Scan barcode
sarah_lamper's review against another edition
2.0
Woof. This was the hardest Poirot/Christie book to get through so far. It reads like a bunch of short stories half linked together. And Agatha Christie is unfortunately not very good at short stories. This weird international spy thriller was an interesting next step for Poirot, unfortunately it was also the wrong one. Hopefully we stay firmly in the murder mystery genre bc this definitely was not it.
An especially hard read when it comes right after The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, which is easily one of her best novels. Will be happy to move on from this one and read the next so I can get this bad taste out of my mouth. How disappointing :/
An especially hard read when it comes right after The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, which is easily one of her best novels. Will be happy to move on from this one and read the next so I can get this bad taste out of my mouth. How disappointing :/
allthingsnerdy's review against another edition
adventurous
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.5
fjette's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
funny
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.75
Fun, lighthearted, easy
lireunmardi's review against another edition
2.0
C'est vraiment la première fois que je peine à terminer un Hercule Poirot.
Vraiment, je n'ai eu aucun intérêt pour cette enquête que j'ai trouvé très décousue.
Cela vient peut-être du contexte d'écriture, et du fait qu'Agatha Christie a réutilisé les intrigues de différentes parutions dans la presse pour tenter de faire une intrigue unique.
Ce n'est pas une réussite, comme dirait Hermione!
Vraiment, je n'ai eu aucun intérêt pour cette enquête que j'ai trouvé très décousue.
Cela vient peut-être du contexte d'écriture, et du fait qu'Agatha Christie a réutilisé les intrigues de différentes parutions dans la presse pour tenter de faire une intrigue unique.
Ce n'est pas une réussite, comme dirait Hermione!
caraeferro's review against another edition
adventurous
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.5
Definitely my least favorite Christie so far. I know this comes with the territory of reading old novels but the racism in this one was particularly rampant. Also it was very disjointed which is the fault of it being 7 books put together. Just not my fave
mrsbooknerd's review against another edition
2.0
I read it, but I struggled. I prefer Poirot solving who killed the Vicar/Lord/Nosy neighbour cases, not big international thriller cases.
Also, Hastings is usually a bit slower than Poirot, but he was an imbecile in these stories, and it really annoyed me.
Also, Hastings is usually a bit slower than Poirot, but he was an imbecile in these stories, and it really annoyed me.
lcy_rose's review against another edition
adventurous
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
2.0
A reread. As an avid Christie fan this is one I hadnt revisited in years. Still not one of my favorites.
nnpp's review against another edition
adventurous
mysterious
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? No
3.25
eclecticlittleadventures's review against another edition
adventurous
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
thaurisil's review against another edition
2.0
Originally created as a series of short stories, The Big Four sees Hercule Poirot take on a secret organisation that is behind all the unrest in the world, from wars to shipwrecks. It comprises a Chinese man Li Chang Yen, who has brains, an American man Abe Ryland, who has wealth, a Frenchwoman Madame Olivier, who is a scientist better even than Marie Curie, and a fourth, the most mysterious, known only as the destroyer. Segregated into short episodes, Poirot explores murders, missing persons and robberies, in each case encountering the hand of the Big Four. While Poirot and Hastings have interactions with Ryland and Curie, most of their interactions are with the destroyer, a man who disguises himself and plays the role of another person so well that he is never recognisable. Poirot eventually uncovers his identity, and finally faces down the Big Four and brings about their destruction.
I appreciate that this was written early in Christie's career and she was trying her hand at a new genre, but Poirot just does not belong in an espionage novel. Poirot's power lies in his cleverness, in his ability to sit in an armchair, deduce the solutions to mysteries, and then surprise everyone with his intelligence. There is little appeal in a Poirot who lays traps and uses disguises and smoke bombs to outwit international crooks. Moreover, the individual stories often involving the enemy laying a trap for Poirot which he sees through, which the enemy knows he will see through, which Poirot knows they will see through, and so on and so forth, creating a convoluted series of traps that are often actually rather easy to see through. There is more action than intelligence, and while Poirot repeatedly talks about his little grey cells, what is demanded of the reader is not so much grey cells as it is believing the opposite of whatever it is Hastings believes.
For Hastings, while brave and good-hearted and overall a pleasant man, is extremely dull-witted, and at some points, rather tiresomely so. He is a foil to Poirot, but the juxtaposition is too stark. As a narrator, he is meant to be as clueless and jump to the same wrong conclusions as the reader, but he ends up being even more clueless than the reader.
This is the only novel in which Vera Rossakoff appears. This flamboyant Frenchwoman is the only woman that Poirot ever shows any hint of romantic interest in. I liked the mutual admiration they have for each other, and their ill-fated affection and their mutual desire to trick and defeat each other but not to kill each other. Poirot is his usual vain and finicky self, sarcastic towards yer genuinely and ostentatiously affectionate towards Hastings.
P.S. There is a good GR review that explains why Christie wrote such an awful book. It’s interesting how the circumstances combined to produce this book just shortly after the ingenious success of The Murder of Roger Ackroyd.
I appreciate that this was written early in Christie's career and she was trying her hand at a new genre, but Poirot just does not belong in an espionage novel. Poirot's power lies in his cleverness, in his ability to sit in an armchair, deduce the solutions to mysteries, and then surprise everyone with his intelligence. There is little appeal in a Poirot who lays traps and uses disguises and smoke bombs to outwit international crooks. Moreover, the individual stories often involving the enemy laying a trap for Poirot which he sees through, which the enemy knows he will see through, which Poirot knows they will see through, and so on and so forth, creating a convoluted series of traps that are often actually rather easy to see through. There is more action than intelligence, and while Poirot repeatedly talks about his little grey cells, what is demanded of the reader is not so much grey cells as it is believing the opposite of whatever it is Hastings believes.
For Hastings, while brave and good-hearted and overall a pleasant man, is extremely dull-witted, and at some points, rather tiresomely so. He is a foil to Poirot, but the juxtaposition is too stark. As a narrator, he is meant to be as clueless and jump to the same wrong conclusions as the reader, but he ends up being even more clueless than the reader.
This is the only novel in which Vera Rossakoff appears. This flamboyant Frenchwoman is the only woman that Poirot ever shows any hint of romantic interest in. I liked the mutual admiration they have for each other, and their ill-fated affection and their mutual desire to trick and defeat each other but not to kill each other. Poirot is his usual vain and finicky self, sarcastic towards yer genuinely and ostentatiously affectionate towards Hastings.
P.S. There is a good GR review that explains why Christie wrote such an awful book. It’s interesting how the circumstances combined to produce this book just shortly after the ingenious success of The Murder of Roger Ackroyd.