I know they don't blow up the box office, but I really hope they continue making these films. Branagh's Hercule Poirot films are some of my favorite films in recent years. There are so few mystery films releasing these days, so these movies are a real treat. I think the marketing for these films could be a bit better. I only discovered the film was in theaters was because I decided to rewatch last weekend Death on the Nile on Disney Plus and looked up if they were planning to make a sequel. I never saw any advertisement or announcements despite being a huge fan sof the first couple films.
@@andrewholden2768I'm not gonna pretend like I find the portrayal of Poirot in the latest movies to be Perfect, but at the same time I don't see it "desecrating" the image of Poirot as you claim it to be. --- In fact, the newer movies help shed light to the fact that Sherlock holmes isn't the only good detective character out there and the newer movies will encourage new fans to look into other works especially David Suchet's.
@@internetgoat4831 Yes, hopefully these horrendous interpretations will indeed encourage people to watch other, far, far better films (basically any detective film without Brannagh in it). He is a brilliant actor, but this series of films are appalling americanisms of an iconic character. Hopefully again, people will see other versions and realise how bad theses are.
@@charlirenner193 the series is a horrific, systematic desecration of an iconic character. Poirot is NOT some gung-ho americanism. Brannagh's objective appears to be the destruction of detectives: his portrayal of Wallander was equally terrible. He will certainly be remembered for playing Poirot, but not in the way he's probably hoping. He should stick to what he does best, and leave detectives alone.
There was the moment after Leopold's father's death where he ran off to cry and I'm positive that we see someone over his shoulder comforting him. But everyone else involved was still in the room at the time.
I feel that Looper forgot to mention on how besides on choosing on how to live his life, its more so him believing that there is, while little, a shred of evidence of the supernatural which breaks his cynicism and pessimism on life such that there may be a presence of something beyond the physical world which would mean that there is hope that ultimately the scales of balance & justice can be achieved which then reignites his vigor as a detective.
Honestly between these and the Knives out/Glass Onion universe I think it’s fair to say people are really enjoying these thriller mysteries! I love them myself
TBH I never read Agatha Christy's novels so I do not know how authentic Poirot's character is in the movies, but I assure you that those movies are actual fun to watch, it is so rare that we get to watch old fashioned detective movies, I hope Kenneth Branagh continues this series with many more adaptations
I just finished my first Poirot novel today and let me say, I might be in the minority, but I prefer the movies and their version of Poirot. Idk he just feels like a nicer man who you actually want to spend time with while in the book I thought he was annoying at times. The one I read is The Murder of Rogan Ackroyd and it was a decent read, but it was pretty boring in the middle and was saved by the ending for me.
From what i have seen in the movie, I would say that Rowena developed severe abandonment issues possibly from her lover or husband leaving her due to not wanting to have children. This possible incident caused Rowena to develop a fixation on her daughter to remain with her forever and not be alone. This is just my theory, I would like to debate this in the replies,
⚠️(SPOILER ALERT)⚠️ So am I right to assume that while the supposed haunted murders were in fact just committed by human, and Poirot seeing ghosts were possibly hallucinogenic drug effects, that there was still supernatural going on? Her mother’s death may or may not be based on Poirot’s hallucination, but how to explain the voice change of Joyce Reynolds and the turning of the chair? The M forming at the walls? The water turning hot in the bathroom?
The M was a hallucination and the water turning hot, I don’t really care about that because sometimes water can be boiling hot out of the pipe (or he just hallucinated it was hot). I totally agree on the voice change, it never gets explained. And I want to add that the turned the water off and then Leopold mentions he forgot to turn it off. That’s also weird
@@LetsBiiny I see, thank you for your inputs. Would also like to ask for your thoughts on another realization I have. If since we cant explain the voice change, it’s really probably Alesia and she had to be the one revealing she was murdered and not Joyce Reynolds right? The three conspirators only had the goal of baffling Poirot of “paranormal” activities, and had no prior idea about the murder in that case. How timely and unfortunate for Joyce Reynolds to then become one of the suspects of the mother since she has been blackmailed at this time. Do you have the same thoughts?
I think the voice changing is not explained because the assistant claims that everything they do is a show and made up so I think by that statement they addressed that question in my opinion
So remember when the water boiled hot? Well right after that, he turns the faucet off. Then he see’s the ghost in the mirror right..? Then right as he’s leaving that restroom, remember he starts talking to the kid, and the kid mentions that the faucets still running..? That was the ghost. Also, when he hears the child’s voice, and he’s talking to her, and then he full on sees the child, and then the Lady Author asks him, who are you talking to..? He glances at the author, then looks back at the kid he saw and the kid was literally gone. Well the kid was Alicia right, BUT at that point in the movie, Hercule didn’t know at all what Alicia looked like yet, he hadn’t seen any pictures at all. So how could he possibly have hallucinated when he saw her in the bathroom mirror and in the upstairs room when she was in child form…? That was definitely her. And I definitely think Alicia’s ghosts certainly killed her mom lol. I mean, the movie wouldn’t be called a haunting in Venice for no reason right.😜
My husband and I saw the film on a weekday in the early afternoon and there were like six other people. It made it feel a bit isolating and amazing because of it.
Michelle Yeoh was SO SO good in this. I was so happy to see her in a role where her race is irrelevant and she is not a maternal figure or kung-fu badass. I wish the role was longer but I also think the emotional weight of her character is amplified by how briefly she is onscreen. It is short but memorable perfromance.
@@nitenight996 Poirot is not some gung-ho americanism. Pretty much every actor who has played the part previously, has played the character in a similar manner i.e. (strange as it may seem) as the character is depicted in the books! Kenneth is brilliant on stage, but his portrayal of such an iconic character will be remembered, but for all the wrong reasons. He should STOP NOW.
@@andrewholden2768 agree to disagree. I think he opens Poirot up to a wider audience who wouldnt have known him otherwise. Just look at it like a multiverse. U can have ur ,,real" Poirot in universe number 1 and the ,,bad" Poirot in universe number 2
@@felixk1843 He is just destroying an iconic figure, by turning him into some gung-ho americanism. Utterly appalling. He should STOP, and now. He will unfortunately be remembered for his desecration of an icon. It's not doing Brannagh's reputation any good st all. He made a complete mess of Wallander as well. Be should stick to what he's brilliant at, i.e. the theatre.
I think so. Hallucinations brought on by the poisoned honey. Tina Feys character stated she found the pot of honey in the linen closet(which is an odd place to store a pot of honey, which meant that it wasn’t supposed to be found).
The whole thing with the honey poisoning was a bit farfetched. The resolve was complicated as it should be in this genre but it wasn't beliavable as a story that could happen.
I don't know if it was mentioned or not but imho it might have been better if the housekeeper offhandedly mentioned that the mother used to serve the tea to Alicia to calm her. Tho it might have caused it to be too obvious
I've just seen it at the cinema. It looked great, and it had a suitably spooky atmosphere for this time of year, but the ending? Meh. A bit far-fetched. As for that annoying little kid...
Each one he makes is worse than the previous one. To quote The Spectator "Why hasn’t someone rugby tackled Branagh to the ground while shouting ‘STOP!’?"
@@pmLite_ All three are horrendous. A desecration of an iconic character. Without doubt, the worst Poirot in cinematic history. It seems his mission is to destroy detectives- his Wallander was equally appalling. He was brilliant in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, but should have stopped there.
What an absolute pile of nonesense this movie is. I suspect I missed part of the plot due to the mumbling and muffled dialogue but then again the whole thing is so weak I don't even care.
@@pancrepe5576 just read an Agatha Christie book these movies are poorly put together. The old tv episodes are 1000 more times better and portray hercule more accurately with the books
How did you like the ending?
i loved that everybody was white for once in this rainbow of a franchise
I know they don't blow up the box office, but I really hope they continue making these films. Branagh's Hercule Poirot films are some of my favorite films in recent years. There are so few mystery films releasing these days, so these movies are a real treat.
I think the marketing for these films could be a bit better. I only discovered the film was in theaters was because I decided to rewatch last weekend Death on the Nile on Disney Plus and looked up if they were planning to make a sequel. I never saw any advertisement or announcements despite being a huge fan sof the first couple films.
I hope they stop. It's a desecration of an iconic character. Poirot is not some gung-ho americanism.
@@andrewholden2768I'm not gonna pretend like I find the portrayal of Poirot in the latest movies to be Perfect, but at the same time I don't see it "desecrating" the image of Poirot as you claim it to be.
---
In fact, the newer movies help shed light to the fact that Sherlock holmes isn't the only good detective character out there and the newer movies will encourage new fans to look into other works especially David Suchet's.
@@internetgoat4831 He is systematically destroying every detective he plays. His portrayal of Wallander was abysmal.
@@internetgoat4831 Yes, hopefully these horrendous interpretations will indeed encourage people to watch other, far, far better films (basically any detective film without Brannagh in it). He is a brilliant actor, but this series of films are appalling americanisms of an iconic character. Hopefully again, people will see other versions and realise how bad theses are.
I never even heard of it till a few days ago and I only realized it was a poirot movie after starting the film today.
I thought it was so fun. Here’s to hopping the movie does well enough that we get more murder mysteries.
Here's hoping he stops, NOW.
I'll say. I'm loving this series.
@@charlirenner193 the series is a horrific, systematic desecration of an iconic character. Poirot is NOT some gung-ho americanism. Brannagh's objective appears to be the destruction of detectives: his portrayal of Wallander was equally terrible. He will certainly be remembered for playing Poirot, but not in the way he's probably hoping. He should stick to what he does best, and leave detectives alone.
Agreed, orient express is still the best for me but this comes at a close second. Hope to see more of the great detective Poirot
There was the moment after Leopold's father's death where he ran off to cry and I'm positive that we see someone over his shoulder comforting him. But everyone else involved was still in the room at the time.
I feel that Looper forgot to mention on how besides on choosing on how to live his life, its more so him believing that there is, while little, a shred of evidence of the supernatural which breaks his cynicism and pessimism on life such that there may be a presence of something beyond the physical world which would mean that there is hope that ultimately the scales of balance & justice can be achieved which then reignites his vigor as a detective.
Honestly between these and the Knives out/Glass Onion universe I think it’s fair to say people are really enjoying these thriller mysteries! I love them myself
TBH I never read Agatha Christy's novels so I do not know how authentic Poirot's character is in the movies, but I assure you that those movies are actual fun to watch, it is so rare that we get to watch old fashioned detective movies, I hope Kenneth Branagh continues this series with many more adaptations
I just finished my first Poirot novel today and let me say, I might be in the minority, but I prefer the movies and their version of Poirot. Idk he just feels like a nicer man who you actually want to spend time with while in the book I thought he was annoying at times. The one I read is The Murder of Rogan Ackroyd and it was a decent read, but it was pretty boring in the middle and was saved by the ending for me.
From what i have seen in the movie, I would say that Rowena developed severe abandonment issues possibly from her lover or husband leaving her due to not wanting to have children. This possible incident caused Rowena to develop a fixation on her daughter to remain with her forever and not be alone. This is just my theory, I would like to debate this in the replies,
⚠️(SPOILER ALERT)⚠️
So am I right to assume that while the supposed haunted murders were in fact just committed by human, and Poirot seeing ghosts were possibly hallucinogenic drug effects, that there was still supernatural going on? Her mother’s death may or may not be based on Poirot’s hallucination, but how to explain the voice change of Joyce Reynolds and the turning of the chair? The M forming at the walls? The water turning hot in the bathroom?
The M was a hallucination and the water turning hot, I don’t really care about that because sometimes water can be boiling hot out of the pipe (or he just hallucinated it was hot). I totally agree on the voice change, it never gets explained. And I want to add that the turned the water off and then Leopold mentions he forgot to turn it off. That’s also weird
@@LetsBiiny I see, thank you for your inputs. Would also like to ask for your thoughts on another realization I have. If since we cant explain the voice change, it’s really probably Alesia and she had to be the one revealing she was murdered and not Joyce Reynolds right? The three conspirators only had the goal of baffling Poirot of “paranormal” activities, and had no prior idea about the murder in that case. How timely and unfortunate for Joyce Reynolds to then become one of the suspects of the mother since she has been blackmailed at this time. Do you have the same thoughts?
I think the voice changing is not explained because the assistant claims that everything they do is a show and made up so I think by that statement they addressed that question in my opinion
So remember when the water boiled hot? Well right after that, he turns the faucet off. Then he see’s the ghost in the mirror right..? Then right as he’s leaving that restroom, remember he starts talking to the kid, and the kid mentions that the faucets still running..? That was the ghost. Also, when he hears the child’s voice, and he’s talking to her, and then he full on sees the child, and then the Lady Author asks him, who are you talking to..? He glances at the author, then looks back at the kid he saw and the kid was literally gone. Well the kid was Alicia right, BUT at that point in the movie, Hercule didn’t know at all what Alicia looked like yet, he hadn’t seen any pictures at all. So how could he possibly have hallucinated when he saw her in the bathroom mirror and in the upstairs room when she was in child form…? That was definitely her. And I definitely think Alicia’s ghosts certainly killed her mom lol.
I mean, the movie wouldn’t be called a haunting in Venice for no reason right.😜
@@LetsBiiny the M was the daughter saying mother . Who killed her
Deli Bal (Turkish) = Mad Honey.
Probably learned by Agatha Christie while in Istanbul writing Murder on the Orient Express.
My husband and I saw the film on a weekday in the early afternoon and there were like six other people. It made it feel a bit isolating and amazing because of it.
I wish they would do an adaptation of "and then there were none" next
Michelle Yeoh was SO SO good in this. I was so happy to see her in a role where her race is irrelevant and she is not a maternal figure or kung-fu badass. I wish the role was longer but I also think the emotional weight of her character is amplified by how briefly she is onscreen. It is short but memorable perfromance.
It was an amazing movie! I loved the twist and the ending.
It was a wonderfully spooky time, perfect for the season!
I thought it was strange that he was hallucinating younger Alicia but this was before he saw the photo of her as a child? How was he able to do that?
I think that was real, as was the voice change of the medium and the ghost on the balcony at the end
I just watched this at the theater and the twist was SO GOOD!!!
These films are not the best out there but I find it so good.
the ending told you that whether you believe that ghost exists or not, it doesnt matter, the truth still reveals anyway
I’m still confused to how the Medium was able to mimic the daughter’s voice during the seance?
But how do you know what the daughter's voice should sound like?
@@anodyne57the mother said that the voice was of alicia
He has very nicely merged 2 great Christie plots - Halloween party × Nemesis 💖 Kudos
He is destroying the character of Poirot, just like he did with Wallander. He should STOP.
@@andrewholden2768how?
@@nitenight996 Poirot is not some gung-ho americanism. Pretty much every actor who has played the part previously, has played the character in a similar manner i.e. (strange as it may seem) as the character is depicted in the books! Kenneth is brilliant on stage, but his portrayal of such an iconic character will be remembered, but for all the wrong reasons. He should STOP NOW.
@@andrewholden2768 agree to disagree. I think he opens Poirot up to a wider audience who wouldnt have known him otherwise.
Just look at it like a multiverse.
U can have ur ,,real" Poirot in universe number 1 and the ,,bad" Poirot in universe number 2
@@felixk1843 He is just destroying an iconic figure, by turning him into some gung-ho americanism. Utterly appalling. He should STOP, and now. He will unfortunately be remembered for his desecration of an icon. It's not doing Brannagh's reputation any good st all. He made a complete mess of Wallander as well. Be should stick to what he's brilliant at, i.e. the theatre.
It was good, kept me guessing to the end. I love mystery movies like that❤
i loved the movie but the detective’s accent was SO HEAVY i couldn’t understand most of the dialogue 😭
Really !!! 😝
Loved the movie, perfection in my opinion. Thank you for your review.🙏
But I don’t understand, were that one girl who was hiding in the house hallucination or one of the orphans?
I think so. Hallucinations brought on by the poisoned honey. Tina Feys character stated she found the pot of honey in the linen closet(which is an odd place to store a pot of honey, which meant that it wasn’t supposed to be found).
It is real as poirot only saw Alicia's picture as a child afterwards. Most of it was hellucination but that one wasn't
The whole thing with the honey poisoning was a bit farfetched. The resolve was complicated as it should be in this genre but it wasn't beliavable as a story that could happen.
You do realize it is a very real thing? (Fun fact, Futurama writers learned about this and used it for the inspiration for “space honey”
I don't know if it was mentioned or not but imho it might have been better if the housekeeper offhandedly mentioned that the mother used to serve the tea to Alicia to calm her. Tho it might have caused it to be too obvious
The classic case of Munchausen syndrome by proxy
If you read the book its not that at all
I kind of miss bouc but this was still fun
Amazing film!
So good
I've just seen it at the cinema. It looked great, and it had a suitably spooky atmosphere for this time of year, but the ending? Meh. A bit far-fetched. As for that annoying little kid...
There is nothing to explain. The film is absolute, unconditional drivel. (Beautifully shot.)
Fun mystery
The previous one was better in my opinion 🤷
A good hbo movie
i found this movie to the the "weakest" of the trilogy (to be fair the book was one of the less engaging ones)
interesting, for me this was above death on the nile but below murder on the orient express
Each one he makes is worse than the previous one. To quote The Spectator "Why hasn’t someone rugby tackled Branagh to the ground while shouting ‘STOP!’?"
@@pmLite_ All three are horrendous. A desecration of an iconic character. Without doubt, the worst Poirot in cinematic history. It seems his mission is to destroy detectives- his Wallander was equally appalling. He was brilliant in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, but should have stopped there.
No, Death On The Nile is much worse
More like a transcript video lol
What a terrible, overly wordy explanation
What an absolute pile of nonesense this movie is. I suspect I missed part of the plot due to the mumbling and muffled dialogue but then again the whole thing is so weak I don't even care.
“Mumbling and muffled dialogue”….absolutely. And the overdone soundtrack was a distraction.
None of these movies ever do Agatha Christie Justice I want to find someone who can do it right 🤦🏽♂️
Reason?
@@pancrepe5576 just read an Agatha Christie book these movies are poorly put together. The old tv episodes are 1000 more times better and portray hercule more accurately with the books
Meh
After watching this movie i want to say I watched the bullshit💩
bullshit it was awesome
I walked out it was shit
Completely agreed
You walked out of a movie you paid for?
@@yutaaaa1178 I did the same, it was sh*te. He is destroying the iconic character of Poirot by turning him into some gung-ho americanism.
@@yutaaaa1178my time is worth more than than the extra hour I would have wasted watching that tosh
Yup we walked out. It was sooooooo boring.
Does Looper suck or what? As by What - I mean come up with something creative? As Looper is phoned in and boring.
well if you dont like them why are you here
Then why watch? There's a million things on UA-cam
Looper needs to be a sports broadcaster - a discordant sound and a delivery like a CBS Sports broadcaster.