Director: Kenneth Branagh
Starring: Kenneth Branagh, Michelle Yeoh, Tina Fey
‘Magnificent Mystery’
Few authors tell murder mystery stories like Agatha Christie. Following the 1920’s when books were published in press, Christie’s tales of murder on the orient express have achieved success. Christie’s style capturing a death on the Nile River has left readers with a smile. Her novels are talked about for capturing servants with knives out. From personal point-of-views, I find her novels about servants without a clue simple to relate to. My interests in Christie started when my housekeeper became the usual suspect of mystery. Years ago, my family endured sorrow when our maid was stabbed in showers by a psycho. To avoid prison, her lover committed suicide before police observed the crime by a rear window. A cruel crime without compassion, it brought my maid’s life to tragic conclusions. Before her murder, she was a shining person I came to adore. Born in Eritrea, she was a servant with stamina. She was a special maid dedicated to putting food on the table. A kind soul, she gave me a goal. However, murder caused my bond with a gone girl to disappear. Like mansions haunted by ghosts of Rebecca, my maid’s death caused lifelong trauma. The world wasn’t a fine place and worth fighting for. Memories of murder weighed on my mind. I grieved absence of a maid killed like lambs in violence. I couldn’t recover after my maid became one of the prisoners of murder. As life hit a low, Agatha Christie’s books healed my sorrow. Novels became a tool to overcome murder which was cruel. Years later, I adore an author celebrating housekeepers.
Now, Christie returns and her haunting housekeepers’ stories are beautifully commemorated in Kenneth Branagh’s “A Haunting in Venice”. Absorbing, thought-provoking and meaningful, it commemorates world-famous authors. Branagh beautifully adapts Christie’s commemorated literature. Boasting phenomenal production-design, extraordinary storytelling and powerful performances, it’s a magnificent mystery. Although “A Haunting in Venice” is haunting, it’s problematic. It lacks character development, building ambiguous conclusions. Nevertheless, it provides old-fashioned entertainment satisfying Agatha Christie fans.
Amidst 1940’s Venice, “A Haunting in Venice” follows Hercule Poirot resolving haunting murders. Kenneth Branagh embodies the world-weary detective experiencing desire to retire. However, Poirot’s retirement ends when he’s hired by mystery writer Ariadne Oliver (Tina Fey) investigating mansion murders. Discovering ghosts that scare, Poirot realizes crime-solving isn’t as simple as it may appear. Adopting negative perspectives, Poirot questions responsibilities of detectives.
Kenneth Branagh is fascinated with crime-solving detectives. A fantastic filmmaker, Branagh has commonly succeeded at adapting Agatha Christie’s literature. With “A Haunting in Venice”, Branagh returns to familiar territory. It’s Branagh’s attempt to reimagine novels, but he succeeds. Evoking “Murder on the Orient Express”, Branagh demonstrates murder suspects’ connections through confined locations. Like claustrophobic orient express trains where passengers commit murder, this time suspects form connections in mansions together. Confined locations elevate the seance scene where suspects bond by recalling spirits of deceased daughters. It reminded me of my strong bonds with a housekeeper I appreciated. Confined locations are tricky. Stanley Kubrick’s “The Shining” illustrated confined locations elevate horror movies about isolation. As Alfred Hitchcock’s “Rear Window” suggested, confined spaces elevated 1950’s mysteries. Nevertheless, it succeeds. Alongside cinematographer Haris Zambarloukos, Branagh captures murder. Branagh celebrates Christie, crafting theatrical viewing.
If mystery authors don’t attract you to theaters, however, there’s several reasons to see “A Haunting in Venice”. Assisted by sound-designer James Mather, Branagh expertly uses diegetic sounds to capture suspects’ shocked reactions towards murders that are tragic. For instance, diegetic sounds elevate the first murder scene. During this unforgettable scene, the suspects gathered together in mansions react in frightened terror to the psychic’s murder. One appreciates diegetic sounds showcasing the shocked reactions to hostile murder in style recalling “Death on the Nile”. It reminded me of my reaction of terror to my housekeeper’s gruesome murder. Diegetic sounds are tricky techniques. Martin Scorsese’s “Shutter Island” demonstrated diegetic sounds elevate psychological thrillers. As Alfred Hitchcock’s “Psycho” suggested, sounds of screaming in reaction to murder elevated 1960’s thrillers. Nevertheless, it succeeds. Furthermore, music is magnificent. Evoking Jonathan Lynn’s “Clue”, it captures detectives’ clue. Through awe-inspiring production, Branagh recreates investigations.
Another extraordinary aspect of “A Haunting in Venice” is storytelling. Michael Green’s screenwriting strength is capturing murder investigations’ traumatic repercussions through flashbacks. Most murder mysteries portray housekeepers as social barriers victims facing odds stacked against their favor. As case-in-point: Ben Wheatley’s “Rebecca” portrayed housemaids as victims haunted by ghosts of Rebecca facing social barriers of the era. Fortunately, however, “A Haunting in Venice” avoids pitfalls. Inspired with Rian Johnson’s “Knives Out”, Green honors housekeepers in horrific murder investigations through flashbacks. For example, Olga is a troubled housekeeper haunted by murder of her employer’s daughter. The film switches simultaneously between separate timelines: Olga’s present-day struggles in mansions and black-and-white flashbacks of her child’s murder. It brought back memories of my traumatic experience being unable to recover following housekeepers’ murder. Flashbacks are complicated techniques. Bryan Singer’s “The Usual Suspects” suggested flashbacks elevated thrillers about usual suspects being investigated. As David Fincher’s “Gone Girl” demonstrated, flashbacks elevate adaptations. However, it succeeds. Through engrossing storytelling, Green commemorates literature.
One appreciates astonishing performances.
Kenneth Branagh gives his finest performance as Hercule Poirot. Branagh achieved success playing crime-solving detectives in “Murder on the Orient Express”. With “A Haunting in Venice”, however, Branagh portrays his most mature role. In his third outing as the iconic detective, Branagh portrays the character from an emotional perspective. Evoking Morgan Freeman in David Fincher’s “Se7en”, Branagh embodies a world-weary detective adopting a cynical perspective. With riveting expressions, he captures the world-famous sleuth’s angst, grief and resentments. It’s a phenomenal performance.
The supporting cast is phenomenal, sharing haunting relationship. Tina Fey’s terrific, striving to convey acknowledgements of a work-oriented writer investigating grim murders with a price to pay. Camille Cottin is captivating, capturing nature of a caring housekeeper wrongfully accused of murder. Finally, Michelle Yeoh merits acknowledgements. As a psychic, she’s menacing.
Despite powerful performances, however, “A Haunting in Venice” can’t honor haunting legacy of an author penning murder mystery stories. Branagh’s decisions deviating from source material by changing the book’s ending is commendable but doesn’t succeed. It’s an abrupt conclusion without any satisfying resolution. Whereas this open-ended conclusion elevated David Fincher’s “Zodiac”, it clashes with source material. As Bong Joon-Ho’s “Memories of Murder” suggested, ambiguous endings elevate foreign movies. Moreover, the film lacks character development. For instance, we’re barely given reasons to care for suspects in investigations. As Denis Villeneuve’s “Prisoners” demonstrated, best murder mysteries feature empathetic characters. Jonathan Demme’s “Silence of the Lambs” suggested mysteries can only maintain a gripping atmosphere when they create characters about whom viewers’ care. Consequently, “A Haunting in Venice” falters.
Nevertheless, Agatha Christie fans will recognize “A Haunting in Venice” and so will moviegoers giving acknowledgements to housemaids’ memories. A magical mystery, it seeks to celebrate an author whose tales of sleuths that investigate clues captivate. Centuries after Agatha Christie put pen to paper wrote dark tales giving acknowledgement in literature, it’s a haunting reminder inspiring individuals to recover from housemaids’ institutionalization murder.
A dazzling tribute to an author with distinct style telling stories of detectives solving death on the Nile, it’s a deep reminder of how Agatha Christie’s novels have left leave readers with a lasting smile.
Despite massive success of her novels published in press, it’s a major reminder that the author’s books are criticized for portraying housekeepers as victims facing stress of murder on the orient express.
If movies can honor housekeepers taking knives out, hopefully it will lead people that face doubt after maids’ murders to recover by reading centuries-old books of authors that continue to be talked about.
As haunting as Venice murders Poirot is resolving, it has made me move on years after my housekeeper’s heartbreaking passing honoring books written by one of the world’s best authors with healing power allowing me to overcome mourning.
4/5 stars
The Film Buff 