Восемь идеальных убийств
Ratings92
Average rating3.5
I'm trying to decide if I loved this or not. I enjoyed it, but it irked me. I can't decide so I will just give it a 3.
Decent but ultimately a let down. The unreliable narrator was kind of a flop. I still enjoyed it overall
Good little mystery novel that is sure to please people who enjoy encountering references to books they know/like in other books. I enjoyed the confessional format of this book, it's a pretty hit or miss format and in this case I think it worked really well.
3.75 stars. It was fine. Not bad, but didn't blow my socks off and into the next room. The last bit is meandering and the constant twists get tiring.
An enjoyable short book to picked up at a whim to with for a library hold to come through. If you enjoy whodunnits this is a fun read,
Closer to 3.5. I've come to see themes in Peter Swanson's mysteries I thoroughly appreciate and this book gave me two more things on my “to-read” pile.
The interconnections between the characters were strong and interesting. This plot kept me reading. Something about the end felt a tiny bit disappointing to me but I think thats just the nature of mystery novels. Overall, would definitely recommend.
This was just alright, my least favorite Swanson. I loved idea behind it and all the incorporation of bookish things, but the plot fell flat. I wasn't shocked by anything that happened, and I kept reading for a big twist to come and blow me away. Maybe because I wasn't attached to any of the characters. (except the cat Nero!)
Recensie van audioboek (via Storytel)
Een ongelofelijk slimme misdaadthriller over iconische misdaadthrillers.
Een echte ode of liefdesbrief aan het genre.
my thought process towards the end of this book:
LMFAOO HOW DID I NOT SEE THAT COMIN
ok what the fuck...
no way.
WHY AM I CRYIN (actual tears runnin down my face)
holy shit.
I'm trying to decide if I loved this or not. I enjoyed it, but it irked me. I can't decide so I will just give it a 3.
Contains spoilers
This book comes across as having plot that is great at the skeletal level but does not flesh out well. The main plot points were cool references to old mystery fiction, and the ending had a fun twist, but by the time I got to it, I felt so disconnected from the rest that I didn't really enjoy it. There were relationships among peripheral characters that were unnecessary in my opinion and did nothing to advance the plot. There were some fun moments , like one that echoed Poe (when he goes to the cellar to get a bottle of wine, I wondered if he'd be chained and sealed in a wall); and I also thought of Virginia Woolf (I'll leave it at that). In general, I feel like this author overkills his reminders of how well-read he is when it comes to mystery fiction, and sometimes I just want his books to be his own. Like, I get it. You're an expert on the mystery genre. Again, it seemed like this particular book was a great thought that was poorly executed. I like some of his other books, so I'll keep reading. Possibly, Gwen the FBI agent will show up in later books since this one is marked #1 in the series. I'll give the next one a go, I guess.
Haven't read many mysteries before but this has made me way more interested in the genre. SO MANY PLOT TWISTS!!
This book has been vastly overrated.
I marked it two stars because it wasn't the worst book I've ever read, but it wasn't worth reading for true mystery and suspense fans.
1) Reading the books on the list was a much better experience than reading the book.
Eight Perfect Murders spoils so many classic mysteries that you should read INSTEAD of this book. I knew about the spoilers beforehand and made sure I read all the mysteries listed on the description. Luckily, I had already read some of them, including The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, which is not on the list but completely spoiled. They are all better than this book.
2) The narrator, and maybe the author, are not the classic mystery lovers they make themselves out to be.
I already mentioned all the spoilers, which I was prepared for. What really irked me was how the spoilers were not 100% accurate about the books they were describing.
Sure they are small discrepancies... he describes a murder scene as a pond instead of a huge lake, how two murders take place in one of the novels instead of three, that there's a secret passage in one of the novels that leads from the study instead of the library. But having just read many of these books, which the author framed his entire story around, it made me question how carefully the author had read them.
Not to mention the narrator is extremely jaded about the genre. He doesn't like mystery and suspense anymore, so he's kind of a wet blanket when you are reading one...
3) The narrator and the plot line are BORING.
While the earlier offenses I could possibly forgive, the pacing felt all wrong. The narrator reveals himself to be unreliable early on and turns out to be the most boring unreliable narrator I have ever read.
Not much actually happens besides the narrator walking around in the snowy streets and worrying. When “the truth” finally comes out, it is no surprise— especially to lovers of the genre.
It felt like the author was clinging to the twist (if you can call it that) to make it interesting. You know, instead of character and plot development. So the whole thing was decidedly uninteresting for a book about murder.
More problems:
Characters are introduced and fall out of the story. (Uh, Gwen, where did you go?)
The organization that inherently comes with a LIST of eight murders for a serial killer to commit somehow disappears. (Seriously, at the end you can't even remember how many were checked off the list).
And, worst of all, you do not care about anyone in the story. (Except maybe the pets, who really don't seem to care when their owners get murdered.)
Forget this one and just read the classics instead.
