Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.84 AVERAGE
3.84 AVERAGE
adventurous
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
This is an excellent story, definitely one of Christie's better novels.
adventurous
challenging
mysterious
reflective
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:
Yes
adventurous
mysterious
tense
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
This is just a fantastically classic Christie, and what she refers to in her introduction as "Poirot's own favourite type of case". No clues only psychology.
The particular gem of this story is Ariadne Oliver, Agatha's own fictional alter ego. Ms Oliver is scatty, disorganised, opinionated, loves apples and hates her fictional detective. Clearly some of the struggles Ariadne has with her writing were ones Christie faced herself: a detective she had invented on a whim and dislikes despite his public success, readers constantly picking up factual errors in her writing, the assumption that she always wants to be accurate, and the fact that writing is hard work, not easy as lay people suppose.
The particular gem of this story is Ariadne Oliver, Agatha's own fictional alter ego. Ms Oliver is scatty, disorganised, opinionated, loves apples and hates her fictional detective. Clearly some of the struggles Ariadne has with her writing were ones Christie faced herself: a detective she had invented on a whim and dislikes despite his public success, readers constantly picking up factual errors in her writing, the assumption that she always wants to be accurate, and the fact that writing is hard work, not easy as lay people suppose.
Die Idee dieser Geschichte fand ich sehr interessant. Der Gastgeber eines Abendessens bringt - seiner Aussage nach - Mörder, denen nie etwas nachgewiesen wurde und Hüter des Gesetztes zusammen an einen Tisch. Natürlich kommt es wie es kommen muss und der Gastgeber wird in Anwesenheit aller unbemerkt ermordet. Eine super Idee für einen spannenden Krimi. Leider fand ich das Buch so überhaupt nicht spannend. Agatha Christie enttäuscht mich eigentlich nie, diesmal konnte sie mich aber leider nicht überzeugen. Vielleicht war ich nicht in der richtigen Stimmung, aber ich fand die Geschichte teilweise wirklich langweilig.
Macht aber nichts, bei so vielen Christie-Büchern, die es gibt, darf auch mal eins dabei sein, dass halt nicht meinen Geschmack trifft. Ich freu mich trotzdem schon auf die nächste Geschichte.
Macht aber nichts, bei so vielen Christie-Büchern, die es gibt, darf auch mal eins dabei sein, dass halt nicht meinen Geschmack trifft. Ich freu mich trotzdem schon auf die nächste Geschichte.
mysterious
medium-paced
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
Cards on the Table: Or, Poirot is Obssesed with Bridge
The amount of focus on the card game of bridge really tested my PATIENCE. If I had to hear another recap of the bridge scores, I would've lost it. Oh, wait, sorry, I should be revieiwing this, not complaining about bridge. What started as an intriguing plot bringing together four of Christie's detectives at a dinner party with four potential murderers quickly devolved into a convoluted and intricate plot of many coincidental and somewhat plausible circumstances.
Despite his obsession with bridge, Poirot manages to be the smartest one of them all (DUH) and he brings together the complicated solution after just a lil bit of murder and confusion.
**Also, was it me or was there a bit of casual racism in this novel?? DO better, Dame Agatha!
The amount of focus on the card game of bridge really tested my PATIENCE. If I had to hear another recap of the bridge scores, I would've lost it. Oh, wait, sorry, I should be revieiwing this, not complaining about bridge. What started as an intriguing plot bringing together four of Christie's detectives at a dinner party with four potential murderers quickly devolved into a convoluted and intricate plot of many coincidental and somewhat plausible circumstances.
Despite his obsession with bridge, Poirot manages to be the smartest one of them all (DUH) and he brings together the complicated solution after just a lil bit of murder and confusion.
**Also, was it me or was there a bit of casual racism in this novel?? DO better, Dame Agatha!
Maybe it would have been more interesting if I understood how to play Bridge. The end seemed slapped together, one more twist and then it abruptly ends. It was like wait what and it was done. Maybe an epilogue could have cleaned the ending up. Poirot reading a letter from Hastings commenting about the case or something.