Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

So... It's really difficult to find a director and a script writer with fewer imagination and lack of drama perception. SCRIPT WRITER: I was actually shocked to discover that Christopher Hampton, the script writer, is Oscar winning. I admit I never saw Dangerous Liaisons but I did see Atonement and I liked it dearly. Yet this script lacks everything expected from a script writer of this amplitude. The way he lost momentum of what in the book are most carefully threaded subplots, some of the dialog not only simply obliterated, but, worse, amputated, characters unreasonable modified or even excluded altogether in a most uninspired way... all tat is absolutely disconcerting. I never expected a movie to follow every letter of the book it's based upon, but there is a limit to which you are bound if you want your movie to hoover around the same level of quality the book does. Christopher Hampton though, thought different. I'm under the impression that he wrote this script in the most unprofessional way he could ever write a script, in the manner one would do if one forgot about the deadline and remembered it the day it should have been delivered. Script wise, the movie is a complete shame on Christopher Hampton's panoply. DIRECTOR: If I was Diane Setterfield I would be very unsatisfied by how this movie turned out. But I think more than being disappointed by the script writer, I would be so by the director. James Kent directed more than one movie based on a book. One of them - I loved the book but I HATED the movie - is 11.22.63. Not gonna comment it here though. The distracted way in which The Thirteenth Tale was directed is disconcerting. Unbelievable how actors like Vanessa Redgrave's or Olivia Colman's acting was reduced to utter amatorism by this director. The same sensation I experienced watching 11.22.63 which I already mentioned. James Franco looked like an impotent amator, not like the great actor he actually is. The only actress that resisted this mutilation of talent and turned out completely untainted was Sophie Turner. Thumbs up for her - and not the first time, either. The location of the filming is superb - I've been in the area (not seen the actual park, only Helmsley) and just like probably most of the countryside England, it is breathtaking - yet this doesn't transpire from the movie. The scenes concentrate on debilitated characters instead of the majesty of the land. A house that is the actual centre in the book for most of the plot is barely filmed here and there and that's only an example. So, considering the two main things that can make a movie an Oscar winning one or a simple celluloid pulp - just, as, unfortunately, The Thirteenth Tale is - scripting and directing, were impossibly idiotic this time. Hence my recommendation: don't watch the movie if you read the book, unless you are a script writer or a director and you want to learn what not to do when doing your job. Or, better yet, just read the book and forget the movie. You'll have more to win like that.

Beware - this isn't scary or creepy. The plot is totally implausible, the characters not fully delineated. Evil sister. Good sister. Spare sister. Hackneyed tropes abound, e.g. the ethereal children's voices singing, guess what? - Ring Around the Rosies, that staple of spooky children movies. The scenery and locations are stunning and beautifully filmed. It looks like an expensive production but it's all very much style over substance.Olivia Colman has nothing much to do and so does nothing much. I've never considered Vanessa Redgrave a great actress but I have to give her credit for saying this line with a straight face: 'If you don't tell your stories, they die and come back to haunt you.' I'm tempted to say 'So what?' It's complete nonsense. Just like this drama. Should have stopped at 12.

It seems lately that every time I turn on my TV I see either David Tennant or Olivia Colman. I am certainly not complaining though.If you watch The Thirteenth Tale you will certainly need your wits about you to follow this wonderfully written plot with all it's many twists and turns.I doubt you will be able to fully fathom it out until virtually the final scenes.Olivia Colman who played Margaret Lea was her usual impeccable self and Vanessa Redgrave (Vida Winter) never puts in anything less than a perfect performance.I feel a special mention must be made about Madeleine Power who played both parts as young Adeline and young Emmeline, Her performances were immaculate and I am sure we will see a lot more of her.SPOILER BEGINS I am not going to give too much away about this TV Movie because you will have to work it out for yourself, but the story begins with Margaret, a professional biographer being engaged by Vida to write her autobiography. Vida is dying of pancreatic cancer.SPOILER ENDS I have given this production a 10 rating because I feel it rates alongside the tremendous whodunit Broadchurch', which incidentally also starred Olivia Colman.If you have the patience to sit down and watch The Thirteenth Tale uninterrupted I am sure you will not regret it.I would be interested to know how long it takes you to work it out. In my case I solved it just before the full facts were revealed.Just a little piece of useless information. Both Vanessa Redgrave and Olivia Colman were born on the same date, 30th January, but of course in different years.

A film version of this wonderful book would be difficult to do properly. I found it adequate, but certainly not impressive. The dialog while touching on aspects of key elements from the book fell short of conveying to the viewer important points of the story. I'm not sure I would have enjoyed this film had I not read and enjoyed the book. Many compromises are necessary to transform a novel, but both the screenplay and direction were lacking.At the outset, it is offered as a ghost story and this emphasis is unnecessary. It is a mystery to unravel without ethereal suggestion. The relevance of the book lacking it's final story is brushed aside where it could have easily been developed. The strangeness of Charlie and his sister was introduced belatedly and incompletely. Margaret's wardrobe was not suitable - did she stop by on her way to the gymnasium? An actress who cared about her role might have provided better input on attire. The romantic element between Margaret and the Doctor was implied by weak smiles between them and a parting comment although not particularly important to the plot.Much of this might have been saved with an introductory voice over or even flashback dialog with Margaret's father at the bookshop to set these facts in place. For example: "The reclusive and mysterious Vida Winter's most famous work is one nobody has ever read in a book of thirteen tales containing only twelve." Likewise, a summary, perhaps as dialog between Margaret and the Doctor where she relates the missing tale as Vida's Cinderellian story of the orphan half-sister would have brought more conclusion to the viewers.