Kenneth Branagh’sA Haunting in Venice, the director and star’s latest foray into the works of Agatha Christie, is not a standout piece of murder mystery filmmaking, but neither is it an interminable slog. Much like a ghost waiting to cross over into the afterlife,A Haunting In Veniceexists in a space between the two. The only thing that is certain about this movie is that it is far and away better than Hercule Poirot’s last big-screen adventure.
Branagh once again assumes the role of Poirot, a part that he has never seemed right for. The vision of Christie’s fussy, short, portly Belgian detective has never quite squared with Branagh’s movie star appearance and energy. Still, he carries on, wearing an exquisitely styled mustache and doing his best to bring Poirot’s inner qualities to life.
RELATED:Murder Mysteries Are Back, But Why?
This time around, Poirot ishiding away in post-World War II Venice, living a quiet life tending to his plants, receiving pastries by boat courier, and definitely not solving any more mysteries. He is only convinced to step outside of his newfound comfort zone when a visiting friend, author Ariadne Oliver (a very wildly miscast Tina Fey) goads him into attending a séance at a supposedly haunted orphanage that now serves as the home of a famous opera singer. There, as in every time Poirot is talked into leaving his house, murder is afoot, and there are mysteries upon mysteries that only the finest detective from Belgium can solve.
A Haunting in Veniceis neither as star-studded nor as bloated asBranagh’s take onDeath on the Nile, and that helps to elevate this movie slightly above its predecessor. The plot moves along at a good pace, delivering the actual murder around which the mystery revolves in the first act, rather than halfway through the second. The movie also benefits from taking place in one set and allowing the story itself to take center stage, even if this one might be slightly easier for any amateur sleuths in the audience to figure out. The production design here favors darkness and shadows, not surprising given the supernatural thriller vibe that Branagh is going for.There’s a Halloween celebrationearly on in the story, and the period-appropriate costumes, games, and activities lend a great texture to the story.
Branagh’s direction coupled with work from his longtime collaborator, cinematographer Haris Zambarloukos, generally works in the film’s favor. Branagh’s signature Dutch angles make a return, and he rarely shoots a conversation in the most standard shot-reverse shot fashion. Branagh and Zambarloukosmake the setting feel appropriately haunted(whether it actually is or not is up for debate), and Branagh even manages to sneak a few genuinely frightening moments into his otherwise standard murder mystery. Still, Branagh’s grasp of constructing a proper horror sequence isn’t always that firm, and he undermines what might have been one of the movie’s more chilling sequences with frantic editing and poor shot choices.
Similarly, the screenplay from Michael Green, who has written all of Branagh’s Poirot movies, isn’t always firing on all cylinders. It could be that this story is slightly more sparse than the previous ones, but it doesn’t always feel like the pieces of the mystery are clicking into place, even if the plot itself moves along at a quicker pace. Once Poirot has everyone gathered together for the final reveal, it doesn’t entirely feel like the audience has been given enough information to understand everything that transpired, even if some of the elements are a little too obvious.
What might throw some viewers off is the tendency for the actors to perform their admittedly stilted dialogue more in the style of stage play than a major studio movie. That might not be that surprising given Branagh’s history with Shakespearian projects and more theatrical takes on blockbuster filmmaking (such as his lone contribution to the MCU,Thor). However, while Branagh can appear much more natural in performing this kind of writing, others struggle with it.
Fey, in particular, comes across hopelessly outmatched by her co-stars. Her performancecomes across like her30 Rockcharacter Liz Lemon doing an impression of an old-timey writer than a real, honest portrayal. Similarly, Kyle Allen gives a performance that doesn’t exactly gel with how everyone else is playing their parts. Others, like an underused Jamie Dornan andCall My Agent!’s Camille Cottin offer up far more nuanced characterizations.Michelle Yeoh also shinesin a somewhat brief appearance as Miss Reynolds, the medium who supposedly can establish contact with the deceased daughter of Kelly Reilly’s opera star Rowena Drake. Branagh also casts the breakout star of his Oscar-winning filmBelfast, Jude Hill, as the son of Jamie Dornan’s PTSD-afflicted doctor. Hill does fairly well here, holding his own against the cast of adults, and never coming across as too precocious in a role that could have easily gone that way.
A Haunting in Veniceisn’t the most exciting or daring movie to tackle the murder mystery genre, but it’s a more-than-serviceable film with a some stylistic choices that make up for some of its shortcomings. Branagh very clearly has a soft spot for this character and Agatha Christie’s stories, and it seems like as long as the studios will let him keep making these movies, he’ll keep taking on the opportunity. Hopefully, any future Poirot mysteries skew closer to this entry thanDeath on the Nile.
A Haunting in Veniceopens in theaters on September 15th.
MORE:Jackie Chan And Pierce Brosnan Star In This Underrated Action Movie
