Murder is Easy

The beginning was good.
The middle was exciting. It got really terrifying. To the last I wasn't sure who the murderer was. I suspected everyone.
The ending was... disappointing. Especially when she explained when she realized who the murderer was. Sure, she did... Agatha wasn't at all sure when she wrote the events leading to that.

I enjoyed seeing how Luke, our sleuth, went about his investigation and his thought processes about the murders! Very methodical, but also fairly fast-paced. The murderer did actually take me by surprise–probably because I was spending too much time trying to out-think the plot! ;) And (slight spoiler) the romantic subplot was well-done! At times I found it a little frustrating, but it ended up happily.

Agatha-Christie-land is my new favourite place to dwell. Full of convoluted crimes that keep me guessing until the end.
This tale is set in a quintessentially quaint English village complete with plenty of bizarre characters, any of whom could be the dastardly murderer! Oh, and there's some tempestuous romance - yes please. Particularly loved the mental cover art - what on earth was the boomerang about, did I miss that bit in a post-nightshift read? Answers on a post-card, please!

In my quest to read all of Agatha Christie's mysteries chronologically, I found this one to be a tad boring. It came as a bit of a surprise to me because I typically like the quiet countryside murders.

Firstly, I think the plot lacked excitement and the romance subplot was a bit thin. There doesn't seem to be a string to Luke's logic so he wings it the entire time and makes assumptions off of little to no evidence. Then he falls for a certain girl in town after knowing very little about her, besides that she looks like a witch when the wind blows...

To call it a Superintendent Battle mystery is misleading, since he only shows up in the last chapter. But what a relief when that happens because the main detective, Luke, is slower than Hastings. His logic throughout the book and his piecing together of the crimes (if you can call it that) are frustrating to say the least.

Sometimes in a novel the characters know more than the reader (e.g. all of Hercule Poirot's mysteries) but in this one, the reader knows more than the characters. I suppose it is a matter of preference, but I found this book infuriating at times because of it.

Overall, I still liked the book. I like all of Christie's books. But this one lacks the pizazz that some of her others (even less popular ones) have.

Reread November 2021

Honestly, the only reason I wanted to reread this book was because I watched a perfectly horrid adaptation and I wanted to see if the book was anywhere close to as awful as the movie was. Let me tell you, it was close. (At least a couple of the murders made better sense in the book.)

The mystery itself was okay. Fairly sub-standard but serviceable enough. The horrible things about this book was 1) Luke, 2) Bridget and 3) Luke and Bridget as a couple. Honestly, Luke was awful to spend time in the head of and, really, only liked the pretty girls in the village. He had no sense when it came to investigating a case and certainly didn't act like a retired policeman. Bridget was...not as bad. In fact, the worst thing about her was her attraction to Luke. (She says, basically, that he treats her beastly but apparently she likes it. So, yeah, there is that.) Luke and Bridget as a couple was as bad as the adaptation I saw and I couldn't believe it until I read it. (Not even to the halfway point and he's asking this engaged woman to marry him.)

Really, it's no surprise that I couldn't remember anything about this book. My lasting impression upon a reread won't be anything to do with the mystery, but rather the horrendous ‘romance.'