This Kenneth Branagh's third Hurcule Poirot movie has been hailed by some critics as the best so far. Maybe this is because it departs somewhat from the mass-entertainment focus to lean towards a more artistic-philosophical flavour.
For one thing, do not expect much by way of picturesque waterways in "A haunting in Venice". The accent is on the first word of the title. Virtually, the entire movie happens in the confined space of an infamous haunted house, a setting not unlike the island in Agatha Christies well-known "And then there were none". But instead of all the characters ending up dead, there are only two deaths in the haunted house. I better not give away anything more.
The background of the haunted house involves children ended up dead there (for detail circumstances, see the movie). The ghost story however is just a plot device, and takes on more metaphorical meaning than literal. This is essentially just another Poirot movie, complete with all the elements you would expect to find in one. The mission, however (initially, at least), is not to investigate a murder but to expel superstition.
When old friend and writer (who has profited from writing about him) Adriadne Oliver (Tina Fey) calls on Poirot (Kenneth Branagh), he is in retirement. "I am much satisfied", he murmurs. "Put some life back into your life" the spirited Adriadne demands. She wants him to expose a séance as a fraud, "to pop a balloon", so to speak. Her motive is not entirely altruistic. This will give her more, and refreshingly different, material to write about.
The main plotline, the reason for the séance, is the death of the invalid daughter Alicia of retired soprano Rowena Drake (Kelly Reilly), the cause of which could be accident, suicide or murder. She fell from a high and got drowned in a pool. Rowena wants to ask her what happened, face-to-face, sort of. Seeing the famous detective arriving at her séance, the popular medium (Michelle Yeoh) losses no time in throwing down the gauntlet "Am I your next case?" Poirot obviously is not one who backs away from a challenge. With pure deductive logic, he argues his belief "there is no god, therefore no ghosts, and therefore no medium (in any meaningful sense)". The game's afoot, if I can borrow those iconic words. Before it all ends, there is a subplot with Poirot in the centre of the vortex, and a post-revelation, clever twist.
The only other comments I'll make are on the characters and cast, not in that order, but simultaneously. Anybody even vaguely familiar with Poirot would be aware that in his cases nobody is beyond suspicion. Here, it includes the three important women aforementioned: author, mother and medium. Making up the rest of the list are as follows. Playing housekeeper Olga Seminoff is French actress Camille Cottin whom I remember best from "House of Gucci". Father and son Leslie and Leopold Ferrier are played, respectively, by Jamie Dornan and Jude Hill, both from "Belfast" and, not surprisingly, playing father and son in that film too. Father, an army surgeon called to the scene by good friend Rowena, suffers from PTSD. The son is best described by the words of the detective himself "12 going on 40". The others are Alicia's former boyfriend, the medium's half-siblings (brother and sister) assistants, and a retired cop who happened to be on the scene just before retirement.
It may not be entirely meaningful to compare "Venice" with "Murder on the Orient Express" and "Death on the Nile", Branagh's two previous takes on Poirot mysteries, both of which stay close to the novel and aim for mainstream entertainment. "Hallowe'en Party", from which "Venice" is adapted, is far less known than the other two. That being the reason or not, the movie does not follow the novel as closely. The "haunting" however is not exactly genre-altering. It merely works as an interesting backdrop. If you want an example, Doyle's "The Hound of Baskerville" is a lot closer to a Gothic horror. The ghosts here are allegory, adding a pinch of philosophical flavour. Perhaps that is why some critics like this movie. In any event, for pure entertainment value, it is well worth recommending too.
For one thing, do not expect much by way of picturesque waterways in "A haunting in Venice". The accent is on the first word of the title. Virtually, the entire movie happens in the confined space of an infamous haunted house, a setting not unlike the island in Agatha Christies well-known "And then there were none". But instead of all the characters ending up dead, there are only two deaths in the haunted house. I better not give away anything more.
The background of the haunted house involves children ended up dead there (for detail circumstances, see the movie). The ghost story however is just a plot device, and takes on more metaphorical meaning than literal. This is essentially just another Poirot movie, complete with all the elements you would expect to find in one. The mission, however (initially, at least), is not to investigate a murder but to expel superstition.
When old friend and writer (who has profited from writing about him) Adriadne Oliver (Tina Fey) calls on Poirot (Kenneth Branagh), he is in retirement. "I am much satisfied", he murmurs. "Put some life back into your life" the spirited Adriadne demands. She wants him to expose a séance as a fraud, "to pop a balloon", so to speak. Her motive is not entirely altruistic. This will give her more, and refreshingly different, material to write about.
The main plotline, the reason for the séance, is the death of the invalid daughter Alicia of retired soprano Rowena Drake (Kelly Reilly), the cause of which could be accident, suicide or murder. She fell from a high and got drowned in a pool. Rowena wants to ask her what happened, face-to-face, sort of. Seeing the famous detective arriving at her séance, the popular medium (Michelle Yeoh) losses no time in throwing down the gauntlet "Am I your next case?" Poirot obviously is not one who backs away from a challenge. With pure deductive logic, he argues his belief "there is no god, therefore no ghosts, and therefore no medium (in any meaningful sense)". The game's afoot, if I can borrow those iconic words. Before it all ends, there is a subplot with Poirot in the centre of the vortex, and a post-revelation, clever twist.
The only other comments I'll make are on the characters and cast, not in that order, but simultaneously. Anybody even vaguely familiar with Poirot would be aware that in his cases nobody is beyond suspicion. Here, it includes the three important women aforementioned: author, mother and medium. Making up the rest of the list are as follows. Playing housekeeper Olga Seminoff is French actress Camille Cottin whom I remember best from "House of Gucci". Father and son Leslie and Leopold Ferrier are played, respectively, by Jamie Dornan and Jude Hill, both from "Belfast" and, not surprisingly, playing father and son in that film too. Father, an army surgeon called to the scene by good friend Rowena, suffers from PTSD. The son is best described by the words of the detective himself "12 going on 40". The others are Alicia's former boyfriend, the medium's half-siblings (brother and sister) assistants, and a retired cop who happened to be on the scene just before retirement.
It may not be entirely meaningful to compare "Venice" with "Murder on the Orient Express" and "Death on the Nile", Branagh's two previous takes on Poirot mysteries, both of which stay close to the novel and aim for mainstream entertainment. "Hallowe'en Party", from which "Venice" is adapted, is far less known than the other two. That being the reason or not, the movie does not follow the novel as closely. The "haunting" however is not exactly genre-altering. It merely works as an interesting backdrop. If you want an example, Doyle's "The Hound of Baskerville" is a lot closer to a Gothic horror. The ghosts here are allegory, adding a pinch of philosophical flavour. Perhaps that is why some critics like this movie. In any event, for pure entertainment value, it is well worth recommending too.