I read Michaelides’ “The Silent Patient” a couple of months ago (I was very late to the party but really enjoyed it). I haven’t yet read “The Maidens,” but when I read the synopsis of “The Fury,” I immediately added it to my TBR. The synopsis hinted at a thrilling and suspenseful ride, but unfortunately, it fell short of my expectations. While the premise seemed intriguing, the execution left much to be desired.

The overall premise is simple: A group of people travel to a private Greek island. Someone is murdered, and a very unreliable narrator tells us the story in a non-linear fashion until we finally learn who died and who killed them.
I want to start by saying that Michaelides is a very talented writer. He crafts an engaging story, and his writing is impeccable. My issue with this book is mainly with the narrator. I hated him. There was absolutely nothing that I liked about him, and when I can’t connect with the narrator – especially when the book is written in first-person – then it’s really difficult for me to remain engaged and invested in the story. While I understand the appeal of an unreliable narrator (I typically LOVE them), I need some likability or charm to draw me in and make me feel connected. Unfortunately, this narrator came across as manipulative and cold, making it difficult to invest in their story fully.

Another annoyance with the narrator was the way he spoke directly to the reader, as though we were hanging out and he was telling me a story. To make it worse, we would get several pages of the story only to get to the end of the chapter and have the narrator tell us that what he just told us was a lie – and then he’d circle back. I get what Michaelides was going for here, but it got to be super annoying after a while. Rather than immersing myself in the world and unraveling the mystery alongside the characters, I was constantly reminded of the artificiality of the narrative, and it became tedious. It felt gimmicky and forced, detracting from the overall experience and leaving me feeling disconnected.

Due to the jumping around and the “lies” told by the narrator, the pacing felt uneven. It left me wanting more depth and development. I was so frustrated at times I had to put the book down, and I struggled to pick it back up. I could have easily read this one in a day had I been able to connect.

That being said, I must admit that the twist towards the end of the book was unexpected and added a much-needed jolt of excitement. It was the saving grace of the novel, rescuing it from a two-star rating in my eyes. The twist was cleverly executed and was a redeeming moment in an otherwise frustrating narrative.

Despite these criticisms, I cannot deny that “The Fury” had moments of creative brilliance. The concept of a group of friends with hidden resentments and a deadly game of cat and mouse unfolding on a secluded island is undeniably intriguing. The idea alone held so much potential for suspense and psychological exploration. I wish the delivery had been better. I kind of feel like hearing the story from the different perspectives of the island guests would have been more engaging.

While the twist towards the end breathed some life into the narrative, it wasn’t enough to salvage the book as a whole. The unlikable narrator and the forced direct address to the reader hindered my immersion in the story and left me feeling disconnected. Despite its creative concept, “The Fury” ultimately failed to deliver the gripping and satisfying experience I was hoping for.