Another o'my ignorant opinions: Teach me how wrong I am:: Agatha CHRISTIE sucks.

[UTUSN]

Maybe once or twice when I was young it was enthralling to see the gimmick of a mystery ravelled at the end, with false leads and bits of supposed brilliant bits turning out to be clues. I've never read her books, have seen maybe one of the movies, Death on the Nile. And I seldom watch movies. The t.v. is on as background all the time but not to watch. I'm either here on the 'puter or doing something else.

So. This afternoon I chose to shut other things down and actually watch Evil Under the Sun, mainly because last year I was impressed with USTINOV's movie of Billy Budd. And then there was Maggie SMITH looking relatively glam in red hair, semi-rowr.

Well, the gimmick just didn't click for me here. It was tiresome. The little bits of ignored clues along the way, the elaborate master plan of the murder carried out with precision, not to mention things we couldn't possibly know.

I believe the lady latched onto a franchise gimmick, plus that facade of English pseudo- wit- and- sophistication, and rode it to fame and cash.


I can still get into DOYLE/Holmes. O.K.: (Yeah, there's an "h" in CHRISTIE. But, hey, I spelled NABOKOV in another thread!1)

[csziggy]

1. I've read nearly everything she wrote

And it's not the contrived plots or mysteries that kept me reading, it was the characters. I enjoyed all of them, even the minor characters in her stories. They were all interesting and they all had full personalities and back stories, even if you did not learn all the details. You could tell there was a depth behind the people.

In the end I have to agree with Lionel Twain:

You've tricked and fooled your readers for years. You've tortured us all with surprise endings that made no sense. You've introduced characters in the last five pages that were never in the book before. You've withheld clues and information that made it impossible for us to guess who did it. But now, the tables are turned. Millions of angry mystery readers are now getting their revenge. When the world learns I've outsmarted you, they'll be selling your $1.95 books for twelve cents.
Murder by Death

[UTUSN]

2. Thanks for that. It was just what I was fishing for. n/t

[Lydia Leftcoast]

3. Agatha Christie is mysteries for beginners

Last edited Sun Aug 12, 2012, 02:27 PM - Edit history (1)

I started out with her and then moved on to other Golden Age authors like Dorothy Sayers, Ngaio Marsh, Margery Allingham, and Josephine Tey. From there I went on to Raymond Chandler.

Now I read other Brits (favorites include Peter James, Peter Robinson, P.D. James, and Val McDermid), Canadians (Louise Penney), Europeans (especially the Scandinavians, such as Henning Menkell, Yrsa Sigurdardottir Arnaldur Indridason, Karin Fossum, and Anne Holt), and a few Americans (James Lee Burke, Faye Kellerman, J.A. Jance). One of my fellow translators, Hugh Ashton, has written some wonderful new Sherlock Holmes stories that are uncanny imitations of Conan Doyle.

But there are an awful lot of American writers who just crank 'em out according to a formula and produce a book every three to six months. You have to wonder if they actually write them or if they just assign them to teams of ghostwriters.

[UTUSN]

5. imPRESSive!1 Really, I'm agog! n/t

[Archae]

4. You can't stand Agatha Christie, I really detest any of the Sherlock Holmes books.

And I used to love Basil Rathbone Holmes movies.

Arthur Conan Doyle had characters that acted "true to type," the noble gentleman, the brute, the cockney, etc.
No one acted out of their "station in life."

And Doyle himself was a blithering idiot, 2 little girls made a prize ass out of him with fake fairy pictures.

[UTUSN]

6. Yeah, the Basil R. movies are my ideal. I detest the Robt DOWNEY stuff, or generally,

the approach in movies that things need to be updated with stunts, explosions, and technology. Or movies where kids are smarter than adults.