A Haunting in Venice, A Failure of Adaptation of Agatha Christie‘s Work

After its global release on September 15th, A Haunting in Venice, directed by Kenneth Branagh, quickly became the week's box office champion in North America and Argentina. Compared to the other two Agatha adaptations by Kenneth Branagh, this one has received relatively better reviews from critics. However, when compared to other Agatha Christie adaptations, especially the 1978 adaptation of Death on the Nile and the BBC version of Hercule Poirot, this film still falls short of being considered a classic. After watching it in the theater, I believe it is indeed a mediocre film. Even with so many stars and grand sets, the film fails to leave a profound impact on the audience in the second half. Therefore, I am wondering what changes were made to this film that prevented it from becoming a memorable Agatha Christie adaptation.

The film effectively creates a mysterious and terrifying atmosphere through its set design and camera shots. This aspect of the film is particularly impressive. The story's setting is changed from the original English countryside estate to a Venetian mansion after World War II. As I eagerly watched it in the dark movie theater, the characters embarked on a nighttime journey through Venice on a small boat. Accompanied by the distant sound of songs, I was completely absorbed in the enchanting atmosphere. It felt as if I myself were about to embark on a thrilling adventure alongside the characters. The laughter of children, the black and white-clad nuns, the elegantly dressed nobles, and the final scene in the dimly lit castle all blend together to create a nostalgic aesthetic ambiance in the film.

In terms of camera usage, the film includes a large number of overhead shots, low-angle shots, and flipped shots. These shots disrupt the balance of the frame and create a sense of unease for the audience. The secluded mansion on a stormy night, isolated from the outside world, also creates a feeling of confinement, giving the audience a sense of oppression. The predominantly black color tone of the visuals even adds to the horror. As someone who enjoys watching horror movies, this is a positive aspect for me. However, for viewers who prefer the light and relaxed atmosphere of Agatha Christie novels, they may consider this adaptation to be negative. There are too many jump scares, most of which are explained as the protagonist's hallucinations and do not have a connection to the main plot. This causes the audience's curiosity and patience to be consumed too early, and the mysterious atmosphere that is built through set design is disrupted.

But too many jump scares in this movie is just a minor problem. The real issues are with the way the story is told and the development of the characters. A Haunting in Venice is based on Agatha's novel Hallow'en Party, but it also includes elements from the 1973 British film Don't Look Now. For instance, the story's location has been changed from a British countryside estate to an old mansion in Venice, with a drowned daughter, a neurotic mother, and strange occurrences in the mansion, all similar to Don't Look Now. This combination results in a significant difference in the plot and the design of the characters compared to the original novel.

In terms of the plot, the order of the murders has changed, so has the causes of deaths and the relationships between the characters. These changes result in more forced motivations of many characters in the movie and contradictions in their actions and logic. (Note: serious spoilers ahead) For example, in the original novel, the culprit Rowena Drake did not kill her own daughter. Instead, she, along with her lover, conspired to murder her ex-husband, the maid, and two potential witnesses in order to inherit a huge fortune and maintain her relationship with her lover. Each murder has sufficient motivation. They are indeed evil, not irrationally insane. However, in A Haunting in Venice, Mrs Drake accidentally kills her daughter and stages her death as an accident. On the surface, the logic is sound, until it is put under closer examination: a mother who loves her daughter so much that she is willing to poison her to control her, upon discovering her daughter's accidental death, would she not be overwhelmed with self-blame, madness, and anguish, rather than immediately resorting to fabricating her daughter's death, making wounds on the body, and pushing her into the water from upstairs? Does this align with the psychology of a mother obsessed with her daughter? This kind of truth is too simplistic and far-fetched.

A good detective story should guid the audience to clearly follow the detective's perspective and observe various useful information. When the protagonist finally reveals the truth, the audience should have a feeling of "Oh, so that's how it is. I almost guessed it." This way, the movie won't be too simple and boring, nor too complex for the audience to understand, relying solely on the detective to solve the case. However, A Haunting in Venice fails to achieve this. It makes me feel that my efforts to observe and analyze every detail in the first half of the movie are completely unnecessary. Because the crucial details of the case are not shown to the audience until the final reveal. For example, if the victim dies from drinking poisoned honey tea, at least let me know that such honey is poisonous. But the director dose not hint these crucial details to us, only leaving them for Poirot to unravel in the end. This also means that even if the audience pays close attention to the details, it would be impossible to guess such a truth until Poriot explained it. Poirot's reasoning ability is also difficult to showcase in this narrative because the audience would feel that Poirot can solve the case only because he possesses some key details.

The changes to the character of Hercule Poirot are often criticized in Kenneth Branagh's adaptation of Agatha Christie's novels. In Christie's novels, Poirot is a somewhat traditional and self-assured detective, but he also possesses a sense of humor and compassion. He pities and sympathizes with the characters involved in the cases, lamenting the complexities and sorrows of human nature. He is the perfect observer of each case, neither getting too involved nor being indifferent. In my opinion, Poirot's character is an epitome of the perfect balance of Agatha Christie's novels: a balance between the intrigue of solving crimes and the seriousness of various murder cases. Imagine if Poirot were to invest too much personal emotion in each case, it would make the story lack amusement and focus too much on Poirot himself rather than the characters in the cases. If Poirot were to maintain absolute calmness and rationality in each case, he would appear cold-blooded and prevent the audience from empathizing with the characters in the story.

However, in Kenneth Branagh's films, Poirot is given additional experiences, some of which are unnecessary and outh of character. For instance, the portrayal of Poirot's loss of comrades and loved ones during World War I in "Death on the Nile" (2022). And the introspection that arises when confronted with the accusation of "Wherever you go, death follows" in "A Haunting in Venice". These plots add an element of melancholic to Poirot's personality, which differs from the cheerful and humorous image of the original character. This also brings a layer of sadness to the story from Poirot's perspective.

To make changes to the protagonist is a common technique in adapting novels into films, and it is also necessary especially in film adaptations of series novels. Because in a series of novels, the protagonist can be a witness and the author can gradually depict and develop the character's personality through multiple stories. However, in a single film, the opportunity to shape the protagonist is limited, lacking the context of previous and future installments. The detective's personality needs to be highlighted through more screen time. For example, in the British series "Sherlock," the writers directly made Sherlock the center of the cases, and the process of solving cases became the process of resolving his own life-and-death issues. In this process, the personal character of Sherlock Holmes is greatly emphasized, becoming one of the highlights of the show that attracts the audience. Therefore, I do not oppose giving Poirot more screen time, but these additional scenes should further interpret Poirot's prominent characteristics from the original work, such as humor, reliability, a sense of boundaries, and a harmless pride and arrogance, rather than turning him into a different person, an injured, self-doubting, and melancholic elderly detective. In my opinion, this is the main reason why Kenneth Branagh's adaptation of Poirot has not been able to win over fans of the original work.

To sum up, adaptation and changes do not necessarily make a movie better or worse. It depends on whether these changes have captured the essence of the original work. It can be said that in the film "A Haunting in Venice," Branagh has made the movie more interesting from an artistic and atmospheric perspective. However, in terms of characters and plot, it is not a successful adaptation and loses the essence of the original work. This gives the film having a grand and polished form without a compelling story core to move the audience. Nevertheless, I sincerely look forward to Branagh's next Agatha Christie novel adaptation film. After all, a new movie based on Agatha Christie's work, starring numerous celebrities, will still excite fans of detective novels around the globe.