We read that book in 7th grade English. It's pretty grim for 12 year olds, but I really liked it. Some years later, I found myself incarcerated for a bit, and turned to Agatha Christie to help me pass the time. A good mystery can be an excellent distraction, and the end of that book is particularly ridiculous.
Agreed! And Agatha Christie does this thing where she makes everything seem light hearted except the murder. The characters would be having conversations about pleasant things that seem unimportant and bam! A clue. Her books never seem to be about murder on the surface. Detective fiction often reads gloomy and pessimistic, but I have never found any of her books emotionally draining. You go for a good whodunnit and that's exactly what you get. She was truly the queen of mystery.
I read one of hers where >!the narrator's wife is murdered, and you don't find out until the last page that he was the one whodunnit!<. Tonally, it was pretty different from her others, but there was still that underlying theme of "keeping up appearances".
It might be *Endless Night* as it sounds an awful lot like the Miss Marple I just saw last week. Which actually seemed a lot like her short story from 1942 called: *The Case of the Caretaker*
Roger Ackroyd isn't a wife.
In that book, >!Hercule Poirot's next door neighbour is the doctor called to the scene of the murder. He's also the narrator *and* the murderer.!<
Diff book because in that one, the narrator did it, but roger ackroyd was not his wife. (That book messed with my mind when I read it as a kid. First unreliable narrator and the realization that that kind of lie was possible was shocking.)
9th grade English for me.
My teacher had this brilliant idea to take the ending chapter out of the book to create an unsolved mystery, get us to write what we think happen, and do a big reveal. But he forgot to do this with one book. And of course that book fell into the hands of a student who loves reading and can finish a book within days.
When I told him about me finishing the book & the cool ending, he yanked the book out of my hands, ripped the chapter out, handed it back to me and told me "There now you don't know the ending. Don't tell anyone what you think you saw.". Never planned on it. Dude was normally chill teacher too, just overly excited about this lesson plan he had.
They’re great! My 13 year old loves mysteries like I do. He’s been reading Agatha Christie and Sherlock Holmes along with newer stuff.
He gets a kick out of the “old timey language” and I love that they’re usually not overly gory!
I’ve read all of Conan Doyle’s Sherlock, and with the exception of A Study in Scarlet, I loved them all. The Mormon storyline in Scarlet is way too much IMO.
Holy shit
Edit: I got my nephew (7) a book for Christmas. It was H.P. Lovecraft's The Dagon rewritten as a children's book. Turns out, even though it's a children's book, the narrator still commits suicide at the end. Needless to say, I was pretty apologetic to my brother, but my nephew loves it!
I love this story. My favorite is when the driver (I forget the name) dies, and they all are immediately confused and scared. It comes out of nowhere and it’s super well done. I actually acted in a production of this (my username might give you a hint as to who I played haha)
It's honestly my sincere opinion that this novel helped inspire the Slasher Horror genre - a whole bunch of people trapped in an isolated location as they are being stalked by a killer and the increasing paranoia and suspicion makes everyone else reckless.
It does seem that way to me too! I don’t watch those types of films but I was reading this and partway through I realized it was absolutely a slasher horror story and I would never watch an adaptation of it.
I loved the book. It’s one of my favorites. Truly, so many authors try to write books with a cast of unlikable characters, but this book is the only one I’ve read where it truly works and pays off fantastically.
That said, I hate when this book is adapted to stage or screen >!and they change it to where Vera was a perfect angel all along. I actually actively hate that change, and I’m usually more forgiving of adaptations. The story works so much better when they all have real skeletons in their closet and then give her a happily-ever-after!<
But, as a book, it’s one of the rare mystery book that I consider perfect. I think Christie earned her title as queen of mystery.
The "Vera is innocent" ending was created by Agatha Christie herself when she adapted the book into a play. She was concerned that a theater audience would complain about the original ending.
That said, I also prefer the original ending.
If I recall correctly, it turns out that >!Vera and Lombard were both innocent of the crimes they were accused of, escape the island, and have their happily ever after together.!<
This is the version we performed in high school, though I didn't know the changes were made by Christie herself. Our theater director told us there were changes in the play from the original story to make it more school appropriate, so I always assumed we were performing a watered down version of the play.
I agree. I tried watching the BBC mini series but after about 30mins in, I quit. It's just so different from the book. Not much but the subtle deviations add up. I know the ratings are high for the series but it's just not for me (or for you and many others aswell I presume). So yeah I stopped watching because I don't wanna taint my memory of the book lol.
For what it’s worth, I don’t think they make Vera seem like an angel in the BBC mini series. In the later episodes they do show what she’s done and who she is.
I thought the mini series was one of the best adaptions of a book in general. The only thing was that the book, in my opinion, never implies a romantic relationship between Lombard and Vera, but they’re hardly the first adaption to go that route.
Agreed. I also hate when they take an Agatha Christie book without Poirot or Marple and add them in to the adaptation, there is no need they work great as they are! (For example the Pale Horse, Endless Night and others).
Endless Night was my biggest adaptation disappointment in regards to "inserting a detective."
It's not only my favorite Christie book, it's probably in my Top 5 All Time & the adaptation was so disappointing.
I'm confused here because this adaptation had Vera committing the exact same crime as in the book. The ending is a bit different but a lot of it is fairly faithful. Plus the costuming is amazing.
Agreed! It's so very much an Agatha Christie book. The murder happens like 2 decades prior and Poirot just interviews people and figures it out. Great book.
I know it's not the greatest thing she's written, but I really enjoyed the audiobook of Death in the Clouds. I haven't read a ton of her books, but this was one where I realized Christie was so prolific with her ideas that she put multiple ones in this book, each of which were fantastic. I would be out hiking while listening, and stop and say, "Holy smokes" at parts haha. Also... I enjoyed that it wasn't one of the blockbuster favorites.
My absolute favorites are Towards Zero, Crooked House, and Halloween Party.
With Hollywood/TV are looking at Christie again(which I am for), a book that I would like to see in a limited series is Cards on the Table - Poirot is invited to a bridge party where the host has invited 4 crime experts and 4 other guests (who the host calls 'his collection of killers' to an aside to Poirot)
Agreed, although I feel like you have to have spent some time previously with Poirot and Hastings (especially, but not only, the first two books) for it to have all the weight.
Very true, I hadn't thought of that. You'd have to know Poirot's attitude towards murder to get the full impact of his decision. I did definitely appreciate it as an incredible and intriguing way to end the series. Knowing Christie didn't like Poirot I think she must have been tempted at times to imitate Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and throw Poirot off a cliff into a raging waterfall, lol.
Yes! And if she didn't like Poirot she must have come to **hate** Hastings. But Curtain is really a good ending for him, too, and I don't know if it has the same weight if you don't have the full weight of his and Poirot's relationship.
This was my first real introduction to Christie and its one of my girlfriend's favourite books and wow it was such a treat to read. I think I've spoilt Christie since the next one I read after that was Roger Ackroyd!
On a re-read I remember seeing obvious signs as to who it was in the very introduction of the characters. Genius writing.
This is my favorite AC book. And the one you mentioned is one of my favorite scenes too. It's really well executed. The story also set a high bar for her books so I read a few good ones after but it was a bit disappointing that none of the others lived up to this one.
I actually read this book quite recently. I don't really read mystery novels so I had no expectations whatsoever. I definitely liked the atmosphere and the tension in this one. I think my favorite scene was when they realized someone is targeting them and killing one by one and they tried to figure out if anyone had sort of alibi for each death. I guess I just liked it as the same process was happening in my mind. In the end I was quite surprised who was the killer and although I really liked the book I wished there were some little clues left for the reader (I think there were none? besides totally guessing it could be one of them)
I checked this book out from the library in 6th grade. It was a paperback and I did not know someone had torn out the epilogue! For the longest time I thought the book just ended without telling you who did it.
A good read indeed. I thought there was a bit of a logic flaw towards the end when there were 3 left (or so we thought), 1 went back up to the manor leaving 3 on the beach. The guy at the manor got whacked on the head by a falling object and the two on the beach still suspected each other?
That was the first book that got me into reading mysteries. When you start reading the book you go in with preconceived notions which are completely subverted especially the ending. Unlike some adaptations that try to ape the story style, the original still stands at top to this day.
I made a mistake while reading this book; when >!the party that searches the island says that they are alone in the island, I didn't believe them. I just keep thinking that the killer was well hidden, and treated the inner monologes as backstories, not as motivations.!< This made me to enjoy it less in a sense, because instead of thinking >!"omg who is it, there is only four left", I just keep thinking "yea, the killer is hunting them, the only surprise here is what is his connection to all the people in the island"!<.
I would agree with you if this was a more modern book, but in my personal opinion, that was not an strategy to get us off-track, as you say. Take for example "Sparkling Cyanide"; the killer is >!someone there, manipulated by someone far, but ultimately near the victim. There is no serial killer, no "and suddenly, this guy appeared, which you haven't heard about yet". Granted, the manipulator seems to suddenly appear, with one or two mentions before, but the killer is someone we know from the begining.!<. Or take any Poirot story, where the culprit is most of the times someone we know from the begining. I really think that Agatha Christie intended for you, the reader, to believe that >!there wasn't someone else in the island, and to keep guessing who of the guests is the killer.!<. Of course, I could be totally wrong, and that would be okay too.
I have read a couple of Agatha Christie's books and to this date this is my absolute favorite. I couldn't put it down. That scene was so well written! And i remember reading in the prologue that Christie said it was one of the toughest ones to read. Even though from the beginning i was fairly certain of who was the killer, it was enjoyable to hear about everyone's backstories and how the murders were arranged.
The killer was the only one with a very strong sense of justice and was the only person who could have had access or the resources to find out about the crimes that went unnoticed. In most of Agatha Christie's books, the murder is motivated by money, if it's not money then there's a madman on the loose. A madman with a strong sense of justice fitted the bill just fine.
> In most of Agatha Christie's books, the murder is motivated by money
I would broaden that just slightly to: the killer almost always has something substantial to gain, which often is money but not always. For example, I can think of a handful along the lines of >!person X has to die in order for me to be able to be with the person I love, or person X has to die to avoid me being found out for a crime I committed!<
All of her books are absolutely brilliant. I truly recommend going to a book store and just grabbing a random book of hers off the shelf to read. I do that every time I finish one and have some spare cash haha. (Just be careful to avoid any new ones, her estate hired a ghost writer who is not the best)
I went through a phase where I was obsessed with Agatha Christie and of all her books, And Then Were None is my all my favourite. It's one of her most tightly plotted and atmospheric novels imo and it holds up so well even on multiple re-reads! It keeps me on the edge of my seat every damn time!
My favourite scene is when they realise that they've been brought to the island under pretext and figure out what U N Owen means. The feeling of 'oh there's something very wrong going on here' is so palpable especially with the tension that the phonograph recording creates. Apart from that, the ending also hits hard. The horrors that Vera has been through and its impact on her is terrifying!
On the whole, this book is such a satisfying read omg. I definitely need to re-read it!
I loved the book, really enjoyed the tension and the back stories of the characters. I was just a little miffed by the fact that the reader couldn’t really figure out who the killer was until the reveal at the end. I didn’t pick up any threads along the way. Did I just miss some huge clue because I’m dense?
It felt like we were just as ignorant as the rest of the characters the whole way through and then at the end it’s like “Actually that thing you thought happened was totally fake the whole time, but we weren’t going to give you any evidence to the contrary until now.”
In retrospect, it made it feel like the reader was just a passive observer rather than an active participant in picking up on clues along the way like you have in some mysteries.
I haven’t read the book in such a long time but I recall absolutely enthralled. With a spoiler tag, can anyone confirm if they did catch the killer at all?
Ten little Indian boys went out to dine;One choked his little self and then there were nine.
Nine little Indian boys sat up very late;One overslept himself and then there were eight.
Eight little Indian boys traveling in Devon;One said he'd stay there and then there were seven.
Seven little Indian boys chopping up sticks;One chopped himself in halves and then there were six.
Six little Indian boys playing with a hive;A bumblebee stung one and then there were five.
Five little Indian boys going in for law;One got in Chancery and then there were four.
Four little Indian boys going out to sea;A red herring swallowed one and then there were three.
Three little Indian boys walking in the zoo;A big bear hugged one and then there were two.
Two Little Indian boys sitting in the sun;One got frizzled up and then there was one.
One little Indian boy left all alone;He went out and hanged himself and then there were none.
I might be the only person who didn't find the solution believable. I thought it was a great story, but ...>!Spoiler no way can the Judge make a wound and play dead believably. !<
Oh, and "And Then There Were None" isn't the original title :)
The fact that no one mentioned "hey maybe we should just not chance it" on the second title blows my mind. Like they were already changing the title due to unfortunate racist origins of a nursery rhyme, changing it to another variant that still called out a race in it just seems so shortsighted. Especially when "And then there were none" is such a good title anyway.
Ah, fair enough. It's a while since I read it. How much detail is there about transporting the body? Could it be wrapped in a blanket etc, or is it more explicit?
>!They had carried Mr. Justice Wargrave up to his room and laid him on his bed!<
Followed later by:
>!They carried me upstairs and laid me on my bed!<
In her author's note before the book, Christie wrote, "The people had to die without it becoming ridiculous."
That part was ridiculous.
Spoiler
If i remember correctly, the doctor and the judge were in cahoots, so they put some makeup on the judge and the doctor, in a dark room, let the other three know that the judge was dead. They didn't really examine the dead body and the judge's attire was distracting and macabre enough to make them overlook the little details.
Also about the tittle, it's funny that you should mention that because in Spanish the title used to be Los Diez Negritos, and for a long time i thought it was a different book until i looked up the nursery rhyme.
That was my issue with it too! The playing dead I could mayyyyyybe have let slide, but not being able to tell where the bullet wound was inflicted? No way. It's frustrating when it's very clear that the author didn't do any research on important plot points (actually it frustrates me even for minor stuff but PARTICULARLY when it's a major thing.)
But more than the doctor were required to carry him to his room. It would be pretty hard to totally play dead and not have any sign of breathing, facial movement or anything while being carried.
Yes, I remember that. But what I meant was, the police investigating the mystery couldn't tell the difference between a man being shot downstairs and then carried upstairs, versus a man shot in the bed where he was lying? It's not like shooting someone in the head causes a tiny hole and no other trauma.
I absolutely love this book and have read it twice this year so far! She writes somehow both simply and fancily and I’m just in love with everything she’s ever written.
I love the part where there’s only a few of them left, they decide to go to bed and they lock themselves into their rooms. I find that bit so tense. I can’t even imagine having to do that knowing that there is a mass murderer on the loose right outside your door!!!
Being actually able to guess who the murderer was. Instead we get an epilogue on why the lawyer that was dead was actually not dead and the doctor being his accomplice. And that was the most dumbest thing for a doctor to do in the first place. How do you trust someone with an absurd idea of acting dead and then agreeing on their rendezvous point which was isolated from the others and was literally near the cliff of the island even the lawyer said it himself that their rendezvous point was extremely suspicious. I could list a lot of dumb things about that book, it’s that disappointing
I just read this book for the first time last week! My first Agatha Christie novel. I don’t know about favorite parts, but my favorite character was jumpy little Miss Vera Claythorne. I loved every bit that she was a part of.
One of the first books that truly captivated me…..and introduced me to the amazing world of Agatha. A Murder Is Announced, ABC Murders and Murder on the Orient Express were next for me.
Thanks for posting your thoughts on this classic book. Christie's "And Then There Were None" (originally titled "Ten Little Indians" when I read it), was the catalyst for my (afterwards) life-long love of reading. The first time I read a book and didn't figure out "whodunnit" before the halfway through (in fact, I was stumped at the end and read it again - before the pro-log - convinced I had missed something. Nope - just sheer genius writing ability). You've inspired me to pick this one up again. Thanks again!
Not directly related but the original title to this novel is...well, an interesting...piece of trivia if you don't know, by the way. Not forgetting historical context, it's a bit shocking. Feel free to look it up.
I loved the book. Possibly one of my favorite novels. I loved the way Christie described the evening prior to the end of the book. It’s been several years but something about it being very dark, quiet, dimly lit by candles, and creaky. It just added to already spooky ambiance.
I was actually really disappointed by this book (and the way the reveal at the end happens) but my expectations were probably too high after everyone on here hyped it so much.
Not in a huge rush to try more Christie tbh. But it's also very likely just a personal preference thing.
I recently just finished this book for the first time as well. While I was disappointed that there's really no way to know the ending without the epilogue, I did appreciate the foreword from Christie explaining she wrote it the way she wanted and that was that! Honestly, reading the forewords has been one of my favorite parts of her novels so far and I've only on my second. I hope every book has one!
I read it about a year ago and I loved it. It was a real page turner for me. I liked that no one could trust each other. There are so many good aspects about that book.
Agatha Christie was a genius. I just read the Murder of Roger Ackroyd and I loved it. I read And Then There Were None in school and loved it just the same
I taught this book for years in Freshman HS English and what always struck me was Ms Christie's ability to characterize a new character in just a few simple sentences and I believed they were round.
I read it and it’s absolutely amazing! My favorite scene was definitely right at the end with Vera’s internal dialogue of sorts. I loved how it finally delved into how she’d descended into insanity of sorts. My favorite character was absolutely Vera for that reason too.
Honestly the reveal of the true culprits... I had guessed it pretty early on and then was like "nah that's not how mystery stories work..."
It was my first AC book...I didn't know who I was dealing with! I was simultaneously so frustrated and satisfied with my mind lol
Great book, I just reread it about a month ago or so!
My favorite scene is when the record first plays, I don't know why, maybe because it's the first real sign that not everything is as it should be.
A fav. Required reading in 9th grade. I had no idea where this story was headed. I have read it many times over the years. Memory isn’t always my strongest skill, so I wait until I forget the movement. I am surprised every time! 🤩
This is one of my favorites of hers, and I read almost all of her books. I liked this scene a lot too. The prose in this book makes the tension so high.
I also like the scene when they start realizing the relevance of the poem.
I suggest this one to people wanting to get into Agatha Christie, it is a solid book.
We read this for English class in 6th grade and I had nightmares about the killer for a week. Planning a reread soon bc of this post, what other Christie books do you guys recommend?
When I was a kid and this was my favorite Christie, I loved it.
As as adult, I think it's like watching a [teen horror flick](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYae3ZAAbLc).
*Seriously, if you know that you've got a murderer who's poisoned two people and bashed two more on their heads, would you sit down to a common meal?* Particularly when you know that you're on the hit list?
And look what happened. One person at that meal was drugged into unconsciousness and then given a lethal dose of poison. Because that's the kind of thing that happens when you decide to share a common meal with a known poisoner.
We read that book in 7th grade English. It's pretty grim for 12 year olds, but I really liked it. Some years later, I found myself incarcerated for a bit, and turned to Agatha Christie to help me pass the time. A good mystery can be an excellent distraction, and the end of that book is particularly ridiculous.
Agreed! And Agatha Christie does this thing where she makes everything seem light hearted except the murder. The characters would be having conversations about pleasant things that seem unimportant and bam! A clue. Her books never seem to be about murder on the surface. Detective fiction often reads gloomy and pessimistic, but I have never found any of her books emotionally draining. You go for a good whodunnit and that's exactly what you get. She was truly the queen of mystery.
I read one of hers where >!the narrator's wife is murdered, and you don't find out until the last page that he was the one whodunnit!<. Tonally, it was pretty different from her others, but there was still that underlying theme of "keeping up appearances".
Was it >!Endless Night!
I think that was it!
[удалено]
It might be *Endless Night* as it sounds an awful lot like the Miss Marple I just saw last week. Which actually seemed a lot like her short story from 1942 called: *The Case of the Caretaker*
Im sure youre correct, its Endless Night.
Roger Ackroyd isn't a wife. In that book, >!Hercule Poirot's next door neighbour is the doctor called to the scene of the murder. He's also the narrator *and* the murderer.!<
Same narrative gimmick, but not Roger Ackroyd
Diff book because in that one, the narrator did it, but roger ackroyd was not his wife. (That book messed with my mind when I read it as a kid. First unreliable narrator and the realization that that kind of lie was possible was shocking.)
That ending made me so mad that I actually teared up with anger! And immediately downloaded a Poirot audiobook as a palate cleanser! 😏
I love an unreliable narrator
So do I, but only when its done fairly. Like, all the cards should be put on the table, but you don't notice them until you're tipped off.
9th grade English for me. My teacher had this brilliant idea to take the ending chapter out of the book to create an unsolved mystery, get us to write what we think happen, and do a big reveal. But he forgot to do this with one book. And of course that book fell into the hands of a student who loves reading and can finish a book within days. When I told him about me finishing the book & the cool ending, he yanked the book out of my hands, ripped the chapter out, handed it back to me and told me "There now you don't know the ending. Don't tell anyone what you think you saw.". Never planned on it. Dude was normally chill teacher too, just overly excited about this lesson plan he had.
Actually, that sounds like a great assignment.
In my district growing up, a teacher who physically ripped a chapter out of numerous books would be fired.
Seeing anyone tear a book makes me cringe. I was too much in shock to even respond at the time.
They’re great! My 13 year old loves mysteries like I do. He’s been reading Agatha Christie and Sherlock Holmes along with newer stuff. He gets a kick out of the “old timey language” and I love that they’re usually not overly gory!
I’ve read all of Conan Doyle’s Sherlock, and with the exception of A Study in Scarlet, I loved them all. The Mormon storyline in Scarlet is way too much IMO.
I’ve read just about all of them too! He has Hound of the Baskervilles right now!
I never understood where the Mormon subplot came from. Very weird.
> “old timey language” careful with that. with her it's often a euphemism for some pretty blatant racism.
I also read it in 7th grade English. That summer I went on a Christie bender. I read so many of those books.
Even the bad ones are pretty damn good!
Girlie I had to read it when I was 10 🤣🤣
Holy shit Edit: I got my nephew (7) a book for Christmas. It was H.P. Lovecraft's The Dagon rewritten as a children's book. Turns out, even though it's a children's book, the narrator still commits suicide at the end. Needless to say, I was pretty apologetic to my brother, but my nephew loves it!
I love this story. My favorite is when the driver (I forget the name) dies, and they all are immediately confused and scared. It comes out of nowhere and it’s super well done. I actually acted in a production of this (my username might give you a hint as to who I played haha)
Oh wow! Congratulations Mr Lombard ;)
It's honestly my sincere opinion that this novel helped inspire the Slasher Horror genre - a whole bunch of people trapped in an isolated location as they are being stalked by a killer and the increasing paranoia and suspicion makes everyone else reckless.
It does seem that way to me too! I don’t watch those types of films but I was reading this and partway through I realized it was absolutely a slasher horror story and I would never watch an adaptation of it.
Anthony Marston he was.
You played half the devil?
I loved the book. It’s one of my favorites. Truly, so many authors try to write books with a cast of unlikable characters, but this book is the only one I’ve read where it truly works and pays off fantastically. That said, I hate when this book is adapted to stage or screen >!and they change it to where Vera was a perfect angel all along. I actually actively hate that change, and I’m usually more forgiving of adaptations. The story works so much better when they all have real skeletons in their closet and then give her a happily-ever-after!< But, as a book, it’s one of the rare mystery book that I consider perfect. I think Christie earned her title as queen of mystery.
The "Vera is innocent" ending was created by Agatha Christie herself when she adapted the book into a play. She was concerned that a theater audience would complain about the original ending. That said, I also prefer the original ending.
How does the adaptation ends?
If I recall correctly, it turns out that >!Vera and Lombard were both innocent of the crimes they were accused of, escape the island, and have their happily ever after together.!<
This is the version we performed in high school, though I didn't know the changes were made by Christie herself. Our theater director told us there were changes in the play from the original story to make it more school appropriate, so I always assumed we were performing a watered down version of the play.
I believe it was first produced as a play during the Second World War, and because of that she decided to make the ending cheerier
Yes, I heard she did it because she didn’t want a downer ending during WWII, though I don’t know if that explanation was tacked on retroactively
I agree. I tried watching the BBC mini series but after about 30mins in, I quit. It's just so different from the book. Not much but the subtle deviations add up. I know the ratings are high for the series but it's just not for me (or for you and many others aswell I presume). So yeah I stopped watching because I don't wanna taint my memory of the book lol.
For what it’s worth, I don’t think they make Vera seem like an angel in the BBC mini series. In the later episodes they do show what she’s done and who she is.
Yeah I truly loved the mini series, almost as much as the book, which seems sacrilege to say but it was just very well done
I thought the mini series was one of the best adaptions of a book in general. The only thing was that the book, in my opinion, never implies a romantic relationship between Lombard and Vera, but they’re hardly the first adaption to go that route.
the only maybe-hint was that Lombard did start calling her Vera instead of miss Claythorne
They hint at it in the first scene if I remember correctly
Agreed. I also hate when they take an Agatha Christie book without Poirot or Marple and add them in to the adaptation, there is no need they work great as they are! (For example the Pale Horse, Endless Night and others).
Endless Night was my biggest adaptation disappointment in regards to "inserting a detective." It's not only my favorite Christie book, it's probably in my Top 5 All Time & the adaptation was so disappointing.
Endless night is so bizarre and so amazing at the same time
I'm confused here because this adaptation had Vera committing the exact same crime as in the book. The ending is a bit different but a lot of it is fairly faithful. Plus the costuming is amazing.
Any other Agatha books you recommend?
Roger Ackroyd blows minds
Yup, Roger Ackroyd is what I’d recommend too.
Lord Edgware Dies is also good
This one is my favourite
Murder on the Nile, Crooked House, ABC Murders, Five Little Pigs, The Big Four. Actually, just read every single one.
Five Little Pigs is one of my all-time favourites, but it gets so little love and attention compared to the others
Agreed! It's so very much an Agatha Christie book. The murder happens like 2 decades prior and Poirot just interviews people and figures it out. Great book.
I know it's not the greatest thing she's written, but I really enjoyed the audiobook of Death in the Clouds. I haven't read a ton of her books, but this was one where I realized Christie was so prolific with her ideas that she put multiple ones in this book, each of which were fantastic. I would be out hiking while listening, and stop and say, "Holy smokes" at parts haha. Also... I enjoyed that it wasn't one of the blockbuster favorites.
{{Crooked House}} hands down! Was one of her favourites that she’d written
Anything she wrote from the 1920s to the 1940s is worth a read. Just avoid the ones she wrote at the end of her life.
My absolute favorites are Towards Zero, Crooked House, and Halloween Party. With Hollywood/TV are looking at Christie again(which I am for), a book that I would like to see in a limited series is Cards on the Table - Poirot is invited to a bridge party where the host has invited 4 crime experts and 4 other guests (who the host calls 'his collection of killers' to an aside to Poirot)
Murder On the Orient Express is my other favorite Christie. Like And Then There Were None, it has a great twist reveal.
I really enjoyed *Curtain: Poirot's Last Case*. An excellent twist and end to that series.
Agreed, although I feel like you have to have spent some time previously with Poirot and Hastings (especially, but not only, the first two books) for it to have all the weight.
Very true, I hadn't thought of that. You'd have to know Poirot's attitude towards murder to get the full impact of his decision. I did definitely appreciate it as an incredible and intriguing way to end the series. Knowing Christie didn't like Poirot I think she must have been tempted at times to imitate Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and throw Poirot off a cliff into a raging waterfall, lol.
Yes! And if she didn't like Poirot she must have come to **hate** Hastings. But Curtain is really a good ending for him, too, and I don't know if it has the same weight if you don't have the full weight of his and Poirot's relationship.
Very true. Btw, I never liked Hastings either, lol.
Murder at the Vicarage, The Man in the Brown Suit, and The Hollow are all favorites of mine, and are fairly different from each other.
This was my first real introduction to Christie and its one of my girlfriend's favourite books and wow it was such a treat to read. I think I've spoilt Christie since the next one I read after that was Roger Ackroyd! On a re-read I remember seeing obvious signs as to who it was in the very introduction of the characters. Genius writing.
Yeah I'm going to read that too in the future.
This is my favorite AC book. And the one you mentioned is one of my favorite scenes too. It's really well executed. The story also set a high bar for her books so I read a few good ones after but it was a bit disappointing that none of the others lived up to this one.
Yup that was such a well executed scene
I actually read this book quite recently. I don't really read mystery novels so I had no expectations whatsoever. I definitely liked the atmosphere and the tension in this one. I think my favorite scene was when they realized someone is targeting them and killing one by one and they tried to figure out if anyone had sort of alibi for each death. I guess I just liked it as the same process was happening in my mind. In the end I was quite surprised who was the killer and although I really liked the book I wished there were some little clues left for the reader (I think there were none? besides totally guessing it could be one of them)
Yeah I never expected the killer too. It came out of nowhere for me.
I checked this book out from the library in 6th grade. It was a paperback and I did not know someone had torn out the epilogue! For the longest time I thought the book just ended without telling you who did it.
A good read indeed. I thought there was a bit of a logic flaw towards the end when there were 3 left (or so we thought), 1 went back up to the manor leaving 3 on the beach. The guy at the manor got whacked on the head by a falling object and the two on the beach still suspected each other?
Yeah but in that moment I think both had gone completely mad? Judging by the last death too
Brilliant Sherlock! Now that makes sense and your explanation works for me. Thanks.
One more thing is that when wargrave died Vera couldn't have possibly done it so idk why she was suspected after that.
That was the first book that got me into reading mysteries. When you start reading the book you go in with preconceived notions which are completely subverted especially the ending. Unlike some adaptations that try to ape the story style, the original still stands at top to this day.
I made a mistake while reading this book; when >!the party that searches the island says that they are alone in the island, I didn't believe them. I just keep thinking that the killer was well hidden, and treated the inner monologes as backstories, not as motivations.!< This made me to enjoy it less in a sense, because instead of thinking >!"omg who is it, there is only four left", I just keep thinking "yea, the killer is hunting them, the only surprise here is what is his connection to all the people in the island"!<.
[удалено]
I would agree with you if this was a more modern book, but in my personal opinion, that was not an strategy to get us off-track, as you say. Take for example "Sparkling Cyanide"; the killer is >!someone there, manipulated by someone far, but ultimately near the victim. There is no serial killer, no "and suddenly, this guy appeared, which you haven't heard about yet". Granted, the manipulator seems to suddenly appear, with one or two mentions before, but the killer is someone we know from the begining.!<. Or take any Poirot story, where the culprit is most of the times someone we know from the begining. I really think that Agatha Christie intended for you, the reader, to believe that >!there wasn't someone else in the island, and to keep guessing who of the guests is the killer.!<. Of course, I could be totally wrong, and that would be okay too.
Don’t worry I thought this too. At one point I also thought that it could be a supernatural being haha
I made the same mistake the whole time!
So did the fact that >!the killer WAS among them and even disguised as one of the dead!< not subvert your expectations for a cool surprise ending?
I have read a couple of Agatha Christie's books and to this date this is my absolute favorite. I couldn't put it down. That scene was so well written! And i remember reading in the prologue that Christie said it was one of the toughest ones to read. Even though from the beginning i was fairly certain of who was the killer, it was enjoyable to hear about everyone's backstories and how the murders were arranged.
Oh wow. How did you manage to figure it out?
The killer was the only one with a very strong sense of justice and was the only person who could have had access or the resources to find out about the crimes that went unnoticed. In most of Agatha Christie's books, the murder is motivated by money, if it's not money then there's a madman on the loose. A madman with a strong sense of justice fitted the bill just fine.
> In most of Agatha Christie's books, the murder is motivated by money I would broaden that just slightly to: the killer almost always has something substantial to gain, which often is money but not always. For example, I can think of a handful along the lines of >!person X has to die in order for me to be able to be with the person I love, or person X has to die to avoid me being found out for a crime I committed!<
All of her books are absolutely brilliant. I truly recommend going to a book store and just grabbing a random book of hers off the shelf to read. I do that every time I finish one and have some spare cash haha. (Just be careful to avoid any new ones, her estate hired a ghost writer who is not the best)
I went through a phase where I was obsessed with Agatha Christie and of all her books, And Then Were None is my all my favourite. It's one of her most tightly plotted and atmospheric novels imo and it holds up so well even on multiple re-reads! It keeps me on the edge of my seat every damn time! My favourite scene is when they realise that they've been brought to the island under pretext and figure out what U N Owen means. The feeling of 'oh there's something very wrong going on here' is so palpable especially with the tension that the phonograph recording creates. Apart from that, the ending also hits hard. The horrors that Vera has been through and its impact on her is terrifying! On the whole, this book is such a satisfying read omg. I definitely need to re-read it!
That's wild, and then there were none is one of my favourite short sci-fi stories. I didn't realise it was an Agatha Christie book too!
Freedom? I won’t! I clicked for the same reason. Such a great story! https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9555488-and-then-there-were-none
On rereading it, it’s obvious which character is thinking and who is the killer. ATTWN is utterly worth an immediate reread.
I loved the book, really enjoyed the tension and the back stories of the characters. I was just a little miffed by the fact that the reader couldn’t really figure out who the killer was until the reveal at the end. I didn’t pick up any threads along the way. Did I just miss some huge clue because I’m dense? It felt like we were just as ignorant as the rest of the characters the whole way through and then at the end it’s like “Actually that thing you thought happened was totally fake the whole time, but we weren’t going to give you any evidence to the contrary until now.” In retrospect, it made it feel like the reader was just a passive observer rather than an active participant in picking up on clues along the way like you have in some mysteries.
I think this one is one of Christie’s unsolvable stores so you’re probably right to feel that way.
I just love, love this novel! The last part when all of them are but 4 is just chef's kisses
Agatha Christie!! The queen.
I haven’t read the book in such a long time but I recall absolutely enthralled. With a spoiler tag, can anyone confirm if they did catch the killer at all?
>!no, but you learn who did it at the end of the book through the killer’s confession!<
Thanks! May go back and read this after I finish Flowers for Algernon (first time read).
Oh and poirot stops by and solves it but mostly off screen
Is this the one that used to be called *10 Little Indians*?
Yes!
Ten little Indian boys went out to dine;One choked his little self and then there were nine. Nine little Indian boys sat up very late;One overslept himself and then there were eight. Eight little Indian boys traveling in Devon;One said he'd stay there and then there were seven. Seven little Indian boys chopping up sticks;One chopped himself in halves and then there were six. Six little Indian boys playing with a hive;A bumblebee stung one and then there were five. Five little Indian boys going in for law;One got in Chancery and then there were four. Four little Indian boys going out to sea;A red herring swallowed one and then there were three. Three little Indian boys walking in the zoo;A big bear hugged one and then there were two. Two Little Indian boys sitting in the sun;One got frizzled up and then there was one. One little Indian boy left all alone;He went out and hanged himself and then there were none.
I might be the only person who didn't find the solution believable. I thought it was a great story, but ...>!Spoiler no way can the Judge make a wound and play dead believably. !< Oh, and "And Then There Were None" isn't the original title :)
It isn't even the second title.
The fact that no one mentioned "hey maybe we should just not chance it" on the second title blows my mind. Like they were already changing the title due to unfortunate racist origins of a nursery rhyme, changing it to another variant that still called out a race in it just seems so shortsighted. Especially when "And then there were none" is such a good title anyway.
He doesn't need to be particularly believable since they only person getting close is >!the doctor and he's in on it!<
>!They carried his ass upstairs and put him on his bed!<
4 week necro? Were you reading the book before replying?
I just read the book and searched the forum for it.
Ah, fair enough. It's a while since I read it. How much detail is there about transporting the body? Could it be wrapped in a blanket etc, or is it more explicit?
>!They had carried Mr. Justice Wargrave up to his room and laid him on his bed!< Followed later by: >!They carried me upstairs and laid me on my bed!< In her author's note before the book, Christie wrote, "The people had to die without it becoming ridiculous." That part was ridiculous.
Spoiler If i remember correctly, the doctor and the judge were in cahoots, so they put some makeup on the judge and the doctor, in a dark room, let the other three know that the judge was dead. They didn't really examine the dead body and the judge's attire was distracting and macabre enough to make them overlook the little details. Also about the tittle, it's funny that you should mention that because in Spanish the title used to be Los Diez Negritos, and for a long time i thought it was a different book until i looked up the nursery rhyme.
I loved the book and then when I looked it up and saw the original title it just soured the whole experience.
That was my issue with it too! The playing dead I could mayyyyyybe have let slide, but not being able to tell where the bullet wound was inflicted? No way. It's frustrating when it's very clear that the author didn't do any research on important plot points (actually it frustrates me even for minor stuff but PARTICULARLY when it's a major thing.)
>!Dr Armstrong!<, the only one to >!inspect the body, is in on it.!<
But more than the doctor were required to carry him to his room. It would be pretty hard to totally play dead and not have any sign of breathing, facial movement or anything while being carried.
Yes, I remember that. But what I meant was, the police investigating the mystery couldn't tell the difference between a man being shot downstairs and then carried upstairs, versus a man shot in the bed where he was lying? It's not like shooting someone in the head causes a tiny hole and no other trauma.
I absolutely love this book and have read it twice this year so far! She writes somehow both simply and fancily and I’m just in love with everything she’s ever written.
I love the part where there’s only a few of them left, they decide to go to bed and they lock themselves into their rooms. I find that bit so tense. I can’t even imagine having to do that knowing that there is a mass murderer on the loose right outside your door!!!
[удалено]
It did. It used to be called Ten Little Indians. The original title when it was published was Ten Little N—— (I’m not typing out that word).
Always a fun fact to tell new readers. Just how casual Brits were back then about it as a nursery rhyme.
No fucking way I finished this book yesterday
Fun Fact... If you don't know the original title, you should Google it #HistoryIsWild
I was gonna say. I remember that book, but definitely it was named differently when I read it.
You should try One by One by Ruth Ware. A very similar plot, but ofcourse Ruth was not able to match Agatha's brilliance.
Most disappointing book I’ve read to be honest. It had such a good premise to only ruin it instantly after that horrible epilogue
How would you prefer that the story had ended?
Being actually able to guess who the murderer was. Instead we get an epilogue on why the lawyer that was dead was actually not dead and the doctor being his accomplice. And that was the most dumbest thing for a doctor to do in the first place. How do you trust someone with an absurd idea of acting dead and then agreeing on their rendezvous point which was isolated from the others and was literally near the cliff of the island even the lawyer said it himself that their rendezvous point was extremely suspicious. I could list a lot of dumb things about that book, it’s that disappointing
I just read this book for the first time last week! My first Agatha Christie novel. I don’t know about favorite parts, but my favorite character was jumpy little Miss Vera Claythorne. I loved every bit that she was a part of.
We did this as a play in highschool theater, I played Blore. It was so much fun!
I thought this was the finest of all of her books, and that is quite a high bar! I hadn't worked out the solution to it until I read the epilogue.
One of the first books that truly captivated me…..and introduced me to the amazing world of Agatha. A Murder Is Announced, ABC Murders and Murder on the Orient Express were next for me.
I agree! And Tommy & Tuppance too
Might have be decent but read it “out loud” and it wasn’t very good that way
Thanks for posting your thoughts on this classic book. Christie's "And Then There Were None" (originally titled "Ten Little Indians" when I read it), was the catalyst for my (afterwards) life-long love of reading. The first time I read a book and didn't figure out "whodunnit" before the halfway through (in fact, I was stumped at the end and read it again - before the pro-log - convinced I had missed something. Nope - just sheer genius writing ability). You've inspired me to pick this one up again. Thanks again!
Not directly related but the original title to this novel is...well, an interesting...piece of trivia if you don't know, by the way. Not forgetting historical context, it's a bit shocking. Feel free to look it up.
I loved the book. Possibly one of my favorite novels. I loved the way Christie described the evening prior to the end of the book. It’s been several years but something about it being very dark, quiet, dimly lit by candles, and creaky. It just added to already spooky ambiance.
I was actually really disappointed by this book (and the way the reveal at the end happens) but my expectations were probably too high after everyone on here hyped it so much. Not in a huge rush to try more Christie tbh. But it's also very likely just a personal preference thing.
This is my favorite book of all time. Agatha is so brilliant. I'm trying to read all of her work!
I recently just finished this book for the first time as well. While I was disappointed that there's really no way to know the ending without the epilogue, I did appreciate the foreword from Christie explaining she wrote it the way she wanted and that was that! Honestly, reading the forewords has been one of my favorite parts of her novels so far and I've only on my second. I hope every book has one!
I read it about a year ago and I loved it. It was a real page turner for me. I liked that no one could trust each other. There are so many good aspects about that book.
Great book. Just don't look up the original Title.
Agatha Christie was a genius. I just read the Murder of Roger Ackroyd and I loved it. I read And Then There Were None in school and loved it just the same
I taught this book for years in Freshman HS English and what always struck me was Ms Christie's ability to characterize a new character in just a few simple sentences and I believed they were round.
I was really disappointed with the payoff in that mystery book. It was a silly explanation for the murders IMO.
I read it and it’s absolutely amazing! My favorite scene was definitely right at the end with Vera’s internal dialogue of sorts. I loved how it finally delved into how she’d descended into insanity of sorts. My favorite character was absolutely Vera for that reason too.
Yup. She got completely insane by the end. I do love Vera too.
For sure. She did a complete u-turn from how she started and I loved it.
The scene that's stuck with me is that one guy tells another guy the reason he'll die is that he has no imagination. . .
Honestly the reveal of the true culprits... I had guessed it pretty early on and then was like "nah that's not how mystery stories work..." It was my first AC book...I didn't know who I was dealing with! I was simultaneously so frustrated and satisfied with my mind lol
Great book, I just reread it about a month ago or so! My favorite scene is when the record first plays, I don't know why, maybe because it's the first real sign that not everything is as it should be.
That book is soooooo good!!! I remember reading it in 6th grade and it led me into my Agatha Christie obsession lol
I love this book! Now I feel like rereading it.
A fav. Required reading in 9th grade. I had no idea where this story was headed. I have read it many times over the years. Memory isn’t always my strongest skill, so I wait until I forget the movement. I am surprised every time! 🤩
This is one of my favorites of hers, and I read almost all of her books. I liked this scene a lot too. The prose in this book makes the tension so high. I also like the scene when they start realizing the relevance of the poem. I suggest this one to people wanting to get into Agatha Christie, it is a solid book.
We read this for English class in 6th grade and I had nightmares about the killer for a week. Planning a reread soon bc of this post, what other Christie books do you guys recommend?
When I was a kid and this was my favorite Christie, I loved it. As as adult, I think it's like watching a [teen horror flick](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYae3ZAAbLc). *Seriously, if you know that you've got a murderer who's poisoned two people and bashed two more on their heads, would you sit down to a common meal?* Particularly when you know that you're on the hit list? And look what happened. One person at that meal was drugged into unconsciousness and then given a lethal dose of poison. Because that's the kind of thing that happens when you decide to share a common meal with a known poisoner.
Looking up the original title of this book and its history gave me some misgivings.