Why, why, why, Mr Branagh?

Rating: 5/10 (3 December 2017)

Went to see it with my friends this afternoon... as one thinks that a title like this has to be good and there's somehow no way they can destroy such a wonderful story, but the changes made by Mr Branagh to the story are absolutely meaningless, they add nothing to the plot and simply answer to... do they ever answer to any reason? Maybe the market. Let's check out a few of this changes...
1- The character of the Swedish nanny has been changed and now is, I guess, a Spaniard... a Spaniard because Pilar is a thoroughly Spanish name, although... Estravados? Such name doesn't exist in Spain but, yes, there is a Pilar Estravados in Christie's book Hercules Poirot's Christmas. Really can't think of a reason for this change. My compatriot Penelope Cruz isn't a great actress, let's face it, but she's well known here, in Italy and in Hollywood -I wonder why-, so maybe... are you using her as a decoy to trap the Spanish speaking public? As for the name... are you perhaps thinking Mr. Branagh, that if this movie works well -I very much doubt it- you can start directing an Agatha Christie movie every year and maybe you want to include Ms Cruz in one or more of them? Heaven forbid!
2- The character of the Italian chauffeur has been changed and now is a Latin guy!!! Are you being politically correct Mr Branagh? Really, if dear Mrs Christie wrote about an Italian driver we want to see an Italian driver on the movie adaptation, if she included in her story a sweet Swedish nanny, we want to see a Swedish nanny. Especially because the change you've made ads Absolutely nothing to the story. As for the name... Biniamino! are you inventing names too? You're such a creative guy! A Mexican guy with a misspelled Italian first name, so very creative. And the last name, Márquez... maybe because Márquez is the only Spanish name you remember after the famous Colombian writer? But including Manuel García-Rulfo in the movie you're calling for a Mexican public... you're a clever guy, Mr. Branagh!
3- And yet another change. The role of Colonel Arbuthnot isn't a Colonel anymore, it's a doctor and, oh my, he's black. You're so very politically correct, Mr. Branagh! You could have used a black actor in the role of the colonel... but wait, I very much doubt there would be retired black colonels in the British army in the early 30s, so to be politically correct you've made a believable Scottish character vanish from the story to create a black doctor in the 1930s Britain that travels around the world... I don't find quite believable this part of the story. The story takes place around 1930... not in the 80s. Of course the change of character here changes something in the story: Dr. Arthbutnot shoots Monsieur Poirot... wooooooow, that's a bit of exciting action in the movie! Really, Mr. Branagh?
4- Why changing the character of the French conductor from the father of the poor French maid who is falsely accused and commits suicide to the brother of the poor French maid who is falsely accused and commits suicide? Wait... Marwan Kenzari is a good actor, and he's a hot guy. Also he's a Dutch of Northern African descent. Once again, you're catering for all public, don't you Mr. Brannagh. There are great French actors of Northern African descent who could play the role of the father. But they don't attract young girls, don't they?
4- I'm not going to talk about more character changes, but really, is there anything less convincing than a Hungarian duke that's a classic ballet dancer? And this ads SO very much to the plot, really!
I couldn't help but laughing at Monsieur Poirot running after and fighting with Mr. McQueen... so very not Agatha Christie's, but some action was needed in the movie, wasn't it Mr. Branagh? Really, a movie like this relies -or should rely- on good acting and a good director. The acting isn't bad at all... not too sure about the direction.
The main reason for not liking this movie is that changes on the plot can be made when adapting a novel (or maybe should be made), and so did Mr Wilder when he filmed Witness for the Prosecution, and it even seems Mrs. Christie loved it and congratulated him for the changes made, but changing characters in a story that ad nothing to the story in order to attract every possible public that's plain bad direction, that shows no interest in the story, just a wish to make the movie more profitable.
Finally, I absolutely hated the final moment when the British officer tells Monsieur Poirot that he's needed in Cairo... are you really thinking of filming an unnecessary version of Death on the Nile? Are you perhaps trying to turn Monsieur Poirot into a sort of Art Deco James Bond? Are you threatening us with a Hercules Poirot franchise? Oh my, they're right: the movie business is really f*cked up!
Bye bye Mr. Branagh, I guess we'll never meet again at the movies.