Get the latest Syracuse news delivered right to your inbox.
Subscribe to our newsletter here.

Unlike his previous boring, conventional detective stories that have already been told by better directors, Kenneth Branagh’s new film “A Haunting in Venice” gives the actor-director an opportunity to show off some of the directorial skills that were displayed in acclaimed films like “Belfast” and “Henry V.”

Unfortunately, the part horror, part mystery movie falls short of being a scary and intriguing mystery. While Branagh builds an unnerving atmosphere, his so-so lead performance and laborious second half, in which Hercule Poirot explains the whole plot, amounts to a bland cinematic experience.

Branagh previously directed two other Poirot films, 2017’s “Murder on the Orient Express” and 2022’s “Death on the Nile,” which both made over $100 million despite receiving mediocre reviews. That’s why Branagh was able to make his latest work, but the two earlier films at least stayed within the realm of a straight up mystery. “A Haunting in Venice” tried to have it both ways and it came up short.

Mainly taking place in a palazzo in the titular Italian city, Poirot (Branagh) receives an invitation to a séance from his friend and novelist Ariadne Oliver (Tina Fey) in order to expose the supposed mystical medium Joyce Reynolds (Michelle Yeoh). The setting for the film has a history of tragedy as the family who owns the palazzo lost their daughter, Alicia Drake (Rowan Robinson), to an apparent supernatural murder. The séance features creepy and unexplainable moments, before someone murders Reynolds, and it becomes Poirot’s job to figure out if it was a person or a ghost that killed the spiritual medium.

Branagh, in his third go at the iconic Christie character, offers a performance that lacks the humor that is present in the dialogue. His delivery made the forced jokes fall stale. After two films full of mystery, Poirot moves to Venice because he supposedly lost all of his faith in humanity and god, wanting to live out retirement in the Italian city. But in his initial meeting with Oliver, Poirot doesn’t feel like a man who has lost faith in the entire world. Rather, he just seems old and tired.

The goofy fake mustache also does him no favors.

To his credit, Branagh plays up the psychological side of the performance pretty well. At the beginning of the film, Poirot suffers through night terrors. When he is solving the mystery at the palazzo, he starts seeing a vision of a ghost child, adding an element of psychological angst that Branagh has shown, though less so, in his more recent performances like the ones in “Tenet” and “Oppenheimer.”

Fernanda Kligerman | Design Editor

But the lack of a convincing lead takes away from some of the finer performances like Yeoh as Reynolds. Along with Yeoh, Camille Cottin, Jamie Dornan, Kelly Reilly and preteen Jude Hill all give solid supporting performances as grieving loved ones of Drake. Dornan shines as the family doctor dealing with post-traumatic stress, while Yeoh offers a performance that taps into the mystery and uneasy feeling of the film’s first act.

As the night progresses, Poirot and the other characters start to feel an unexplainable terror and begin to believe that there is a sinister supernatural force behind these murders.

Branagh and cinematographer Haris Zambarloukos create a film world full of high and low angles that throw the viewer’s perspective off kilter. All three of Branagh’s Poirot films are also mysteries that take place in a single setting. It’s a frequent trademark of Christie’s works, and Branagh taps into the claustrophobia that the film requires.

Many of his prior films have been standard three-act stories that aren’t groundbreaking (2011’s “Thor” and 2015’s “Cinderella” are good examples of this). But by creating this sense of claustrophobia in “A Haunting in Venice,” Branagh makes the mystery film feel like it’s coming apart at the seams. For a brief moment, it felt like a case Poirot wouldn’t be able to come out from, and he may not make it through the night.

As the second and third acts come along, the film reverts back to being an extremely conventional mystery. But after carefully building all of this tension, it feels like Branagh threw it all away just so there could be a fitting and comfortable conclusion.

On top of this, the film’s actual scares are disappointing, to say the least. “A Haunting in Venice” relies too heavily on quick camera pans and sudden loud noises to actually build jumpscares. While it may terrify some audience members, the jumpscares get stale by the film’s second half. And the third-act explanation by Poiroit also explains the ghostly visions, ruining any form of suspense in the name of a happy ending.

Maybe Branagh was just stuck with the source material that he seems to enjoy. Some viewers and critics enjoy this type of film. But with the actor-director routinely hinting at something deeper and sinister at play, Branagh’s third Christie adaptation falls short. Like “The Nun II” and “Insidious: The Red Door,” “A Haunting in Venice” feels hollow.

Published on September 19, 2023 at 9:45 pm

Contact Henry: henrywobrien1123@gmail.com