Death on the Nile (2022)

Score: 4 / 5

Thank goodness Kenneth Branagh can still surprise us. In his follow-up to Murder on the Orient Express (in 2017, five years ago, can you believe?!), he returns to the Poirot pot and gives us inklings of greatness. The previous installment in Branagh's burgeoning franchise left a lot to be desired for this viewer, but any effort to make a fairly stoic, period mystery would be challenging for most major studios right now; while I disagree with his choices to make certain parts action-based and illogically melodramatic, I understand that he wanted it to be accessible and entertaining for younger audiences and to make lots of money. But I'm grateful this time that he chose an Agatha Christie story that lends itself quite well to more of those action-packed money shots.

This time, it's out of the snowbound Alps and into the sparkling, expansive Nile valley. Hercule Poirot (Branagh) is again hard at work, both in solving the titular crime -- although the body count increases dramatically -- and in dealing with his own history. We open with a black-and-white flashback scene in WWI, with a convincingly digitally de-aged Poirot getting injured and falling in love with the nurse who aided him and encouraged him to grow a large mustache to hide his scars. It opens the film with surprising tragedy and violence but also warmth and actual romance, all things that were notably missing from the previous film. It feels, this time, that writer Michael Green (American Gods, Logan, Alien: Covenant, Blade Runner 2049, and Jungle Cruise) hits his stride a bit more confidently and with good reason. His tweaks to the source material, as before, wonderfully diversify the cast, but this time it feels more earned and less forced; his other additions -- especially including Bouc (the wonderful Tom Bateman) -- are truly inspired, and I just about lost my mind when the third body hit the floor nearer to the climax of this film.

I don't really want to go over the beats of this film, because as with any mystery, half the joy is taking the journey with the characters. And what a journey this story takes, along a lush and exotic Nile river cruise in 65mm film. To be fair, most if not all of it is certainly digitally enhanced or completely manufactured, but this is big-budget moviemaking and it never feels less than ridiculously expensive. The costumes are breathtaking and shimmering in the bright lights, the champagne flows in bubbling rivers, and the S.S. Karnak, a honeymoon river boat on the Nile, shines with hardwood floors and windows for days. I noticed at least one crocodile action shot, too, and that made me impossibly joyful. 

And then there is the cast, which is as varied and beautiful and talented as any ensemble picture we've had in a while. Whereas the previous film's cast often felt underwritten and misdirected, this cast actively breathes in the grandiosity of its surroundings and leans into the glittering bourgeois atmosphere with vivacity. I was especially pleased with Sophie Okonedo and Letitia Wright as the jazz-singing Otterbournes, though the character of Bouc's mother Euphemia is lovely as played by Annette Bening. Then there are the stars, the handsome Armie Hammer as Simon Doyle and his beautiful fiancee Jacqueline de Bellefort, played by Emma Mackey, whose intensely sensual introduction in the film felt a little jarring considering the allegations of abuse and assault against him in real life. Then enters Gal Gadot as the impossibly gorgeous heiress Linnet Ridgeway, for whom Simon leaves his fiancee and gets quickly married, leaving a distraught Jacqueline to follow them hauntingly and hauntedly around the world.

Who else? The ensemble includes Ali Fazal, Russell Brand (almost unrecognizable and underutilized, thankfully), Rose Leslie, and even the achingly trenchant real-life comedy duo of Jennifer Saunders and Dawn French. It's hard to give everyone equal time, but the balance is better on the Karnak than it was on the Orient Express, even with each character mostly deconstructed to a few basic traits. At least they look pretty! And the actors do significant work to each feel sympathetic and suspicious when the screenplay gives them precious little to do. I found Mackey and Okonedo the most joyful to watch, other than Bateman of course, but this affair as a whole is more emotionally satisfying, visually splendid, and less illogical in scope and style than Branagh's previous Christie adaptation. I didn't expect to say this, but I do rather hope for more from this series, even though at the current rate they're being produced we'll be lucky to have half a dozen in total. I'm hoping for Evil Under the Sun next. 

Victoria and Abdul (2017)

Score: 4 / 5

Victoria & Abdul is one of those movies it has quickly become cool to hate. I saw it and loved every minute.

Yes, it takes place at a time of and with people who were instrumental in the oppression and violence of British colonialism in India. No, it does not accurately represent their plight, and yes, it trivializes the severity of racist imperialism that amounted to genocide in many parts of the world. But Victoria & Abdul, as the title suggests, is about two individuals. It is not a historical film; it immediately declares itself to be "Based on real events" with a cutesy knowing little "...mostly" tacked on. Trite as that may be, it is also more honest than most films touting their historical accuracy. Stephen Frears (Florence Foster Jenkins, Philomena, The Queen) knows how to do this well, and this picture is no exception.

The film centers on an ill, aging Queen Victoria, whose court is riddled with scheming aristocrats and cruel bigots seeking power. Judi Dench, returning to screen as the empress, gives one of her best screen performances, riveting and often painful to watch. Her honesty about her health, age, and loneliness is some of the most vulnerable screen acting I've ever seen; I'd compare it, oddly enough, to Patrick Stewart in Logan earlier this year. She also has a curious sense of humor, which broadens and enlivens as the film progresses, but the filmmakers seem intent on projecting that onto the screen as well. Other characters are flat and caricatured, and, as far as Victoria and we are concerned, simply irritating.

As I say, the film centers on Victoria and her experience. With a few notable exceptions (we'll discuss presently), the film forces us to view the world much as Victoria does. We see sumptuous feasts for consuming, wicked underlings scraping and bowing while conniving behind closed doors, and duties so banal and confining that we -- like she -- would rather be in bed. Fabulous castles, decadent style, a whole world of beauty and extravagance at her fingertips. The camera paints for us a portrait of gardens and tapestries, food and music, and it's easy to forget the horrors of British-ruled India. "Aha! The film is reinforcing colonial racism!" Maybe. It's also making sure we sympathize with Victoria, because her life of luxury is all she knows. I think it's all most of us know, too; the film has a pretty specific target audience.

Enter Abdul (played expertly by Ali Fazal, matching his co-star with grace and humor), a young clerk from Agra, who is selected for his stature (and, likely, education) to gift Victoria with a gold coin, a symbol of gratitude and loyalty to the empress. After brazenly looking Her Majesty in the eye, Abdul finds himself summoned by Victoria to attend her personally. She is intrigued by this exotic man, but her commodification of him is never consummated; he begins to teach her. She grows hungry for knowledge of Urdu and the Qur'an, much to the horror of her household, and elevates Abdul to the position of her Munshi, teacher. Their friendship is also deeply personal, as they confide in each other and treat each other as intimate family. Victoria's will to live returns, and she embraces the culture of India which she, admittedly, has overlooked and forsaken.

Of course all will not end well, as Victoria's age and illness lead to her eventual death (but not before she delivers, in close-up, an Oscar-nomination-worthy speech about her situation). Her efforts to protect Abdul are undone by her cruel and jealous son, Edward VII (a delicious Eddie Izzard), who burns their correspondence and casts Abdul and his family out of the country. It's a difficult film to watch as we see this intolerance and violence, but it makes you re-consider who is really to blame in the situation. Sure, Victoria had been hated for her seeming attempts to bridge the cultural divide and promote tolerance, but isn't it horrifying too to think that her cultural appropriation and lack of genuine action on behalf of her Indian subjects could be cast as humanitarian, even progressive?

Movies like this are feel-good movies that work by appealing to our ignorant whiteness, that try to let us forgive ourselves for the unspeakable horrors we have enacted around the world through colonized oppression. We don't deserve that. But on the other hand, let's not discredit the effect movies like this can have on people who don't think critically about these issues. This isn't a lesson in history; it's equally not a moral treatise. I spoke with an elderly white man outside the theater who was amazed that "someone like Abdul" could be so kind and loving to people who hated him so much. I read a post from an acquaintance saying that if Judi Dench wasn't horrified by being friends with a Muslim, she would try not to be either. Whatever those statements are ultimately worth, it is encouraging that the people for whom this film is aimed may be getting some good messages out of it.

If all movies being released had messages like this, then we could certainly be more vocal in critiquing its subtext of imperialist rhetoric and racial treachery of Abdul (yes, his role could be read like Samuel L. Jackson's in Django Unchained). There is no arguing that this film could and should have done better. But this is one humble film with a heart of compassion, and to write it off because of its depiction of false history -- which has little to do with the drama it's really portraying -- is a weak and petty position to take.

IMDb: Victoria and Abdul