I don't get why they're bothering to say it's based on this. I read the book this past October, and from what I can tell, this plot is very dissimilar. The book is in Britain, and the victim is a young girl, I think she's 12 or so, and it's a few days later that he comes to investigate, not a year later, and Poirot isn't present at the seance in the book, and the movie looks to make much more of the seance than the book does.
shareThat was the first Agatha Christie book I ever read. I chose it from a shelf full of her books based on the title/cover. I remember absolutely nothing about the story! (I read it in the summer of 1986.)
sharei'm guessing the character of the gardener, Michael Garfield, is also cut..
since he banged 80% of the women in the book, and turned out to be pretty nasty
r.i.p.
I guess it just sounds better to say its based on Christie's work. Mostly I just like watching Poirot work and these movies have been well-adapted.
If anyone's interested, I reviewed the movie on my youtube channel. Appreciate any feedback. Trying to improve -https://youtu.be/kPKUjWTmQuU
And I was right. This only bore the vaguest of similarities to the book. A few things from the book made it but even those were changed a lot.
shareA Haunting in Venice Biggest Changes from Book to Movie
https://www.cbr.com/haunting-in-venice-biggest-changes-from-book/#hallowe-39-en-party-doesn-39-t-happen-in-venice
So they changed basically everything and it's like a complete different movie. Why they even bothered with leaving real names of characters of that book is beyond me. It's not a Agatha Christie novel, she never wrote anything of it. Everything that happened in this movie is more like a fan-fiction. Like written by a person who read the books and inspired by them.
It's weird. They should just left everything that was in book. Or don't pretend this is Agata Christie work. Maybe that's why there was name change and setting. But still they left characters names from book.