Three young women share a London flat. The first is a coolly efficient secretary. The second is an artist. The third interrupts Hercule Poirot's breakfast, confessing that she is a murderer - and then promptly disappears.
Slowly, Poirot learns of the rumors surrounding the mysterious third girl, her family, and her disappearance. Yet hard evidence is needed before the great detective can pronounce her guilty, innocent, or insane.
©1966 Agatha Christie Limited (P)2002 HarperCollins Publishers Ltd
Who is the nefarious soul in this Christie tale? Could it be the young woman who confesses to Poirot that she has murdered someone (and exactly WHO has she murdered)? That would be entirely too simple and would not require the use of Poirot's "little gray cells"! Perhaps it was the young artist who pursues a relationship with this woman; maybe one of her flatmates - one of whom works for her rich (and almost blind) uncle. As usual, the cast of characters (and potential culprits) is large and leave one with any number of possible solutions as to the identity of the murderer. Hugh Fraser's narration is also "spot on". The inclusion of Ariadne Oliver, and Poirot's exasperation with her, is always a quirky, enjoyable part of a Poirot storyline as well.
I'm open to any book as long as it is true to itself.
I had watched this first so even though I knew what would happen it did not make any difference the book was much better. This book felt more complicated than normal but I enjoyed the change.
The narrator kept you interested by the different voices of each character. The plot was very complicated and complex. High quality well listen again.
It is another delightful mystery romp with Hercule Poirot featuring mystery writer, Ariadne Oliver as Poirot's sidekick. And I always, always, enjoying Hugh Fraser's narration.
This is another interesting Christie novel. The book is set in the early 60's. I really enjoyed the interaction between Poirot and Ariadne Oliver
Lots of suspects and plot twists. Hugh Fraser is his typical outstanding self. I could not put it down and listened to the whole volume in a single afternoon.
I tried listening to this several times, maybe 4. But I could not get into it!
It was a convoluted story at best, it started great then, seemed to get befuddled and muddled. I really tried and I actually thought, I must have downloaded a 'Christie-INSPIRED' book instead because this just can't be!
I did not like this narrated version, just did not have enough emotion for me that I was used to (Suchet).
I could not even get that far! I was 3/4 through and said I quit, can't do it.
When a man reads the main character of a book authored by a woman it changes the tonality of the story and the character of the males.
The authoress does no speak with a man's voice. I don't mean the pitch but the thought process, social influences etc. and points of view that effect how women look at he world and how men look at the world..
I say that having read many if not most of Christie's books and I see, as a woman, a very different character for her male leads than the male readers portray.
That and just the fact that women are not reading male authors and given the male leads a woman's interpretation. It would change the character.
It likely doesn't interpret the characters anything like Agatha Christie would sound reading her characters.
Male read women characters as very stereotyped. Not like real people.
Report Inappropriate Content