Customer reviews

4.0 out of 5 stars
4 out of 5
1,060 global ratings
5 star
49%
4 star
22%
3 star
14%
2 star
7%
1 star
8%
How are ratings calculated?
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzes reviews to verify trustworthiness.

Review this product



Customer images

Customer image
See all customer images
Top reviews

Top reviews from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

T.
3.0 out of 5 stars An improvement over the previous Poirot novel, but still not worth reading.
Reviewed in the United States on September 6, 2016
Verified Purchase
This novel is the second new Poirot story written by Sophie Hannah. I haven't read Hannah's other works, but I have read The Monogram Murders, the first novel she wrote with Poirot. I don't know if it's a feature of her work in general, but those two novels share many inelegant commonalities: the plot device of inauthentic, contrived conversations that are conveniently overheard and misunderstood; chapters that ramble on about some event in the past that somehow set up the current situation; and epicycles upon epicycles of complications that contribute nothing beyond padding out the book length and artificially obscuring the mystery's solution.

The writing in the book is fine: unremarkable, but not terribly distracting. Christie's dialogue was workmanlike but had a parsimonious efficiency to it. Here, characters just ramble on uninterestingly. The writing outside dialogue isn't much better. Catchpool is apparently psychic. When he's in conversations, we're told that his interlocutors speak as if they're concealing a secret, or that they're boiling with rage, or have some other emotion or concern. Yet there's nothing in the conversation itself to indicate that fact, and the reader isn't given any physical description or actions to corroborate it. We're just flat-out told, rather than shown, what people think. That's poor writing in general, but it's damning in a mystery novel. The reader should be drawing his own conclusions about the characters; instead, we're dependent on Catchpool not just for the facts of the case but also their interpretation.

The mystery itself has some compelling points. Without revealing any spoilers, you can clearly tell what part of the solution was the hook the author set for the story, and it's indeed worth basing a novel on (which I would not have said about the scenario in its predecessor). It's a clever setup, although its execution is not worthy of it.

I gave up trying to solve the mystery about halfway through. I lost confidence in the author's ability to tell a compact, self-contained story without a revelation three-quarters of the way through the book that some of the characters had a heretofore unrevealed secret backstory with the murder victim. That happened in the predecessor to this novel, and it happened in the current one as well. A murder mystery is supposed to be a puzzle for the reader to solve. With Catchpool's magical insights spoiling the current investigation and the unknowable backstory spoiling the murder itself, it's not a fair game. Instead of solving the mystery, I just patiently waited for the ending for the author to pull some arbitrary solution out of her hat. That solution had some gaping holes in it (for example, without introducing spoilers, the murder has no reason to be carrying around the murder weapon, and the novel lampshades this fact), but it more or less makes sense. It's not completely satisfying, but it's a definite improvement over the solution of the Monogram Murders.

So, how is the book overall?

As a reincarnation of Poirot, it feels clunky and fake. There's no real need for Poirot to even be in the novel; what little characterization occurs is mostly of Catchpool, the Hastings substitute.

As a reincarnation of Agatha Christie, it's just not up to the task. It feels like an ersatz knockoff: someone who's copied a few of the mannerisms but missed the whole point of the writing.

As a revival of a Golden-Age-style murder mystery, it's a respectable effort. It's not great, but I didn't feel cheated after reading it. It's bloated and needlessly complex, and the author ruins a genuinely good idea with tedious backstories and complications for the sake of complications. Christie at her best was a master of economy: the story fit together like a jigsaw puzzle, with no unnecessary pieces and no need to artificially shove pieces together. Hannah didn't meet that standard. With a better editor--- not just a copy-editor (though the dialogue could use some work), but someone to polish down the story to its deserving essentials--- she could have had a good story. As it stands, it's a decent but unspectacular one. I don't feel cheated or disappointed for it, but in retrospect I should have just read the first and last chapters.

The book is decent enough that I'll read Hannah's next Poirot novel, but I wouldn't recommend this one. If Hannah improves in future stories, I'd recommend readers just skip to the later books in the series. If she doesn't improve, I'd recommend readers avoid her novels altogether. This novel is just mediocre.
Read more
Bob Sproule
1.0 out of 5 stars You Want Agatha Christie? Then Read the Genuine Article
Reviewed in the United States on November 10, 2019
Verified Purchase
Apparently, the Agatha Christie Estate had authorized Sophie Hannah to write Christie-like mystery novels featuring Ms Christie's famed creation, Hercule Poirot. Let me tell you, "Agatha Christie-like" stories ain't Agatha Christie. Normally, if a book, any book, doesn't grab me after 60-75 pages, I put it down and forget about it, which I should have done with "Closed Casket", but I forged on with this one to the end, and let me tell you, it was awful. My advice to the reader: If you want to read an Agatha Christie story, read one that she wrote, even if you've already read it a half dozen times before. My advice to the Christie Executors: pull the plug on Sophie Hannah before she does irreparable harm - if it hasn't happened already - to the legacy of Agatha Christie. (Wish Amazon allowed a "Zero Star" rating)
Read more
Ken Sullivan
2.0 out of 5 stars Just not Christie's Poirot.
Reviewed in the United States on November 15, 2016
Verified Purchase
There is far too little Poirot in this novel and far too much 'detecting' is done outside the pages of the book. This is the second of Hannah's Poirot novels I've read and the last I will.This book confirms what I have always felt: If you have any favorite series where the creators have died and you want more, I'd say to go back and reread the originals.
Read more
Gina Wilde
2.0 out of 5 stars So disappointed
Reviewed in the United States on September 13, 2016
Verified Purchase
Christie fans canot possibly like this book. I concur with other negative reviews, so won't repeat the reasons.
Read more
tnredhat
1.0 out of 5 stars Poor Poirot
Reviewed in the United States on January 9, 2017
Verified Purchase
thought it was too long and too wordy when setting the scene. As an Agatha fan I was sorely disappointed and disappointed by her grandson who authorized Poirot's resurrection.
Read more
painter
1.0 out of 5 stars Faux Agatha Christie
Reviewed in the United States on December 14, 2019
Verified Purchase
As an author myself, it don't want to denigrate a writer's work. HOWEVER. This is a blatant theft of Ms. Christie's ideas/characters/work up to and including the (often used) font of her name boldly at the top of the book. My own fault for not paying enough attention to 'authorship', but with the name at the top I quickly purchased as a gift for a Christie fan.

I have never heard of the author here. What a disappointment that a writer feels compelled to use another's character to bolster his/her own efforts. What is it called? Fan fiction? Whatever it is, I'm not impressed. Instead of giving it as a gift I decided to read it myself. I'm a third of the way through and it's a slog. It is NOT in the same league with Ms. Christie and other than some classic lines from Poirot (Mon Dieu, Mademoiselle, Oui, etc.) the lines coming from him are jarringly out of step with the Poirot as Ms. Christie wrote him.

It seems a cheat to put Agatha Christis's name at the top of the cover, same font as in many of HER works, then put your own name in small print at the bottom. Lame.
Read more
Kindle Customer
1.0 out of 5 stars Leave Poirot to the REAL Agatha Christie!
Reviewed in the United States on May 16, 2020
Verified Purchase
When I first heard about this reboot of Poirot, I was both skeptical and intrigued. As a lifelong fan of Christie and her Belgian detective, I wasn't sure than anyone could truly pick up the mantel and continue on, but with Christie's name on the title, I was willing to give it a shot. The result: one star.

From the first pages of the book, there was absolutely NO comparison to an original Christie. The writing was thin and shallow, the characters weak and sad, and Poirot? Oh, my favorite character was just a mockery of the original.

This will be the only faux Poirot mystery that I try, and now I must go wash my mind of it by rereading one of the originals. With all due respect to Ms. Hannah, Dame Christie truly was and is the queen of mystery.

This is a hard pass for me.
Read more
maryteresa platt
1.0 out of 5 stars Boring
Reviewed in the United States on February 12, 2017
Verified Purchase
I found this book to be rather tedious. There was too much repetition. Parts of the story just dragged on and on. Dame Agatha must be twirling in her grave .hercule Poirot had none of his usual panache. A disappointing read
Read more

See all reviews

Top reviews from other countries

greenycrimson
1.0 out of 5 stars Really disappointing. It reads rather like a play done by some sixth formers who would like to write their own whodunnit
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on April 27, 2018
Verified Purchase
If you were going to sell a book using a Christie character, surely you'd do your homework?

Apparently not. Watch me now, I have done more research for this complaining review than Hannah does for her whole book.

Poirot is a parody of himself - an achievement, really, when Christie wrote him as a caricature in the first place. In Christie's works he is egotistical, certainly, but it is well founded egotism always. In Christie's books when Poirot exclaims he has been three times an imbecile, it's because he has, up until that point, been thinking along the lines of the reader - thinking the obvious, overlooking some simple point - and has realised what the self same facts actually mean. It is not having to be told what strychnine poisoning looks like, it is not having to ask the suspects for help (hot tip for Ms. Hannah: he asks people questions in the 'give them enough rope to hang themselves' way, not because he's out of ideas), it is not having to be told what to do by your new POV character.

Speaking of the viewpoint character - awful. He started off putting me in mind of Colin Lamb from "The Clocks" (1963) and then dropped the impartial narrator act to start whining and fussing and complaining. If you've read "Mysterious Affair at Styles" (1920), you know for all that Hastings draws his own conclusions, he is still charming and you, the reader, are still given the straight facts fair and square - it's up to you to assemble them. No such luck here.

And, oh, the behaviour of everyone is anachronistic; three servants for an upper-class household in 1929? Really? In "Why Didn't They Ask Evans?" (1934) a small middle class household has the same number! Servants who are /rude/ to the quality, no less. The characters all call each other by their first names: these are not 'bright young things' sneering at the class system they benefit from, these are a doctor, people in their 30s and 40s, people who are not related by marriage or blood -- people who would always call Poirot 'Monsieur Poirot' and who would call a married woman using her husband's name, think "Hercule Poirot's Christmas" (1938) with Mrs. George Lee and Mrs. Alfred Lee or "Murder on the Orient Express" where one character calling another by her first name is a clue!

Christie wrote books using intelligence, using psychology over physical clues - all of that is absent here. Messy prose, rather than Christie's clear style, and completely overlooking what makes a Christie book brilliant. Don't bother.
Read more
Intheamazone
1.0 out of 5 stars Left more than a little...bereft.....
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on May 29, 2017
Verified Purchase
'He said...', 'she said...', 'they said...', 'Poirot said'.....superfluous ..oh dear! 'Closed Casket' is disappointing in the extreme. I sincerely wish that I had not read this. There is little in the way of real plot, the characters (not one of them pleasant) are under developed including M. Poirot himself (although there is, in fact, very little of Poirot in this which, perhaps, we should be more than a little thankful for.) The narrator is both unlikely and unlikeable. It simply drones incessantly on, in a 'wishy washy' way, to little conclusion. There is no charm, charisma nor wit. This is neither Christie nor Poirot. (Having been entrusted with this task, and accepting it, this author's work will, of course, be judged by the Christie yardstick and it just does not live up to expectations). I will continue with my re-readings from the great lady herself and the original Poirot who, quite simply, can be neither improved upon nor emulated. Why try? This 'parody' has left me feeling more than a little...bereft.
Read more
Jadi
1.0 out of 5 stars Disappointing
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on July 26, 2017
Verified Purchase
This was very disappointing read ; tedious and verbose, most unlike Christie's writing style. The drawn-out, lengthy conversations between the central characters on page after page became extremely tiring to read, and the final explanation was something of a cop-out, with a thoroughly unbelievable motive. Worst of all, there was not one likeable character, and Christie's books always had those, even if they were flawed at times. Poirot himself was rather shadowy in this tale, and setting it in Ireland didn't really work, either. I won't be reading the next one, I'm afraid.
Read more
E. Walker
1.0 out of 5 stars Not my Poirot
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on April 2, 2017
Verified Purchase
As a long time Christie fan I'd been looking forward to reading this, I was so disappointed, not gripped, didn't care what happened to any of the awful characters including Poirot... awful! will stick with the originals.
Read more
Dr. Laurence Raw
2.0 out of 5 stars Disappointing Christie Refit
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on November 23, 2017
Verified Purchase
The trouble with a rewriting of Agatha Christie by someone else is precisely that: try as she might, Sophie Hannah cannot reproduce Christie’s style- Christie was no real stylist, but she had an instinctive feel for plot, and knew when to move things on, Hannah lacks that facility, and as a result the plot drags, with too much time spent on superfluous detail that leaves this reader yearning for her to get on with things.

The plot, such as it is, is straightforward enough. Inspector Catchpool of Scotland Yard gets invited to the country to protect a lady. There he encounters Hercule Polrot, who is there for a similar purpose- Togethrt they investigate a murder mystery almost Byzantine in its complexity involving an extended family all worried about the final destination of the old woman’s money. As usual in such situations, it is money that brings the family together once.more-

There some memorable characterisations. The daughter and her fiancé exchange waspish opinions that shock everyone else, but represent the. Means for keeping them together. The more personal the insult, the more they like it, Sometimes these characterisations are so monstrous that they threaten to disrupt the flimsy plot.

In thee d, the murderer is exposed by Poirot with Catchpool’s aid- But we are left short-changed a little, on account of wanting to know more about the other charActers. Sometimes it seems that Hannah has become so engaged with them that the plot is overlooked.

CLOSED CASKET offers mildly diverting entertainment, but could have been a much better tale if Hannah had balanced plot and character.
Read more

See all reviews