Cacería En Venecia

This was surprisingly spookier than I thought it would be but it was happily welcomed during this Halloween Season. It was spooky without being cheesy or goofy which is what a lot of traditional horror movies tend to lean towards. I saw it in theaters but can definitely see myself cuddling up on the couch with a hot chocolate and a blanket to watch this film in the autumn.

You can tell Tina Fey isn't used to playing more serious roles but she pulled it off enough. It was definitely a surprise to see her in this film, especially as such a large character.

I would love to see more Poirot in the future as Kenneth Branagh does a great job portraying him.

This film was a good length too. Not too long and not too short.

I'd recommend this to those who enjoy a little spook and mystery but not for anyone looking for light hearted Halloween fun.

A Haunting in Venice is the third installment of Kenneth Branagh's adaptation of Agatha Christie's novels, featuring the Belgian detective Hercule Poirot. Set in post-World War II Venice, the film follows Poirot as he investigates a murder at a seance in a haunted palazzo, where he faces a surprise from his own past.

The film boasts an impressive cast, including Branagh himself as Poirot, Michelle Yeoh as the medium Joyce Reynolds, Jamie Dornan as the doctor Leslie Ferrier, Tina Fey as the mystery writer Ariadne Oliver, and Kelly Reilly as the opera singer Rowena Drake. However, none of the characters are likable or charming, and that makes it a bit challenging as the story requires a lot of patience. The film attempts to be eerie, but the camera work and the actors do not seem to be believable or convincing, despite its atmospheric setting and stellar location views of Venice.

The plot is loosely based on Christie's novel Hallowe'en Party, but with several changes and additions that make it more complex and modern. The film explores themes such as guilt, revenge, faith, and justice, and touches on the historical and social context of post-war Italy. The twist is detailed but not too convoluted, however, not very believable. The film also relies too much on CGI effects and jump scares, which undermine the suspense and mystery.

A Haunting in Venice is not a bad film, but it is not a great one either. It is a decent adaptation of Christie's work, but it lacks the charm and wit of the original. It is a film that tries to do too much, but fails to deliver on its promises. I liked it, but not very much. I gave it just a 6/10 rating.

The change of setting to Venice is inspired, it gives it an otherworldly and insular, claustrophobic tone, which is emphasised by the camera work, and lighting, this one is tricky to review without spoilers so I must be brief, and leave some ideas out, the script is close to superb, but it just hits a couple of bum notes, the third act is over too soon, the denouement rushed, but in part it's because the mystery for all the effort and effects isn't that mysterious, but fundamentally the problem is Branagh, he obviously wants to be Poirot, but he isn't, he just isn't idiosyncratic enough, or dare I say talented enough, and he pales in comparison to the giant magnificent performances that have been before, the genius of Peter Ustinov only surpassed by the subtlety and diligence and sheer depth of David Suchet, one of the greatest acting performances ever, unfortunately for Branagh it's a tough school, and he just doesn't make the grade, gave it a 7, felt like an 8, but also a 6 coz of KBs love letter to himself.

A Haunting in Venice is the best of Kenneth Branagh's trilogy of Poirot adventures. This one being a smaller scale whodunit with a supernatural edge fixes any remaining issues whilst still being an engaging mystery with a satisfying answer to whodunit.

Kenneth Branagh is still endlessly entertaining as Hercule Poirot, the humour is toned down here due to the darker story and yet again he's grown as a character by the end. Each one has tested something different, first it was his morality then his humanity and here it's his sanity that is pushed to breaking point.

The cast is still undeniably star studded but still smaller than the predecessor which means no one goes unnoticed. Highlights include Tina Fey who makes for a great double act with Branagh's Poirot and Michelle Yeoh, given her best role in a Western film in ages (excluding EEAAO of course).

Mostly being confined to one smaller, interior heavy location, Branagh's direction is even better that what's come before. His trademark canted angles have never been more at home and even though the film isn't massively scary, Branagh is still able to craft some effectively uncomfortable moments.

Thanks to the location this franchise is finally free of the distracting CG that's been its biggest flaw. Being majority practical just makes the whole thing infinitely more immersive and means the stylish visual composition on display isn't having to make up for shoddy effects.

This is an interesting film if you're not an Agatha Christie & Hercule Poirot fan. But for me it completely lacked the unique charm of Poirot, his methods and his personality. KB is a great actor but in this film he is as far from being Poirot as can be. Maybe that was intentional but for me it just didn't work. Tina Fey was a nice surprise although my image of Ariadne Oliver was quite different. The pace of the action is not at all balanced and is difficult to follow. It is not bad film, I would definitely recommend it instead of hundreds others but it doesn't do justice to Agatha Christie's marvellous writing.