What do You think about Third Girl (2015)?
"Third Girl" has a different feel from the other Agatha Christie novels I've read. For starters, this is set in the 1960s. This mystery is easily the funniest I've read. Hercule Poirot gets a visit from a young lady who says she think's she's murdered someone, but can't remember who, when or where. She departs abruptly, leaving Poirot to figure out the puzzle. Ariadne Oliver, a mystery novel author, joins him in tracking down the girl and her identity. Those two are a pair and the ending left me guessing until the very end. But what makes this book a treat is the humor. Oliver, of course, is a bit of a caricature of Christie herself. Poirot's laments of the "good old days" and the sloppy fashions of the days youth is humorous, as is the remark the famous detective has to endure about his age.
—April Helms
From the moment he meets her, the young girl strikes Hercule Poirot as peculiar. In fact, everything about her - from her tousled appearance to her perplexed stare - seems too strange; downright abnormal to him. Yet it's her vague confession to a murder she's not even entirely sure she committed that really throws the little Belgian detective for a loop. In all his years, Monsieur Poirot has never encountered such an unusual child.The mystery becomes even darker and more complicated when he finds out that the odd little duck has suddenly flown the proverbial coop. What's more: No one knows where she may have gone, nor does anyone seem to care that she's missing. So, the question is: Just what's her secret? No one's talking. But Monsieur Poirot suspects that the answer is going to be a killer...Over the past several years, I've actually read a total of eight of Agatha Christie's books - this is the fourth book that I have read in her Hercule Poirot Series. In my opinion, this was certainly an enjoyable read for me, but still incredibly intricate and confusing in parts. This perhaps wasn't Agatha Christie's best book in my opinion, but in typical Agatha Christie style; I was completely in the dark when it came to revealing the 'who-done-it' moment in the story. Overall, I would give this book a B+!
—Mary
It's not that Agatha Christie has never written a bad book in her career. Though I love most of her books, I do not like some of her more political novels. So while I am not shocked that I disliked this book, never has Christie written something so meandering and pointless. Till the last chapter, the book seems to have no plot at all. There is no murder committed, there is nothing happening. There are not even any interesting interactions between the various characters like in The Hollow before the murder happens. The entire book is composed of Poirot ruminating on bits and pieces, which ended up being frustrating and boring. There are far too many angles being explored, and the story wanders all over the place, while Poirot (and the reader) struggles to make sense of it all. Another problem with this book is that it is just too long. There are far too many repetitive scenes, which could have been deleted. This book could have done with a good dose of pruning by a good editor. In its core, it is not a bad book, but the writing is extremely shoddy. There are a couple of wonderful scenes such as Mrs Oliver shadowing someone, but the bulk of the book is simply random scenarios that don't hang together very well. The plot is actually quite interesting, and the story would have worked if it had been written in a more Christie-like style. I think perhaps she was experimenting with a different style, which simply did not work out.The book also suffers from my own personal bias. I prefer the Golden Age novels, an era in which crime fits in snugly. With the exploration of the drugs and art scene of the 60s, the atmosphere of the story became quite different. I was definitely not too happy with the setting.
—Kavita
