On the heels of last year’s overall disappointing “Death on the Nile,” Kenneth Branagh returns with his third film as Agatha Christie’s seminal Belgian detective. Under his mustache and director’s hat, he firmly establishes who Hurcule Poirot is and with “A Haunting in Venice” he brings his darker, more brooding take on the character to a new, predictable and almost supernatural mystery among the canals.

Branagh has shifted the tones of Christie’s works from a cozy drawing room reveal to a shivering palazzo in a story that deviates so much from its source, that it may as well have been a completely original script from screenwriter Michael Green. The source in question is Christie’s “Hallowe’en Party” and just about the only similarities to it are a few of the character’s names.

“Venice” sees Poirot (Branagh) retired, refusing to even hear a case from those desperate for his help, that is until an old friend, popular mystery author Ariadne Oliver (Tina Fey) asks for his help exposing a charlatan medium known as Mrs. Reynolds (Michelle Yeoh), the last woman tried under England’s Witchcraft Act of 1735 (no doubt inspired by the actual 1944 case involving Helen Duncan).

They attend a seance at the home (which also happens to be a former orphanage with a grisly history) of opera singer Rowena Drake (Kelly Reilly) who is desperate to reach out to her daughter, Alicia (Rowena Robinson) who died a year prior by an apparent suicide.

The seance begins and Mrs. Reynolds begins talking in Alicia’s voice, even saying that her death had been a murder, but before the murderer can be pointed out Poirot quickly reveals the tricks at Mrs. Reynolds’ hand.

Before the night is over, predictably just after midnight, Mrs. Reynolds ends up dead and Poirot dusts off his little notebook and is on the case. But this case will show the stalwart detective more than even his little grey cells can explain.

Everyone in the cast fits fairly well in their parts with no one outstandingly brilliant or banal and the overall result of the film is relatively fine.

The mystery that unfolds isn’t particularly hard to figure out (save for one reveal at the end that did actually surprise me) and it is great to see the priority made to filming on location in Venice as opposed to the overreliance on CGI last year’s “Death on the Nile” suffered from (as well as miscasting). It also is shot in a very specific way to make the viewer feel uneasy, dipping us in the haunting story from the get-go.

One of the better additions to this particular story is, that while it has elements of horror in it, it mostly delves into how we deal with death and particularly the trauma left by it. We seek comfort in believing that those we’ve lost aren’t gone and in the case highlighted here, those that seek to exploit that grief through trickery of seances and mediumship.

It is a theme that has been threaded through all three of Branagh’s Poirot films and more broadly the character as a whole.

Death is a constant companion to the astute detective and where other iterations of the character may be more true tellings to what Christie originally wrote, Branagh is finally sticking his feet down firmly and showing how his take is different.

Branagh’s Poirot has brought far more theatricality to the role, with more action for modern audiences as opposed to the more standard series of interrogations, giving the genius detective more to do than just think. But that is kind of the point of the character.

The other three of the better portrayals rely more on the original text to guide their performances: Albert Finney (who is so far the only Poirot actor to receive an Oscar nomination for 1975’s “Murder on the Orient Express”) brought the fastidiousness and almost curtness to the character who may have erred on the more serious side but still had some levity; Peter Ustinov brought an almost boy-like quality to his Poirot (who he played six times) which is exemplified with the almost sly playfulness of his co-stars; and David Suchet (who played the character on television from 1989 to 2013) who is probably the most true representation of the character striking that perfect balance between being a lovable fussbudget and a brilliant detective.

Branagh chooses to go darker and more dramatic for his role and we see that come to its full extent with “Venice.” Part of it all works by shedding the original, frankly confusing, storyline from the book in favor of Green’s more original and streamlined script.

You can tell both have deep admiration for the character and Christie’s works, with Branagh also seeming to have the blessings of her estate to continue his films far into the future.

“A Haunting in Venice” might be a steep deviation from what Christie fans are used to and Branagh’s half-whispered performance might be a bit too schmaltzy to place him higher than fourth in the list of “who played Poirot best” (it’s Suchet by the way), but the end result is an easily digestible, slightly spooky mystery that is good for a Sunday matinee as we creep towards Halloween.

“A Haunting in Venice”

103 minutes

Rated PG-13 for some strong violence, disturbing images and thematic elements

3 stars