Her magic was her mind and imagination. Gifted woman with a love for learning. My favorite author. A stranger in a bookstore recommended I read And Then There Were None. I am forever grateful.
Thats a great first book to read. such wonderful storyteller. My sister has all her books. I've loved them all so far but I do have a soft spot for the Belgian and his little grey cells
Watching from Wyoming. I grew up on Nancy Drew Mysteries and then Agatha Christie, plus the myriad of others from Blighty-P.D. James, Dorothy L. Sayers, Daphne De Maurer, in book form and on Telly, and more recently on You Tube-Ruth Rendell. I am a lucky reader, for sure!🥰
I love Nancy Drew mystery..my sister and I competed with eachother who could read more.. I will add Sherlock Holmes to your list. Daphne du Maurier's "The necklace" 🙏👍👏🤭🤭💕🐈🙏
More could have been said here with less dramatics. Christie writes simply, but appears to have a formula that engrossing onto hypnotic and builds up to a rapid compelling payoff, like a harmless addiction. She may be a good guide, for writers and for law enforcement, but also for anyone who want to learn to think rigorously in particular ways. But, for all it's hype about cracking great mysteries, this doc stops short of really analyzing what Christie is giving people, besides a craving for the next book. If we have software for meta-analysis, we can do better than talk about why books become popular, we can talk about why they endure and how they teach us to think.
I love this perspective on Christie. It explains why I was compelled to read 50 of her books in a two year period 😂 I can however imagine her laughing at all of this analysis of her writing style, as from her perspective she was probably just simply writing stories that came to mind, albeit with genius plot twists.
Masterpiece. Love you perspective for this brilliant fables. We should appreciate them for their future projects. This video deserves far better response.
as a teenager I read all of her novels. Made entire spreadsheets, written on pieces of left over wallpaper, who was were with whom and who was not.... trying to figure it out. It wasn't often that I got it right... This woman was way smarter then I was, I' m afraid.
Rather tongue in cheek documentary on Agatha Christie - spoiler - the mystery is ... Agatha Christie is the greatest most popular crime mystery writer ever.
Because that's what academics do, they sit in dry ice infused, dramatically lit circles being very very serious. There is a far more interesting story only partly written across several good biographies, the story of how Christie's work connects to her social environment, and/or the way her work both synthesizes and progresses prior popular fiction. She had some very weak novels, especially the later one-offs, and her work is not without some pretty shocking ideas, but largely her work is socially progressive, if not criminologically so. I read fans on IMDB complain about lesbian and gay characters in adaptations as if the producers had invented them to be woke, which is quite funny, as Christie was adept, and relentless, at portraying gay characters in ways that passed the censor. There is real tragedy in these plots, and the aspects which might displease a modern LGBT affirming reader tend to reflect the pervasive reality of life at that time (whereas her views on crime and punishment were far from universally held at the time). So many compelling angles from which to come at this crucial and hugely influential writer. To reduce Christie to some sort of semiotic language math algorithm is just kinda desperate and sad to me.
Having studied Axel Olrik's Principles for Oral Narrative Research and applied it, I can cross what these people say with his epic laws and the rest of his principles. Two to a scene but also some event that it takes two people to handle (sidekicks, anybody?); one person addressing a large group; re-orient the reader after a sidebar chapter about one of the plot lines; don't introduce info until it's needed in the plot; action action action, not descriptions so, "she said" and then an action that illustrates the emotions behind the words; CULTURAL APPROPRIATENESS (=know your audience and what they react to); iconic characters; magic numbers (3s, 5 for mystery, 7 for religion, 10 for a complete group, 12 for a group unified by some feature); repeated episodes, usually three of them, each addressing the same important part of the plot (never say "this is important") or each increasingly extreme; have at least two characters with an important feature that the lead character also has, but all three of them contrast with each other (Joseph, Reuven, and Judah's sexual escapades). Olrik's book came out in English in 1992. Also, top writers suggest limiting a novel to 100K words and chapters to 3K words. The chapter limitation forces you to focus on the important event that pushes the plot forward, and keeps you from confusing the reader.
This was fun, but isn‘t it all rather silly? Sure, Christie was great, but don‘t all memorable novelists use language cleverly and „hypnotize“ us? I mean, isn‘t that the point of good storytelling? And regarding Arthur Conan Doyle, couldn‘t the broader scope of his style, as shown in that spacy 3D computer model, be due to the obvious fact that he wrote a far broader range of books? All I learned was that Christie came up with a great formula for exciting crime fiction, but I already knew that.
I agree. This mystery stuff is just made up hype. Lot of people like fluff and nonsense. But this is no more credibility than the ancient alien theorists.
This makes so much sense not only for The Christie stories but for other of our favorite authors that we go back too as SOON as a new book is released! I believe Anne Rice used the same "code"! Another of my favorite authors is James Lee Burke! He writes his novels the same way! So very interesting this theory! I know for sure that in a good story ,I have " tranced out" and lost track of all place and time in the reading! Terrifying when you are in the middle of it and genuinely satisfied at the end of the book! I shall Kay better attention my next reading binge! Thanks for this insight!
She was a gifted woman who remained consistent and disciplined throughout her career. What’s more, she knew what ‘story’ is and remained faithful to that. But I do agree with commentator @alannothnagle, it was fun.
It ends, leaving me to wonder if someone will decide the next step would be to monitor a reader's brain as they read. To determine if indeed, reading an Agatha mystery is the same as doing a line of cocaine.
“A person's conscious mind has very limited focus. It can only concentrate on somewhere between five and nine things at a particular point in time. Once we go over nine things the conscious mind can’t track that and literally the person goes into a hypnotic trance.” -David Shephard, Master Trainer, Neuro-Linguistic Programming 36:35 One wonders how air traffic controllers or day traders or the people who monitor New York City’s subway trains-or any of the myriad of people who concentrate on more than nine things at a time-keep from falling into hypnotic trances at any given moment.
@@hypatia4754 “…which is really what they're talking about…” No, they're not. It’s an obvious reference to-and misapplication of-Miller’s “Magic 7 ± 2” Rule which has to do with the capacity of short-term memory and has *nothing to do with* concentration, focus, hypnotic trances, flow or anything like that. As stated in the video it’s complete nonsense.
"The Concordance of Agatha Christie" - a Pseudo Scientific mystery - set in an eerily-lit television set - with 3 mysterious figures transfixed on computer screens - analyzing the words and expressions of the subject AC's writing - and ending with Mr Neuro Linguistic Programmer summing up and naming the culprit - Hypnosis (aka Neuro Linguistic Programming) - the vital clue? - AC uses more descriptions at the start - and more action towards the denouement - (which writer doesn't - they don't say) - - a pretentious fail - while the real culprit behind AC's great success - is still roaming free and working its magic undetected - on hapless Agatha Christie addicts
Thank you for posting this video, I found it intriguing and informative. I appreciate it. I love her movies, have yet to read her books yet. Thank you. Stay safe and healthy. May your endeavours succeed. God bless you. God keep you.
Just, WOW!!! How fascinatingly amazing are these findings? And are we presuming this "code" was a comscious and deliberate one, or a manifestation of knowledge and experience from observation?
I always thought her secret was the way she wrote dialogue. Everything was immediately understandable, but any little detail could be a key to the mystery.
@10:55 any writer worth their salt knows that “said” no matter how bland is better than “asked, sniped, mumbled, shouted, exclaimed, ejaculated, expounded, asserted, proclaimed, shouted, uttered, yelled...” because it disappears. It’s so bland, it doesn’t interfere with the dialogue. It’s a rookie mistake that sets shite writers apart from good writers. And, I worry that this “expert” doesn’t know any better.
Incoherent, overly long and repetitive. This could have been a good documentary, but it was not. Instead, we get again and again and again three scientist in a highly staged and ridiculous setting. Their colleagues will have so much fun with them after seeing that!
Neuro-linguistic programming: now that sounds dangerously topical with the criminalisation of certain aspects of language, the eradication of freedom of speech.
It’s driving me nuts! Who is narrating this - I know the voice so well. ( well, in true Agatha Christie style - I think I do). Thank you , I’m enjoying it👏👏👏👏👏👏🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺
Thank you. As soon as you said it, I ‘got it’. She did the voice for travel programs, Egypt, Greece, India etc. she’s very good at it. Thank you 🙏. It can drive one nuts! Maybe Agatha still has ‘it’ beyond the grave 🤣🤣🤣. Thanks again 🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺
So much of this is total claptrap. There are interesting bits here and there, but good grief......... I am a great fan of Christie! She wrote interesting and engaging plots. But the 'brain science' here is garbage. 'Hypnotising'? No. Like 'Cocaine'?!? You must be kidding. Neurolinguistic Programming?!? A real thing, but not here.... The mere words "computer analysis" are meaningless. I think I'll dig up a old Christie, read a chapter with a cup of tea, and then go to bed. Idiocy.
The formula is : a diverse group of people gathers at a country house or seaside hotel. There's a strong, young female character and a retired Army officer. The body is found in the library and a doctor whose only line is "He/she's dead". The sleuth rounds up the suspects. The evidence is circumstancial but the murderer promptly admits the crime.
What a load of poppycock. Agatha Chrstie must be spinning in her grave listening to these professors talk such a load of rubbish. Val McDermid another brilliant mystery writer was the person to host this show and gave us wonderful insights into Christie's genius. What an awful group. The only enjoyable parts were the actual film of Agatha Christie and comments by Suchet and McDermid. There is better stuff on Agatha Christie out there than this pompous concoction.
Christie is not above criticism (note her social conservatism in some cases, for instance), but let us not criticize her for the wrong reasons! I was really annoyed to hear a contemporary writer with an obvious snobbism towards Christie's brand of crime fiction lament that her villains are always predictably similar. What utter nonsense! Nothing is less predictable than the identity of a Christie villain! It could be one person killing many or many persons killing the one; it could be an adult killing a child or a child killing an adult; it could be a dashingly handsome and charming man the type of which she would have as a hero in another of her stories; it could be the no-nonsense, hands-on heroine unmasked as the culprit or the ethereally beautiful waif who in reality is anything but. Etc., etc. There are types of characters, and yes, stereotypes. But there is no one type of murderer!
This is a silly documentary! Of course Agatha Christie had a formula which she successfully exploited again and again - or should I say used? "Exploitation" sounds far too negative 😊 It's true that reading her novels can lead to a mild addiction. But most of her works are immensely entertaining, and she has actually written a few novels with genuine psychological insights. I recommend to read "Towards Zero", "The Hollow", "Death Comes At The End". And one of her best late novels - "The Pale Horse" - helped to catch a real-life murderer and it saved a few lives because readers of the book reckognized the symptoms of a certain poison! As to cracking Agatha's alleged code or finding her formula - well, I managed to do this ages ago, and it helped me to solve Agatha's puzzles quite reliably - at least most of the time. There were a few outliers like "The Murder Of Roger Ackroyd" which was a novelty at the time of the book's publication, and Christie hadn't written enough books, yet, and her readers didn't have enough material for finding her formulas. But today we know Christie's biography and how she has usually constructed her mysteries, and as I said already, I became very good in figuring out most of her who-dunnits. But this didn't decrease the fun I had😊
If we could just understand the criminal nature on order to protect ourselves from evil intentions, we never learn enough friends. Still we have to live as perfect victims of criminal intentions of mass murderers psychopaths without any chance to find any solution, trying to explore and understand murder is never enough... let's enjoy now together such great documentaries & help us Lord to find a solution how to stay safe from any death threat at all friends
"How did she do it?" The answer is rather simple, really. She could think and she had a staff to do the household grunt work. Women who write don't often have it so cushy. Or, "posh", as one might say. Not to detract from her prodigious achievements just a ray of reality. Usually makes a mystery story "pop" when reality rears up on its hind quarters and says "Howdy!" now and then.
Her magic was her mind and imagination. Gifted woman with a love for learning. My favorite author. A stranger in a bookstore recommended I read And Then There Were None. I am forever grateful.
Luv that! Readers so bursting to share their love of books they''ll tell strangers!
Thats a great first book to read. such wonderful storyteller. My sister has all her books. I've loved them all so far but I do have a soft spot for the Belgian and his little grey cells
I love Agatha Christie, she will be for ever the Queen of mystery.
Joanna Lumley's voice is so beautiful, I could listen for hours. Good doccie, by the way.
How did you know for sure it was her? I just started the video to see, and they don't credit her. But of course it sure sounded like her.
@@simonestreeter1518 Hi Simone, as a fan of her voice I recognized it, but right at the end they did show credits, and I saw it there.
@@bruceboome Ah. I'm not to the end yet, thank you. But yes, 2/3 in and it is certainly her mellifluous tones.
@@simonestreeter1518 It's clearly her.
@@simonestreeter1518 I recognized it right away as well! Her voice is distinctive there is no way it could be anyone else! 😍
Watching from Wyoming. I grew up on Nancy Drew Mysteries and then Agatha Christie, plus the myriad of others from Blighty-P.D. James, Dorothy L. Sayers, Daphne De Maurer, in book form and on Telly, and more recently on You Tube-Ruth Rendell. I am a lucky reader, for sure!🥰
I love Nancy Drew mystery..my sister and I competed with eachother who could read more.. I will add Sherlock Holmes to your list. Daphne du Maurier's "The necklace"
🙏👍👏🤭🤭💕🐈🙏
Now for some fun read all of Roald Dahl, p.g.wodehouse, willa couther...
Same. American watching from France.
Same here, I love Dorothy L. Sayers
More could have been said here with less dramatics. Christie writes simply, but appears to have a formula that engrossing onto hypnotic and builds up to a rapid compelling payoff, like a harmless addiction. She may be a good guide, for writers and for law enforcement, but also for anyone who want to learn to think rigorously in particular ways. But, for all it's hype about cracking great mysteries, this doc stops short of really analyzing what Christie is giving people, besides a craving for the next book. If we have software for meta-analysis, we can do better than talk about why books become popular, we can talk about why they endure and how they teach us to think.
I love this perspective on Christie. It explains why I was compelled to read 50 of her books in a two year period 😂 I can however imagine her laughing at all of this analysis of her writing style, as from her perspective she was probably just simply writing stories that came to mind, albeit with genius plot twists.
Masterpiece. Love you perspective for this brilliant fables. We should appreciate them for their future projects. This video deserves far better response.
My favorite author. Most of her characters have respect.
as a teenager I read all of her novels. Made entire spreadsheets, written on pieces of left over wallpaper, who was were with whom and who was not.... trying to figure it out. It wasn't often that I got it right... This woman was way smarter then I was, I' m afraid.
I often write diagrams in the fly leaves books, to keep track of all the characters.
Rather tongue in cheek documentary on Agatha Christie - spoiler - the mystery is ... Agatha Christie is the greatest most popular crime mystery writer ever.
Because that's what academics do, they sit in dry ice infused, dramatically lit circles being very very serious. There is a far more interesting story only partly written across several good biographies, the story of how Christie's work connects to her social environment, and/or the way her work both synthesizes and progresses prior popular fiction.
She had some very weak novels, especially the later one-offs, and her work is not without some pretty shocking ideas, but largely her work is socially progressive, if not criminologically so. I read fans on IMDB complain about lesbian and gay characters in adaptations as if the producers had invented them to be woke, which is quite funny, as Christie was adept, and relentless, at portraying gay characters in ways that passed the censor.
There is real tragedy in these plots, and the aspects which might displease a modern LGBT affirming reader tend to reflect the pervasive reality of life at that time (whereas her views on crime and punishment were far from universally held at the time).
So many compelling angles from which to come at this crucial and hugely influential writer. To reduce Christie to some sort of semiotic language math algorithm is just kinda desperate and sad to me.
Having studied Axel Olrik's Principles for Oral Narrative Research and applied it, I can cross what these people say with his epic laws and the rest of his principles. Two to a scene but also some event that it takes two people to handle (sidekicks, anybody?); one person addressing a large group; re-orient the reader after a sidebar chapter about one of the plot lines; don't introduce info until it's needed in the plot; action action action, not descriptions so, "she said" and then an action that illustrates the emotions behind the words; CULTURAL APPROPRIATENESS (=know your audience and what they react to); iconic characters; magic numbers (3s, 5 for mystery, 7 for religion, 10 for a complete group, 12 for a group unified by some feature); repeated episodes, usually three of them, each addressing the same important part of the plot (never say "this is important") or each increasingly extreme; have at least two characters with an important feature that the lead character also has, but all three of them contrast with each other (Joseph, Reuven, and Judah's sexual escapades). Olrik's book came out in English in 1992.
Also, top writers suggest limiting a novel to 100K words and chapters to 3K words. The chapter limitation forces you to focus on the important event that pushes the plot forward, and keeps you from confusing the reader.
This is really interesting! Are you a writer? (You say you've applied these principles).
Thank you for this. I saw this on PBS years ago and, to no avail,, tried to find it.
This was fun, but isn‘t it all rather silly? Sure, Christie was great, but don‘t all memorable novelists use language cleverly and „hypnotize“ us? I mean, isn‘t that the point of good storytelling? And regarding Arthur Conan Doyle, couldn‘t the broader scope of his style, as shown in that spacy 3D computer model, be due to the obvious fact that he wrote a far broader range of books? All I learned was that Christie came up with a great formula for exciting crime fiction, but I already knew that.
Lighten up
I agree. This mystery stuff is just made up hype. Lot of people like fluff and nonsense. But this is no more credibility than the ancient alien theorists.
Couldn´t agree more. A nice bit of fluff though to pass an afternoon.
More than silly. April fools day
Looking for hidden knowledge in everything is a sure recipe to become a party p00p€r.
This makes so much sense not only for The Christie stories but for other of our favorite authors that we go back too as SOON as a new book is released! I believe Anne Rice used the same "code"! Another of my favorite authors is James Lee Burke! He writes his novels the same way! So very interesting this theory! I know for sure that in a good story ,I have " tranced out" and lost track of all place and time in the reading! Terrifying when you are in the middle of it and genuinely satisfied at the end of the book! I shall Kay better attention my next reading binge! Thanks for this insight!
Computers, BAH! Native intelligence, imagination, and hard work.
She was a gifted woman who remained consistent and disciplined throughout her career. What’s more, she knew what ‘story’ is and remained faithful to that. But I do agree with commentator @alannothnagle, it was fun.
Agatha Christy and Sherlock Holmes you can't beat them!
I agree with you there 100%
I really enjoyed this. Pretty darn good.
Excellent!! Thank you for this documentary, it is so good 🌟🌟🌟. Agatha was a GENIUS! Brilliant mind!! ❤️❤️❤️
It ends, leaving me to wonder if someone will decide the next step would be to monitor a reader's brain as they read. To determine if indeed, reading an Agatha mystery is the same as doing a line of cocaine.
“A person's conscious mind has very limited focus. It can only concentrate on somewhere between five and nine things at a particular point in time. Once we go over nine things the conscious mind can’t track that and literally the person goes into a hypnotic trance.”
-David Shephard, Master Trainer, Neuro-Linguistic Programming 36:35
One wonders how air traffic controllers or day traders or the people who monitor New York City’s subway trains-or any of the myriad of people who concentrate on more than nine things at a time-keep from falling into hypnotic trances at any given moment.
They go into the flow state, which is really what they´re talking about, where they become superinvolved in what they´re doing so.
@@hypatia4754 “…which is really what they're talking about…” No, they're not. It’s an obvious reference to-and misapplication of-Miller’s “Magic 7 ± 2” Rule which has to do with the capacity of short-term memory and has *nothing to do with* concentration, focus, hypnotic trances, flow or anything like that. As stated in the video it’s complete nonsense.
Ha ha exactly, some collapsing at their desks as that ninth plane/train clicks into view.
@@SecretSquirrelFun Hahaha, no, ridiculous! It's the _tenth_ plane/train!
"The Concordance of Agatha Christie" - a Pseudo Scientific mystery - set in an eerily-lit television set - with 3 mysterious figures transfixed on computer screens - analyzing the words and expressions of the subject AC's writing - and ending with Mr Neuro Linguistic Programmer summing up and naming the culprit - Hypnosis (aka Neuro Linguistic Programming) - the vital clue? - AC uses more descriptions at the start - and more action towards the denouement - (which writer doesn't - they don't say) - - a pretentious fail - while the real culprit behind AC's great success - is still roaming free and working its magic undetected - on hapless Agatha Christie addicts
Thank you for posting this video, I found it intriguing and
informative. I appreciate it. I
love her movies, have yet to
read her books yet. Thank you.
Stay safe and healthy. May
your endeavours succeed.
God bless you. God keep you.
I'm so glad I found this channel
Just, WOW!!! How fascinatingly amazing are these findings? And are we presuming this "code" was a comscious and deliberate one, or a manifestation of knowledge and experience from observation?
This channel is so underrated.
I always thought her secret was the way she wrote dialogue. Everything was immediately understandable, but any little detail could be a key to the mystery.
To summarise, Agatha Christie is just like hypnosis according to dudes who think picking up chicks in bars is also just like hypnosis.
@10:55 any writer worth their salt knows that “said” no matter how bland is better than “asked, sniped, mumbled, shouted, exclaimed, ejaculated, expounded, asserted, proclaimed, shouted, uttered, yelled...” because it disappears. It’s so bland, it doesn’t interfere with the dialogue.
It’s a rookie mistake that sets shite writers apart from good writers. And, I worry that this “expert” doesn’t know any better.
The mystery of the Code is .... be a good writer!!!
There are so many silly, unprovable theories about Christie's writing here.
This program uses my favorite adaptation of “Evil …”.
Reminds me of famous Egyptian singer Oum Kalhoum were she would repeat & repeat a line of her song & get people in a sort of trance.
Ingenious 💗
The technology is so old at the beginning. I use concordance often as a lawyer and as a linguist. It’s free, I believe.
I love Agatha Christie but really?
Christie.
Thank you for sharing this documentary.
34:15; 35:10
I can relate to her experience now.
VERY interesting!
Incoherent, overly long and repetitive. This could have been a good documentary, but it was not. Instead, we get again and again and again three scientist in a highly staged and ridiculous setting. Their colleagues will have so much fun with them after seeing that!
I have that some Agatha Christie books were very similar to Arthur Conan Doyle. I love both authors.
I have found ...
What computer software is that? I find it interating actually
Neuro-linguistic programming: now that sounds dangerously topical with the criminalisation of certain aspects of language, the eradication of freedom of speech.
What would TH-cam comments be without some right wing obsessive spewing forth their political fears?
Fake News
It’s driving me nuts! Who is narrating this - I know the voice so well. ( well, in true Agatha Christie style - I think I do). Thank you , I’m enjoying it👏👏👏👏👏👏🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺
It's Patsy, Patsy Stone. Joanna Lumley.
Thank you. As soon as you said it, I ‘got it’. She did the voice for travel programs, Egypt, Greece, India etc. she’s very good at it. Thank you 🙏. It can drive one nuts! Maybe Agatha still has ‘it’ beyond the grave 🤣🤣🤣. Thanks again 🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺
@@gonefishing167 She's in a few Miss Marples with Geraldine McEwan, too. The body in the library etc.
@@rafaelvoncina6036 - that was a good one.
Yes, I’ve seen them. Funny, I never liked absolutely fabulous but I really like her now 🇦🇺🇦🇺
So much of this is total claptrap. There are interesting bits here and there, but good grief.........
I am a great fan of Christie! She wrote interesting and engaging plots.
But the 'brain science' here is garbage.
'Hypnotising'? No. Like 'Cocaine'?!? You must be kidding.
Neurolinguistic Programming?!? A real thing, but not here....
The mere words "computer analysis" are meaningless.
I think I'll dig up a old Christie, read a chapter with a cup of tea, and then go to bed.
Idiocy.
Agree 100%. Like those fake and sensationalistic "documentaries' on the so-called History Channel.
Amazing documentary throughout.
The formula is : a diverse group of people gathers at a country house or seaside hotel. There's a strong, young female character and a retired Army officer. The body is found in the library and a doctor whose only line is "He/she's dead". The sleuth rounds up the suspects. The evidence is circumstancial but the murderer promptly admits the crime.
I’d have really enjoyed this but for the overwhelming commercials, I don’t have time for it
Marvelous!
35:40 El secreto de su éxito? La repeticíón de palabras
Agatha may be good, but not as good as Cocaine. These guys must have a really crap Dealer, I'd ask for my money back!
Ha!
Dame Joanna Lumley is a wonderful narrator 🌹🇦🇺
What a load of poppycock. Agatha Chrstie must be spinning in her grave listening to these professors talk such a load of rubbish. Val McDermid another brilliant mystery writer was the person to host this show and gave us wonderful insights into Christie's genius. What an awful group. The only enjoyable parts were the actual film of Agatha Christie and comments by Suchet and McDermid. There is better stuff on Agatha Christie out there than this pompous concoction.
Well said. You've spared me the labor of writing a comment essentially bashing this junk-science disaster.
what a ridiculous documentary format
Christie is not above criticism (note her social conservatism in some cases, for instance), but let us not criticize her for the wrong reasons! I was really annoyed to hear a contemporary writer with an obvious snobbism towards Christie's brand of crime fiction lament that her villains are always predictably similar. What utter nonsense! Nothing is less predictable than the identity of a Christie villain! It could be one person killing many or many persons killing the one; it could be an adult killing a child or a child killing an adult; it could be a dashingly handsome and charming man the type of which she would have as a hero in another of her stories; it could be the no-nonsense, hands-on heroine unmasked as the culprit or the ethereally beautiful waif who in reality is anything but. Etc., etc. There are types of characters, and yes, stereotypes. But there is no one type of murderer!
What kind of a wanker wears a (too small) hat indoors?
You have won the internet for me today. Thank you for this.
This is a silly documentary! Of course Agatha Christie had a formula which she successfully exploited again and again - or should I say used? "Exploitation" sounds far too negative 😊
It's true that reading her novels can lead to a mild addiction. But most of her works are immensely entertaining, and she has actually written a few novels with genuine psychological insights. I recommend to read "Towards Zero", "The Hollow", "Death Comes At The End". And one of her best late novels - "The Pale Horse" - helped to catch a real-life murderer and it saved a few lives because readers of the book reckognized the symptoms of a certain poison!
As to cracking Agatha's alleged code or finding her formula - well, I managed to do this ages ago, and it helped me to solve Agatha's puzzles quite reliably - at least most of the time. There were a few outliers like "The Murder Of Roger Ackroyd" which was a novelty at the time of the book's publication, and Christie hadn't written enough books, yet, and her readers didn't have enough material for finding her formulas. But today we know Christie's biography and how she has usually constructed her mysteries, and as I said already, I became very good in figuring out most of her who-dunnits. But this didn't decrease the fun I had😊
If we could just understand the criminal nature on order to protect ourselves from evil intentions, we never learn enough friends. Still we have to live as perfect victims of criminal intentions of mass murderers psychopaths without any chance to find any solution, trying to explore and understand murder is never enough... let's enjoy now together such great documentaries & help us Lord to find a solution how to stay safe from any death threat at all friends
Don't you think that if this show had any real merit, they wouldn't need the oh so mysterious set and somewhat inane conclusions?
My very favourite Lady Author 💜
Imagination, curiosity, sense of humor world traveler and complete enigma 💙💐🍀🌙❤️🩹🌹😉
This is laughable. She told good stories with intriguing characters. That is why she is popular. Period. End of story.
Get rid of the background noise
Boy, I hope Dame Joana was paid a LOT to narrate this shite!
27:50 Entrevista
Joanna Lumley. 🌻
Joanna Lumley!
Maybe she just wrote great mysteries. So like Sudoko you can't just read or solve one.
What is this twaddle ?
42:00 Patrones
"How did she do it?" The answer is rather simple, really. She could think and she had a staff to do the household grunt work. Women who write don't often have it so cushy. Or, "posh", as one might say. Not to detract from her prodigious achievements just a ray of reality. Usually makes a mystery story "pop" when reality rears up on its hind quarters and says "Howdy!" now and then.
Is that Joanna Lumley? If it is why don’t you say so?
The Narrator sounds like Joanna Lumley. I adore her. 😊
A HUGE waste of time...
🤟🤘
Too many commercials.
Try TH-cam premium. Commercial free.
strange
Balderdash!
Affectation much? Gees.
Piffle
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Boring doc.
Influencers
This is just silly.
is this a man?