What do you think?
Rate this book
Pasajero de francfort
Sir Stanford Nye, un brillante aunque algo bohemio diplomático, vuela con destino a Londres. Por causas atmosféricas, el avión aterriza en Fráncfort y, en la sala de tránsitos, una joven le pide prestada su capa y su pasaporte para poder salvar la vida, sir Stanfford accede. Una vez en Londres, el documento le es reintegrado a través del correo. El diplomático cree que allí termina el incidente, pero se equivoca
228 pages, Kindle Edition
First published September 1, 1970
1633 people are currently reading
9455 people want to read
About the author
Agatha Christie
5,800 books75k followersAgatha Christie also wrote romance novels under the pseudonym Mary Westmacott, and was occasionally published under the name Agatha Christie Mallowan.
Dame Agatha Mary Clarissa Christie, Lady Mallowan, DBE (née Miller) was an English writer known for her 66 detective novels and 14 short story collections, particularly those revolving around fictional detectives Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple. She also wrote the world's longest-running play, the murder mystery The Mousetrap, which has been performed in the West End of London since 1952. A writer during the "Golden Age of Detective Fiction", Christie has been called the "Queen of Crime". She also wrote six novels under the pseudonym Mary Westmacott. In 1971, she was made a Dame (DBE) by Queen Elizabeth II for her contributions to literature. Guinness World Records lists Christie as the best-selling fiction writer of all time, her novels having sold more than two billion copies.
This best-selling author of all time wrote 66 crime novels and story collections, fourteen plays, and six novels under a pseudonym in romance. Her books sold more than a billion copies in the English language and a billion in translation. According to Index Translationum, people translated her works into 103 languages at least, the most for an individual author. Of the most enduring figures in crime literature, she created Hercule Poirot and Miss Jane Marple. She atuhored The Mousetrap, the longest-running play in the history of modern theater.
Associated Names:
Agata Christie
Agata Kristi
Агата Кристи (Russian)
Агата Крісті (Ukrainian)
Αγκάθα Κρίστι (Greek)
アガサ クリスティ (Japanese)
阿嘉莎·克莉絲蒂 (Chinese)
Dame Agatha Mary Clarissa Christie, Lady Mallowan, DBE (née Miller) was an English writer known for her 66 detective novels and 14 short story collections, particularly those revolving around fictional detectives Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple. She also wrote the world's longest-running play, the murder mystery The Mousetrap, which has been performed in the West End of London since 1952. A writer during the "Golden Age of Detective Fiction", Christie has been called the "Queen of Crime". She also wrote six novels under the pseudonym Mary Westmacott. In 1971, she was made a Dame (DBE) by Queen Elizabeth II for her contributions to literature. Guinness World Records lists Christie as the best-selling fiction writer of all time, her novels having sold more than two billion copies.
This best-selling author of all time wrote 66 crime novels and story collections, fourteen plays, and six novels under a pseudonym in romance. Her books sold more than a billion copies in the English language and a billion in translation. According to Index Translationum, people translated her works into 103 languages at least, the most for an individual author. Of the most enduring figures in crime literature, she created Hercule Poirot and Miss Jane Marple. She atuhored The Mousetrap, the longest-running play in the history of modern theater.
Associated Names:
Agata Christie
Agata Kristi
Агата Кристи (Russian)
Агата Крісті (Ukrainian)
Αγκάθα Κρίστι (Greek)
アガサ クリスティ (Japanese)
阿嘉莎·克莉絲蒂 (Chinese)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,834 reviews
March 9, 2025
Turns out some of these more obscure Agatha Christie books are obscure for a reason.
This is a bananas stand-alone spy novel.
And boy oh boy, Agatha really tossed the kitchen sink in with this plot.
Ok. I'm going to try to explain some of it, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to make any sense to you.
This diplomat dude meets a chick in the airport who tells him she needs to drug him and take his cloak and passport, or else she'll be killed.
HE GOES ALONG WITH IT. Because boredom is real, man. And that includes drinking the spiked beer she gives him.
Alright, this opens him up to the wacky world of spycraft. But not before the plot meanders around with him chilling with his great-aunt for quite a while while he tries to track her down.
Cryptic ads in newspapers, secret hand-offs on a bridge, clandestine meetings at concerts, etc.
By the time they finally get down to brass tacks, I'm bored.
And then things just slide sideways into insanity.
She introduces him to her spy enclave and they proceed to send the two of them on a mission to do SOMETHING. They don't tell Mr. McDiplomat what they're doing or why. Which is really fucking dumb, because how can you do your job with zero information? YOU CAN'T!
It turns out to be a test to see if he'll fall for fake baby Hitler and this fat, rich old woman's evil plot to turn the youth of the entire world into (I guess) next-generation Nazis.
This handsome young man is supposedly the son of Hitler. Because according to rumor Hitler switched himself out with a mental patient who had delusions that he was Hitler, and lived in a mental institution til the end of the Second World War. The delusional dude was the one that was found dead, not Hitler. He then moved to Peru (or somewhere like that), married an Aryan ballerina, and had the aforementioned son who is now building an army of chaotic youth across the globe.
What? <--is exactly the appropriate response, random Goodreader.
But wait, there's more!
The good guys (a bunch of old farts) also have a plan to save the world by spraying all the young Vietnam protestors with some kind of a chemical that has Clockwork Orange side effects.
Project B.
B as in, it makes you BENEVOLENT. Because that's a thing you can do.
All they have to do is track down the scientist who started the project and get him to give them his notes. Bond-level shenanigans ensue.
I wish I were kidding.
I will say this, reading these older books makes me realize that nothing has changed that dramatically. This describes all the problems we have in the world right now, and the fear that if something isn't done the entire universe is going to collapse. There ain't nothing new to all the shit that's happening today.
Things change but things stay the same.
And humanity has always been nuts.
Here's the thing, this story was published on Christie's 80th birthday, and it shows.
IT SHOWS.
Passanger to Frankfurt is only for completionists. And even then, you need to know what you're getting into with this one. You thought The Mysterious Affair at Styles was bad?
Oh, no. You don't know bad till you've read this stinker.
This is a bananas stand-alone spy novel.
And boy oh boy, Agatha really tossed the kitchen sink in with this plot.
Ok. I'm going to try to explain some of it, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to make any sense to you.
This diplomat dude meets a chick in the airport who tells him she needs to drug him and take his cloak and passport, or else she'll be killed.
HE GOES ALONG WITH IT. Because boredom is real, man. And that includes drinking the spiked beer she gives him.
Alright, this opens him up to the wacky world of spycraft. But not before the plot meanders around with him chilling with his great-aunt for quite a while while he tries to track her down.
Cryptic ads in newspapers, secret hand-offs on a bridge, clandestine meetings at concerts, etc.
By the time they finally get down to brass tacks, I'm bored.
And then things just slide sideways into insanity.
She introduces him to her spy enclave and they proceed to send the two of them on a mission to do SOMETHING. They don't tell Mr. McDiplomat what they're doing or why. Which is really fucking dumb, because how can you do your job with zero information? YOU CAN'T!
It turns out to be a test to see if he'll fall for fake baby Hitler and this fat, rich old woman's evil plot to turn the youth of the entire world into (I guess) next-generation Nazis.
This handsome young man is supposedly the son of Hitler. Because according to rumor Hitler switched himself out with a mental patient who had delusions that he was Hitler, and lived in a mental institution til the end of the Second World War. The delusional dude was the one that was found dead, not Hitler. He then moved to Peru (or somewhere like that), married an Aryan ballerina, and had the aforementioned son who is now building an army of chaotic youth across the globe.
What? <--is exactly the appropriate response, random Goodreader.
But wait, there's more!
The good guys (a bunch of old farts) also have a plan to save the world by spraying all the young Vietnam protestors with some kind of a chemical that has Clockwork Orange side effects.
Project B.
B as in, it makes you BENEVOLENT. Because that's a thing you can do.
All they have to do is track down the scientist who started the project and get him to give them his notes. Bond-level shenanigans ensue.
I wish I were kidding.
I will say this, reading these older books makes me realize that nothing has changed that dramatically. This describes all the problems we have in the world right now, and the fear that if something isn't done the entire universe is going to collapse. There ain't nothing new to all the shit that's happening today.
Things change but things stay the same.
And humanity has always been nuts.
Here's the thing, this story was published on Christie's 80th birthday, and it shows.
IT SHOWS.
Passanger to Frankfurt is only for completionists. And even then, you need to know what you're getting into with this one. You thought The Mysterious Affair at Styles was bad?
Oh, no. You don't know bad till you've read this stinker.
June 14, 2012
"I hate to say it, but this was terrible. Dear Agatha was really losing it. Laughably, this is subtitled ""an Extraganza"", but it's more like a disaster.
Passenger is one of her thrillers, although the word hardly applies. Set in 1970, it starts out promisingly with unambitious diplomat Sir Stafford Nye accepting a daring proposal from the beautiful and enigmatic Countess Renata in the Frankfort airport. The next 100 pages are engaging as he tries to track down this woman, avoids some near death experiences, and meets with his amusing great aunt. But then Agatha Christie totally forgets about that plot and spends another 160 pages underdeveloping a Youth riot/neo-Nazi/world domination scheme where the same characters are rarely seen in more than one chapter and the so-called mystery/murder is an afterthought in the last chapter (no clues anywhere that I can see). And then a nonsensical epilogue.
I had read this as a child but didn't really remember very well; now I see why. It's full of rants about youth which are sadly typical of late Christie. The only thing I can say is that an author needs to start rewrites from page 100 on with the premise. I really can't even recommend this for completists. "
Passenger is one of her thrillers, although the word hardly applies. Set in 1970, it starts out promisingly with unambitious diplomat Sir Stafford Nye accepting a daring proposal from the beautiful and enigmatic Countess Renata in the Frankfort airport. The next 100 pages are engaging as he tries to track down this woman, avoids some near death experiences, and meets with his amusing great aunt. But then Agatha Christie totally forgets about that plot and spends another 160 pages underdeveloping a Youth riot/neo-Nazi/world domination scheme where the same characters are rarely seen in more than one chapter and the so-called mystery/murder is an afterthought in the last chapter (no clues anywhere that I can see). And then a nonsensical epilogue.
I had read this as a child but didn't really remember very well; now I see why. It's full of rants about youth which are sadly typical of late Christie. The only thing I can say is that an author needs to start rewrites from page 100 on with the premise. I really can't even recommend this for completists. "
August 1, 2021
“Does anybody care to look at history nowadays?”
Passenger to Frankfurt is best known for being maybe the weirdest thing Agatha Christie ever wrote. I can understand why many would find it weird, but personally that is not the first word I would think of using. I think Passenger to Frankfurt won itself such unflattering epithet mostly because it comes from the mind of one of the most loved and acclaimed mystery writers of all times, an artist whom the public has learned to trust unconditionally, a pen so reliable it can do no wrong. In my opinion, if Passenger to Frankfurt had been written by someone else, a less known writer or even an author at his first try, it wouldn’t be regarded as such a bad book.
I know how all this sounds, but, actually, I’m not at all trying to write an apology: as you can see from my rating, I myself disliked the book. How so? Well, the reason is not to be found in its weirdness, or in its extravagance (Christie herself used the adjective to describe this 80th novel of hers). I in fact think this book has indeed a very solid basis. I also think it came out exactly how Agatha Christie wished for it. But, on the other hand, I am also deeply convinced of its inefficacy, mostly due to certain flaws in its plotting, flaws that, quite frankly, I don't know how to explain coming from such a great writer. (See? Had it been someone else, maybe...)
Curiously enough, all these flaws really stand out only at the end, simply because this book hasn't got a proper ending. Everything is left pending, all narrative threads are left loose, as if it abruptly and inexplicably stopped halfway through its conclusion. It’s at that point that all the vagueness and very generically outlined storylines stood out as unpleasantly pointless, and it’s at that point (namely, about three pages to the end) that I understood the (deserved, as far as I’m concerned) unpopularity of this book.
In spite of its lameness, Christie's fans might want to read Passenger to Frankfurt because this book more than others gives us a peek into the genius mind of its author—or anyway, so I've come to believe. But to the occasional reader, no, I wouldn't recommend it.
Passenger to Frankfurt is best known for being maybe the weirdest thing Agatha Christie ever wrote. I can understand why many would find it weird, but personally that is not the first word I would think of using. I think Passenger to Frankfurt won itself such unflattering epithet mostly because it comes from the mind of one of the most loved and acclaimed mystery writers of all times, an artist whom the public has learned to trust unconditionally, a pen so reliable it can do no wrong. In my opinion, if Passenger to Frankfurt had been written by someone else, a less known writer or even an author at his first try, it wouldn’t be regarded as such a bad book.
I know how all this sounds, but, actually, I’m not at all trying to write an apology: as you can see from my rating, I myself disliked the book. How so? Well, the reason is not to be found in its weirdness, or in its extravagance (Christie herself used the adjective to describe this 80th novel of hers). I in fact think this book has indeed a very solid basis. I also think it came out exactly how Agatha Christie wished for it. But, on the other hand, I am also deeply convinced of its inefficacy, mostly due to certain flaws in its plotting, flaws that, quite frankly, I don't know how to explain coming from such a great writer. (See? Had it been someone else, maybe...)
Curiously enough, all these flaws really stand out only at the end, simply because this book hasn't got a proper ending. Everything is left pending, all narrative threads are left loose, as if it abruptly and inexplicably stopped halfway through its conclusion. It’s at that point that all the vagueness and very generically outlined storylines stood out as unpleasantly pointless, and it’s at that point (namely, about three pages to the end) that I understood the (deserved, as far as I’m concerned) unpopularity of this book.
In spite of its lameness, Christie's fans might want to read Passenger to Frankfurt because this book more than others gives us a peek into the genius mind of its author—or anyway, so I've come to believe. But to the occasional reader, no, I wouldn't recommend it.
March 8, 2019
I am ranking all of the Agatha Christie mysteries from worst to best. This book is 66/66.
Passenger to Frankfurt was published in 1970, very late in Christie's career. In fact, there are only 5 books that were published after P2F - Nemesis, Elephants Can Remember, Postern of Fate, Curtain and Sleeping Murder, and of those five, both Curtain and Sleeping Murder, were written many years prior and held for publication until the end of Christie's career.
Reason for the ranking: Passenger to Frankfurt is an execrable book that was only published because it was written by Agatha Christie. By every possible metric, it should not have been published: the mechanics of the mystery are bad, the characters are worse, and the plot is utterly lacking in credibility. The writing is pedestrian at best.
No book ever should use the possibility that Adolf Hitler left behind an heir to represent the Teutonic ideal as a plot point. This book is abysmal, and doesn't merely stand as the worst book that Agatha Christie ever wrote, it stands as one of the worst books published by a legitimate publisher in all of human history. It's not even worthy of reading as a curiosity.
The only reason to read this book is if you are reading everything written by Agatha Christie.
I do have to confess that I couldn't stomach the idea of reading this book again, so I am working off of my memory when I write this. I've been trying to reread before ranking, and I will continue with my rereading project as I work through this definitive ranking process, but this was such an obvious choice for #66 that I felt no responsibility to revisit it.
Link to book 65/66
*************************************************
Review dated 6/2013
I was going to write a thoughtful review about how some of the elements of this book resonated in an era of Trumpism. Things got a little shaky early on, but I struggled forward. And then, on page 159, it became entirely insane, at which point I simply couldn't do it any more.
This is among the worst books I have ever read. I cannot even begin to imagine why Christie thought this was a good idea. If Atlas Shrugged and Mein Kampf sexually assaulted The Big Four in the darkest corners of Christie's fevered imagination, this book would be born nine months later.
Fuck this book.
Passenger to Frankfurt was published in 1970, very late in Christie's career. In fact, there are only 5 books that were published after P2F - Nemesis, Elephants Can Remember, Postern of Fate, Curtain and Sleeping Murder, and of those five, both Curtain and Sleeping Murder, were written many years prior and held for publication until the end of Christie's career.
Reason for the ranking: Passenger to Frankfurt is an execrable book that was only published because it was written by Agatha Christie. By every possible metric, it should not have been published: the mechanics of the mystery are bad, the characters are worse, and the plot is utterly lacking in credibility. The writing is pedestrian at best.
No book ever should use the possibility that Adolf Hitler left behind an heir to represent the Teutonic ideal as a plot point. This book is abysmal, and doesn't merely stand as the worst book that Agatha Christie ever wrote, it stands as one of the worst books published by a legitimate publisher in all of human history. It's not even worthy of reading as a curiosity.
The only reason to read this book is if you are reading everything written by Agatha Christie.
I do have to confess that I couldn't stomach the idea of reading this book again, so I am working off of my memory when I write this. I've been trying to reread before ranking, and I will continue with my rereading project as I work through this definitive ranking process, but this was such an obvious choice for #66 that I felt no responsibility to revisit it.
Link to book 65/66
*************************************************
Review dated 6/2013
I was going to write a thoughtful review about how some of the elements of this book resonated in an era of Trumpism. Things got a little shaky early on, but I struggled forward. And then, on page 159, it became entirely insane, at which point I simply couldn't do it any more.
This is among the worst books I have ever read. I cannot even begin to imagine why Christie thought this was a good idea. If Atlas Shrugged and Mein Kampf sexually assaulted The Big Four in the darkest corners of Christie's fevered imagination, this book would be born nine months later.
Fuck this book.
January 7, 2024
A goal in 2024 is to read one Agatha Christie book a month. Not only will I enjoy the Poirot and Miss Marple cases that are always favorites, but I will also explore her standalone novels and maybe even branch out to books she wrote under a pseudonym. My favorite books of hers involve train travel so when I saw the title Passenger to Frankfurt, I thought trains, Christie at her best. I was to be mistaken because the travel involved concerns air not trains and this foray into spy thrillers is hardly Christie at her best.
Sir Stafford Nye is traveling home to England via Frankfurt. A mysterious woman appears next to him at the airport and asks if she can use his passport and cloak to get home or “they will kill me.” Nye is not known to do anything out of the ordinary but this woman named Daphne Theodaphonous aka Renata Zerkowski aka Mary Ann reminds Stafford of his king dead sister Pamela. There is definitely a facial resemblance and it would tug on his conscience if she died on his account, so he agrees. Both Mary Ann and Sir Stafford arrive safely in England, setting up a convoluted story of international espionage. The airport encounter and subsequent two chapters where the higher ups brief Stafford on happenings are the best part of the novel. After these meetings and the introduction of flamboyant Aunt Matilda, the novel goes downhill. I continued to read because this is Agatha Christie; I should have stopped after part one and left with a decent story and dialogue.
At the novel’s opening, Christie explains how she gets the ideas and titles for her books. I find the writing process fascinating so learning how the best of the best gets her ideas is enlightening. How she got the idea for this book, I cannot fathom. The original publication date is 1971, five years prior to Christie’s death. James Bond and John Le Carré novels had become en vogue. Perhaps, Christie wanted to foray into modern spy thrillers just to prove that she could. She had successfully written an early spy novel Man in the Brown Suit, but this was prior to the days of international espionage and did not need the action required in a Bond novel or film. That is what makes James Bond unique, and Agatha Christie is not Ian Fleming, just as Ian Fleming is not Agatha Christie. While I laud the Queen of Crime for stepping outside of her comfort zone, at that point in her life she should have stuck to what made her the Queen of Crime in the first place. International spies in the time of the Cold War, not so much.
The novel did have some merits. Aunt Matilda was a riot. After years of experience creating Miss Marple, Christie knew how to create a strong, older female character. I laud her for that. Stafford Nye probably would not have had access to all the information that he did if he did not have access to his aunt and the stores of information in her brain. In the days where older women were seen as weak and out to pasture, Aunt Matilda shatters that myth and looks as feisty as ever in her old age. While Stafford Nye gets top billing in the novel, I enjoyed the Daphne/Mary Ann character more. Who is she? Where is she? Whose side is she on? Even as Christie attempted to tell this tale, it fell short. There were too many gaps in the action taken up by stuffy old men in meetings that went on for pages. I mixed up names and many of them ended up being irrelevant. The female characters, even the peripheral ones, ended up holding up the novel, or it would have been a total dud.
As of now, I will stick to the plan to read one Christie a month. I’m nearly complete with the full length Miss Marple cases and have some Poirot cases left to read. There are also some standalones that I am intrigued by although after this weak point in Christie’s career, I am not so sure. Next month I will play to my own strengths: I will return to Poirot and reread a favorite that goodreads has mysteriously deleted from my read books. That is a mystery within a mystery, which is my favorite type of mystery to read. As for the spy novels, my palette is now craving a James Bond book or movie. At least I know that Ian Fleming knew how to write entertaining ones.
3ish stars
Sir Stafford Nye is traveling home to England via Frankfurt. A mysterious woman appears next to him at the airport and asks if she can use his passport and cloak to get home or “they will kill me.” Nye is not known to do anything out of the ordinary but this woman named Daphne Theodaphonous aka Renata Zerkowski aka Mary Ann reminds Stafford of his king dead sister Pamela. There is definitely a facial resemblance and it would tug on his conscience if she died on his account, so he agrees. Both Mary Ann and Sir Stafford arrive safely in England, setting up a convoluted story of international espionage. The airport encounter and subsequent two chapters where the higher ups brief Stafford on happenings are the best part of the novel. After these meetings and the introduction of flamboyant Aunt Matilda, the novel goes downhill. I continued to read because this is Agatha Christie; I should have stopped after part one and left with a decent story and dialogue.
At the novel’s opening, Christie explains how she gets the ideas and titles for her books. I find the writing process fascinating so learning how the best of the best gets her ideas is enlightening. How she got the idea for this book, I cannot fathom. The original publication date is 1971, five years prior to Christie’s death. James Bond and John Le Carré novels had become en vogue. Perhaps, Christie wanted to foray into modern spy thrillers just to prove that she could. She had successfully written an early spy novel Man in the Brown Suit, but this was prior to the days of international espionage and did not need the action required in a Bond novel or film. That is what makes James Bond unique, and Agatha Christie is not Ian Fleming, just as Ian Fleming is not Agatha Christie. While I laud the Queen of Crime for stepping outside of her comfort zone, at that point in her life she should have stuck to what made her the Queen of Crime in the first place. International spies in the time of the Cold War, not so much.
The novel did have some merits. Aunt Matilda was a riot. After years of experience creating Miss Marple, Christie knew how to create a strong, older female character. I laud her for that. Stafford Nye probably would not have had access to all the information that he did if he did not have access to his aunt and the stores of information in her brain. In the days where older women were seen as weak and out to pasture, Aunt Matilda shatters that myth and looks as feisty as ever in her old age. While Stafford Nye gets top billing in the novel, I enjoyed the Daphne/Mary Ann character more. Who is she? Where is she? Whose side is she on? Even as Christie attempted to tell this tale, it fell short. There were too many gaps in the action taken up by stuffy old men in meetings that went on for pages. I mixed up names and many of them ended up being irrelevant. The female characters, even the peripheral ones, ended up holding up the novel, or it would have been a total dud.
As of now, I will stick to the plan to read one Christie a month. I’m nearly complete with the full length Miss Marple cases and have some Poirot cases left to read. There are also some standalones that I am intrigued by although after this weak point in Christie’s career, I am not so sure. Next month I will play to my own strengths: I will return to Poirot and reread a favorite that goodreads has mysteriously deleted from my read books. That is a mystery within a mystery, which is my favorite type of mystery to read. As for the spy novels, my palette is now craving a James Bond book or movie. At least I know that Ian Fleming knew how to write entertaining ones.
3ish stars
July 24, 2023
A bored diplomat is approached by a woman at an airport in Frankfurt. She claims to be a spy whose life is in danger. She kindly asks if she could drug him and steal his passport, flight ticket and coat. So she can impersonate him and get back to London safely. He says: sure, why not? Like any normal person would.
Then they run into each other a couple of times and the protagonist slowly figures out what’s really going on.
Let’s be honest here, the concept is ridiculous. If a stranger walks over to you and asks if she could drug you and rob you, the answer should always be a firm no. After the opening scene, the pacing slows down quite a bit as the tension is raised very subtly and slowly. And it feels like we’re slowly moving towards a very serious spy thriller plot. Once the spy plot really kicks in though, the story is simply all over the place. It’s just absolutely bonkers. Completely over the top ridiculous. Now I have to admit, the core of this story is actually quite interesting. It definitely feels inspired by the Second World War, and especially what came after it. And some of the themes this story tackles are still very relevant to this day. It’s just that the execution could have been better.
Overall, a pretty decent spy thriller with some cool moments. As long as you don’t take it too seriously. Definitely not one of Agatha Christie’s best, but still pretty entertaining.
Then they run into each other a couple of times and the protagonist slowly figures out what’s really going on.
Let’s be honest here, the concept is ridiculous. If a stranger walks over to you and asks if she could drug you and rob you, the answer should always be a firm no. After the opening scene, the pacing slows down quite a bit as the tension is raised very subtly and slowly. And it feels like we’re slowly moving towards a very serious spy thriller plot. Once the spy plot really kicks in though, the story is simply all over the place. It’s just absolutely bonkers. Completely over the top ridiculous. Now I have to admit, the core of this story is actually quite interesting. It definitely feels inspired by the Second World War, and especially what came after it. And some of the themes this story tackles are still very relevant to this day. It’s just that the execution could have been better.
Overall, a pretty decent spy thriller with some cool moments. As long as you don’t take it too seriously. Definitely not one of Agatha Christie’s best, but still pretty entertaining.
September 9, 2013
Also find this review on - Don't Stop Readin'
What in the world was this! I disliked this book from the very first page itself.
I'm no one to question Agatha Christie but this book was totally ridiculous. It was supposed be to espionage but was reduced to an utter pile of fail. I really, really don't want to disrespect the Queen of Crime but Passenger to Frankfurt was boring, and along with being pointless it was also plotless.
It started off with a diplomat being asked to lend his identity to a woman on an airport or else she would have been killed and he agreed to it!
Now, why would someone agree to simply lend his passport and clothes to a strange woman on such short notice? This act of stupidity bothered me from the first chapter only.
Then comes the part where he tries to track down that woman - which was a little interesting but then the book took a major U-turn where it became all about creating another world with superhumans, swaying a crowd with words and all those Hitler concepts.
That's when I lost even the little interest I had in this book and started reading it just for the sake of finishing it. In the last couple of chapters a murderer/traitor is revealed - the topic which was completely sidelined in the middle and then comes a very unrelated epilogue and da-dum. Book is over.
What a complete waste of time. It takes me mere hours to finish Christie's books on an average but this time it took me 2 whole days! I think that says what a monotonous read this must be.
Not recommended to anyone. Not even hardcore Agatha Christie fans.
What in the world was this! I disliked this book from the very first page itself.
I'm no one to question Agatha Christie but this book was totally ridiculous. It was supposed be to espionage but was reduced to an utter pile of fail. I really, really don't want to disrespect the Queen of Crime but Passenger to Frankfurt was boring, and along with being pointless it was also plotless.
It started off with a diplomat being asked to lend his identity to a woman on an airport or else she would have been killed and he agreed to it!
Now, why would someone agree to simply lend his passport and clothes to a strange woman on such short notice? This act of stupidity bothered me from the first chapter only.
Then comes the part where he tries to track down that woman - which was a little interesting but then the book took a major U-turn where it became all about creating another world with superhumans, swaying a crowd with words and all those Hitler concepts.
That's when I lost even the little interest I had in this book and started reading it just for the sake of finishing it. In the last couple of chapters a murderer/traitor is revealed - the topic which was completely sidelined in the middle and then comes a very unrelated epilogue and da-dum. Book is over.
What a complete waste of time. It takes me mere hours to finish Christie's books on an average but this time it took me 2 whole days! I think that says what a monotonous read this must be.
Not recommended to anyone. Not even hardcore Agatha Christie fans.
December 26, 2024
Perhaps not the worst she's written ... but it's the worst I've read!
With over 80 detective novels to her credit, not to mention an enormous number of short stories, plays and even romance novels under the pseudonym Mary Westmacott, Agatha Christie is, by any conceivable standard, a prolific author. Therefore, it follows as a logical inevitability that something she wrote must be classed as "the best" and something else as "the worst". I can't claim to have read everything the good lady wrote but, of those novels that I have read, PASSENGER TO FRANKFURT easily qualifies as the worst of the bunch.
Stafford Nye, a rather shiftless, easygoing member of Britain's diplomatic corps who, by his own admission, enjoys a good joke and takes life rather less than seriously, encounters a mysterious woman in the airport in Frankfurt. Appealing to his chivalrous instincts and his desire for a bit of an adventure, she persuades him to let her steal his passport and boarding pass and use them to travel to England to avoid what she claims would be her likely murder if she travelled to Switzerland on her previously intended route.
Starting from this preposterously unlikely opening scenario, Christie takes us on a pointless, meandering, achingly repetitive "thriller" that actually constitutes a personal diatribe - the aging dowager authoress's post 1960s current outlook on the world as she rather bleakly perceived it. Neo-fascism, youth rebellion, drugs, violence, armament smuggling, hippies, skinheads and megalomaniacal financial tycoons bent on world domination all make their appearance in a novel whose plot never truly crystallizes into anything concrete.
The current Wikipedia article on PASSENGER TO FRANKFURT quotes Robert Barnard, a crime writer and contemporary of Agatha Christie, who categorized this novel as "the last of the thrillers, and one that slides from the unlikely to the inconceivable and finally lands up in incomprehensible muddle."
I couldn't agree more. Not recommended.
Paul Weiss
With over 80 detective novels to her credit, not to mention an enormous number of short stories, plays and even romance novels under the pseudonym Mary Westmacott, Agatha Christie is, by any conceivable standard, a prolific author. Therefore, it follows as a logical inevitability that something she wrote must be classed as "the best" and something else as "the worst". I can't claim to have read everything the good lady wrote but, of those novels that I have read, PASSENGER TO FRANKFURT easily qualifies as the worst of the bunch.
Stafford Nye, a rather shiftless, easygoing member of Britain's diplomatic corps who, by his own admission, enjoys a good joke and takes life rather less than seriously, encounters a mysterious woman in the airport in Frankfurt. Appealing to his chivalrous instincts and his desire for a bit of an adventure, she persuades him to let her steal his passport and boarding pass and use them to travel to England to avoid what she claims would be her likely murder if she travelled to Switzerland on her previously intended route.
Starting from this preposterously unlikely opening scenario, Christie takes us on a pointless, meandering, achingly repetitive "thriller" that actually constitutes a personal diatribe - the aging dowager authoress's post 1960s current outlook on the world as she rather bleakly perceived it. Neo-fascism, youth rebellion, drugs, violence, armament smuggling, hippies, skinheads and megalomaniacal financial tycoons bent on world domination all make their appearance in a novel whose plot never truly crystallizes into anything concrete.
The current Wikipedia article on PASSENGER TO FRANKFURT quotes Robert Barnard, a crime writer and contemporary of Agatha Christie, who categorized this novel as "the last of the thrillers, and one that slides from the unlikely to the inconceivable and finally lands up in incomprehensible muddle."
I couldn't agree more. Not recommended.
Paul Weiss
May 7, 2020
No me gustó en absoluto. Ni siquiera se entiende de qué va, el comienzo es bueno, pero después esos personajes no vuelven a salir y se meten en otro tema; tampoco me encariñé con ellos, este es un libro que seguro olvidaré mañana.
Directo a peor lectura en lo que va del año.
Directo a peor lectura en lo que va del año.
July 3, 2016
You can create a third world now, or so everyone thinks, but the third world will have the same people in it as the first world or the second world or whatever names you like to call things. And when you have the same human beings running things, they’ll run them the same way. You’ve only got to look at history.’ ‘Does anybody care to look at history nowadays?’
The thing is, I actually enjoyed the first half of the book.....then it became more and more convoluted and bizarre.
Ok, a bit more detail: I could follow the plot up to about the half-way mark and had even made peace with the plot basically being about a resurgence of Nazi-Germany, orchestrated by some weird Countess and thwarted by some English gentleman, his girlfriend, and his auntie (who incidentally was at school with the Countess).
As a plot it was way out there, like a deliberately bad space opera,......and it was only the ridiculousness of the whole thing that made it bearable.
But it didn't stop there (or anywhere, really), on top of the plot we also get what I think was Christie's re-imagination of Charles de Gaulle - as the Marshal ??? - but being somewhat deranged and hell-bent on declaring war on all youths, because they are the root of the evil that seems to have befallen the world (seriously, in the context of the plot this is supposed to make some sense - because young people are incapable of individual thought?).
"‘Riot must be put down. Rebellion! Insurrection! The danger to men, women and children, to property. I go forth now to quell the insurrection, to speak to them as their father, their leader. These students, these criminals even, they are my children. They are the youth of France. I go to speak to them of that. They shall listen to me, governments will be revised, their studies can be resumed under their own auspices. Their grants have been insufficient, their lives have been deprived of beauty, of leadership. I come to promise all this. I speak in my own name. I shall speak also in your name, the name of the Government, you have done your best, you have acted as well as you know how. But it needs higher leadership. It needs my leadership. I go now. I have lists of further coded wires to be sent. Such nuclear deterrents as can be used in unfrequented spots can be put into action in such a modified form that though they may bring terror to the mob, we ourselves shall know that there is no real danger in them. I have thought out everything. My plan will go."
We also get some science, well pseudo-science, about drugs and mind-control. In particular, drugs that make people benevolent, but may also lobotomise them.
Seriously, tho, where I lost it was with the seemingly endless political theorizing between the parts that actually moved the plot forward. So boring, so weird, so making me forget what point we were at in the story.
Having finished, my verdict is that this truly is a terrible book, not just a terrible Christie book, but a pretty poor work of writing altogether. However, it is worth reading it to see that towards the end of her career, Christie really did lose touch with the world and her readers. The only question is whether this was a result of some sort of dementia or whether there was another reason.
The thing is, I actually enjoyed the first half of the book.....then it became more and more convoluted and bizarre.
Ok, a bit more detail: I could follow the plot up to about the half-way mark and had even made peace with the plot basically being about a resurgence of Nazi-Germany, orchestrated by some weird Countess and thwarted by some English gentleman, his girlfriend, and his auntie (who incidentally was at school with the Countess).
As a plot it was way out there, like a deliberately bad space opera,......and it was only the ridiculousness of the whole thing that made it bearable.
But it didn't stop there (or anywhere, really), on top of the plot we also get what I think was Christie's re-imagination of Charles de Gaulle - as the Marshal ??? - but being somewhat deranged and hell-bent on declaring war on all youths, because they are the root of the evil that seems to have befallen the world (seriously, in the context of the plot this is supposed to make some sense - because young people are incapable of individual thought?).
"‘Riot must be put down. Rebellion! Insurrection! The danger to men, women and children, to property. I go forth now to quell the insurrection, to speak to them as their father, their leader. These students, these criminals even, they are my children. They are the youth of France. I go to speak to them of that. They shall listen to me, governments will be revised, their studies can be resumed under their own auspices. Their grants have been insufficient, their lives have been deprived of beauty, of leadership. I come to promise all this. I speak in my own name. I shall speak also in your name, the name of the Government, you have done your best, you have acted as well as you know how. But it needs higher leadership. It needs my leadership. I go now. I have lists of further coded wires to be sent. Such nuclear deterrents as can be used in unfrequented spots can be put into action in such a modified form that though they may bring terror to the mob, we ourselves shall know that there is no real danger in them. I have thought out everything. My plan will go."
We also get some science, well pseudo-science, about drugs and mind-control. In particular, drugs that make people benevolent, but may also lobotomise them.
Seriously, tho, where I lost it was with the seemingly endless political theorizing between the parts that actually moved the plot forward. So boring, so weird, so making me forget what point we were at in the story.
Having finished, my verdict is that this truly is a terrible book, not just a terrible Christie book, but a pretty poor work of writing altogether. However, it is worth reading it to see that towards the end of her career, Christie really did lose touch with the world and her readers. The only question is whether this was a result of some sort of dementia or whether there was another reason.
August 30, 2010
Weird, weird, weird. You could tell based on the preface and the strange pleading to the reader that this COULD all happen and that Christie had stewed long and hard on this, but really it was her way outside her element. The book is like an old woman's paranoid treatise, so guess mildly interesting just for that odd window to Christie's view of 1970.
I kind of skipped thru the Benvo part, because it didn't really make sense and was a terrible idea. Then the revelation of Juanita (who I actually suspected earlier in the book, but dismissed because the part was so small and got distracted by the all the angst and silliness) happened and I found I didn't even care that much who the murderous assasin was. And really? That's who Juanita was? I just guessed that person because so improbable but seriously Agatha?
How did everything wind up? Was Big Charlotte stopped? Adolph Hitler Jr. foiled? I'm not really sure... all I know is a Panda stuffed animal stood in as best man and a wedding happened. Yawn.
I kind of skipped thru the Benvo part, because it didn't really make sense and was a terrible idea. Then the revelation of Juanita (who I actually suspected earlier in the book, but dismissed because the part was so small and got distracted by the all the angst and silliness) happened and I found I didn't even care that much who the murderous assasin was. And really? That's who Juanita was? I just guessed that person because so improbable but seriously Agatha?
How did everything wind up? Was Big Charlotte stopped? Adolph Hitler Jr. foiled? I'm not really sure... all I know is a Panda stuffed animal stood in as best man and a wedding happened. Yawn.
July 27, 2025
Pues una decepción, no parece ni un libro de Agatha??
Es sobre espías pero luego deriva en un galimatías de insurrecciones, anarquía global y demás vericuetos, en fin, que me ha resultado deslavazado y lioso, con un final un tanto ridículo.
Valoración: 3/10
A otra cosa mariposa!!
Sinopsis: Cuando un diplomático aburrido es abordado en un aeropuerto inhóspito por una mujer cuya vida está en peligro, acepta, en un momento de debilidad, darle su pasaporte y su pase de abordaje.
Repentinamente, la propia vida de Stafford Nye cambia, entrando en una red de intriga internacional, de la cual la única salida es detener a la Condesa von Waldsausen, quien, loca de poder, trata de dominar el mundo mediante la manipulación de la juventud del planeta, la cual planeaba transformar en un resurgimiento de la dominación Nazi.
# 13. Un libro con una calificación menor a tres estrellas en Goodreads. Reto Popsugar 2025
Es sobre espías pero luego deriva en un galimatías de insurrecciones, anarquía global y demás vericuetos, en fin, que me ha resultado deslavazado y lioso, con un final un tanto ridículo.
Valoración: 3/10
A otra cosa mariposa!!
Sinopsis: Cuando un diplomático aburrido es abordado en un aeropuerto inhóspito por una mujer cuya vida está en peligro, acepta, en un momento de debilidad, darle su pasaporte y su pase de abordaje.
Repentinamente, la propia vida de Stafford Nye cambia, entrando en una red de intriga internacional, de la cual la única salida es detener a la Condesa von Waldsausen, quien, loca de poder, trata de dominar el mundo mediante la manipulación de la juventud del planeta, la cual planeaba transformar en un resurgimiento de la dominación Nazi.
# 13. Un libro con una calificación menor a tres estrellas en Goodreads. Reto Popsugar 2025
November 15, 2020
Ahora comprendo que lo escribiera con ochenta años...
No es una novela de Agatha Christie convencional, con su muerto, sus intrigas y sus imposibles resoluciones para los lectores. Es una novela rara, diferente, de espías, de elucubraciones políticas, diplomáticas, ideas conspiranoicas de cambiar el orden mundial, jóvenes luchando por sus derechos, países que quieren librarse de sus dominadores, científicos que son tachados de locos ...
He leído y hasta releído muchas de las novelas de Agatha Christie; excepto ésta, y además tengo que admitir que me ha costado mucho terminarla.
Sin duda, lo peor que he leído de ella hasta ahora.
No es una novela de Agatha Christie convencional, con su muerto, sus intrigas y sus imposibles resoluciones para los lectores. Es una novela rara, diferente, de espías, de elucubraciones políticas, diplomáticas, ideas conspiranoicas de cambiar el orden mundial, jóvenes luchando por sus derechos, países que quieren librarse de sus dominadores, científicos que son tachados de locos ...
He leído y hasta releído muchas de las novelas de Agatha Christie; excepto ésta, y además tengo que admitir que me ha costado mucho terminarla.
Sin duda, lo peor que he leído de ella hasta ahora.
June 20, 2016
I can't not give this 5 stars. It was definitely one of the most puzzling books I've ever read, but I loved every minute! A riot of fabulous characters, too. (Though that's expected with AC) ;)
February 2, 2017
Dame Agatha, like her alter-ego Ariadne Oliver with apples, might've chewed on too many plot lines and misplaced some of the half-baked ones here.
Apples everywhere
This novel started out with fun intrigue and Stafford Nye, a mischievous court jester of sorts in Britain's political circle, seemed like an interesting character.
Too bad he had to get himself involved with espionage and revolutions et al, all because of one boring character. The way this Mary-Ann spy girl was written is still reminiscent of Christie's 'I've got something to hide' damsel-in-distress, but here it felt too obvious, with hardly any charm to the Jane-of-all-trades character.
Towards the middle the plot meandered, and there were lots of talk between illustrious folks that included a few prescient observations about populism (relevant to current times even), but there were also a whole compendium of indulgent ramblings.
The conclusion and epilogue felt quite rushed and downright cheesy. I don't quite dislike this, but alas, this may be a case of the upset apple cart.
Apples everywhere
This novel started out with fun intrigue and Stafford Nye, a mischievous court jester of sorts in Britain's political circle, seemed like an interesting character.
Too bad he had to get himself involved with espionage and revolutions et al, all because of one boring character. The way this Mary-Ann spy girl was written is still reminiscent of Christie's 'I've got something to hide' damsel-in-distress, but here it felt too obvious, with hardly any charm to the Jane-of-all-trades character.
Towards the middle the plot meandered, and there were lots of talk between illustrious folks that included a few prescient observations about populism (relevant to current times even), but there were also a whole compendium of indulgent ramblings.
The conclusion and epilogue felt quite rushed and downright cheesy. I don't quite dislike this, but alas, this may be a case of the upset apple cart.
August 5, 2019
First published in 1970, it is the second last novel Agatha wrote before her death, her last novel being Postern of fate published in 1973. To me, this is one of her weakest novels. She has tried to address to many contemporary issues in the novel starting from anarchy, youth unrest, dictatorship, vain politicians and danger of megalomaniacs. But she fails to weave them together in a strong, singular plot. The end is the weakest link. If you have loved her writings, you will be disappointed to read this.
October 27, 2018
Woof. This is far and away my least favorite Christie. I'm still processing all the ways that this is terrible, but yeah. Not good.
February 22, 2021
Agatha was definitely drunk... and I love it.
RTC!
RTC!
October 12, 2025
Halloween Bingo 2025
Overwrought and over the top, Passenger to Frankfurt is not representative of Christie's usual writing. I am convinced that it was published simply because of the author's reputation, which this novel did nothing to enhance. Christie is at her best when writing about village life and should have left global conspiracies to other writers.
I kind of liked Sir Stafford Nye, despite his willingness to go along with irrational plans on the spur of the moment. I wonder what Christie would have made of the world in 2026 and the alt-right? She did her part in WWII and knew a thing or two about fascism. IMO, she would have had a field day with QAnon.
I was pleased to see the momentary reappearance of Amy Leatheren (Murder in Mesopotamia) as Matilda Cleckheaton's companion. I enjoyed Matilda as well, the elderly aunt who knows things. Christie certainly enjoyed that type of character.
I read this book for the Blazing Inferno square of my Halloween Bingo card, after applying the Teleportation Potion to summon it from my TBR (just as I used interlibrary loan to summon it from another library).
Overwrought and over the top, Passenger to Frankfurt is not representative of Christie's usual writing. I am convinced that it was published simply because of the author's reputation, which this novel did nothing to enhance. Christie is at her best when writing about village life and should have left global conspiracies to other writers.
I kind of liked Sir Stafford Nye, despite his willingness to go along with irrational plans on the spur of the moment. I wonder what Christie would have made of the world in 2026 and the alt-right? She did her part in WWII and knew a thing or two about fascism. IMO, she would have had a field day with QAnon.
I was pleased to see the momentary reappearance of Amy Leatheren (Murder in Mesopotamia) as Matilda Cleckheaton's companion. I enjoyed Matilda as well, the elderly aunt who knows things. Christie certainly enjoyed that type of character.
I read this book for the Blazing Inferno square of my Halloween Bingo card, after applying the Teleportation Potion to summon it from my TBR (just as I used interlibrary loan to summon it from another library).
January 26, 2012
Christie attempts a James Bond style story, complete with outré villains and globe trotting protagonists. It's almost spec fic with its near-future revolutions and social engineering.
Sadly, it's overblown, vague waffle predicated on a premise of OMG YOUNG PEOPLE! and I BLAME NAZIS!! Most characters speak in almost the same voice, though Aunt Matilda and Stafford Nye manage to rise above the general mess. The villains may be outré but that's no substitute for actual characterisation.
Only a few scenes come to life with real personality and Christie's trademark arch humour. The end is abrupt and muddled, and frankly throws away an interesting idea that has been explored in SF TV shows to good effect.
The text is full of repetition that does not even lead to a solid idea. A good prune and some clarity in the plot would have done this book a world of good. I will return instead to Poirot and Marple.
Sadly, it's overblown, vague waffle predicated on a premise of OMG YOUNG PEOPLE! and I BLAME NAZIS!! Most characters speak in almost the same voice, though Aunt Matilda and Stafford Nye manage to rise above the general mess. The villains may be outré but that's no substitute for actual characterisation.
Only a few scenes come to life with real personality and Christie's trademark arch humour. The end is abrupt and muddled, and frankly throws away an interesting idea that has been explored in SF TV shows to good effect.
The text is full of repetition that does not even lead to a solid idea. A good prune and some clarity in the plot would have done this book a world of good. I will return instead to Poirot and Marple.
July 5, 2021
YOUTUBE / INSTAGRAM
Bueno, de los aproximadamente 66 libros que escribió Agatha Christie, estaba claro que no podían gustarme todos. Pero es que no es simplemente que Pasajero para Frankfurt no me haya gustado por cuestiones de gustos subjetivos, es que es raro de narices. Me sorprendí al empezar a leer el libro y ver que aquí en Goodreads tenía una media de un 2, pero ahora lo entiendo perfectamente.
Para empezar, es importante destacar que en este caso no se trata de la investigación de un crimen o asesinato, como suele ser el caso con los libros de Agatha, sino que creo que podría considerarse más bien una novela de espías (y digo "creo" porque ni tengo claro qué es exactamente este libro).
La historia carece de un argumento coherente, de un propósito claro y de personajes que atrapen al lector. Las primeras 100 páginas no están mal. Sir Stafford Nye le presta su pasaporte a una misteriosa mujer que le dice que si no la matarán, y luego intenta encontrarla mientras pasan algunas cosas a su alrededor e incluso intentan matarlo a él. Hasta ahí, más o menos todo bien. Pero después de esas 100 primeras páginas, todo va cuesta abajo y sin frenos. El libro no llega a las 300 páginas pero uff, me ha costado acabarlo. Empezaba a leer y me hallaba totalmente desconcertada, leía párrafos y párrafos y no sabía qué quería decir la autora.
Es como si hubiera metido un montón de papelitos con ideas en un sombrero y los hubiera sacado al azar para usarlos: ¡neonazis! ¡Hitler podría estar vivo! ¡Viajes de aquí para allá! ¡Saltos temporales desconcertantes! ¡Cabos sueltos por doquier! ¡Tráfico de armas! ¡Rusia! ¡Un señor que no es espía pero que se aburre y que va de aquí para allí sin que al lector le quede nunca claro qué hace o cuál es su verdadero objetivo!
Sinceramente, la historia es un gran sinsentido y es pesada de leer. A lo mejor es porque fue uno de los últimos libros de Christie. Después de este, solo se publicaron cinco libros suyos más, y dos de esos cinco se habían escrito antes que Pasajero para Frankfurt, aunque se publicaran después. Quizás quería innovar, quizás se hacía mayor, quizás... Hay muchos quizás posibles, pero sea cuál sea el real, este libro no funciona.
Bueno, de los aproximadamente 66 libros que escribió Agatha Christie, estaba claro que no podían gustarme todos. Pero es que no es simplemente que Pasajero para Frankfurt no me haya gustado por cuestiones de gustos subjetivos, es que es raro de narices. Me sorprendí al empezar a leer el libro y ver que aquí en Goodreads tenía una media de un 2, pero ahora lo entiendo perfectamente.
Para empezar, es importante destacar que en este caso no se trata de la investigación de un crimen o asesinato, como suele ser el caso con los libros de Agatha, sino que creo que podría considerarse más bien una novela de espías (y digo "creo" porque ni tengo claro qué es exactamente este libro).
La historia carece de un argumento coherente, de un propósito claro y de personajes que atrapen al lector. Las primeras 100 páginas no están mal. Sir Stafford Nye le presta su pasaporte a una misteriosa mujer que le dice que si no la matarán, y luego intenta encontrarla mientras pasan algunas cosas a su alrededor e incluso intentan matarlo a él. Hasta ahí, más o menos todo bien. Pero después de esas 100 primeras páginas, todo va cuesta abajo y sin frenos. El libro no llega a las 300 páginas pero uff, me ha costado acabarlo. Empezaba a leer y me hallaba totalmente desconcertada, leía párrafos y párrafos y no sabía qué quería decir la autora.
Es como si hubiera metido un montón de papelitos con ideas en un sombrero y los hubiera sacado al azar para usarlos: ¡neonazis! ¡Hitler podría estar vivo! ¡Viajes de aquí para allá! ¡Saltos temporales desconcertantes! ¡Cabos sueltos por doquier! ¡Tráfico de armas! ¡Rusia! ¡Un señor que no es espía pero que se aburre y que va de aquí para allí sin que al lector le quede nunca claro qué hace o cuál es su verdadero objetivo!
Sinceramente, la historia es un gran sinsentido y es pesada de leer. A lo mejor es porque fue uno de los últimos libros de Christie. Después de este, solo se publicaron cinco libros suyos más, y dos de esos cinco se habían escrito antes que Pasajero para Frankfurt, aunque se publicaran después. Quizás quería innovar, quizás se hacía mayor, quizás... Hay muchos quizás posibles, pero sea cuál sea el real, este libro no funciona.
December 11, 2021
Con todo el dolor de mi corazón, le doy a una novela de Agatha una puntuación tan baja, ya en su momento cuando leí este libro por primera vez no me gustó mucho, y es uno de los libros de Agatha que no habia releido y el que menos me ha gustado hasta el momento.
La novela comienza cuando sir Stafford Nye es abordado en un aeropuerto y decide ayudar a una joven dejandole su capa y su pasaporte. La vida de Stafford cambia a partir de este simple hecho, y se ve inmerso en una intriga internacional, a causa de una revolución juvenil cuyo objetivo es dominar el mundo.
Esta novela de Agatha es una novela espias en toda regla, abundan sobre todo, conversaciones sobre politica y reuniones entre diplomáticos y dirigentes políticos, se me ha hecho lenta y me ha costado terminarla, la he acabado por cabezonería.
En esta novela volvemos a encontrarnos con un par de personajes que salen en las novelas protagonizadas por Tommy y Tuppence Beresford, Mr. Robinson y el coronel Pickeaway.
Esta novela seguramente gustará a los amantes de las novelas de espías, pero como a mí no me gustan, así me ha ido.
La novela comienza cuando sir Stafford Nye es abordado en un aeropuerto y decide ayudar a una joven dejandole su capa y su pasaporte. La vida de Stafford cambia a partir de este simple hecho, y se ve inmerso en una intriga internacional, a causa de una revolución juvenil cuyo objetivo es dominar el mundo.
Esta novela de Agatha es una novela espias en toda regla, abundan sobre todo, conversaciones sobre politica y reuniones entre diplomáticos y dirigentes políticos, se me ha hecho lenta y me ha costado terminarla, la he acabado por cabezonería.
En esta novela volvemos a encontrarnos con un par de personajes que salen en las novelas protagonizadas por Tommy y Tuppence Beresford, Mr. Robinson y el coronel Pickeaway.
Esta novela seguramente gustará a los amantes de las novelas de espías, pero como a mí no me gustan, así me ha ido.
July 14, 2021
Het slechtste boek van Agatha Christie dat ik gelezen heb. Ik zie er helemaal geen plot in. Ik heb het gewoon uitgelezen omdat ik alle boeken van Christie lees die ik in handen krijg. Het enige wat ik uit het boek kon opmaken is dat er wordt gespioneerd: de jeugd in verschillende landen wordt in de gaten gehouden omdat ze opstandig en gewelddadig zijn. Op het eind is er een oude professor die een beroerte gehad heeft, die jaren geleden iets uitgevonden had om de mens 'benevolent' te maken, maar zogezegd zijn project opgegeven had en alle documentatie vernietigd had. Nu is hij van plan om dit project nieuw leven in te blazen.... en zo eindigt het boek. Eigenlijk zou dit uitgangspunt beter het begin kunnen zijn van een verhaal dat spannend te maken is!
Read
January 6, 2024Dnf at 17%, in chapter one something ridiculous happened so I went to reviews and found that some Christie fans I trust explained why this is her worst book and from the first 3 chapter I agree with that assessment so I'm calling it quits. Onto the next
July 22, 2021
Hugh Fraser reading this redeemed the story for me. He does a man’s voice, a woman’s voice, old voices, young voices, accents (the Scottish housekeeper and the ‘intelligence man’ were my favorites). Perhaps I’ve read too many conspiracy books lately (39 Steps, Bulldog Drummond) which made this sound like the same old, same old. I had trouble keeping track of the story… it really was all over the place.
February 5, 2017
I feel sad giving only 1 star to an Agatha Christie novel, as I have found almost every other book I've read of hers really intriguing. Passenger to Frankfurt is definitely of a different genre than the rest of her novels. It is more a book about politics and social commentary than the typical whodunnit that she is known for. I really couldn't get into the plot, nor could I even understand what was going on half the time because the story seemed to jump around a lot and lose focus. The only reason I stuck it out until the end was because I'm trying to chronologically read through her entire catalog of written works. That being said, I feel like I could have skipped this one and not missed out on anything.
May 31, 2021
Extremely boring. Too long. Almost no action.
November 4, 2023
okay this was an absolute mess but I need a crossover between jane marple and lady matilda cleckheaten RIGHT now
August 21, 2011
A Cold War spy thriller/mystery from Agatha Christie and a perfect example of the author at her worst. After a far fetched but decent opening gambit, the first part of the novel descends to a catalog of the trouble with "young people" circa 1970, and a lot of improbable conspiracy theories about what was behind then current political and social movements. Christie was clearly at odds with the values and ideas of the era and it infects her book with a strange, paranoid flavor that seems very funny from a point 40 years after the novels publication.
Her writing style feels antique and she would probably have been better off writing period books at this stage of her career. She is also clearly out of her element when trying to offer psychological insight into her characters or events of the time, something she often managed successfully in earlier books.
The second half of the book is by turns boring and ludicrous, some of the plotting is so fuzzy it barely hangs together and her dialogue (never her strong suit) is awkward, at times even pointless, there are several conversations that seem totally unnecessary as they don't reveal character or advance the plot and seem to be merely filler.
Christie was an uneven writer for almost her entire career, capable of delivering brilliant mysteries with ingenious plotting, literally helping to create the modern mystery genre along the way but also offering up her fare share of clunkers. Unfortunately this is the latter.
Her writing style feels antique and she would probably have been better off writing period books at this stage of her career. She is also clearly out of her element when trying to offer psychological insight into her characters or events of the time, something she often managed successfully in earlier books.
The second half of the book is by turns boring and ludicrous, some of the plotting is so fuzzy it barely hangs together and her dialogue (never her strong suit) is awkward, at times even pointless, there are several conversations that seem totally unnecessary as they don't reveal character or advance the plot and seem to be merely filler.
Christie was an uneven writer for almost her entire career, capable of delivering brilliant mysteries with ingenious plotting, literally helping to create the modern mystery genre along the way but also offering up her fare share of clunkers. Unfortunately this is the latter.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,834 reviews