perhaps Gatiss should let somebody else take over next time around...
10 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Tiresome
rocknrelics26 December 2019
No atmosphere, no scares, bland. That says it all.
11 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Excellent
giddeonlaw27 December 2019
Warning: Spoilers
I think Mark Gatiss has hit his stride with this adaptation. Whilst The Tractate Middoth and The Dead Room were both good, this production is spot on; perfect writing, casting, location, photography, directing and editing. Not as deliberately scary as, for example, Lawrence Gordon Clark's A Warning To The Curious, nevertheless its sense of human horror as worse than ghostly horror leaves a chilling impression. Here's hoping Mr Gatiss is willing and able to deliver many more such.
4 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
What a let down
kjjames814 January 2020
I watched this as I am a fan of M. R. James.

Boy I now know I should have not bothered. Yes this has a high score on here but it was awful.

I cannot think of one good thing that this had in it.

I have now only started to catch up with all the horror shows on television over the Christmas holidays as I work over them.

Got to now watch Susan Hill' s Ghost Story and A Christmas Carol with Guy Pearce.

See I told you I could not think of anything good to say about this.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Can't quite decide whether it wants to be blackly comic or scary and ends up being neither
dr_clarke_227 September 2020
Warning: Spoilers
December 2019's instalment of A Ghost Story for Christmas sees Mark Gatiss writing and directing once again, and this time returning to M. R. James for his source material with an adaptation of 'Martin's Close'. Unfortunately, it proves to be one of the weaker episodes of the revived program.

'Martin's Close' sees the eponymous John Martin on trial before "Hanging" Judge Jeffries for the murder of a young girl. The problem is, that despite all the evidence that he killed her, she's been seen by other witnesses since her death. Being an M. R. James story, it is of course her ghost that has been spotted, and which inevitably turns up at the courthouse when Martin receives his predictable guilty verdict.

There's nothing inherently wrong with the plot of 'Martin's Close', which is classic M. R. James and ideal material for A Ghost Story for Christmas. The problem is that Gatiss makes two unwise decisions in adapting it for television. The first is that he provides framing narration courtesy of Simon Williams' Stanton, and although Williams makes a perfectly respectable narrator, this seems unnecessary and rather like Dr Black's narration way back in The Stalls of Barchester detracts from the atmosphere. The other problem is that as in his adaptation of 'The Tractate Middoth', Gatiss includes some comic relief in the form of Elliot Levey's comedic, boorish performance as Judge Jeffreys, which completely undermines the drama of the story and clashes horribly with everybody else's performance.

The end result of this is that 'Martin's Close' can't quite decide whether it wants to be blackly comic or scary and ends up being neither. Which is a shame, because aside from Levey the cast is excellent, with Peter Capaldi bringing gravitas to Dolben the prosecutor, and Wilf Scolding impressing as haunted killer John Martin. In addition, we get the nice period sets and costumes that one expects from these adaptations, plus the traditional rural English location filming, and Gatiss the director provides some nicely creepy moments such as when Martin sees the ghost in the courtroom and when it reappears by the jury towards the end. It would be unfair to say that 'Martin's Close' is neither entertaining nor without merit, but it really ought to have been a great deal better than it is.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Good Production
rlyberge16 May 2020
This production stays with the style of the story, and without that there would be no production. M.R. James is amazing, his ghost stories can scare me out of the house in the middle of the night, but they never do. That's what I like about them. When I've read (or listened) to one of his ghost stories, I'm never left wanting more from the story. Ive been entertained & then I'm respectfully left to myself and my own thoughts. This production does just that. I'm influenced by the fact that I've read the story several times. I wasn't left wondering or wanting at the end of the episode. The story line was understood. The humor in this production was equal to that of the story. It worked out right, that rarely happens in the story to screen conversion. I find that commendable. A ghost story for Christmas... is not meant to stick around, making you sick and hollow with fear.... it's something else, and it requires balance. This production kept that balance, not an easy thing to do these days.
2 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed