Read Black Coffee by Charles Osborne Agatha Christie Online

black-coffee

Sir Claud Amory's formula for a powerful new explosive has been stolen, presumably by a member of his large household. Sir Claud assembles his suspects in the library and locks the door, instructing them that the when the lights go out, the formula must be replaced on the table -- and no questions will be asked. But when the lights come on, Sir Claud is dead. Now Hercule PSir Claud Amory's formula for a powerful new explosive has been stolen, presumably by a member of his large household. Sir Claud assembles his suspects in the library and locks the door, instructing them that the when the lights go out, the formula must be replaced on the table -- and no questions will be asked. But when the lights come on, Sir Claud is dead. Now Hercule Poirot, assisted by Captain Hastings and Inspector Japp, must unravel a tangle of family feuds, old flames, and suspicious foreigners to find the killer and prevent a global catastrophe....

Title : Black Coffee
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 9780061739323
Format Type : ebook
Number of Pages : 100 Pages
Status : Available For Download
Last checked : 21 Minutes ago!

Black Coffee Reviews

  • David Schaafsma
    2019-03-26 12:21

    The mystery detective novel Black Coffee was not written by Agatha Christie, in spite of the 24-point-type declaration of her name above the title that the Christie estate insisted on [ruddy liars!]. Black Coffee is a novelization published in 1998 by Charles Osborne of the 1930 play of the same name by Christie. Osborne had written a scholarly work about Christie’s fiction that was praised by the Christie estate; Osborne, encouraged by this, proposed to write a novelization of one of her plays and they enthusiastically agreed. Christie’s last book had been published 22 years before, in 1976, the year she had died, and they probably saw this as a way to boost the Christie franchise [cash grab]. So 68 years after Black Coffee was launched on stage, it emerged as a novel with her name on it. Most of the words in it are hers. But.Christie didn’t like any of the dramatic adaptations of any of her novels, which led to her trying her hand at playwriting herself. The Mousetrap is one of the very, very successful ones, obviously, the longest running play of all time, well-written, great theatre; Black Coffee was one of Christie’s early attempts at drama that was pretty well received, as she was an author of international renown already by this time, but it is now seen as a very minor work in the Christie universe, though two films were actually made of the play. But I can’t imagine Christie herself actually adapting it to a novel just to [make more money for the Christie family] fill out her already substantial catalogue. In this novel[ization], Hercule Poirot and his friend Hastings [hiss, such a dope!] visit the famous physicist Sir Claud Amory, who has devised the formula for a new type of explosive, but they learn that he has been poisoned (in his black coffee, hence the title) the night of their arrival. Christie famously makes it very difficult to find out who dunnit in her mystery novels, but in Mr. Osborne’s [two left] hands, we know the murderer very early on [argh].Osborne describes Poirot more harshly than Christie would have: "An inveterate snob, he was already predisposed in Sir Claud’s favour by virtue of his title. If he were to be found in Who’s Who, a volume in which the details of Poirot’s own career could also be discovered, then perhaps this Sir Claud was someone with a valid claim on his, Hercule Poirot’s, time and attention." Ingenerous, stuffy. Poirot could be a tad arrogant, but this is harsh. When Osborne gets a chance to try his hand at Poirot dialogue, he has him more British than Belgian: "I do beg your pardon, my dear George."[augh!]The whole first chapter Osborne wrote, and almost every sentence reveals he is NOT Christie. The prose doesn’t match the style or tone of Christie at all. How could a Christie critic, purporting to really understand Christie, write that chapter?! If you are in fact a writer, why not transform the text and make it your own, as so many have done, turning Austen novels, for instance, into their own art, with inventive hooks and descriptions and turns of plot. What would Christie herself do in writing a novelization? Oh, but then she didn’t do that. And she could have, and would have done it well, rethinking Austen, for instance. But she didn’t. Part of the reason it doesn’t work as well as it might is that it is an early, less accomplished play by a writer that was generally a better novelist than a playwright. It’s not a bad play, but when you are going to write a novelization of an okay play, you should take license to do something interesting with it, make it new. Black Coffee is fan fiction, and as with 50 Shades of Grey as fan fiction of Twilight, it worked out for the author, and for the Christie franchise. I like fan fiction and very much support it as a creative enterprise, it’s creative reading using writing in response. And long time Christie fans welcomed a new “Christie” book, even knowing it was not written by her. Or all written by her. And the book sold well, blessed as it was as “the first Christie novel in 20 years,” so many many Christie fans the world over had to have it. In 1998 had I been a Christie fan, I would have bought it, probably. So it sold so many copies that the estate sanctioned him to take two more minor plays and turn them into novels [that they claim are “written by Christie”] [liars!] and they also did pretty well. I mean, there’s enough Christie fans wanting a “new Christie novel” to assure lots of books sold, regardless of quality. Just you wait to see my new Harry Potter novel, where Dumbledore arises from the dead . . . tottering, pale, seeking blood revenge. . .All that said, I wanted to hate this book more than I did. I like the short (for Christie) title, the story is not bad, it’s middle-of-the-road Christie, it’s not the worst. The dialogue, which Christie actually wrote is, as it almost always is, good, of course. But almost nothing else is quite good enough. Almost everything Osborne writes as Christie’s ghost is pretty badly or at best blandly done. I hate it that it is part of the officially sanctioned catalogue of Christie’s Poirot novels, when she didn’t even write it; she just wrote the dialogue and stage directions [which Osborne actually KEEPS in places, lazily!]Mathew Prichard, Christie’s grandson, wrote the afterword that makes it clear the family was going to officially sanction this (hack work) as a Christie novel, which he says “reads like authentic, vintage Christie. I feel sure Agatha would be proud to [rolling over in her grave with horror] have written it.” [Augh!!!] I actually might have given this two stars, just because it has some decent Christie language in it and, that fan fiction support point, but in principle have to give it one star [liars!].

  • BrokenTune
    2019-04-13 18:54

    "‘George,’ he called, ‘please take my heavy tweed suit and my dinner jacket and trousers to the cleaners. I must have them back by Friday, as I am going to the Country for the Weekend.’ He made it sound like the Steppes of Central Asia and for a lifetime."Tweed? No, I cannot....no to Poirot in tweeds.I am all in favour of fan fiction, especially when it is done well. Unfortunately, Black Coffee fell flat on so many counts.What is, in my opinion, even worse is that the book was authorised, even commissioned, by Christie's estate. Subsequently it was published as part of the official Agatha Christie catalogue. This is just plain wrong. Christie did write the play Black Coffee in 1929 to experiment with play-writing herself after stage adaptations of her previous books failed to impress her. However, I guess she must have had her reasons for not developing this particular story into a full novel - although many, many elements in the story do appear in later stories.Or maybe Charles Osborne would just regurgitate the tricks and techniques of Dame Agatha's better known works to cover his lack of imagination? After all, he did write the book some 20 years after Christie's death.My dismay at Agatha Christie Ltd and the publishers for allowing this book to be published as part of the official series is not, however, solely because it is so obvious that it was a financial decision to milk the franchise.I'm disliking that this book should be the best available work of fan fiction and should be worthy of publication - especially when readers may pick this up and actually think it was written by Christie. The obvious lack in sincerity in Osborne's portrayal of the characters is downright upsetting. So, not only does he make Poirot wear tweeds, but he also turns him into something that he is not. For all of Poirot's eccentricities, the Poirot Christie had created may have had high standards but he has always had some empathy with other people."An inveterate snob, he was already predisposed in Sir Claud’s favour by virtue of his title. If he were to be found in Who’s Who, a volume in which the details of Poirot’s own career could also be discovered, then perhaps this Sir Claud was someone with a valid claim on his, Hercule Poirot’s, time and attention." No. Just, no.

  • Kaya Dimitrova
    2019-03-30 17:24

    Отново Агата Кристи и отново случай, който гениалният детектив Еркюл Поаро поема. Този път жертвата беше известен учен, а причината за убийството му - скъпа и опасна химична формула, способна да причини множество щети. Заподозрените, в случая - роднините на жертвата и най-приближените му приятели, остават под ключ в дома му, докато Поаро и неговият добър приятел Хейстингс се заемат и с най-дребните подробности около убийството. Стилът, както винаги бе завладяващ, а Агата Кристи отново поднасе интригуващи обрати и не по-малко интересни заподозрени.

  • Nandakishore Varma
    2019-04-11 15:17

    A play featuring Hercule Poirot turned into a novel by Charles Osborne. Well, all I can say is, he shouldn't have.

  • Andrea
    2019-04-05 16:09

    I picked up this book with low expectations. In fact, if I wasn't such an awful completist I would have skipped this little outlier altogether. Being merely an adaptation of Agatha Christie's foray into playwriting, it lacks the Dame's impeccable style. It's too heavy on dialogue, and sometimes is too deceptively easy to figure out. I'm saying "deceptively" because after all it is still Christie's storyline. Surprisingly, it was an enjoyable light read. Perhaps not on the level of her average work, and certainly not even close to her defining volumes, but Black Coffee cannot be called a waste of time. I don't know what took me so long to finally read it.

  • SumitRK
    2019-04-08 20:21

    As a Poirot novel, this one felt very weak in comparison to many others. Maybe, because it was an adaption from a play. The characters are forgettable and there are very few twists. You could even guess the ending. Strictly for Poirot fans.

  • A~lotus
    2019-04-22 18:20

    I am planning to go see Black Coffee as a play this summer, and so I thought I would check this book out to read from the local library. This is my first Agatha Christie "novel." Although I had seen a good handful of theater productions of Christie's plays, I immediately recognized that this book is not Christie's style. Black Coffee was first written as a play by Christie herself and should have remained as such instead of adapted into a "novel." This adaptation is written by Charles Osborne, who is, according to the book jacket, "a world authority on theater and opera." While Osborne may be well-known, I believe a classic like Christie's Black Coffee should not have been altered by writing style. Thus, as it stands, the "novel" reads and is written--quite forcefully--in the style of playwriting techniques instead of a true novel. In playwriting, there is usually a few key props that are of interest throughout the play. In Black Coffee, some of those key props are the poisonous hyoscine in a phial, the coffee cup, and a valuable scientific formula that goes missing. While there are those key props in mystery novels, this adaptation does not illuminate what the characters are actually thinking or feeling as they become involved with any of these key props. Therefore, this adaptation is not a true novel either because a novel would show the reader what each character is thinking and feeling internally, which is not known to the other characters. In a sense, the character development is quite terse with exaggerated habits that are written for a play instead of a novel. I am sure that if I read Black Coffee as a play, there would be more character development than in this adaptation because the reader would be able to read and analyze the characters through symbolism and character behavior and would come to appreciate them more that way. For me, the characters seem somewhat two-dimensional in this adaptation. I just felt like I could neither relate to them nor appreciate them.Both the narration and the dialogue are nicely written and moved the story along. However, I wonder how much of the narration and the dialogue are from Christie's work? After all, they both read in a playwriting style as mentioned earlier. For instance, consider the following:Then the door to the hall opened, and Miss Amory entered, carrying a small work-bag. She went over to the settee, put the bag down, knelt, and began to feel at the back of the seat. As she did so, Dr. Carelli entered by the other door, carrying a hat and a small suitcase. Seeing Miss Amory, Carelli stopped and murmured a word of apology at having intruded upon her.Miss Amory rose from the settee, looking a trifle flustered. "I was searching for a knitting needle, " she explained unnecessarily, brandishing her discovery as she spoke . . .This passage could be easily condensed to stage directions and a scene description in an actual play. And once again, despite the dialogue, the reader has no idea what Miss Amory is thinking about in this moment of time. She could have been looking for (or hiding) something else rather than a knitting needle. Why did she come into the library even though she knew that no one is allowed to go in after someone's unexpected death?While mystery novels tend to bounce from place to place and through space and time, the reader is directed back to the library again and again (the scene of the crime) throughout this adaptation. As mentioned before, I haven't read many of Christie's novels, but I do know that in plays, scenes/places are few. Hence, the transition between scenes should be as smooth and not as confusing as much as possible. In this adaptation, however, I feel like I have no sense of time because it wasn't really emphasized in the "novel." With a well-written novel, the reader knows what time and day it is, which keeps the reader grounded and engaged in a novel. Otherwise, the reader is alienated and uninvolved with the story, which I felt with this book.Before concluding, this book is about Sir Claud Amory who is worried about someone stealing his valuable scientific formula. When he calls Poirot to come and help him, he winds up dead in the library in the midst of everyone present after the one-minute darkness. Who has stolen the formula and killed Sir Claud? As Poirot and his partner, Hastings, interview the members of the household, they find many other complex stories and clues along the way.To conclude, although I enjoyed guessing "whodunit," this adaptation was not well-written nor wholesome. I feel that this book has done much injustice to a brilliant author like Agatha Christie. A play should be a play and could be adapted into a film. However, I believe that if Christie wanted Black Coffee to be written as a novel, she herself would have done it years ago. I hope to read the play itself (Black Coffee) soon for comparison as well as other actual Christie's novels.

  • Alaina Meserole
    2019-04-26 19:01

    At first I was really interested in this book because it wasn't really written by Agatha, like at all. Black Coffee is more like a play adaptation than anything and the only thing you're going to get from Agatha Christie is her name on the cover. Why? Because this book is by Charles Osborne.Now I will admit that I read other people's review before I wrote my own because I honestly had no idea how to write this one. It's very hard since it wasn't written by Agatha (who's writing I've fallen in love with) but it's apart of the Hercule Poirot Series. I'm probably not making sense at all to anyone who hasn't touched a book within this series but just know it was hard to write this review.Okay, so, I didn't really love this book but I also didn't end up fucking hating it either. It was just okay - more like meh. The fact is that this book didn't really do anything for me. It was boring and really predictable. It's about how Poirot gets called to a murder case and finds out something very valuable has been stolen as well. Kind of like clue.. but not really.Again, I'm probably making zero sense here so I apologize for this sort of crappy review. But, idk, I liked the characters because they didn't change that much from the last book (Poirot and Hastings I mean) but other than that it was just meh. I kind of wish I skipped this book and went onto the next one in this series. I'm just glad that I'm done with this book.

  • সালমান হক
    2019-04-22 20:08

    আসলে ব্ল্যাক কফি নামে আগাথা ক্রিস্টি কোন উপন্যাস লিখে যাননি। এটা মূলত তার একটি নাটকের নভেলাইজেশন। সেই কারণেই হোক আর মূল প্লটের কারণেই হোক, একদমই টানেনি বইটা। কিছু কিছু ক্ষেত্রে পোয়ারো আর হ্যাস্টিংসকে দিয়ে এমন এমন কাজ করিয়েছেন লেখক যা একেবারেই তাদের চরিত্রের সাথে বেমানান। রিকমেন্ড করবো না, এর চেয়ে আরও দারুণ দারুণ উপন্যাস আছে পোয়ারোকে নিয়ে। বছরের শুরুটা ভালো হলো না।

  • Obsidian
    2019-03-31 12:11

    This book sucked which is why I kicked it to the proverbial curb when I got to 40 pages in. I often say that a good DNF review can steer potential readers away from a book that the reviewer articulates why it would be a waste of time. Honestly, all you have to know is that Agatha Christie did not write this novel. Instead, Christie wrote a play called "Black Coffee." However it was not turned into a novel. Decades later, Charles Osborne would take up the mantle and write this. I have no idea why anyone thought the guy could pull this off, and the foreword by Christie's nephew talking about what a good job Osborne did must have been in jest.This is a bad novel aping to sound like Christie. I don't know how else to spell it out. It's like trying to see your reflection through a really dirty mirror. You can almost see yourself, but then you move a little and that's all she wrote. I just could not get past how unlike Poirot this sounds in Osborne's hands. He obviously did not get our egg head shaped detective at all. Yes, Poirot is vain, but is not so far up his own ass that he would be acting like he does in this book. The overall mystery, did not interest me either. Poirot is called in when a man named Claud Amory is worried that someone in his home is hoping to steal secret formula.Don't even get me started on why Amory doesn't just leave his home and come to Poirot. That would make too much sense. Instead Poirot goes to Amory's home to help and of course finds him dead. Amory has been poisoned by coffee he had after dinner. Of course my first thought is who drinks coffee after dinner. I can't drink coffee after noon or I will be up all night. Insomnia sucks. Oh wait, back to this terrible book. Poirot now has a household of suspects. Hastings is also in this one and of course just like Poirot acts so alien you think he and Poirot have been body snatched by aliens.I finally called it a day at page 40. Back to the library this book goes. Well I got my first DNF of 2017, maybe the Book gods are coming back....sigh.

  • Aimee
    2019-04-18 14:19

    Agatha Christie did not write this book. She wrote it as a play and then 68 years later Charles Osborne, the foremost and in my opinion a very poor Christie 'expert', came along and turned it into this godawful mess of a novel. For someone who is supposed to be a Christie aficionado, he clearly has little to no knowledge of the basics of Christie's characters and their personal idiosyncrasies. For example, at a key part of the story, Hercule Poirot's sidekick Captain Arthur Hastings eavesdrops on a personal and obviously private conversation in order to relay the content of said conversation back to Poirot. Anyone who has read even one or two Christie novels featuring this duo should know that this is something Hastings would actually NEVER do. In fact, he often chastises Poirot for exactly this behavior as it is not 'playing the game'. Hastings comes from the time of the 'old school tie' where British gentlemen were brought up with very strict rules of conduct. Spying, listening at keyholes, etc. is abhorrent to him. Poirot often replies to these complaints of Hastings that "Murder is not a game".

  • John Carter
    2019-04-18 14:14

    “The first Poirot novel in twenty years” says the blurb. Except it isn’t twenty years, since Christie’s contribution was done in 1930; and it isn’t a novel, it’s a novelisation. And it’s a novelisation done by someone without the courage (and perhaps the talent) to make changes to the play. When Christie turned The Hollow into a play she kicked Poirot out of it altogether because it made a better play. I’m not suggesting that Osborne should have removed Poirot, but he should have managed somehow to tweak things so as not to give away the solution before page 60. But he felt that stage directions needed to go unchanged into the book. So something we might well have been distracted from on stage by the movements and dialogue of other characters has now been put in in plain sentences: “Look At This: This Is The Clue.” I might have given the play four or five stars, but this book rates only two.

  • Gary
    2019-04-17 19:16

    I am a huge fan of Agatha Christie and have read virtually everything she ever wrote so I felt drawn to this book. Black Coffee was written as a play but Agatha Christie never actually turned it into a novel for whatever reason. This book was written as a novel several years after her death by Charles Osborne and I think it is plain to see. Although the plot is the same the Christie polish is missing.This book does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as any of Agatha Christie's actual novels and I think that it is a bit misleading to identify this adaptation of her play as her novel, she was far better than that.

  • Esherlocked
    2019-04-18 12:19

    Ünlü Fizikçi Sir Claud buluşunun çalınmasından endişe ettiği için Hercule Poirot’u evine davet eder. Poirot arkadaşı Hasting ile eve vardığında çok geçtir Sir Claud’un cansız bedeniyle karşılaşır ve katilin kim olduğunu aramaya başlar.

  • Barbara
    2019-04-11 20:23

    For an avid Agatha Christie fan, I remember being so excited--a "new" book!And then I read it. It was based on a play Christie wrote--an early play. Too many elements reminded me of other, better novels (actually written by Dame Agatha Christie herself). There were no surprises, no Christie prose; Poirot didn't sound or act like *my* Poirot, and Hastings wasn't Hastings. The language was terribly forced; putting stage directions into a paragraph does not a novel make.Don't care if Osborne is an "expert" on Christie. Doesn't make him qualified to rewrite her work, plaster her name over the cover, and mislead her fans.For anyone who reads this book before any other Agatha Christie: I tell you, it only goes up from here.This book still hangs out on my shelf, but only because it's the only Christie--excuse me, pseudo-Christie--book that lists all of her novels in publication order. And I'm a nerd like that.

  • Annerlee
    2019-04-03 18:04

    The book is a novelisation of an Agatha Christie play and I couldn't help imaging the theatrical version as I was reading. I often thought I'd spotted comments directed to the audience, humourous comments that would make the audience laugh, entrances and exits to the stage. The scenes had something static about them too (obviously the scene would stay the same and characters come and go.This didn't detract from the reading experience however. In some ways, it added to the interest and has made me want to see a Christie play someday.The plot wasn't one of Christie's most cunning or elaborate, but I enjoyed the book all the same.

  • Flor
    2019-04-01 18:07

    3,5 ⭐️ Se nota bastante que esta novela NO fue escrita por Agatha Christie. Me faltó esa vuelta de rosca que tienen por lo general sus libros, y más desarrollo de los personajes, pero en general fue divertido y no adiviné al culpable, como siempre jaja...😂

  • Pallavi Sharma
    2019-04-05 16:01

    ***3.5***Review soon

  • Book Concierge
    2019-04-08 16:12

    The seventh work by Christie to feature retired Belgian detective Hercule Poirot was written as a play, after Christie had been dissatisfied with the dramatization of an earlier work and decided she would write a play herself. Some twenty years after her death, former actor Charles Osborne was hired by her heirs to novelize the work. Hercule Poirot is asked to come to the country estate of Sir Claud Amory to unmask the traitor in his midst. Amory is a famous scientist and has been working on a formula for a new explosive for the government – a weapon that would change the course of war. He wants Poirot to come to his home, and take the formula to the Ministry of Defense. But mere minutes before Poirot’s arrival, Sir Claude is dead – was it a heart attack, or poison? And where is the missing formula?Most of the elements of a classic Poirot “locked room” mystery are here: a country estate, a variety of characters / suspects, a mysterious secret (or two, or three), and Poirot’s amazing “little gray cells.” The dialogue is typical Christie, but the connective tissue of the novel lacks her sparkle. If anything it seems “over” dramatized. Still, it’s a quick read, and moderately enjoyable. I didn’t figure it out much ahead of Poirot’s reveal (Poirot, of course, had it figured out long before I did).

  • Angela
    2019-04-12 12:12

    The novel Black Coffee is an adaptation of the play Black Coffee written by Agatha Christie. I'd highly recommend first time readers of Mrs. Christie not pick this one up first. And that's what I've got to say about that.

  • R Z
    2019-04-17 20:20

    2.5, rounded up. Eh. The dialogue was on point, but yeah, you can tell that this was a novelization not written by Christie.

  • Amy
    2019-04-16 18:13

    I am sorry, Tori! I *did* want to like this one! I imagine as a play this would be quite fun, especially because you would have to pay attention to catch the details of the characters' actions. However, in a novel, it is very easy to track their movements and gestures and I figured out the murderer pretty quickly. I kept waiting for a shocking twist that never came! (view spoiler)[ Though oddly enough, I was assisted in my "sleuthing" by a memory of someone straightening a vase that contained a missing document...though I haven't read this book before or seen the play. Hmmm.(hide spoiler)]

  • Ruth
    2019-03-26 19:16

    This is a novelization of a play by Agatha Christie. The adapter, however, is not Agatha Christie and does not have her skills. The writing is clunky at best and the characters are stereotypes through and through. It's a testament to Christie's original plot though that this is essentially enjoyable if taken on its own terms as a simple, conventional English-country-house mystery.

  • Ubendran
    2019-04-11 13:16

    Sir Cluade facing some serious problem regarding his experiments and formulas for his work.So, to safe guard it, he making call to Hercule Poirot and informing him to come and collect the formula and take it back to London.On the day of arrival, Poirot pick his Captain friend Hastings with him for collection of formulas. Sir claude made Hercule to come a day earlier without any further infomation. On that day, after dinner, Sir Claude announce everybody to assemble in centre room.Everybody received Coffee. Sir Cluade said like every evening, today also the coffee taste better. He told everything about Poirot, before that he told, his formula has been stolen. I will turn off the lights for 2 minutes. In the time, keep it in the table. When the lights came back, Poirot enter and saw the man sitting motionless. Hercule checked the man's pulse by hands declared dead. Richard, son of Sir Cluade told, he is been dead and you are no longer required your help here. During that time, Mrs.Amory, daughter-in-law of Sir Claude, told Hercule to stay back and find the truth behind the death.Richard called Dr.Graham. He came and look the corpse and asked everybody what was the things he consumed before dying. Everybody told, he had coffee and told Sir Cluade comment also, like every evening, this evening coffee taste is bitter. Dr.Graham feels something wrong and told for autopsy. After, autopsy he declared he is been poisoned and murdered. So, he told he will call for police. But, Richard take him to side and told him, don't go for police. Dr.Graham left without saying further.Now, Hercule start his investigation. He went to the corpse room. Then he saw the coffee cup and take some pinch of drink in his tube and place it back in the same place. During that time, Lucia entered and try to take cup, but she don't have the knowledge of Poirot presence and when he inquired, she told she came for bag. Poirot searched with the word " where is the lady's bag? and there it is and he took and gave it to her.He started, inquiring each member of the family. Sir claude sister Claudine telling what happened last night. Hercule told to close her eye and imagine the situation. Now, feel what happens after the lights turned off. Any cling sound of keys, he asked and for that she told his there and who sat there? Lucia. Apart from this, anything else. She told everything. At the last, she recollect one thing. A silk cloth tearing sound. But, I dunno from whose dress.After the enquiry, Tredwell secretary of the Sir Claude came to room. He told he have doubt on Dr.Cardii, Italian Doctor who states he is friend of Lucia. Among the family members enjoy the death of Sir Claude, most enjoyable one is Barbara, thinks the Claudine. She faced lot of problems and struggles.Then, due to the health issues, Claudine came to pick her drugs from the box unopened for long time above the cupboard. That time, Hercule asked her, what is all this? She told, Lucia is not well. He saw the medicine names and all, went without saying anything.Dr.Graham confirms he was poisoned by Hyoscine butylbromide and lethal dosage makes permanent sleep. Hercule came to Claudine and asked her, anybody take the box recently. She replied, on the day you arrived, that evening Lucia told some drugs for her health, I told it is in that box. She told, she need the drug for permanent sleep.Hercule told Dr.Cardii that you can't leave the house until the investigations over. He said, he have urgent business in London. Hercule said firmly you can't leave. Next day, Dr.Cardii pack everything and try to escape via French window, that time Claudine saw and asked him. He told he have urgent business and has to leave. When he was about to leave, Hastings came through French Window and Hercule took main door. They blocked him and started their enquiry, why you killed Sir Claude ?He told, he is not friend of Lucia. I need money and I told her to steal the Formula. But she refused to do. Hercule asked, reason for black mailing. HE told, Lucia back ground.Hercule came to Lucia room, he asked why you need permanent sleep? She got shocked and How is your mother Selena Gomez? Richard know the things is the only Lucia reply. Hercule told he won't and she begged her, don't tell to Richard. Everybody gone, Hercule start climbing to cupboard and about to do something. That time, Hastings told Dust is there, why you climbing on the dust. Suddenly he came down and thanked him for his clue to the case. Hastings asked him without knowingly, what I did? Hercule replied, if a box isn't open for so many days then it will be filled with dust. See it, in the box there is no dust. So, before Lucia take the box, somebody else did it.Then, Hercule turned his attention to Sir Claude assistant Edward. In between inspector Japp arrived due to the complaint made by Dr.Graham. That time, Richard came to Hercule and told him, he killed his father for money. But, he know the truth, without saying the real fact, he told Richard to hide from Police. After the incident, Hercule told to stay in this room. After Hercule & Japp went to another room, Barbara came to Hastings and taken him forcefully to garden.In mean time, Edward came to that room, searching for it. He is about pick something and went to run, Hercule came from French window and he thought of running through door, there Japp standing. Hercule catch hold of him, went to find Hastings. He saw, Hastings with Barbara, he told to his friend to come here. He requested Barbara to give Hastings for one hour.Then, Japp started enquire the Edward. He told he killed the Sir claude for Formulas, which give lot of money.Hercule told Lucia, be happy and left the house.

  • Jenny
    2019-04-03 16:10

    3 ⭐️I quite liked this Poirot book, for it was quick and easy. I didn't exactly enjoy the overdramatics, but you can't really escape them with Christie. I did like the 3rd person POV and the fact that we got a little taste of the action before Poirot got involved. It gave the readers a possibility to try and solve the crime themselves from the beginning, rather than rely on a 2nd person POV.

  • Sergei Ter-Tumasov
    2019-03-27 17:09

    Вроде, детектив, а скучно!После остросюжетных современных детективов, классические начинают мне казаться скучными и без интриги!!! Да, лучшее - враг хорошего!!!

  • Anastasia ^^
    2019-03-29 18:54

    Μακάρι να ήταν γραμμένο από την ίδια (αν και αυτή έγραψε το σενάριο)

  • Wilde Sky
    2019-04-24 19:03

    During a weekend at a country house a secret formula is stolen and a man murdered.The basic plot was good but I found the writing didn't grab me.

  • Erin
    2019-04-06 18:15

    While an interesting enough mystery, you can tell the prose isn't actually written by Agatha Christie -- it's adapted from one of her plays, but not written by her.

  • Chrissie
    2019-04-25 16:21

    Oh, what fun. Maybe it's because I went into this fully expecting a stinker—I mean, it's a novelization of a drama, come on!—but I thought this was just a delightful little Poirot story. I liked it as much as, if not more than, the previous installment of the collection, The Mystery of the Blue Train.Clearly, I am waiting with bated breath to make it up to Murder on the Orient Express, and I don't expect anything nearly as good as The Murder of Roger Ackroyd (which is sensational, by the way), but these last two have been fun and easy reads. Surely (Shirley :: Don't call me Shirley!), the very definition of a cozy mystery.