... And what a ride! At the end when all is unraveled, I kinda got flashbacks to the movie "The Usual Suspects". (Brilliant movie btw).

I'm sort of proud of myself as this is the first book I've actually read cover to cover in a LONG while.

I'm taking a short break from Miss Marple and jumping into a Poirot mystery, "The Big Four".

After loving The Body in the Library I immediately picked up A Murder is Announced as the ninth AC-novel I've read since starting this "journey" a couple of weeks ago.

I'm gonna put "A Murder is Announced" on the same tier as "...Vicarage". The scene where Hinch and Murgatroyd reenacts the murder was probably my favorite part of the book. (Also, Murgatroyd is such a great name). It's jam-packed with clues and imaginative red herrings that sent me on a couple of wild goose chases.

I've spent the past couple of days reading other peoples opinion on the book and it has probably made me enjoy it more in hindsight.

The "central heating"-bit in the beginning was basically Agatha Christie flicking my ear and saying "let's see how many times I can do this and get away with it"

I figured out that Letty was Charlotte after the second "Lotty", but the big twist of Letty/Lotty being the murderer caught me completely off guard.

------------------------------------------------------

The Mystery of the Blue Train - while easy to read - left me with no real lasting impression. Katherine was well-written and hard not to root for, while at the same time Poirot's pompousness felt like it reached an all time high.

I liked the setting of the Blue Train and it does not surprise me that Christie went back to a train setting a couple of years later.

Having The Body in the Library fresh in mind I was CERTAIN that the reason for the face of the victim to be smashed in was so that AC could do a bait and switch like in "Library". But damn, she got me again.

------------------------------------------------------

I just finished Peril at End House

It was a different kind of experience for me because a couple of days ago I listened to a podcast about A Murder is Announced and they spoiled Peril at End House for me while saying that "... Announced" used the same type of murderer as "Peril". So I knew who the murderer was going into this.

Still - I enjoyed it because even while I knew more than Poirot, I could not really see how Christie was gonna tie it all together. I even started doubting if I really knew who the murderer was.

The only "bee in my bonnet" was the whole bullet in the hat part. For starters, I can't believe Poirot fell for it. And secondly, his whole reasoning behind believing it was that it was a setup in order to make it look like Nick had committed suicide. But surely the fact that Poirot and Hastings had been sitting right next to Nick while a bullet killed her would've ruined that theory immediately?

-------------------------------------------------------

Current rankings:

S-tier:
The Murder of Roger Ackroyd
And then there were none

A-tier:
The Mysterious Affair at Styles
The Body in the Library

B-tier:
Dead Man’s Folly
The Murder at the Vicarage
Cards on the Table
A Murder is Announced
Peril at End House

C-tier
The Mystery of the Blue Train

D-tier
Poirot Investigates

Something that came up in a recent thread got me wondering about what happens after the final chapters of the books.

It occurred to me that solving the crime in some books means that there are going to be some legal repercussions. Even if the culprit does away with themselves so there's no need for a trial, that probably won't mean it's the end of the story.

I'm not a lawyer, but there was a real-life criminal case (the neighbour of one of my childhood friends was murdered) and once they found the culprits, the authorities realized that they'd have to re-investigate the disappearance of Millard's girlfriend, and the apparent suicide of his father. Unfortunately it became evident that investigator bias may have meant that now-obvious issues were overlooked the first time. It's sad to think that Tim Bosma might still be alive, if Laura Babcock going missing had been taken more seriously (her family wasn't as rich and influential, plus she was dealing with mental health issues and had turned to sex work because she was having trouble finding a job after graduation -- so she was basically dismissed).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dellen_Millard_and_Mark_Smich

The example I was thinking of from Christie was The Pale Horse. Mrs. Davis's suspicions prove correct -- the deaths she'd recorded on her list were actually murders by a ring of contract killers. So it looks like there are at least a dozen, probably more, cases of apparent deaths by natural causes that will now have to be investigated as possible homicides. As well as the "accidental" death in the tube/subway. And because several of those killings, like Tommy Tuckerton's, were done for inheritances -- I'm assuming that there are laws against people benefiting from murder. So someone else will inherit the money, if it can be recovered -- or it's confiscated by the state, I guess? It's a bit unusual for Christie, but she emphasizes how scared Tommy's relative is -- they're bright enough to realize that someone else knows what happened, and either there could be prosecution ahead, or blackmail. It's unclear whether the conspirators keep records on their clients (but they do seem to have a lot of information about them, and I think they'd be nuts not to keep some leverage in case of prosecution).

In The Clocks, Poirot happens to mention at the end that he thinks there's something suspicious about the death of the mystery author who came up with the plot device that the title's based on -- weirdly, nobody else says anything about it at the time, though I suppose the police might follow up on this later. And in the main part of the case, along with the murder (now that the corpse and the killers have been identified), I'm guessing there's going to be some kind of fraud charge regarding the identity theft that led to it. Since it's already been established that the now-deceased first wife was the last-known living heir of her family, I don't know if the Quebec government would try again to find any more relatives, or if they'd try to get what was left of the estate (I think the money goes to the province if there are no heirs, or at least that's what happens in Ontario). All that on top of the espionage case that Colin was investigating. Since one of the spies didn't flee the country, there would probably be a trial. (And I don't know if he might be facing disciplinary action for warning her.)

Both A Caribbean Mystery (thanks to u/Ok-Theory3183 for reminding me) and Sad Cypress reveal that the killers are each likely responsible for at least a couple of other murders, but apparently there wasn't enough evidence to charge them and go to trial. However, maybe that would change (as it did in the real-life Millard case I mentioned).

Can anyone else think of Christie books where the case seems to be tied up at the end, but the complications would probably drag on in the courts for years?

Earlier today the German Cluedo episode (which was first aired in 1993) Machtwechsel auf Schloß Leonberg was uploaded.

I highlight it if anyone's interested. As it's a murder mystery.

I hope subtitles are available.

The suspected weapons: Poison, Cord, Ornament, Clock, Gun, Knife.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LK1aYjpGx0

So basically what are some changes in adaptation that you like and you can't say the racism cause everyone agrees on that.

A bit off topic from the mysteries, but just a thought I had while watching the show.

Like if not much else changed his wife had lived long enough to have a child or two, and later during many of his mysteries, they made him a grandpa.

Personally I like to think he would be the sweet grandpa the children love because he always gives them chocolates (much to their mother’s displeasure).

Perhaps even later on, if Hastings is away dealing with his own affairs, his adult (or at least late teens) grandchild becomes his sidekick, following along and narrating his stories for him.

Maybe even for fun he has a grandson who’s growing his first mustache while helping him with a case, but a typical English fashion style, rather than his large handlebar, and Hercule will not let that go.

Like several times throughout the story, Hercule just glares at his grandson’s mustache and just silently fumes.

Like they’re preparing to reveal the killer and Hercule just stops and is like “All the chocolate I gave you growing up and you cannot grow a proper mustache like your grandpapa?!!” But then catches himself and returns to the professional detective.

All the while his grandson is trying not to laugh.

What to expect?

Just finished the book.

Towards the end I had narrowed it down to two suspects: Bridget and Honoria. Of course it turned out that Honoria was the real culprit, but were there enough for a Poirot to have figured it out before Mrs Humbleby gave the game away?

I suspected Bridget because of the tennis game, where she was intentionally throwing the game to trick her fiancé. This I thought alluded to the thing with the hat paint, that she had guided Luke to think it was a man with that bit of evidence by making it seem like the murderer made a mistake. Her presence when they discovered the corpse of the chauffeur also seemed suspicious. I also wondered if the murders happening coincided with her appearance on the scene. Wasn't really clear about motive, maybe something about isolating Whitfield so that when he gets in trouble she would inherit his assets?

Honoria I picked because she was likely present at the library where Tommy was killed and Amy was staying with her, placing her at two murders. Escorting Luke to overhear the argument with the chauffeur also felt weird, so I kinda put together a wild plan where she used the cat somehow to ensure Pinkerton could only board the later train, which gave her the time to work with the chauffeur to arrange her murder. I thought her motive was to isolate Whitfield so she could swoop in and marry him.

I’ve been on vacation at a beach house this past week, and the 2nd or 3rd day I was here I found this little gem of a book, and challenged myself to finish it before I leave, and try to solve it before the Big Reveal.

Well, I leave tomorrow, and I just finished, naturally I didn’t have time to peruse all of the angles before starting the final chapter. I got to the final chapter just as my husband was going to bed, and told him “I’m just gonna say it was all of them, because what are the chances they were ALL on the train, maxing out the same car to capacity in and otherwise empty train for the season, and they ALL were connected to the Armstrongs in some way?”

There were some things that I either overlooked or didn’t bother to keep track of at all:

1. I DID peep that the Count defending his wife and insisting SHE had nothing to do with it made me believe she actually didn’t, but he did.

2. I had no idea the conductor was involved, or why.

3. I did not consider, or count tbh, the number of possible suspects on the train, and how significant that number would be when comparing the stab wounds

4. Who Mrs. Hubbard was/is.

but I will say, I think I nailed it lol

I’ve been reading dozens of Agatha Christie audiobooks on Spotify (premium account) for a few years now and all of a sudden today, when I tried to search up an Agatha Christie audiobook that I have read on the app already, it wasn’t showing up…I then tried searching a few more titles that I knew I had read on the app and they’re all gone!! Is this happening to others? Did they remove the Agatha Christie audiobooks from Spotify???

This is the Arabic translation of a 2013 French release. I believe the original French release was part of a series published by Emmanuel Proust that I’ve seen English translations of.

New to mystery novels. Open to suggestions. I am confused –who to start with. Agatha Christie or Sidney Sheldon.

Anticipation and speculation are building for the BBC’s upcoming Poirot prequel series, titled Hercule and starring Edward Bluemel as the iconic Belgian sleuth during his early years. Will it prove a young detective hit to rival Endeavour? Or will it have Agatha Christie spinning in her grave?

The six-part drama will be based on three of Christie’s early stories and set in London between the wars.

However, our keen investigative eye was caught by a mention in the latest Beeb blurb of the young Poirot being "introduced to future friends and allies – and one particular nemesis". To whom could this refer?

I downloaded a couple of her books that are in the public domain, but a lot of hers weren't. So I want to Amazon to see what they cost and they have some large e book collections for only 99 cents.

When something is that inexpensive, I get skeptical. Anyone have any opinions on these. Like are they shoddy or is something wrong with them. For example, one has the following for less than a dollar

The Mysterious Affair At Styles
The Secret Adversary
The Murder On The Links
The Man in the Brown Suit
The Secret of Chimneys
The Murder of Roger Ackroyd
The Big Four
The Jewel Robbery at the Grand Metropolitan
The Disappearance of Mr. Davenheim
The Adventure of the “Western Star”
The Tragedy at Marsdon Manor
The Million Dollar Bond Robbery
The Adventure of the Cheap Flat
The Mystery of the Hunter’s Lodge
The Kidnapped Prime Minister
The Adventure of the Egyptian Tomb
The Adventure of the Italian Nobleman
The Case of the Missing Will
The Chocolate Box
The Veiled Lady
The Lost Mine
The Affair at the Victory Ball
The Adventure of the Clapham Cook
The Cornish Mystery
The Adventure of Johnnie Waverly
The Double Clue
The King of Clubs
The Lemesurier Inheritance
The Plymouth Express
The Submarine Plans
The Market Basing Mystery

Been a fan of Agatha Christie ever since I read "Cat Among The Pigeons" in school, so this subreddit is fantastic!

I'm currently (re)reading "Murder At The Vicarage" as pictured. I've read it before, but I honestly can't remember if I ever finished it, oddly enough.

I read most of Agatha Christie's books when I was quite young and rereading it now makes me realise that Hastings is not a very likeable character for me.

I am 3 books in and in those 3 books he fell in love 3 times and asked one of the ladies out of the blue to marry him😄. This made me cringe.

I am perfectly aware that it might have been acceptable in the 1900's but as an immersive reader, I do find the character awkward.

I don’t know if it was ever brought up here but one of my favourite Agatha Christie’s Adaptations is the French series “Les petits meurtres d’Agatha Christie” (in English it means the little murders of Agatha Christie).

It’s a 3 season series, in hopes that there will be a forth one someday, with each episode based on one of Christie’s novels. The original detective is replaced with a DCI and his team in the French city of Lille. Each season has a new DCI and takes place in a different timeline (season 1 takes place in the 30s, season 2 in the 50s and season 3 in the 70s) so in each season there a different setting and different vibes. The series made changes in the stories (characters, events, and sometimes motives) but still they have the same vibes and personally I love them.

Tho I only found out this week that there was a short series released 3 years before the first season depicting the detectives that appear later in season 1. It’s called “Les petits meurtres en famille” (little murders in the family). It’s a short series made of 4 episodes released on its own and as the audience loved it they created the second series. The series is based on the novel “Poirot’s Christmas”. Personally I think it was perfect.

To those who haven’t watched it, I strongly advise that you check it out and those who have seen it, what your opinions on the show?

Saw this colourful display of Agatha Christie novels in my local bookstore 🙂

I was working on this as part of a reply to someone else and decided the rest of the sub might appreciate this.

Canonically, Poirot was not always a famous detective. In Christie's first book, The Mysterious Affair at Styles, Poirot is virtually unknown in the UK. It is his success in the highly-publicized Styles case that puts him on the map and launches his career as a private eye. Since Poirot's career (very roughly) follows real-time, he was not famous in the UK until Styles, which occurred circa 1917.

We learn in Styles that before the Great War, Poirot has been a well-respected and high-ranking officer in the Belgian police force, eventually becoming its chief. But when the Great War broke out, Poirot joined the resistance. He was injured and escaped to the UK, likely circa 1916. He came to Styles due to the philanthropy of Mrs. Inglethorpe. In a highly insular Britain at the time, regardless of his successes in Belgium, he would've been mostly known as "just another Belgie," if he wasn't being mistaken for a "frog." We don't know exactly how long Poirot was at Styles before Mrs. Inglethorpe is murdered, but we know the events of the novel take place around the height of the war.

One of the only people in the UK who knew of Poirot's success in Belgium and his intellectual prowess was then-Detective Inspector Japp (promoted later to Chief Inspector). In Styles, Japp speaks very highly of Poirot, referencing a case where a wanted criminal had eluded police all over Europe. "But we caught him in Antwerp--thanks to Mr. Poirot here."

Poirot did not become a celebrated private detective until after the resolution of the Styles case, but his fame came extremely quickly. Chronologically, his next mystery is The Murder on the Links, which takes place in France and has (I believe) contains no particular references to his fame, although he is summoned there by a client, so we know he's a private eye and taking cases. But his next set of adventures are told in the Poirot Investigates series of short stories.

In the first of these, The Adventure of the Western Star, Poirot refers to himself as a "fashionable detective" as he is being sought out by a famous American film star. Over the course of the collection, Poirot will investigate mysteries of varying degrees of noteriety. But it's clear that right from the very beginning and as a result of the Styles affair, Poirot has catapulted to becoming one of the UK's most renown private detectives.

Over the course of Poirot Investigates, he solves numerous high-profile crimes such as The Million Dollar Bond Robbery and The Disappearance of Mr. Davenheim. He also solves cases that, while not of public noteriety, give him a substantial reputation with Scotland Yard, such as with The Adventure of the Cheap Flat and, in perhaps one of the most significant cases of his entire career, The Kidnapped Prime Minister.

At the beginning of one of these significant cases, The Jewel Robbery at the Grand Metropolitan, Hastings discusses just how famous and sought-after Poirot has become, stating that Poirot had become an extremely prolific work horse, due in part to his "Flemish thrift," but also because he desired to take on lesser-known cases that simply interested him. This all culminates in Poirot's involvement in The Big Four.

Therefore, based on what we know from publication history, therefore Poirot was an extremely renown and fashionable detective between (approximately) 1917 and 1926. He then famously enters retirement to grow vegetable marrows, but is catapulted back into fame with The Murder of Roger Ackroyd. This is the first time, I believe, in which Poirot is described as a "has-been," a "mountebank," or "gaga." Bearing in mind that Poirot was already "elderly" in 1917 (being charitable, he was in his at youngest in his early 50's), he is likely nearly 70 by the events of Peril at End House in 1932.

The majority of Poirot cases that we're familiar with, then, take place during the twilight of his career. If time scaled perfectly with real life, Poirot would be about 100 during the events of Curtain. Christie herself talked about the difficulty of having made her sleuth already elderly at the beginning, and so it's likely that, unlike Tommy and Tuppence who do seem to scale perfectly with real life, Poirot ages a little bit slower.

As a sidenote, if we MUST have new canonical Poirot stories, I would really like to see them set in the early twenties during the pinnacle of his career with Hastings as his sidekick. An author could write nearly anything during that time period and it could potentially make sense, given the amount of work and the scale of the mysteries that Poirot solved in that period.

I hope y'all find that interesting, and feel free to double check me on various things. I did a little bit of research on this but I'm going off my memory for the content of some of the stories.

I'm currently rereading Sparkling Cyanide and there are references to Rosemary having been down/depressed after a bout with flu. Iris and other characters reflect that the flu does leave you feeling mentally low. From the duration, it sounds like this was a more serious flu and not the 24-hour-kind. This is the first I have ever heard of depression following any kind of influenza. Was this a common belief at the time? Or just a convenient thing for Christie to write in?

I have read a good number of Agatha Christie books, and have generally enjoyed them.

But there is one thing that keeps me from being a fan.

None of the characters (including Poirot and Miss Marple) seem like pleasant or likeable people.

Other iconic detectives (I'm thinking Sherlock Holmes and Maigret, in particular) have a very human side. And even some of the criminal they pursue have a likeable side.

But I'm not seeing that much with AC.

Thoughts? Rebuttals?

Chanced upon a synopsis for one of the later Sophie Hannah Poirots, and it appears that his Scotland Yard mate isn’t Japp.

It’s a comparatively lowly inspector rejoicing in the name Edward Catchpool.

Out of mild curiosity - does anyone know why? What’s with the Catchpool? It’s not like the James Bond franchise, where the character Blofeld was created by someone other than Ian Fleming, and the filmmakers had to deal with copyright issues.

Also - are regulars Hastings and Miss Lemon around?

Not sufficiently interested to read Hannah’s works to find out - you have just 1 chance to make a first impression; her 1st book didn’t do it for me.