A Haunting in Venice

 

Score:  B

Directed by Kenneth Branaugh

Starring Kenneth Branaugh, Tina Fey, Michelle Yeoh, Kelly Reilly, et. al.

Running time: 103 minutes

Rated PG-13

Long Story Short:  A Haunting in Venice, a third adaptation of Agatha Christie's Poirot mysteries by director/actor Kenneth Branaugh, is a pleasant early fall entertainment.  While not a great, memorable movie, it's nevertheless rock-solid, a close match in quality to the first Murder on Orient Express.  Poirot continues to be a dependable good guy in this unashamedly traditional franchise.

Hercule Poirot (Branaugh) has decided to leave his famed investigative work behind and hide away in Italy in retirement.  However, one day an old frenemy appears, writer Ariadne Oliver (Fey), who tempts Poirot to join her in attending a seance for a wealthy single woman's dead young daughter.  Poirot is quickly able to discern the medium's (Yeoh) tricks, but soon one of the participants turns up dead.  Trapped in the building that night by a fierce storm, Poirot is determined to get to the bottom of the situation quickly - before anyone else ends up haunting the doomed home.

A Haunting in Venice is a fine, well-made film, providing light fall entertainment that's not super ambitious yet also performs its role as a traditional mystery quite well.  This is Branaugh's third adaptation of Agatha Christie's Poirot stories, and like the others, the plot and characters do have quite a different feel to them compared to contemporary equivalents.  Earnest might not quite be accurate, with all the inevitable twists and relative complexity to the characters and relationships; still, it's a welcome change of tone (IMO) from the cynicism, self-awareness and sheer darkness that many of today's new stories bring.  The atmosphere and various moods are fairly restrained - it's more of a mental exercise than an emotional one.  But there is a light Halloween-y feel to it, with creepy moments but certainly well short of a horror.  There's also some good humor sprinkled in, usually having to do with Poirot's electicisms.  I would say this is about as good as the first Branaugh-Poirot movie (though also nicely distinct from it), thanks in large part to a renewed focus on the lead character.  He's an interesting, and ultimately good, character, fighting for justice by using his wits.  There's precious little moralizing, as there are quite a few shades of gray, but where there is right and wrong, it springs straight from the facts.  I do wish Fey had been given a little more to do, but maybe too little is better than too much in this case.  Ultimately, it's a film that's unlikely to stick with you for a long time but it's also a very pleasant diversion for a wide array of audiences.

***

Although they aren't among the very best films ever, I've enjoyed Branaugh's Poirot mysteries and was glad that another one came out this fall to provide something worth seeing during what's usually a miserable month at the theaters (unless you like horror... yuck!).  I was a bit nervous about this one, though, because the second movie was nowhere near as good as the first.  It strayed from Poirot himself, who was mostly reduced to an observer of a rotten cast of wealthy assholes.  I'd be happy to see a few more of these from Branaugh, provided that they are more like his first and third films.  Now that it's just about October, we should be getting some Oscar contenders as well as blockbuster-level entertainment (can't wait for The Marvels).  Hopefully the next theater trip will be soon - until next time!

* By 20th Century Studios - Disney Media Kits, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=73652505

Oppenheimer

 

Score:  B+

Directed by Christopher Nolan

Starring Cillian Murphy, Emily Blunt, Matt Damon, Robert Downey, Jr.

Running time: 180 minutes

Rated R

Long Story Short:  Oppenheimer is star director Christopher Nolan's latest, a historical epic about the development of the a-bomb.  It's the darker half of this summer's "Barbenheimer" phenomenon and is well worth (if you didn't already) a visit to the theater.  Nolan emphasizes a rapidly moving story across multiple time periods in place of his more typical sci-fi flair.  The final act is unfortunately a misfire, but what leads up to it is quite good.

At a time of building tension in the world and the rise of the murderous Nazi regime in Germany, a startling scientific discovery is made in 1938: nuclear fission.  J. Robert Oppenheimer (Murphy), working as a theoretical physicist at universities in California, immediately realizes the significance not just to his own field but also for the terrible possible consequences it could have in war.  The Army recruits Oppenheimer to develop a program to weaponize the new science - desperate to do so before the Nazis, who are believed to be ahead of the Americans due to their formidable physics establishment.  Oppenheimer works quickly, driven by both scientific curiosity and horror at the consequences of the Nazis winning this "race".  But another game is being played under the surface as American politicians grow suspicious of their fragile alliance with the Soviets and potential influences on the scientists.

Oppenheimer is a typically high-quality movie from director Christopher Nolan; it's stylishly made and entertaining, though it is held back from Nolan's top tier by an unnecessary and poorly done final act.  Many of Nolan's movies are sci-fi or at least have a strong emphasis on the visual elements (e.g., Dunkirk).  This movie does have some creative - and a few spectacular - images as well, from Oppenheimer's imagining of stars and molecular processes to the humongous fire of the Trinity test to haunting hallucinations in the aftermath of the bomb's use on Japan.  But these are relatively scarce, with Nolan instead focusing on a fast-edit style that bounces among several different time periods - chiefly, the Manhattan project (1942-45), a security hearing on Oppenheimer (1954) and a Presidential cabinet vote (1959), though there are also scenes showing Oppenheimer's rise from 1926 until the fateful a-bomb project.  This fast-edit style mostly works well: it keeps the pace moving briskly despite the large time span and character spread, and focuses each mini-scene on the most essential dialogue (sometimes just a word or two), details, and images.  There are also cues that help the audience place scenes within the overall puzzle - film quality (including black & white), recurring sets, etc.  The ultimate outcome is obvious to all, yet Nolan still wrings plenty of intrigue from the process, and spends enough time on the physical details of that first test bomb and its preparation to make it feel chillingly real.

Unfortunately, the film lingers on far too long after the first atomic bomb explodes.  Some type of resolution was necessary and appropriate, of course, but the race to get to a successful test of the a-bomb was by far the highest-stakes and most compelling part of the movie.  Instead of leaving it as the film's pinnacle, Nolan extends the film another thirty to forty-five minutes to dwell on Oppenheimer's post-Manhattan advocacy and his political fate.  Even if you didn't know before, it's pretty obvious what is going to happen - and as opposed to the race to develop the a-bomb, is far less consequential or, frankly, interesting.  To make matters worse, Nolan loses his subtle touch and turns the messy political fight into a literally black and white struggle.  Robert Downey, Jr. plays the "villain" here and early in the film he is quite good - but the character becomes far less interesting as his diabolical (but also kind of pathetic, when you think about it) plot unspools.  There are good performances throughout the film, where you'll find a huge number of stars or at least familiar faces in small roles.  Oppenheimer himself is played well by Murphy, an engaging presence, but he remains difficult to decipher, partly because his behavior is wide-ranging.  Matt Damon gives the best performance I've seen from him in a long time as Oppenheimer's supervising Army General, an earnest figure with a nicely dry sense of humor.  There's just not enough time for anyone else to stand out; this three-hour movie feels the same way, packed with lots of good things but ultimately didn't know where to stop.

***

Oppenheimer is a good film that I'm glad I got to see in the theater, despite doing so almost two months after it was released.  Nolan is one of my favorite directors, and while this one falls a little short of my high expectations for him, it still has plenty going for it and was especially good to see in a theater.  It also confirms that Nolan can succeed outside the sci-fi genre; Dunkirk already did that - it's my favorite war movie of all time - but Oppenheimer shows that it wasn't just a fluke.  But please, Nolan: be careful not to lose control like you did a bit with the ending of this movie!  Hopefully there will be some interesting movies coming up this fall - longer term, I'm growing more concerned about the extended writers and actors strikes, but I'm also all for them getting the full compensation they deserve, and waiting until that happens.  Until next time, hopefully soon!

* By Universal Pictures Publicity, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=71354716