You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.29 AVERAGE
3.29 AVERAGE
adventurous
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
This one didn't hit for me. Poirot trying to be 007 .. a bit of a divergence from the cosy mystery formula into something a bit more like a campy spy novel with lots of crazy goings on. Give me a manor house with a dead rich guy and a bunch of suspects hiding secrets. I don't need a worldwide high stakes conspiracy.
Also lots of racism, Agatha. Not cool.
Also lots of racism, Agatha. Not cool.
adventurous
mysterious
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
adventurous
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Same as another volume I read, this one is impossible to "solve." You have to just read along. Second criticism: the language is no longer appropriate. Chinese in Britain are "Chinamen," which is out dated enough, but either Poirot or Hastings actually uses the word "chink" to refer to a "Chinaman" as slang. So not the villain, but the protagonists.
This was probably completely normal 90 years ago, but it's pretty grating today.
Last critique: I think Christie was going for the equivalent of a blockbuster film. The plot grows larger and larger, eventually becoming one of those "evil cabals [the Big Four of the title] who seek to overthrow the world's governments and rule." We're talking Dr. Evil from Austin Powers level, complete with submarines, atomic lasers, etc.
I finished it, only to see how ridiculous it got. Worst Christie I have read, ever.
This was probably completely normal 90 years ago, but it's pretty grating today.
Last critique: I think Christie was going for the equivalent of a blockbuster film. The plot grows larger and larger, eventually becoming one of those "evil cabals [the Big Four of the title] who seek to overthrow the world's governments and rule." We're talking Dr. Evil from Austin Powers level, complete with submarines, atomic lasers, etc.
I finished it, only to see how ridiculous it got. Worst Christie I have read, ever.
Jämfört med andra Poirot-böcker så är den här inte bland de bättre. Historien är annorlunda för att den innehåller ovanligt mycket action för en Agatha Christie och utspelar sig under lång tid, typ ett år.
The Big Four är fyra mästerskurkar som håller världen i ett järngrepp (utan att någon vet om det). Alla som ens nämner dem dör en snabb och omisstänkt död. När Poirot och Hastings kommer dem på spåren blir det farligt.
Jag gillar mer när det är de små grå cellerna som jobbar än när det ska kloroformas, kidnappas och gömmas i hemliga labyrinter.
The Big Four är fyra mästerskurkar som håller världen i ett järngrepp (utan att någon vet om det). Alla som ens nämner dem dör en snabb och omisstänkt död. När Poirot och Hastings kommer dem på spåren blir det farligt.
Jag gillar mer när det är de små grå cellerna som jobbar än när det ska kloroformas, kidnappas och gömmas i hemliga labyrinter.
challenging
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
First published in 1927, the Big Four is not your usually Hercule Poirot mystery. It's a tale of international intrigue and espionage narrated by Captain Hastings and in which Poirot is fighting against a Chinese mastermind and his 3 accomplices (a French woman, an American billionaire and a British master of disguise) who intend to dominate the world making sure Poirot is not in their way.
I've noticed that quite a few people had criticised the book because it had been poorly made up with 11/12 short stories Agatha Christie had written for a newspaper which had been separately published. It didn't feel at all like this to me. It was a book with different chapters dealing with the same intrigue, just with numerous subplots as is the case in many Agatha Christie's books.
I really enjoyed this read as it was so different to the other books by the author I have read so far. The writing and plotting are as good as ever. Agatha Christie continues to astonish me with her talent and imagination. How did she think of all this intrigue and these plots in 1927?
I've noticed that quite a few people had criticised the book because it had been poorly made up with 11/12 short stories Agatha Christie had written for a newspaper which had been separately published. It didn't feel at all like this to me. It was a book with different chapters dealing with the same intrigue, just with numerous subplots as is the case in many Agatha Christie's books.
I really enjoyed this read as it was so different to the other books by the author I have read so far. The writing and plotting are as good as ever. Agatha Christie continues to astonish me with her talent and imagination. How did she think of all this intrigue and these plots in 1927?
mysterious
medium-paced
A series of short stories inter-linked by the crime syndicate, the Big 4. A different plot line as Christie dabbles in the world of espionage. Thankfully she doesn't do this often. Unfortunately, the interlinking of stories does make it a bit disjointed in the read. One of her worse novels, but due to emotional trials in her personal life and pressures from publishers at the time of publication, it is forgivable.
adventurous
funny
mysterious
tense
fast-paced