by Scott Batchelor, Contributing Writer
I am very thankful we are getting big screen adaptations into one of the world’s greatest detectives. Hercule Poirot (Kenneth Branagh) returns in A Haunting in Venice, a very loose adaptation of one of Agatha Christie’s later stories, Hallowe’en Party. The only thing used from the novel are the character names, and that creates a bit of an issue with the overall plot. The previous two Branagh-led Poirot films (Murder on the Orient Express and Death on the Nile) are unique in that they take place in the cramped quarters of a train and boat respectively, and that seems to be the pattern for these vehicles (no pun intended). In the novel, Poirot is not forced to find the killer quickly because they will be able to evade capture soon, but in the film, writer Michael Green and Branagh find a contrived reason for why we are repeating the formula of being stuck together during a murderer case. The deviation doesn’t make this a terrible movie, but it feels clear that it is not something Agatha Christie wrote.
We start off in a different mood than what we are used to. The haunting part of A Haunting in Venice becomes front and center, as our favorite mid-century detective wakes from a nightmare. We get a quick shot of something slightly off kilter, full of horror movie sound effects and sudden loud noises. This is a trick that is used over and over again until, by the time you see it, all you can do is think the horror effects were an afterthought written by a 12-year-old with only a basic understanding of the elements of a horror movie.
Taking place in 1947 Italy (duh), 10 years after his last major case on the Nile, Poirot is refusing to do anything at all. He doesn’t have any friends, he isn’t working, and the only companionship he gets is through his bodyguard, Vitale Portfoglio (Riccardo Scamarcio). He is finally pulled out of his slump by his old friend and not at all Agatha Christie stand-in, Ariadne Oliver (Tina Fey). She convinces him to come help her solve a mystery that has everyone stumped.
Joyce Reynolds (Michelle Yeoh) comes to perform a seance for a woman who died under mysterious circumstances a year earlier. Poirot, a man of science and facts, feels he has to see for himself. Oliver claims to have no idea how Reynolds performs her “tricks,” and needs Poirot to take her to task. Upon arriving at our bottle episode setting, we are toured throughout the Drake residence before Reynolds arrives to begin talking to the dead.
I feel revealing anything plot-related past this point would be spoiler territory. A large part of the story is all about if Reynolds is able to actually talk with the dead, and I feel that is actually a hindrance to the plot. It doesn’t feel like a Poirot story — it feels more like The X-Files or Fringe. Strange things start happening, and Poirot thinks he has an explanation, but also maybe he doesn’t have an explanation. To say one way or another would kind of take away the point of the movie.
But rest assured, there is a murder or Poirot to sink his teeth into once he arrives. For the most part, our detective story returns to what we are used to. Poirot locks down the area to make sure he can interrogate and investigate all cast of characters to determine what just the heck is going on. The mystery of the psychic does add a new layer, but the film leans so hard into the horror territory that it distracts from what made these movies enjoyable to begin with.
The acting is very on point here. You have a number of award-winning actors that just bring it. Yeoh hams it up when she is speaking with the dead (or not speaking with the dead…), but when she gets a chance to be a bit more subdued, you are reminded that there are powerful stars here. The other standout is the youngest of the cast, Leopold (Jude Hill), whose breakout role was Branagh’s previous film, the Oscar-winning Belfast. Hill brings believability to lines that feel forced, but his delivery sells his character. Fey attempts to go against type, but she does not really land what she is going for. I don’t want to typecast her, but it would have been nice to see a bit more humor in the film, and with a legend like Fey, maybe you don’t have to lean so hard against type. This film tries something new, but it doesn’t really focus on what made the previous installments hits to begin with.
A Haunting in Venice tris to mix mystery with horror, but it doesn’t really land on either side. Any cliché you can think of is used to scare you. Mirror tricks, little girl singing, bumps in the night, and sudden loud noises (as seen in the opening scene). Anybody hoping to scratch the horror itch might feel a bit of a let down. However, as far as gateway horrors go, this is not a bad one to share with preteens to feel out how they feel about the horror genre, starting with a Hocus Pocus type and then maybe seeing how they can handle this one. There are few bumps in the night, but nothing that should really stick with anyone. Though, there is an interesting premise of this being a horror movie for everyone except Poirot, who is trying to disprove the hauntings.
This movie is aggressively just fine. It exists, and it’s not the worst thing you could ever watch. There is a place for it in our busy viewing schedule, just not anything you have to rush out to see. It mostly just boils down to nothing new; it doesn’t have much worth looking for.
Rating: It Was Just Okay
A Haunting in Venice is currently playing in theaters
You can read more from Scott Batchelor, and follow him on Letterboxd and Twitter