Scan barcode
catherine_the_greatest's review against another edition
3.0
While not as ridiculous as [b:The Big Four|16316|The Big Four (Hercule Poirot, #5)|Agatha Christie|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1372506728l/16316._SY75_.jpg|721292] nor as bizarre as [b:Dumb Witness|16344|Dumb Witness (Hercule Poirot, #16)|Agatha Christie|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1295672288l/16344._SY75_.jpg|2393238], this is not one of Dame Christie's best.
First, the title doesn't make sense. It takes place in the Middle East -- first in Jerusalem and then in Petra -- in the period between the Balfour Declaration and the establishment of Israel. The cast features an American family (mother, three adult step-children, the eldest's wife, and her biological teenage daughter), a French doctor, a British medical student, and a couple of old British ladies -- a member of parliament and a recently retired governess. None of them have appointments, just a general itinerary. (The Italian title, "La domatrice," is more fitting.)
Mrs. Boynton, the matron of the American family, a sadistic and obese woman known to have heart problems, dies suddenly about halfway through the book. Her four children, who she financially controlled and emotionally manipulated, stand to inherit her fortune, but that in itself doesn't point to foul play. But her death begins to look suspicious when people's stories don't add up. Multiple people claim to have spoken to her after the estimated time of death and some items are missing or moved in the French doctor's tent. Enter Hercule Poirot, who wasn't at Petra, but had encountered the entire group in Jerusalem and overheard a suspicious conversation. He promises Colonel Carbury, the man in charge of the investigation, that he will find the truth within 24 hours, even if there's no proof.
True to form, Poirot questions everyone involved, noting their attention to detail, their obvious lies and omissions, before a group meeting where he seems to accuse various people before explaining why they're not guilty. Of course, it's never the obvious answer and...once again...Poirot is more concerned with finding the truth than with justice actually being served.
Solution:
First, the title doesn't make sense. It takes place in the Middle East -- first in Jerusalem and then in Petra -- in the period between the Balfour Declaration and the establishment of Israel. The cast features an American family (mother, three adult step-children, the eldest's wife, and her biological teenage daughter), a French doctor, a British medical student, and a couple of old British ladies -- a member of parliament and a recently retired governess. None of them have appointments, just a general itinerary. (The Italian title, "La domatrice," is more fitting.)
Mrs. Boynton, the matron of the American family, a sadistic and obese woman known to have heart problems, dies suddenly about halfway through the book. Her four children, who she financially controlled and emotionally manipulated, stand to inherit her fortune, but that in itself doesn't point to foul play. But her death begins to look suspicious when people's stories don't add up. Multiple people claim to have spoken to her after the estimated time of death and some items are missing or moved in the French doctor's tent. Enter Hercule Poirot, who wasn't at Petra, but had encountered the entire group in Jerusalem and overheard a suspicious conversation. He promises Colonel Carbury, the man in charge of the investigation, that he will find the truth within 24 hours, even if there's no proof.
True to form, Poirot questions everyone involved, noting their attention to detail, their obvious lies and omissions, before a group meeting where he seems to accuse various people before explaining why they're not guilty. Of course, it's never the obvious answer and...once again...Poirot is more concerned with finding the truth than with justice actually being served.
Solution:
Spoiler
It wasn't any of the children, although they all lied about talking to her after her death because they thought one of their siblings had killed her. Instead, it ends up being the member of parliament. She had been a prisoner at the facility where Mrs. Boynton was a warden before both of them snagged rich husbands. Mrs. Boynton recognized Lady Westholme and planned to blackmail/torment her. Of course, she realizes that Poirot has her figured out and shoots herself rather than be publicly accused. I've lost count of how many times Poirot has let criminals take this easy out. PLEASE STOP! And, of course, all the young couples end up paired off to live HEA.martaperezluis1974's review against another edition
4.0
Como siempre, te mantiene en vilo hasta el final.
librosdebakerst's review against another edition
4.0
Una trama que no defrauda, muy en la línea de Agatha Christie.
leamaura's review against another edition
5.0
I think it's funny how I happened to read this book during such times. Agatha Christie's mysteries don't really grow old, they are already a certainty of great narration and quality, but the setting of this particular one made the whole experience even more relevant to our times. I happened to be caught in the snippets of culture that now and then emerge from the story, and the close link with psychology of this specific case elevated it all to a whole new level.
m_deodato's review against another edition
adventurous
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.25
abastone's review against another edition
4.0
Good. Kinda odd how the murder didn’t occur until well into the book.
Weird that the murder on the Orient Express was mentioned!
Typical that the horrible character is American. Oh Agatha!
Weird that the murder on the Orient Express was mentioned!
Typical that the horrible character is American. Oh Agatha!