I set off on the walk to Picturehouse Central to see Jurassic Park with two friends. On arrival, I raved about The Odyssey and was experiencing that elation you can only feel where you have come out of a film and have been moved in some way. My friend Juliette (@whataboutbirdy on Substack and Instagram) informed me that it was filmed in Occupied Western Sahara and I was shocked. I consider myself as someone who is well-read and well aware of the news, but this was the first time I had heard about it. I googled and found an article which affirmed what my friend had told me. This article amongst many others really changed my view of the film and made me think further. I can square the fact that I enjoyed the film and performances, but also, fundamentally disagree with the way it was filmed. I studied Political Science and International Relations at university which included neocolonialism. I spent hours writing about China’s neocolonialism in many countries within Africa and also learned about Western Sahara’s occupation. This has not received much public attention or discourse, so I wanted to write about it.

Before I begin, there are a lot of great resources about this that I wanted to highlight:

• Mohamed Sleiman Labat’s piece in The Guardian.

• The open-letter about the film’s decision to film in Occupied Dakhla from the Western Sahara International Film Festival.

• Sarah Yerkes piece in Carnegie Endowment.

Neocolonialism - A Brief Explanation

Neocolonialism and colonialism are related concepts, many of us are more familiar with the latter, given its historical nature. Some may have learned about colonial powers such as the British Empire in school or you can learn about it through film, TV or literature. Colonialism and neocolonialism differ in that colonialism is often direct control such as the British Empire’s installation of Crown rule in India. Neocolonialism works by one country using its economic, political and cultural power over territory. They may choose to displace the local population or exploit the natural resources by extracting them for their own use. Whilst independent on paper, the country’s economic and political systems are controlled by another. It is a form of indirect control which distinguishes it from the direct control of colonialism. Today it is driven by the ‘scramble for Africa’ following the Second World War.

We find examples in countries like China who have presence in dozens of countries within the continent of Africa. Providing loans with strings attached to make those countries economically dependent on China, beneficial to them through the economic concessions afforded to the country or political support for their infrastructure projects. In Zambia, China is the primary buyer for their copper. Zambia owes over $4 billion in debt to China, representing nearly two thirds of the country’s total debt figure of $6.3 billion. Other forms of neocolonialism can be found at the institutional level, organisations such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund have long been criticised for providing ‘bail out’ loans to developing countries in exchange for those countries deregulating their economies. Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs) may be used to force austerity conditions on the country, cutting funding for their public services. And the powers behind these institutions are wealthier countries, the very beneficiaries of neocolonialism.

Occupied Western Sahara: A Timeline

A brief timeline for how Western Sahara came to be occupied and its status today:

• 1884: Spain claims Western Sahara as a territory, creating a trading post at Villa Cisneros (now known as Dakhla).

• 1958 - 1976: Western Sahara becomes a Spanish province known as ‘Spanish Sahara’.

• 16 October 1975: The International Court of Justice issues an advisory opinion, ruling that there was no evidence of any territorial sovereignty between Western Sahara and Morocco and Mauritania.

  • The court upheld the local population’s right to self-determination.

• 14 November 1975: The Madrid Accords are signed, transferring administrative control of Western Sahara (then known as Spanish Sahara) to Morocco and Mauritania.

• 28 February 1976: Spain withdraws from the territory following The Madrid Accords.

• April 1976: Morocco and Mauritania partition the territory.

  • Morocco annexes the northern two-thirds and Mauritania annexes the southern third.

  • This escalates the Polisario Front’s (a Sahrawi liberation movement to end the occupation of Western Sahara) efforts to obtain self-determination.

• August 1979: Mauritania renounces its territorial claim by signing a peace treaty with the Polisario Front.

  • Morocco deploys troops to annex the southern third, bringing it under Moroccan control.

• 1980 - 1987: Morocco constructs the Berm, a 2,700km defensive sand wall to divide the region.

  • 80% of the region is under Moroccan control and the 20% remaining is under the Polisario Front.

• September 1991: The UN helps Morocco and the Polisario Front reach a ceasefire. A peacekeeping mission is established to monitor this, and there are plans to organise a referendum on self-determination (this has not been held yet).

• 2007: Morocco introduces an Autonomy Plan (which is rejected by the Polisario Front) proposing self-governance under Moroccan sovereignty.

• November 2020: The Moroccan military enters the Guerguerat buffer zone (which is monitored by the UN), this begins armed conflict.

• December 2020: The US recognises Morocco’s sovereignty over Western Sahara.

• July 2024: France reverses their foreign-policy stance by endorsing the Autonomy Plan.

• August 2025: Hundreds of artists, journalists and activists (including Javier Bardem and Pedro Almodóvar) sign an open letter against the choice to shoot The Odyssey in Occupied Western Sahara

• 17 July 2026: The Odyssey releases to wide critical acclaim amidst calls to boycott the film, given the film’s filming in Occupied Western Sahara.

The Odyssey and Neocolonialism

Christopher Nolan’s choice to film The Odyssey in Occupied Western Sahara is an interesting present-day example of neocolonialism and how cultural power can continue to legitimise the illegitimate occupation of a state. It mirrors the concepts I studied for hours at university, the countries I studied and how I came to better realise how the media landscape and consumption of media could feed into neocolonialism. As a lover of cinema and film, I now feel uncomfortable reviewing the film given how it was made. I doubt I will encourage people to see it with this new knowledge. A lot of people will argue that you can separate the art from the artist, I argue instead that you cannot separate the big blockbuster from the occupied soil it was shot on. That occupied soil became the setting for The Odyssey, the first major Hollywood film to shoot scenes in Western Sahara, using the backdrops of Dakhla. A gorgeous region where the desert meets the ocean and for Nolan, a fitting location to represent part of the mythical world Homer created in The Odyssey. But Dakhla does not exist simply as a physical location or a canvas for him to tell this story. Its history is informed by decades-long conflict suppressing the indigenous population’s right to self-determination. Many Sahrawi people were forced to leave for refugee camps in Algeria. There is no right to peacefully protest. Indigenous people cannot make films about their own lives or experiences. Yet for the right price, Morocco lets in those foreign to the region to film whatever they choose to.

Cultural power is a key tenet to neocolonialism and it is not passive. It provides the occupying power with the consent and justification to occupy and rebrand occupied land into a product. Portions of The Odyssey were filmed on the beaches of Dakhla using permits and with support from the Moroccan government, alongside subsidises. In giving Universal Pictures access and the studio only consulting the Moroccan government, whilst cutting out the Sahrawi people, they have taken a side in the conflict. Ignoring the claim of self-determination the Sahrawi people have to the land and in doing so, use a region under active conflict as a beautiful backdrop for one of the most significant blockbusters of the year. The Moroccan government has explicitly said that this will open up the doors to more Hollywood productions. Given the lack of news on it and discourse around The Odyssey focusing on the acclaim for the performances and direction, the Moroccan government can shift focus away from the conflict to a sanitised palatable aesthetic. The region is no doubt gorgeous and the film affords it the opportunity to brand itself away from being an occupied zone to being the location of one of the biggest blockbusters of the year. If a woman like Celine Song or Chloé Zhao had filmed one of their films in occupied territories, would we afford them the same courtesy we have to Nolan in keeping it out of discourse around the film? I doubt it. Nolan’s status as a filmmaker and track record with a filmography which is critically acclaimed and filled with box-office successes shields him from the scrutiny we would place on other directors, especially women. Nolan wields power, influence and wealth on levels many of us cannot fathom within filmmaking and the choice to shoot in an occupied territory, where he has locations at his fingertips makes this decision even more depressing.

Concluding Thoughts

I feel gross having enjoyed the film given the choice to shoot part of it in Occupied Dakhla and embarrassed that as somebody who considers herself well-versed on politics, that I did not know about this heading in. My first thoughts about it questioned whether I was a bad person for having enjoyed it and with this knowledge still believing it to be a well-made film? And it is a difficult space to navigate and one that I am privileged to do. My thoughts are now on how hypocritical it all is. That one of the most acclaimed and powerful directors can do this and everyone will fawn over his latest work, whilst indigenous filmmakers in the occupied land he used are denied the same rights.

I feel disappointed and disillusioned with other creators on TikTok and Instagram who are ignoring it in favour of churning our video after video of content about rewatching it X number of times in X number of formats or by blindly praising it, neglecting to mention this. I believe you can enjoy the film and praise its technical elements, but the fact there is a lack of nuance and no space afforded to raising this as a huge issue about the film by fellow creators is thoroughly disappointing. It is a reason I am increasingly disillusioned with the state of film criticism and reviewing on social media, because it’s easier to ignore the harder conversations around Nolan’s decision to shoot in an occupied zone. Algorithms don’t reward you for having a difficult conversation or talking at length about it.

I’ve been thinking a lot about Berlinale and specifically, remarks from industry figures who have made a concerted effort to depoliticise film and cinema. And the 2026 Oscar’s race where we saw Paul Thomas Anderson shy away from speaking to the politics of One Battle After Another, to instead claim the film speaks for itself and laugh off questions. At the same time, we had an international film line-up with directors like Jafar Panahi, Kaouther Ben Hania and Kleber Mendonça Filho who created films which address war, genocide and question the state of the World we find ourselves in. And for Jafar Panahi who will go back to Iran to serve a one-year prison sentence for making It Was Just An Accident, the lengths these filmmakers will go to, to not only create films but to speak about politics is a stark contrast to the cowardice of many individuals who have stayed silent.

At Berlinale, individuals I admire for their craft and contributions to film (Wim Wenders, Michelle Yeoh and Ethan Hawke) disappointed me by shying away from the politics of film. I mention it a lot, but as someone who studied Political Science and International Relations at university, I see politics everywhere. I have often joked that I am that one friend who is too woke and have spent many evening with friends lamenting the state of the world and the helplessness we feel in understanding it and trying to see a way forward. I started in October 2019 where the political landscape felt on the verge of immense change with the UK General Election in December and US Presidential election the following year. Over six years on, I have graduated and now in a ‘grown-up job’ and I could not do justice to the extent of political and societal change that came with the Black Lives Matter movement, Sarah Everard’s horrific murder and the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic which occurred in my first year alone. Movements and events that I did not foresee happening on that first day of university, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed and ready to take on the world. As someone who has held film and cinema dear for some time, the remarks from industry figures has greatly disappointed me, because the eradication of politics from the film erases the impact film has had and continues to have on society, on culture and on change.

In GCSE History, we studied the Cold War and I was fortunate enough to visit Berlin with school where we got to see the film, Bridge of Spies on a free evening. Even at the age of fourteen, I could see the transformative power of cinema in how me and my classmates were able to bring areas of history, diplomacy and politics that we had studied in an accessible and informative way where we could observe the differences in how Rudolf Abel was afforded the constitutional rights America holds dear in contrast to the treatment of those subjected to enhanced interrogation. Fourteen year old me was so angry something like the practice of enhanced interrogation could be practiced and decided to do a ten-minute speech on it for the speaking portion of GCSE English Language. Two years later, it was during A-Level History, where I began my obsession with Mad Men, having been told by my teacher it showcased the slow progress in the Civil Rights Movement and the musical Hamilton, useful for my studies on the American Revolution and establishment of the Republic. Needless to say, these pieces of media were seminal in stoking my interest in these periods of history and provided an introduction to the topics which I later delved into with more complex research, such as reading Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations for my coursework into Hamilton and his economic policies.

Cinema and film are political. Awards Season is a great example of this where the industry and voters determine what stories can be told, which performers can be awarded and what is of value to culture. A look at Oscar stats would highlight the differences in the average age for those receiving a Best Actress Oscar and a Best Actor Oscar are vast and reflect how we perceive women at different stages of their life and how we view their role in the public and private sphere. In the run-up to the 2025 Oscar’s, nobody wanted to do Variety’s Actors on Actors with Sebastian Stan for his role in The Apprentice, cowering away from making any sort of commentary on Trump’s America due to the fear of backlash. Politics guides the choices we make, what we say and do not say. And for those in the industry, how they navigate a landscape where we have an increasing amount of conflict, genocide and war and people rightfully want them to speak up due to their influence and power.

It is not lost on me that 2026 marks one hundred and eleven years since, The Birth of a Nation was released. The film is a vile and racist rewriting of history and was released to provide consent to subjugate African Americans, to renew the Ku Klux Klan who were inactive (and would use this film as a recruitment tool) and positioned the Ku Klux Klan as the heroes in a story which was false. At this point, the Civil Rights Movement was not well-organised and in infancy so attempts to censor or remove this film from being screened did not work and it became the first film to be screened at the White House. One of the most harmful aspects of the film is that it conjures up a story where a black man is lynched for raping a white woman. Turning black men into a stereotype where they only have eyes and uncontrollable lust for white women, an argument later used by the men who tortured, mutilated and murdered Emmett Till and many boys and men whose only crime was being black in America.

The Social Network is one of my favourite films of all-time and I see clearly how it shaped views on how we perceived these tech oligarchs and how that view has changed over time, with films like Ex Machina, Jobs, Knives Out Glass Onion and most recently, Mountainhead. These are five films I have long thought are interesting to watch, because the change in how these CEOs are portrayed as antisocial and awkward geniuses initially to the ‘tech bro CEO’ archetype we see with Mountainhead’s on the nose satirical portrayal of how tech CEO’s are not as smart as we think they are, reflect the change in how we perceive them and their role in the World. The Social Reckoning is one of my most-anticipated films, due to my love of The Social Network, the cast of this film and the topic. A film which should scare everyone about the reach of ‘Big Tech’ and its impacts on society. An example which comes to mind is the genocide in Myanmar. aAcademics and United Nations reporters agreed Facebook was culpable for the genocide in Myanmar for not tackling the misinformation and hate speech through failing to hire moderators which led to the deaths and displacement of hundreds of thousands Rohingya Muslims in Northern Myanmar. Film and cinema can interrogate areas of history, politics and can reflect how society views them and shape their perceptions of events.

I think of the twelve year old version of me where I became political aware and politics formed a huge part of my life and identity. In debate club, I would argue passionately about a number of causes and I would make an effort to raise political awareness in my middle-school and secondary school. I think about how my ability to critically interrogate films, their meanings and purposes was aided by my love of cinema. I chose my university specifically because I loved the course and it included a module on US Foreign Policy in Film (it was withdrawn before I started). I have been dismayed by the state of the World more times than I can count and I have found films like It Was Just An Accident, The President’s Cake, The Secret Agent, Sinners, One Battle After Another and Palestine 36 to be films which are not only well-made, but also meaningful films about areas of history, politics and the World. To claim films are apolitical and devoid of politics and separate is to deny the economic, societal, cultural and political contexts films are made in and rid film of its power in reinforcing or challenging ideology, societal perceptions and power structures.

November was a really great month. I hosted my long-overdue housewarming (all of the pictures are on a film camera, so I do not have them developed yet!) and I went to many incredible film events. I had the privilege of seeing Michael B Jordan, Miles Caton and Ryan Coogler speak about Sinners at the BFI Southbank. To hear them speak about one of my favourite films of the year and in-depth about the choreography of the film, the cinematography and the preparation to take on their roles. Ryan particularly impressed me, because he took care to acknowledge how Sinners is an incredible film, due to the sum of its parts. I also got to see Pillion with a Q&A with Harry Lighton and I appreciated how the dynamic between our two main characters can be perceived according to our views on relationships.

In the course of four days, I saw Dead Man’s Wire with a Q&A with the Bill Skarsgard and Gus Van Slant and spent much of the runtime laughing, My Father’s Shadow with a Q&A with director, Akinola Davies Jr who created a film which feels so tender and vulnerable whilst educating the viewer about Nigeria in 1993 in the context of two brothers spending the day with their father. I saw Lorde in concert where she brought out Sadie Sink for Green Light, and ended the night with arms around my friend screaming to Ribs. After being unlucky at the members sale for the Paul Thomas Anderson and Leonardo DiCaprio in conversation with event at the BFI, I refreshed for 30 minutes on a random day during lunch and got a ticket. The event was incredible and Paul Thomas Anderson shared that initially they were going to film the iconic road chase scene on a normal road, which feels blasphemous after seeing the iconic sequence twice in cinema. And then I got to see Amanda Seyfried at an in conversation with event, and loved hearing about her career and how she’s changed her view on her performance in Les Mis, after previously not liking it. And I also got to see Jay Kelly again in 35mm at the Barbican followed by a screen talk with George Clooney and Adam Sandler!

December was less busy, but I managed to spend a lot of time watching films and also seeing friends. The month started off with getting to hear from Will Arnett reflect on his career at the BFI before watching Is This Thing On? I loved this talk so much. It was hilarious, it was one of the best talks I’ve been to and I really appreciated his reflections on how his comedy roles helped prepare me for Is This Thing On? The next day, I rewatched The Holdovers and took part in a film quiz with Frame by Frame Film Club. I of course wore my custom Holdovers jumper and enjoyed taking my friend who had not seen it. The morning after, I hosted a bunch of people from my film club (The Film Club London and Dear Soft Serve on Substack) at the BFI where we got to watch The Muppet’s Christmas Carol and spent a couple of hours after, at the bar talking endlessly before rushing off to watch Eternity with my friend.

On Thursday evening, I got to see a preview of Rental Family at the Barbican with a Brendan Fraser screen talk. I have missed Japan since my holiday last November and the film really does encapsulate the experience of being a foreigner in the country and reminded me of the two-week solo trip I enjoyed so much. Yesterday, I rewatched Home Alone in cinema, went to my film club’s discussion of Bridget Jones Diary and the Wes Anderson pop-up. Looking ahead to the next couple of weeks, I am looking forward to seeing Joachim Trier in conversation with at the BFI (tonight!), seeing Chloe Zhao speak about Hamnet with the launch of the film’s phonebook and I will hopefully see the exhibition. Films I am looking forward to include Eleanor the Great, Avatar: Fire and Ash, Marty Supreme and the new SpongeBob Squarepants film (don’t judge, it was one of my favourite shows growing up) and some Christmas rewatches.

I’ve been really fortunate to be able to attend all of these incredible events and get tickets to them. Hearing from so many incredible directors and actors over the last few weeks alongside seeing some incredible films has been a great reminder of why I love film, why I love living in London and why I love institutions like the BFI who not only programme such incredible events, but shine on a light on indie films. Over the next few weeks, I’m to post a piece on The Holdovers, as my rewatch reminded me of how much I love the film and why it is one of my Letterboxd Top Four. A post re-introducing my substack, because it’s been some time since I started and I have a brand new Letterboxd Top 4. I’m hoping to also post about Dead Man’s Wire as it’s a film that I loved. I’m also hoping to do a summary of films I watched this month, I’ve watched a fair few, so I will try to find a way to summarise them all or I will pick out my favourites from the bunch. Looking further ahead to January, I will be hopefully publishing pieces on Hamnet and Sentimental Value which I got the incredible experience of watching at the UK Premiere Gala at London Film Festival (I got to meet Joachim, Renata, Stellan and Inga on the red carpet!!!).

Thank you so much for reading this piece. In contrast to my post on here, this felt joyous to write. Reflecting on the last five weeks through writing this and looking back at the pictures has reminded me of the sheer amount of events I got to go, the incredible people I got to hear from & the great memories I’ve made with my friends. I’m really optimistic and excited to write again, I missed it a lot. I will be more active on substack and excited to replace the doomscrolling on Twitter during my commute, with reading the incredible articles I see on this site.

I’ve said it before, but I haven’t been writing as much. And I’m disappointed in myself for that. More than that, I feel as if I won’t be able to get back to it. Ironic words given that I’m writing this, but it is a lot different to write from the heart about how I am feeling than it is to write a review about films. When I started my Substack a few months ago alongside my TikTok and Instagram, I was really proud of myself. I love film a lot, I would talk constantly to friends who could bear my muddled rambles and I had so many thoughts in my head about stuff I could write, stuff I wanted to write. But I didn’t have the courage to actually sit down and write, to make posts or videos or to just put myself out there.

But I eventually got the courage to do so and once I did, I found a lovely community of people who liked and enjoyed my work. As of writing, there are nearly 1,500 people across my Substack, Instagram and TikTok who follow my work. For months, I had a routine of sitting down every Sunday after cleaning my room, showering and getting ready for the week ahead to make a plan of what content I would make. I would film video reviews and these videos sometimes took over an hour for something that in its final cut was only two-minutes. I would stumble or stutter and rewatch the playback cringing or hating myself for saying a sentence awkwardly. And at many points, I saw myself scrutinising how I looked. I didn’t start with video reviews and didn't do video content really for weeks, because they were daunting to me. I truthfully do not like how I look, I hate how fast I talk when I’m excited and I feel self-conscious (which is probably quite evident from the tone of this piece).

But eventually, I fell into a comfortable rhythm and was so proud of what I had made, the compliments I’d receive and being recognised at LFF for my film TikTok. But then September hit. I moved into my new place, I finished my second year of my grad scheme six days later and the next day I had a two week holiday to South Korea and Malaysia planned, I would come back, and two days later, start the final year of my grad scheme and then two days after, take 8 days off for London Film Festival. This was a really bad time for me, I was constantly busy, having incredible experiences but it all came at once, all I could do is try not to drown over how stressed and busy I felt. And how selfish I felt to feel this when I was experiencing these incredible films, visiting these amazing countries and the opportunities to immerse myself in film. London Film Festival gave me that time to focus just on film and I felt like I could get back into the groove after my holiday. And then I had to take time away, because I went to A&E after a heavy day of a period caused me to bleed for over 8 hours constantly. I had to leave some work training and it took me 45 minutes to get up. I rushed home, breaking my journey twice to use bathrooms near the stations. I then tried to get some things together and went to A&E. Away from home for the first time, weak from the intense pelvic pain and constant bleeding, I felt fear and humiliation. At the thought of people observing how many times I went to the bathroom, seeing me alone and in tears. When I went home, I sobbed in the bathroom curled up in pain. I lied and told people that I was in pain, but I was better or fine or coping. Truthfully, I wanted to go back home, forget about moving out to London and forget about everything else in my life. To go back to a time before it felt like my period had ruined my life.

I’ve wanted to write about the incredible films I’ve seen recently, I've wanted to join in when I saw One Battle After Another, when I saw all of the incredible films at London Film Festival… but I couldn’t. I feel like I constantly apologise for not writing as much and promising to get back into it, but I don’t know if I can. And it scares me a bit. Because writing about film has been so cathartic. It has provided me with so much joy and it has reminded me that I am someone who has a passion and a love for film which is immense. I still have that love for film that compels me to go to the cinema often, but writing about them has eluded me recently. And it’s the busyness of these last 6 weeks, but also the issues with my period have gotten bad and really affected my mental health.

TW: the following paragraph includes brief descriptions of depression and anxiety

I’ve struggled with anxiety and depression for many years. I used to take medication for it until I felt like I could function without it. Now is not one of those times. I haven’t felt like a person lately. I haven’t felt like myself. I’m not Aaminah, the person who is constantly smiling and filled with life and a love for everything around her. I’ve been crying a lot. I feel broken. I’ve regressed to my teenage years and have spent a lot of time on Tumblr laying on my bed. I’ve been holed up inside a lot. Bleeding heavily, cuddled up with a hot water bottle which does soothe my cramps, but cannot soothe my depression. I’ve had to say no to plans a lot. I’m scared that my pain or bleeding will be an inconvenience. I’m scared to be thought of a burden. And to be perceived as weak. And I’ve put on a brave face, trying to act like everything is okay. It’s why they don’t tell you to believe what you see on social media, because by all accounts my posts will have you think it’s business as usual for me. It’s anything but that.

Dishes have been left to the side for a couple of days. I haven’t cleaned as much until I forced myself to do a really big clean and change my bedding. My eating habits have been erratic. I’ve existed by eating some food my Mum lovingly made me for dinner. But for the rest of the days that have just passed, I’ve been surviving on a few crackers every few hours. Or sometimes, it’s been fish fingers if I can force myself to use the air fryer. In the midst of the searing pain and bleeding and paranoia that I’ve leaked, I’ve not felt the need to eat. Yesterday, I had dinner at 9:30pm and before that, 6 crackers and a fibre one brownie. It’s pitiful. How can I feel like a person? How can I feel like me? When I can’t seem to function. When the basic parts of life are now difficult or hard to do. When I force myself to grit my teeth when I step outside, constantly in fear of bleeding or bracing myself for the intense pain I’ve been experiencing.

I don’t know if the doctors will find out what is wrong with me all of a sudden. The most terrible outcomes have plagued my mind, by virtue of having severe anxiety and being a hypochondriac. But I hope they do, because this has not only caused me so much pain, it’s also messed with my mental health and it’s zapped the enjoyment and zest for life I normally have. It’s stopped me from writing, from laughing or smiling as much. I do want to get back into writing, but I think this is a break for me. Some time to focus on getting better and navigating how I can function when I’m bleeding for weeks on end with no reprieve. By writing this, I wanted to be a bit more vulnerable and open and honest. And more than anything, periods can be a bit taboo topics, I catch myself warning my friends that I’m sorry if it sounds gross and then have to chide myself, because they aren’t gross. But more than anything, I wanted to write about the impact of them. I struggled a lot with heavy bleeding when I was a teenager and it sucked. But for the last few years I’ve been lucky to have light flows, only now they’re 3+ weeks long. It really can disrupt your life and sap the happiness. I don’t want to let it have that effect on me, and I’m determined to go out more, see my friends and get back to what normal is.

I thought I wanted to be a teacher for a long time. I tutored for 7 years from the age of 16 and taught students aged 3 to 18 and loved it. The kids were for the most part engaged and ready to learn, but for the rest? Forced to be in the weekend classes to prepare for the 11+, SATs, GCSE’s and A-Level’s. And some felt the pressure of getting the best grades they could. When I applied to the Teach First graduate scheme, I was told that it was incredibly difficult from friends who tried it and from others, that the kids would eat you alive. Needless to say, I chose a different career. When I looked through the LFF programme, I knew I had to watch Bad Apples. Bad Apples is Jonathan Etzler’s English language debut starring Saoirse Ronan in the lead role as Maria. Maria is a primary school teacher struggling with the disorderly behaviour of one of her students. After one of her students is injured on purpose, she makes a series of morally questionable decisions.

If you have been educated in the British school system, this film will be a little trip down memory lane. There were certain parts of the film that stood out to me. The incident that leads to Maria locking Danny in her basement starts because of an incident at school. Maria asks a girl to walk with Danny to spare her trouble dealing with his unruly behaviour. And Danny’s response is a violent one. Often at school, seating plans and moving students around the class focused on well-behaved girls being sat next to boys who had behavioural issues. An early form of socialisation which put the onus on women to mitigate the impact of the behaviour of men. I could understand why Maria did it. She’s frustrated, Danny will not listen to her and will swear and scream at her. She has raised the potential of moving Danny out of her class or to a new school with her headteacher, who tells her behaviour management is part of her job. And that is the issue. Nobody senior enough cares to sit in on Maria’s class to observe it first-hand, help her and provide her with tips as seasoned educators. And it hammers home a key issue in the education system. Behaviour has worsened in schools. Behaviour management often forms the main part of the role. Students who create disorder, who are violent and act out often do so for reasons. Yet, the system in place does not address the root issues. Students are suspended or expelled. And for students in the class who behave, they do not have the full attention of their teacher. It’s a cycle which continues, in the hopes that students will mature.

Bad Apples takes absurd and dark turns which work because of the performances from our main actors. Saoirse Ronan steals the show as Maria, as she does in all of her performances. At first, when we meet her, she is tired. She is worn down by the disruptive behaviour of her student Danny. He swears at her. He swears at the other children in the class. They poke at his outbursts. She’s contending with his behaviour and the job of teaching 20-odd students. You cannot help but be sympathetic to her. When she begins the day at school, she’s excited! Keen to shown her kids not what’s on the syllabus, but music and poetry. In a scene where she shows her class a verse from a poem (it may have been a song, my memory is shaky!), I could not feel anything but despair and sympathy for her. In Dead Poets Society, John Keating has a similar approach to his students. He focuses on poetry instilling the love for the English language and the ways we construct phrases, we organise words and draw on our experiences to produce beautiful pieces of art. His students are receptive. Saoirse Ronan is not as fortunate as John Keating to have students who are receptive to this ideal.

They fail to answer her questions, in a scene which will remind you of awkward silences in classes. At school, I felt compelled to stick my hand up every time a teacher asked a question to an unrelenting silence. One student even questions Ronan’s Maria as to whether this would feature on their SATs. In an exchange which will remind you of the importance of OFSTED ratings at school, exam results and league tables. Bad Apples works as a satire about school which takes the form of a dark comedy, because moments like these exist in the film. Saoirse Ronan’s performance is subtle and this is why the film works. Not overly dramatic, but a realistic depiction of what life must be like for teachers struggling with their classes. Her feelings are conveyed not by screaming or shouting, but with subtle facial movements. The droop of her face as her students are boisterous, the nod she makes to herself as they fail to respond understanding she has lost their attention and that buildup of frustration, the feelings of helplessness against the unruly behaviour which fuels her choices to lock her student, Danny in her basement.

The other two performances worth discussing are those of Danny and Pauline. When we meet Danny, we cannot help but dislike him. I hesitated to write that as it sounds incredibly unfair to talk about a child like that. But he is mean, foul-mouthed and violent. It’s hard to sympathise with him, because he reminded of the boys in my class who disrupted my learning, bullied me and were unkind to my friends. It’s an interesting watch as I went to a mixed-gender school from 3 to 13 and then in Year 9, I went to an all-girls school where my experience was much better. Classes were smoother, there was significantly less disruption and I didn’t have mean boys interrupting my day. But as the film goes on, I felt awful for disliking his character. It is clear that Danny is struggling, because he doesn’t have a parental figure as his Father is out working all day as a delivery driver. He has little oversight and he struggles in school. He doesn’t have a loving or warm home to get back to. When the school bell rings, he goes on alone. This provides us with the full picture of his behaviour and why he acts out.

Pauline is a character I saw parts of myself in. At first, she’s a really sweet, quiet and studious young girl who is perceived as weird by her classmates. She loves her teacher and is keen for her approval. I was very much the same at school sometimes, I really liked my teachers and behaved really well, put my head down and I just enjoyed being a well-behaved kid who did well in school. Thankfully, I do not fully relate to Pauline, as her character takes a sinister turn. In her limited screen time, we learn so much about her. She has parents who do not understand her, who think she is weird for being a dreamer and loving literature and music the way she does in contrast with their practical and work-focused upbringing. As the film progresses, her appreciation and love for her teacher becomes obsession. Maria is relatable to Pauline, she loves poetry and art and music, unlike her parents. She sees more of Maria than her parents, who are not present. I saw part of myself in her, because she for all accounts was a good and well-behaved student. But she is lonely, does not have friends and has parents who do not care for her. I was fortunate enough to have friends who were nerdy and geeky as I was, four siblings in a boisterous household and two parents who loved me and got my interests, even if they didn’t share them. The differences between myself and Pauline really do illustrate how Pauline’s appreciation for her teacher becomes obsession. Maria is the only person in her life who feels like a genuine role model who gets her.

I thoroughly enjoyed the film. As I’ve said, there are incredible performances all around from Saoirse Ronan and the host of students who form her class. It took me back to school and I felt it was an honest and faithful depiction. My one gripe with it, is that it does have an incredibly absurdist ending. Many extraordinary events happen and I was sat in shock and disbelief as the story goes on. However, this is based on a novel so it may be a case that it is faithful to that ending. I would recommend seeing Bad Apples in cinema. You do not need the best sound system or biggest screen, but you need a busy screening amongst others. In my press screening, there was a lot of laughter, shock and it felt like a very lively atmosphere.

Sorry this took so long! I had to cut LFF short by 5 days, went to the hospital and the toilet in my house share malfunctioned, so it has been a tricky week for me. I have a couple of more pieces around LFF left, which I’m excited to share.

Other pieces I have on LFF coming up include a bite-sized review of The Fence, two longer reviews on Bad Apples and Palestine 36 and a LFF week 1 wrap-up with short reviews for each of the films I managed to see. I am also live posting about my LFF experience on my social media platforms - aaminahthroughthescreen on TikTok and Instagram. Apologies for the huge gap in between this post and the last post, it’s been an incredibly busy time for me.

Wasteman is Cal McMau’s debut feature and with a 90-minute runtime which keeps you tense throughout. Starring David Jonnson as Taylor, a parolee who wants a fresh start which is threatened by the arrival of his new cellmate, Dee played by Tom Blyth.

David Jonnson and Tom Blyth deliver two incredible performances, proving their status as the some of the best actors in their generation. Jonnson’s Taylor is a shrinking violent. He avoids drama and violence and wants to get through his sentence with little trouble. Disparagingly referred to as a nitty, he also struggles with addiction. Whereas Blyth’s Dee is the complete opposite. Domineering, sociopathic and an intensity that cannot help make you feel sympathetic to Taylor for having to contend with such a cellmate who threatens his release.

The film was an uncomfortable watch. Being set in a prison, it is a gritty film which does not shy away from what people are capable of doing when they need to survive. And in my press screening, during moments where I was horrified and in shock, I could hear laughter which surprised me. Funny moments are found in the film, but similar to Anora, there are some moments people will laugh at which I did not find at all. The opposite really. There are some incredible moments, particularly the exchanges between Blyth’s Dee and Jonnson’s Taylor which standout because both characters are the complete opposite of each other. Yet they strike up a mutual understanding, which comes under threat after a viscous attack.

The film’s cinematography is incredible. It alternates the lingering shots which highlights the loneliness of prison for Taylor who keeps to himself to avoid trouble juxtaposed with phone camera footage of prisoners fighting, playing up to the camera and creating trouble.

This was the first film of London Film Festival for me and I enjoyed it. Enjoy may be the wrong word, but it was a well-made film with two strong leading performances from actors I really love. Tom Blyth with Plainclothes and Wasteman and David Jonnson with The Long Walk and Wasteman are having incredible years and once again, have proved their status as some of the best actors of their generation.

I haven’t stuck to my weekly posting schedule, I know, I know, I was so diligent about it and it became part of my routine every week. But I got exhausted and I kept forgetting. A week passed, and then I would say to myself that next week would be my week… but it didn’t happen. For many reasons. The first is that I was struggling a bit with my depression and sometimes, I really don’t have the energy or derive any joy from writing. I become a shell of myself. I ghost friends, I get angry and become an ugly version of myself and that version cannot bring herself to sit at my desk and write a post.

And now for the other reasons and why I wanted to write this post. The second reason I just didn’t write for AGES is because I caught pneumonia. The one thing embarrassing about catching it, is the assumption from people that this is a Victoria disease and I have the immune system of a sickly Victorian child. Catching it exhausted me for weeks. I could barely stare at a computer screen and couldn’t bring myself to sit at my desk. Working from home during this time was horrific, as I love going to the office and seeing people. More than anything, I was so sad that I missed out on a chance to meet Greta Gerwig at a Q&A! Anyway, that aside, pneumonia was intense and I could not bring myself to do much.

And for the third reason and why I’m writing this… I have moved out of my family home and to London!!! This is a huge thing for me, because I have spent ages trying to find somewhere and I am now all moved in thanks to my amazing family, especially my parents and eldest sister who did SO much. My family home is fun, chaotic (there are 7 of us) and full of love, but it is also over an hour to an hour and 30 mins to London. And I’ve done the commute to work for over 2 years, I’ve said no to opportunities because it exhausts me and it got to a point where I just felt sick and weird and upset about the thought of commuting into work or for cinema stuff.

So I decided enough was enough, I would move out. It took weeks - I began my search in mid July and took 3 weeks off because of pneumonia. The day before I found my current room, I cried because weeks of searching, hundreds of Spareroom messages I had sent and viewings I had attended weren’t successful. It demotivated me and it felt like I was hooked to Spareroom and FaceBook groups… which is why I also haven’t written in ages. But I eventually was successful. The area is gorgeous, it is diverse like home is and there’s a lot to do on the high street. I’ve changed the room layout to suit me more and managed to fit in another chest of drawers, a bookcase and a desk. It feels like me, but I still need to get a few things and decorate with some posters.

I feel a bittersweet happiness. I am so excited for this new chapter of my life and feel ready to grow up a bit more. Living at home with my family is something I am so grateful for as I got to do so much. I visited so many countries including some of my favourites - Japan and Canada are two standouts and I could afford to go to all of these incredible concerts. And I was lucky to be in a household where I could see my grandparents regularly and be enveloped by love. But there is a downside, I felt more like a teenager and regressed a bit. I think it’s just something that happens when you move out for university to a bright and big new city and cosplay at being an adult and then move home after graduation. But now? I feel more of a grown-up and I am so excited to see my friends more, go out more and build a life that reflects the new me.

I did start this off excusing my radio silence and have to end on this new note. I am off to South Korea and Malaysia on the 19th September! Part of my trip will of course be film related, as I do a day trip to Busan and attend Busan International Film Festival and I will hopefully catch a film or two in Seoul and Kuala Lumpur. After that, I start my final year on my graduate scheme and then I will take 10 days or so off for London Film Festival. It’s my first year as press and I’m so excited for all of the incredible opportunities, the films and the screen talks I’m attending.

So on being able to write more regularly - I will probably get back into my weekly routine post LFF, and will have lots to write during it about all of the incredible films I see.

I’m really excited for my holiday and for all of the fun stuff that’s coming up for me, it’ll be busy but part of now having moved and not occupying all my time on Spareroom means I can get back into writing! Please do send over anything I’ve missed from you, I’d love to read and support. I’m sadly so busy this week as I am off on holiday and it’s the last week of my second year of my graduate scheme.

Modern dating sucks. It’s hard to not feel depressed about the landscape of dating and romance. Not least because it’s changed over the last few decades, but with the advent of social media and popularity of TikTok, it’s so easy to be deterred from being vulnerable and honest. Why would you? When your vulnerable and honest admissions could be blasted on the internet for anyone to see. Where dating apps rule supreme and the list of ‘candidates’ are endless, honesty and vulnerability feels harder to achieve. I have to caveat something… As much as I moan, I’m part of the problem.

At university, one of my favourite things to do was take a friend’s phone and swipe through dozens of people with a stream of running commentary. Dating at that age isn’t really serious, even more so when you treat it as a game. I’ve talked many friends away from redownloading hinge, reminding them of the times they’ve complained about the app. But at the same time, I’ve had to be persuaded not to download apps. Am I a hypocrite? Or is this the way apps are designed to make dating feel? Maybe it’s a bit of both. I’ve been thinking about the different types of love - romantic, familial and friendship and some films recently have shaped my views towards them. I recently watched the Before Trilogy and Materialists, Celine Song’s newest film. I felt a bit numb after both and shaken in terms of my beliefs and attitudes towards love. I caught Materialists at a Picturehouse preview in late July and wanted to write a spoiler-free review closer to the UK’s release date.

Firstly, before I provide details of the plot, I feel that it’s necessary to advise that you come into the film with an open mind. People are expecting this to be Past Lives 2, and I want to be upfront and say whilst I see elements of Past Lives in Materialists, it is not an extension of Past Lives. Materialists focuses on the modern world of dating as we know it. Following matchmaker Lucy who works for a luxury matchmaking service, Adore, Lucy’s day to day job involves matching high-value and demanding clients to each other. When we meet her, she’s clearly capable and great at her work. We learn her matchmaking efforts have led to nine weddings, and it’s at this ninth wedding we are introduced to the two leading men. As she’s sitting on her table, she encounters Harry the brother of the groom and as she is served two drinks, her ex-boyfriend John serves her as one of the catering staff for the wedding. Immediately, we’re treated to this juxtaposition. Harry works in private equity, he owns a multi-million dollar penthouse in Tribeca whilst John is a struggling actor living with roommates, desperate to break into theatre whilst working part-time in the service industry. And the story unfolds. This is not merely a story about Dakota Johnson choosing between two men, Materialists follows Lucy’s journey in considering her perceptions of love due to her upbringing and job. The film has mixed reviews, but I loved it and felt it had a lot to say about the modern world of dating.

Celine Song has an incredible ability to make her characters feel fully formed in the context of a short runtime in a genre which feels oversaturated with specific tropes. Lucy was my favourite character and Dakota Johnson delivers one of her best performances to date. As Lucy, she is charming, a great observer of people and empathetic. As we see throughout the film, her upbringing and her role have shaped her perceptions of love. Facing clients with insane demands for a partner, which often at times are contradictory. Love is currency in her world of matchmaking and assets such as height, income, weight and race makes candidates more or less desirable. Johnson’s performance is subtle, and it worked. The inner conflict about her feelings towards both men and her perceptions of love and her job come to a conclusion in refreshing, grown-up and deeply heartfelt conversations with both Harry and John.

As for the leading men, Evans and Pascal both shine and add something to the film and Lucy’s journey of navigating her feelings. Harry to many is the obvious choice. He’s good-looking! He’s rich! He’s handsome! And it’s easy to be just an attractive character, but Harry is a three-dimensional character who more than anything wants to have a say in how his life turns out and find someone who shares his views on the world. Evans as John is the complete opposite to people. People have dubbed his character as ‘broke boy’. John is relatable, where Harry is aspirational. Evans has some of the best moments in Materialists owed partially to flashbacks of his relationship with Lucy. We gain an insight of why they didn’t work out the first time and in Materialists, Evans delivers one of the most powerful monologues about love. Song is incredible at writing rich and layered characters and treats them with such vulnerability and honesty, that this film is not merely girl chooses between two guys. Neither Harry or John are antagonists and she does not use the overly used trope of one guy turning out to be horrible to justify the choice of the other. Instead, she uses her characters to position Materialists as a film about societal expectations around dating as we see through the main and supporting performances. And overall, how do we consider what romance is like in today’s world and how with dating apps and changing expectations it is so easy to be disillusioned.

Although I made a caveat that this film is not an extension of Past Lives, I can see elements of that in Materialists. Firstly, the way Celine Song frames is evidence of her attention to detail and care. In Past Lives, we see this in the very opening as we’re introduced to all three characters and begin to speculate as to the nature of their connection. In Materialists, as Lucy and John catchup following years of no contact, the tender framing as they memorise the outlines of each other’s faces is slow and deliberate. In that moment, there are not two exes who are catching up awkwardly, but they are two people who clearly still love each other and have history

Equally, when Lucy and Harry are on a date in a fancy restaurant in New York, one Lucy could never afford on her own, the framing is used to emphasise their thoughtful conversations where Lucy expresses her doubts about Harry pursuing her. He is not simply a rich guy in love with a girl, and she is not simply a matchmaker on the hunt for a rich man. They are two people who are having a tender, vulnerable and open conversation about their buddying romance and what they want in life. It’s as tender in a way you do not expect a conversation with someone you have just met to turn out and adds to the realism around Lucy’s conflict between the two men and her role in the dating world, as a matchmaker. New York City is once again a gorgeous setting and is almost a character in Materialists. It’s dreamy and made me come out of the film longing to move to NYC. More than anything though, in the context of an unimaginable setting of the New York luxury dating market, every frame is gorgeous and elegant. The camera captures the luxurious lifestyle of Harry through a colour palette of creams, dark reds and black with an almost darkness which is romantic, whereas John’s less glamorous life is portrayed with lighter colour tones and a lighter setting. One is sunshine, and the other is midnight rain (sorry I had to get the Taylor Swift reference in!).

Materialists is a film which does not hesitate to inquire about the nature of modern dating. Our parent’s generation and their parent’s generation had such a different landscape and it felt easier to meet someone organically back then. Whereas now, modern dating feels like an impossible minefield riddled with contradictions. In Materialists, in montages where Lucy’s clients are demanding a whole host of qualities in their future partners, you cannot hope but to despair. An middle-aged man wanting to date a younger woman, but also finds 20 something year olds uninteresting… but gets along with them better is positioned next to women who find a guy who matches all of their qualities but he’s not 6 foot tall. Without providing spoilers, the film through a subplot explores how this can take a more sinister turn. Especially in this context, where these people vying for partners are high-income and therefore high-value clients and have a degree of entitlement. In a world where you can swipe hundreds of people on a dating app over the course of an hour, we have assigned arbitrary valuations to people to assess their potential. Dating apps have encouraged this. Hinge is a great example of one where it’s purported to be more meaningful limiting you to 5 likes a day… but that’s only a limit if you choose to not pay their monthly subscription. Money ranks supreme. Celine Song’s exploration of the modern dating world through Lucy’s role and her interactions with the two men is masterfully done. Sometimes we cannot treat dating as a transactory exchange and have to listen to our heart. Sometimes that person who does not fit any of your criteria suits you or that person who is just like you, is the perfect match for you. My feelings on the overall theme of the film is that the film depicts the overall feeling of unhappiness and hopelessness in the dating market and we all have a role to play in that, however big or small that may be. For those of us who write people off over the smallest of icks, to those of us who have unrealistic and unfair expectations and to those of us who have treated dating like a game.

Materialists has become one of my favourite 2025 releases this year and I felt so touched by the film. It made me think a lot about the roles I’ve had to play in feeling hopeless about the modern dating market and how it’s set up to depress us all. As I’ve said before, expecting an extension of Past Lives is wholly unfair to Celine Song as a filmmaker, because Materialists is a different story and for me, a film ultimately about the modern world about dating. A24 has marketed this well as a romantic comedy so if you have that expectation going in, you may be disappointed. Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of humorous moments, but this film is more romantic than comedy. It’s a film that sits with you and over two weeks after watching it, I’m still thinking about it and my views of love. Please do see it in the cinema, it is an incredible watch and desperately needed and I hope people take something from it.

I really enjoyed writing this review, sorry about the gap between them and more overall inactivity on Substack. It can sometimes be really hard to balance that with work, hobbies and I’ve been sick recently which took me out of writing for the last couple of weeks. My next post will be more about that and what I watched during my extended period of illness.

If you’ve watched Materialists I would really love to hear your review and views on it, as I know people took different things from it and have different interpretations of the film.

Words of War is director James Strong’s newest feature film, following his television adaptation of the Post Office scandal into the acclaimed show Mr Bates vs The Post Office. The film stars Maxine Peak as Anna Politkovskaya, a journalist and human rights activist who reported on the conflict in Chechnya, at great personal risk. Throughout her career, she also worked hard to expose the corruption which took place in Russia under Putin. Politkovskaya was poisoned, threatened and harmed and eventually killed in a contract killing. Jason Isaacs stars as Alexander Politkovsky, Anna’s husband and television journalist and Ciarán Hinds stars as Dmitry Muratov, Anna’s boss and former editor-in-chief for Novaya Gazeta. Thank you to Signature Entertainment for providing me with the opportunity to review this incredibly powerful and important film.

Before I go into my review, I thought it would be important to touch upon the context and importance of this film. Journalists, especially those who report on war and conflict are doing a dangerous job to fight against corrupt systems and individuals and severe human rights abuses. As Anna says in the film ‘if you choose to be a journalist in Russia, you accept the risk’. In 2018, we all saw as the Saudi government tried to cover up their government’s involvement in the killing of Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi dissident journalist at their embassy. The right to a free press has never been more important than ever. In a world where AI has the ability to generate disinformation, where people accept fake news as face value and journalistic outlets face economic threats, because the costs of operating are extortionate, this film has come at the right time.

Words of War excels at portraying the personal side of Anna’s story and examines the impacts of her words, with a fitting title for the film. The strength of this film is Maxine Peak’s performance. As Anna, she is unrelenting and keen to uncover the truth of the corruption, of the ravages imposed on ordinary people and the personal cost of her reporting. As she publishes an article about the atrocities in Chechnya, the fallout emerges and is monumental. Her husband is fired from his job and her children are in fear that her journalism and uncovering of the truth will place her and them in danger. Peak’s performance is also incredible in relation to her scene partners. In exchanges with ordinary Chechen citizens, she is empathetic and wants to understand what they’ve been through to report on the atrocities committed against them. In contrast, as she delivers her testimony about her experiences, as she comes face to face with army personnel who harass and intimidate her, she has a steely resolve.

Strong’s decision to focus on the last few years of Anna’s life is an interesting directorial choice. Why not focus on her motivations for reporting? A question some have raised in response to this film, in choosing to focus on the time Anna spent reporting in Chechnya, Strong immediately raises the stake and spotlights the costs of Anna’s moral courage. Is there a motivation great enough to explain the impetus around the decisions to report on war and conflict? I do not think so nor do I think it would make a convincing story. Strong’s direction shines through in how he frames Anna’s life and dedication to journalism, she not only represents Anna Politkovskaya, she also carries the story of every journalist who has been under threat.

The film can only work, because of the incredible performances from the ensemble with particular emphasis on the performances from Maxine Peak, Jason Isaacs and Ciarán Hinds and Strong’s direction. It is a political thriller which depicts a story which despite being twenty years old has as much relevance as it does today, even more so. If you are interested in journalism and its depiction in films like The Post or She Said or a fan of political thrillers, this film is a must watch. I am not only reviewing this as a writer, but as someone who studied Political Science and International Relations at university focusing on the Putin regime. From the academic perspective, media is one of the most powerful tools at our disposal to shine a light on grave atrocities and it is increasingly important in an environment where journalism is constantly changing.

Words of War is available to rent digitally, via YouTube, Google Play, Sky, Apple TV+ and Amazon. You can also check out my video review via my TikTok, also aaminahthroughthescreen!

Thanks for reading this review, this was an incredible film to review and something I thought was such a vital watch. We live in an age where the news cycle is 24/7 and people can access news with a touch of their fingertips. Words of War belongs to a genre of film which covers the importance of a free press, but also reminds us that this right is not one people have access to equally.

Are you planning to watch Words of War?

I love superhero films and have done so for a very long time. I remember being introduced to the 2004 Fantastic Four film by my Dad and having a toy of The Thing with a smashed car, which I played with a lot. I remember being shown the Nolan Dark Knight Trilogy and being utterly obsessed with Jonathan Crane, Bane and Two Face and their respective actors. These are some of my earliest memories of cinema and film. I dressed up in 2016 for Comic Con as Spiderman and the next year, I went as Mario. Truth be told, at school I also ran a Tumblr where I wrote SO much fan fiction about the Avengers, about Batman, about Superman and Sherlock. I was one of those insufferable teenagers with bags dotted with endless pin badges. When I watched Man of Steel, I was disappointed. It was too dark and too gritty to be fitting of this Superman I had seen in comic books and read extensively about. So when it was announced James Gunn was directing the new Superman, I was excited having loved the Guardians of the Galaxy trilogy (especially the third!) and full faith in his direction. I watched Superman at the Odeon Luxe Swiss Cottage in their IMAX screen on the 12th of July and had an incredible time. James Gunn’s take on Superman is a fresh, vibrant and fully human one and one we desperately need today.

Superman (2025) is written and directed by James Gunn and stars David Corenswet as Superman; Rachel Brosnahan as Lois Lane; Nicholas Hoult as Lex Luthor; Eli Gathegi as Mister Terrific; Nathan Fillion as Green Lantern, Isabela Merced as Hawkgirl; Skyler Gisondo as Jimmy Olsen and Wendell Pierce as Perry White. The film opens with text which informs the viewer that the first metahumans were discovered three centuries prior to the events of the film, with Superman coming to earth thirty years before the film found by Jonathan and Martha Kent who adopt him, and name him Clark. At twenty-seven he becomes Superman to the people of Metropolis. Over the course of the film, Superman must prove to the world that he is the good-natured superhero who intends to protect them, after Lex Luthor schemes to turn the public against him through nefarious means. Simultaneously, conflicts abroad means his attention is divided and he must find a way to prove he is well-intentioned and save the day.

The strength of this film is in its performances, particularly the main performances from Corenswet, Brosnahan and Hoult. David Corenswet grounds Superman with humanity. Throughout the film, he displays the characteristics of a good superhero. He doubts himself, cares about the little guy (at one point in the film he rescues a tiny squirrel in a busy street about to be crushed), he laughs and cries and, even doubts. He wrestles with the enormity of the mantle the Superman title holds and when push comes to shove, he throws his whole heart into being the hero Metropolis needs.

Rachel Brosnahan is the perfect complement as Lois Lane. She is witty, sharp and not content to stand in the shadow of Clark Kent/Superman. There’s a particular scene where she conducts an interview with Superman and the ethics of his actions abroad. She questions him forensically, not affording him special treatment due to their relationship and she challenges him and pushes back against his justifications and makes him a better Superman for it. And the chemistry they have is palpable. Nicholas Hoult’s Lex Luthor is a generational hater. Gone is the jittery, self-aware neuroticism Jesse Eisenberg gave us and in his place is a man whose hatred of Superman stems from deep within. Hoult’s Luthor is incredible in his exchanges with Superman, his smirks as he wins smaller battles and the most terrifying thing about it? He leaves no room to question why he’s so evil, and that clarity makes him incredibly terrifying.

Underpinning the film is James Gunn’s masterful direction. We are thrown straight into the action with no clunky origin story to slow us down nor exposition to reveal information in chunks. Gunn trusts his audience to fill in the blanks and it’s a decision which pays off with a runtime which passes by quickly and a tight focus within each act. Visually, this film is stunning. The film rejects the dull and desaturated colour palettes that have plagued so many superhero films. Since the Nolan Dark Knight trilogy, it seems that subsequent superhero films have tried to emulate it not understanding that the dark and gritty aesthetic fits with that trilogy, because it respects the representation of Batman and Gotham. Gunn’s decision to film Superman’s flying scenes with the Leica Tri-Elma lens makes for dream like sequences.

Superman is full of heart, this film is not trying to replicate the dark and gritty films which directors have long stuck to in an attempt to replicate Nolan’s The Dark Knight Trilogy. Superman’s greatest strength is not his ability to fly, shoot lasers or his strength. It is rather his humanity. And although I’ve not mentioned the whole host of cast members involved, the supporting characters feel well-developed and help speed the storyline. I have to say there is a fantastic sequence with Mister Terrific which I adore so much, it reminds me of the infamous X-Men Apocalypse where Evan Peters saves everyone to the song Sweet Dreams are made of this. And I’d be remiss if I did not include the fact that this is substantial given that Eli Gathegi’s character, Darwin in X-Men First Class was killed too early and that decision was evidently the wrong one. Look Up! And watch Superman in cinemas right now, it’s well worth seeing it on the biggest screen, especially in IMAX!

Thanks for reading, I’d be keen to see what others thought about the film as I know it’s opened to such amazing reception!!

On Wednesday, I was able to catch Jurassic World: Rebirth at my local Odeon Luxe. I had contemplated seeing this and whether it was worth the cinema trip. For lovers of cinema, 2025 has become an incredible year for original films (Sinners, Black Bag, Hard Truths to name a few) but has also been a year of live-action remakes (Lilo and Stitch and How To Train Your Dragon) and new films in existing franchises which have often be met with groans and exasperation. I was also hesitant to watch it, given my experience watching the previous Jurassic World films. Would this be as painful to watch? Would I be treated to an film which clutches to CGI? Despite my many reservations, I decided to give the film. chance. Jurassic World: Rebirth is the fourth Jurassic World film and seventh instalment in the franchise, directed by Gareth Evans and written by David Kopek. The film has a star-studded cast consisting of Scarlett Johansson (Zora); Mahershala Ali (Duncan); Jonathan Bailey (Dr Loomis); Rupert Friend (Martin); Manuel Garcia-Ruflo (Rueben); Luna Blaise (Teresa); David Iacono (Xavier) and Audrina Miranda (Isabella).

The film is set five years following Jurassic World Dominion and focuses on a team of skilled operatives led by Zora Bennett travelling to an island. Their journey is dangerous, not the least because it is illegal, but because the island they’re travelling hosts the research facility for the original Jurassic Park and by virtue of that, lots of dangerous dinosaurs. Their aim is to secure genetic material from three dinosaurs - the Mosasaurus, Titanosaurus and Quetzalcoatlus, whose DNA can help humanity with a world-changing drug to combat heart disease. The catch? They need to be within 10m to extract that material adding danger to their journey. As Zora and her team travel to the dinosaurs which consists of Dr Loomis, a palaeontologist; mercenary, Duncan Kincaid; pharmaceutical representative, Martin Krebs (who hires Zora), they soon run into trouble with the dinosaurs and find a shipwrecked family in need of help.

I wanted to begin my review by praising the cast of this film. Introducing new characters to an established franchise in the course of the film is an incredibly difficult feat, but it paid off. I particularly enjoyed Scarlett Johannson’s and Jonathan Bailey’s. As Nora, Scarlett is able to portray this quiet intensity you’d expect from a covert operative, but what’s really interesting is how her views on the mission changes and her chemistry with Dr Henry Loomis. Nothing happens between their characters and Gareth Evans does not attempt to fit in a contrived romantic subplot. Jonathan Bailey’s performance is one I was most surprised at, as Dr Henry Loomis (a palaeontologist) he gives the film grounding and morality. There is one incredible scene which stood out to me. He’s knowledgeable about all things relating to dinosaurs, which is the reason for his position in the team, but lacks real experience with dinosaurs in the wild. When he gets up and close to the dinosaurs observing mating rituals, his astonishment and wonder at being able to observe the subject of his study and career up close is a tender moment which is well-executed.

I will love Mahershala Ali in anything he’s in, but I think as Duncan, he does a great job with what he’s given. His character is a grieving mercenary who does have an important role in the team as leader, but I don’t think his character develops and is very much the same person we meet at the beginning of the film. Rupert Friend’s role is very simple - he represents a pharmaceutical company which wishes to utilise the genetic material of dinosaurs for their own benefit. At first, he’s just another corporate guy who can be a bit of an asshole, but as the film develops, the lengths he’ll go to secure the genetic material are discovered by his team. He does well with what he’s given and it’s another role in a sort of archetype that is developing around how high-ranking and important people in business are portrayed in film and TV. I also wanted to briefly mention the performances of the family who become shipwrecked, I felt they each gave great performances particularly, David Iacono who plays Xavier (Teresa’s boyfriend). At first, I was rooting for him to be swept away and devoured by the dinosaurs but over time, he grew on me and it turned out his character wasn’t all superficial.

For fans who love homages to other films, there is a lot of that in Jurassic World: Rebirth including a tasteful homage to Jaws which I definitely sat up for! Gareth Evans does a great job at tastefully adding to the Jurassic World franchise through his direction of the incredible cast assembled. There are sequences where the typical trope of a menacing figure in the background who is out of focus is contrasted with a character distracted by something in the foreground, it’s great the first and second time but over utilised in this film. I’d recommend watching this film if you’re a fan of the original and want an action-packed film with some incredible sequences and performances.

Have you watched it? I’d love to know what you thought about the film!

I could pick ten solely from 2024, so the decision to narrow down the choices to ten for this century was difficult and I did um and ah my way through it. But I gave myself some parameters, I wanted to choose ten films that I felt personally deserved it due to how I felt when watching them, but I also wanted to choose films which were transformative, innovative and incredibly crafted. The way we rate films I find is always a mix of what you love personally, what works for you, but also what you can appreciate from a deeper interrogation of film.

The list below reflects ten films I believe stand out for those exact reasons, there are so many more I could have chosen from this century which I will list as honourable mentions.

Godzilla Minus One

This was one of the last films I watched in 2023 and as soon as I left the cinema, I proclaimed it was one of the best films I have watched and the best film of that year. It stuck with me for months and I kept crossing my fingers it would be nominated for several Oscars.

Godzilla Minus One is set in Japan which has barely recovered from the World War Two when a gigantic peril in the form of Godzilla emerges off the coast of Tokyo. Koichi, a former kamikaze pilot who is traumatised by his first confrontation with Godzilla, where he was unable to defeat the monster grapples with post-traumatic stress disorder. As Godzilla emerges and begins to lay siege on Japan, Koichi sees this as an opportunity to redeem himself during the war.

Godzilla Minus One is one of the best Godzilla films to exist, and one of the best films of the 21st Century. It is visually stunning through a shrewd use of visual effects which led to the film receiving the Best Visual Effects Oscar with a budget far less than its competition. Often the human consequences and drama is an impact of Godzilla, but in this film it is everything. The film is able to tap into the psyche of Japan post World War Two and expertly weaves in themes such as chosen family, survivors guilt and is the type of human story, a Godzilla film should be.

The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring

I have not rewatched the film in a long time and I need to rectify that, however I am certain the Lord of the Rings trilogy is one of the best book to screen adaptations in all history.

The film is adapted from Tolkien’s 1954 novel, Fellowship of the Ring which is the first volume in the The Lord of the Rings. The film is set in Middle-Earth and as a ring with mysterious powers lands into the hand of a young hobbit, Frodo (Elijah Wood), he must destroy it, as Dark Lord Sauron (Sala Baker) seeks the ring to return to power. He makes the journey to Mount Doom in Mordor to destroy the ring with eight companions.

The first film in a series has an incredible duty to establish the story and the world it is set in and Fellowship of the Ring had to establish the entire expanse of Middle-Earth, the central conflict of the story and the characters from a well-loved and well-known story. This film is one of the best of the century, and one I consider a fantasy epic, because it is flawless in its executions. The storyline is tightly focused, the film is underpinned by such a beautiful score and it masterfully executes a faithful, technically brilliant adaptation of Tolkien’s first volume of Lord of the Rings.

Sinners

Watching this in 70mm IMAX at the BFI IMAX was one of the best decisions I made this year. The aspect ratio changes particularly within the History of Music sequence was breathtaking and rendered me speechless, with no thought but the fact that I knew instinctively that this film would be one of the best films I would see in 2025.

Sinners is set in 1930s Mississippi and is a Southern Gothic vampire film that follows twin brothers (both played by Michael B. Jordan) as they return to their hometown to start again by opening a juke joint. At the heart of the film is their cousin Sammie (Miles Caton) who is a gifted guitarist caught between his family’s church (led by his strict preacher father) and his ambitions to play the blues and forge his own path set amongst conflict which is driven by the arrival of vampires, with the lead vampire Remmick (Jack O’Connell) keen to use Sammie’s gift of the blues and ability to conjure up spirits for his own purposes.

Sinners deserves its place deservedly on this list, because there is so much love and care and attention which has gone into this film. The melding of themes is an ambitious feat managed to astonish me. The film’s focus in the first half which is slower, really allows the viewer to get to know each characters so as the danger emerges in the second half, we have personal stakes with whatever occurs for each character. Each part of the film - its cinematography, the performances, the direction, the gorgeous score and editing works in harmony and the end result is a truly exceptional film.

Anatomy of a Fall

If you thought Anatomy of a Fall would just be another courtroom drama you would be wrong. The film focuses on the story of a marriage between German-born author Sandra (Sandra Hüller) and aspiring writer, Samuel (Samuel Theis). As Samuel is found dead and Sandra is the suspect, the pursuing film centres around the investigation and court case, which unveils the layers and parts of the couple’s tumultuous relationship.

Justine Triet is able to utilise the court setting to interrogate the couple’s relationship through an incredible screenplay. As each piece of evidence is submitted, discussed and Sandra is interrogated alongside other witnesses, we soon see a marriage laid bare for us to judge. Anatomy of a Fall is a film which is great because the sum total of its parts are remarkable - the writing is sharp, it allows the viewer to judge and spectate without revealing too many details,

Sandra and child actor, Milo Machado Graner provide two incredible emotional performances. One of the best scenes are where Sandra is in the courtroom forced to switch between different languages, providing us with an idea of who is she in French, in German and in English (similar to the use of Korean and English in Past Lives). Milo Machado Graner provides one of the best performances from a child actor. Graner is central to the film and his portrayal of a grieving child, who is forced into a position where he must consider whether his Mother killed his Father and face a messy legal battle makes for a masterclass in acting. Anatomy of a Fall is a film which perfectly unpacks a relationship against a dark context of a murder trial.

Interstellar

Seeing this for the first time in cinema at a normal cinema and rewatching it on TV was a vastly different experience to when I was able to watch it at the BFI IMAX in 70mm IMAX in November 2023. Even though I had side seats towards the middle and the view was not incredible, I was amazed at how much the cinematic experience gave me a fonder appreciation for the film - particularly on a technical level.

Interstellar is set in the future where crops are scarce and a Dust Bowl is rendering Earth uninhabitable. Professor Brand (Michael Caine) is a physicist working on a plan to save mankind through transporting Earth’s population to a new home through a wormhole. To do so, Brand must send Cooper, a farmer and ex-NASA pilot to pilot a spacecraft to find a new planet for humans through the wormhole with a group of researchers.

Interstellar is another film which I truly believe was not appreciated enough when it was released. It is not just a question of science and wormholes and distant planets, it is also a truly human story. Matthew McConaughey’s performance as Cooper is an incredible one, as he grapples with his responsibilities towards civilisation and his responsibilities as a father, it is truly a story also about the themes of love and sacrifice. It deserves its spot on my list of top 10 films of the 21st Century, because it is visually breathtaking, it has a well-paced storyline and incredible score and the positioning of the huge questions of science and survival with the parent-child relationship is incredibly done.

Killers of the Flower Moon

I do not use the word masterpiece liberally when it comes to films, but this is truly one. As much as I loved Oppenheimer, I believe Killers of the Flower Moon was snubbed of many accolades at the Oscars. And criticisms around the film are founded with a fundamental misunderstanding of what the film is. This is not a mystery or a whodunnit, but rather a film which interrogates how these criminals committed a series of murders and why they were able to avoid suspicion for so long.

Killers of the Flower Moon chronicles the Osage murders of the 1920s which were a series of brutal killings that targeted the Osage Nation after oil made them some of the wealthiest people per capita in the world. It is a crucial chapter of history that too many have conveniently ignored and Killers of the Flower Moon brings the story to the forefront and showcases the horror committed against the Osage Nation.

This film had to be in my list of the top 10 of the century, because the strength of it lies in its commitment to telling an important story with moral clarity. Killers of the Flower Moon is an incredible depiction of this point in history through refusing to sensationalise the violence or treat it as a backdrop for white heroism. Lily Gladstone’s performance as Mollie Burkhart grounds the film and her facial expressions carry the weight of her families’ grief, the anguish of seeing people pass one by one and the realisation the evil causing it is much closer to home, than she thinks. As the film ends, you do not only learn about a horrific series of crimes against the Osage nation, but you are forced to confront the legacy which still reverberates today.

Parasite

I know, I know! Parasite will probably top everyone’s list. I am probably going to be considered a sheep for having this film on here, but I truly believe it is one of the best films of the century. And it is a film that I believe will truly stand the test of time.

Parasite follows a poor family, the Kims who are struggling to survive and go from insecure work to insecure work. When an opportunity arises for the son, Kim Ki-woo to tutor Park Da-hye, the daughter of Park Dong-ik, a wealthy businessman and Choi Yeon-gyo, a stay-at-home mum, the Kims begin scheming to get jobs for all of them within the same household.

Parasite is a film which I believe executes its themes really well. It’s an interesting critique of neoliberalism and when you consider the metaphor of parasite to denote the relationship between different social classes, in the film’s case the Kim and Park family, as a way to represent these often exploitative relationships. The film is able to execute this visually through several motifs, most notably the stairs and how the camera moves to insinuate the position of characters and the two families.

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse

I can’t remember when I saw the film or what I felt, but when it comes to how I describe it now, all I can say now it is transformational and one of the best superhero and animated films of all-time.

Into the Spider-Verse focuses on Brooklyn teenager Miles Morales who after being bitten by a radioactive spider in the subway, suddenly develops mysterious powers that transform him into Spider-Man. When he meets Peter Parker, he discovers that there are many others who share his special talents. Miles must now use his newfound skills to battle the evil Kingpin, a hulking madman who can open portals to other universes and pull different versions of Spider-Man into his world.

Into the Spider-Verse has cemented itself in my top 10 of the 21st Century because the animation style is gorgeous and stylistic and innovative, the storyline is so well-done and it has an interesting depiction of the father-son relationship and the score and soundtrack were incredible. The leap of faith scene alone is enough to put it on this list, if I rewatch it on my TV, my phone screen or shut my eyes and listen to it, I still get goosebumps. It is a powerful film and one that was such a huge accomplishment.

Zone of Interest

I left the screening of this film with an undeniable feeling that this was incredibly made and one of the most haunting films I would ever watch. There are a few films that will do this to me, in this list, these films are Nickel Boys, Zone of Interest and Killers of the Flower Moon. The film focuses on the life of Rudolf Höss, the Auschwitz commandant and his wife Hedwig and family who live in the ‘Zone of Interest’ in a home next to Auschwitz.

Glazer wanted to make this film to dispel myths that the people behind the atrocities of the Holocaust were mythologically evil through having the film focus on the day-to-day life of the Höss family as these atrocities occur beyond the walls of their family home. And the focus works, a lot of Holocaust films do rightfully show the atrocities and how hateful, violent and evil people were. This film showcases the evils in a different way. This family who by all means look like a normal one are living their lives, happy and content whilst you can hear (due to the incredible sound design) recreated sounds of Auschwitz. Throughout the film, you can hear the mechanical sounds of the gas chambers, the gunshots and the screams of prisoners, but you never see them.

The Zone of Interest is one of the most incredible films of this century. The decision to contrast the evils of the Holocaust and Auschwitz through the sound design with the focus on the lives of the Höss family make for a cinematic experience which will stay with you, for a very long time.

Nickel Boys

Nickel Boys centres around two young boys, Elwood Curtis (falsely accused of stealing a car) and Turner played by Ethan Herisse and Brandon Wilson who are sent to a violent and racist reform school where they and other Black pupils are abused whilst their white counterparts are not.

When I came out of Nickel Boys, it was following a screening of Dead Poets Society and then Sonic the Hedgehog Three and I felt I needed that sonic film to prepare me for what was to come. But I wasn’t. Nickel Boys was a cinematic experience I’ve had like no other. The film showcases some of the most groundbreaking cinematography I have seen and is unlike any I have ever seen.

Telling a story entirely from the first-person perspective is a risk but one that pays off insurmountably here. The film is visually stunning intercutting the story with parts of Elwood’s history, news stories and film footage about the reform school ands archeological reports. It made for an uncomfortable watch because it was a haunting story about a dark period of history on a subject matter seldom covered in film with an incredible decision to utilise the single-person perspective. Nickel Boys had to feature in my list of the top 10 films of the 21st Century, because it shines a light on an important part of history and does so with a groundbreaking use of cinematography to immerse you with all of the horrors of the period.

Honourable Mentions

Ten is really hard to work with. If you gave me one hundred, I would have had a much easier time selecting films (though a harder time ranking them!). Other films I would have included in the list are: In the Mood for Love, The Social Network, The Holdovers, Ratatouille, Sing Sing, I’m Still Here, Past Lives, Aftersun, The Batman, The Dark Knight, Challengers, The Brutalist, Shutter Island, Inception, La La Land, Everything Everywhere All At Once, Fantastic Mr Fox, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Four Lions, Spirited Away and so many more films.

I’d be interested to know what your favourite films of the 21st century are. Let me know in the comments below!

Happy Pride! In honour of Pride Month, I made a series of film recommendations via my TikTok and Instagram. These were films which touched me deeply and for me, felt that they showcased the a range of the LGBTQ+ experience. There were many I could have included, but did not have time to! It’s quite easy for filmmakers and creatives to pin down the experience and create narrow boxes and roles. The gay best friend for example was a popular archetype in television and film and represented one of very few LGBTQ+ roles for characters.. Over time, representation has evolved and still is evolving. This got me thinking. I could point to so many incredible LGBTQ+ films and I could have made a much longer list, but could I do the same for television? I sat down and thought about the shows I have watched and loved and realised there are great examples of LGBTQ+ representation I wanted to highlight in them. This list is by no means exhaustive, but it does contain a few of my favourite shows and characters.

Annalise Keating, How to Get Away with Murder

We’re introduced to Annalise Keating as a powerful defence attorney who incorporates her work into her university class. She goes through a lot during the course of How to Get Away with Murder. Her character begins married to a man, who she later discovers is not what he seemed at all. As the show progresses, we begin to learn about her history including previous relationships. The husband she married began as a therapist who she left her law-school girlfriend Eve Rothlo for. It is in that second season, we learn there is more to Annalise’s sexuality. Within film and television, there can be the tendency to create LGBTQ+ characters and conceive of their histories and storylines in ways which solely focus on their sexuality and/or identity. With Annalise, her character is portrayed with layers of complexity. She is powerful and vulnerable in equal measure, she is considered simultaneously a hero or villain (depending on who you ask). Namely, she is not perfect nor does purport to be nor is she defined by her sexuality.

I felt the way How to Get Away with Murder explored Annalise’s sexuality to be a great example of battling internalised homophobia. She is a black woman, the daughter of a religious mother and grew up in a community, where it was difficult to accept who she was, let alone come out. In law school, she had what seemed a great relationship with Eve and ultimately left her for a man. She was scared of being perceived as gay. Scared of being rejected, subjected to further discrimination and for many people of her generation, they grew up in an intolerant society. Observing the government’s inaction towards the AIDS crisis, the ridicule and bullying people faced for being gay or because people suspected they were and a time before gay marriage was legal. Simply put, it is understandable that Annalise would grapple with coming to terms with who she, let alone come out. The course of the show subtly weaves in Annalise’s journey to explore her sexuality alongside the main plot. It’s meaningful. Annalise ultimately labels herself as someone who is bisexual in a beautiful speech and it’s a really long journey she’s gone through to get to that point. Over time, we may label ourselves with labels which make sense at a specific point of time, and then we may use different labels.

Mitchell Pritchett and Cameron Tucker, Modern Family

Modern Family is a show I got into over the last couple of years. It’s a go-to comfort show and funny and heartwarming. At the time it aired on television, it was transformational at the time in its portrayal of the LGBTQ+ community, especially gay men. I chose to include Mitchell and Cameron as a couple, because it would be a disservice to focus on one of them. They come as a partnership and its their portrayal of partnership which helped shape attitudes towards LGBTQ+ people. In the very first episode, we learn they are a couple and have recently adopted a daughter from Vietnam, Lily. They may not look like the typical American family, but they’re still a family and are portrayed in a mockumentary style alongside two other families. Their on-screen relationship is an example of how media can reflect changing attitudes in society and shape them. Mitchell and Cameron were an example of how the nature of family was changing. There are of course some stereotypes presented in the show - Cameron is extremely flamboyant, theatrical and dramatic. Easily a character who could embody the stereotypes of gay men. We learn that he was an ex-college football player who loves the sport with as much zeal as he loves music and the theatre.

With respects to how it redefined gay and family representation, there are many things to draw upon. First, research has found that knowing a gay couple (real or fictional) brings more support for gay marriage than knowing a gay individual. Within the context of the US, Republicans were most likely to associate gay men with promiscuity. There is nothing wrong with gay men being promiscuous. Straight men who are promiscuous are applauded in shows, like Barney in How I Met Your Mother. They own a black book of women they’ve slept with and their body counts are celebrated, as if they are some sort of achievement. However, the views held by Republicans that gay men are inherently promiscuous is a harmful one. People’s attitudes towards groups of people are shaped by their experiences and also parasocial contact with fictional characters. Mitchell and Cameron are faithful to each other during the course of the show, in contrast to Claire and Phil, a heterosexual couple where a recurring gag is Phil being attracted to Claire’s mother in law and other women in the show. The commitment to their relationship and each other makes their relationship one of the strongest and consistent.

In relation to family, Modern Family featured two gay men taking care of a daughter. How many shows about family have existed with the mother or daughters doing the main household duties? How much of this is justified under the idea that a man could not do a good enough job? Weaponised incompetence. Having two gay men raise a child really dispelled that notion that women are inherently better caretakers and should shoulder the burden of childcare and housework. Their sexuality and gender did not make them better or worse parents, merely, the fact that they were committed to their family. I don’t think there’s such thing as perfect representation, but in the context of the society it was released in, Modern Family was able to tap into this change in society. The typical American family has traditionally consisted of a mother, a father and two children (one boy, one girl). Modern Family showed us that times were changing, the composition of families were changing and the sexualities of parents did not factor into their ability to parent.

Taylor, Billions

Before I developed a huge love for Succession, Billions took its place in my heart as rich and powerful people doing terrible things. I was 16 in my first year of A-Levels and my Business A-Level teacher recommended it to me. The show simply boils down to this premise of a cat and mouse game between a US Attorney and a hedge fund manager. I never anticipated the show would become the first mainstream US television show to feature a non-binary character. In the second season, we’re introduced to Taylor. Taylor is non-binary and stands out amidst the sea of macho attitudes, sex-obsessed and frat bro’s that make up the hedge fund of Axe Capital. Finance is a boys club. It serves to be an incredible environment to introduce a non-binary character. From the outset, Taylor is effective, exceptionally gifted and is indifferent to the sorts of stuff their fellow traders love (drugs, money, sex). First impressions count and we do not learn Taylor’s gender identity or pronouns immediately, we’re in a position where we’re assuming. It’s an interesting way to portray a non-binary character in this environment. Taylor’s first big part in the show is where they intervene to show their manager, Mafee a way to save Axe Capital $10 million.

Axelrod (also known as Axe) of course wants to meet Taylor, they’re skilled and proven valuable to the company. Axe assumes Taylor goes by he/him pronouns, again due to the company being a boy’s club. He meets Taylor who introduces themself with their pronouns. Axe simply remarks, okay. He immediately respects them and does not make it an issue. Nor does the majority of Axe Capital. I also enjoy the fact that everyone in this show is not accepting. Sounds weird to say, but it would be incredibly strange for everyone to be kind and respectful, especially in the climate and direction society has taken. Taylor does experience discrimination - some of their adversaries respect their pronouns acknowledging their issue with them is through their loyalty to Axe Capital and position, but other adversaries take it personal through misgendering. Including Taylor’s own father. Similar to Cyrus Beane in Scandal, I enjoy the turn Taylor’s character takes. They’re different to everyone in Axe Capital, because they don’t have the same vices or attitudes. We’re lulled into a false sense of security where we think Taylor might be one of the only redeeming rich people on this show. But they aren't. Their identity does not preclude them from being morally bankrupt. And I’m glad this isn’t the case. Billions is a show about frauds, sleaze, corruption and immoral behaviour. Taylor is the same as the other cisgender heterosexual characters. We can say eat the rich and mean it equally when we talk about Axelrod, about Chuck Rhoades and crucially, about Taylor.

Cyrus Beane and James Novak, Scandal

One of my favourite sayings is ‘be gay, do crimes’. It quite literally applies to Cyrus Beane, one half of Scandal’s gay couple. I chose similar in my decision to include Mitch and Cam from Modern Family as a couple to incorporate both Cyrus and his husband, James Novak. This will mainly focus on Cyrus’s characterisation in Scandal, he has a much larger part in the show and is a very interesting character. Cyrus Beane is the first gay character presented in a conservative way on a major show. He is a staunch republican, committed to his values and the moderate Republican president who he serves as Chief of Staff. From the outset, we are introduced to both Cyrus and James as a couple and we later learn the story of their love. It’s a Washington-esque love story. Cyrus was working on the Grant presidential campaign and James was a journalist covering the Grant campaign. At first, their love is a secret affair and transactional. James is keen to rise the ranks in journalism, but lacks the connections and inside scoops to do so, Cyrus is well-connected and powerful and can give him secrets. Cyrus is initially concerned about their relationship, of course he’s a republican in Washington, and gay. In a similar vein to Annalise, he also was alive during the time where the Republicans launched and continue to launch a major conservative campaign against LGBTQ+ individuals, including the inaction on the AIDS crisis. He soon gathers the courage to come out, after being tipped off, that their relationship is an open secret. They get married.

Over the course of the show, we learn more about their relationship. They’re the complete opposite of Mitchell and Cameron - they’re mainly stable and conflicts are smaller and resolved easily. For Cyrus and James, there is a significant conflict throughout the first season or so. Cyrus is not bothered about having a child and is averse to the idea, but James wants a child desperately and it causes arguments. Until Cyrus placates his husband by adopting a daughter. Problem solved, right? Not at all. Cyrus agrees to starting a family, because James is close to uncovering a government scandal implicating him and the administration which would pose career-ending scandals and prosecution. The reason I believe this situation in particular is great representation, is because I could easily imagine a husband trying to placate his wife by agreeing to start a family. Their relationship is full of passion, tension and disagreements and it’s complicated. Cyrus in particular is an interesting character. Similar to Taylor in Billions, his sexuality does not make him immune from being morally corrupt. If anything, he is one of the more evil characters we face. He is power-hungry, he wants to protect the administration no matter the cost. We see this through the many illegal acts he commits. Him being gay does not give him a different moral compass and I love that he is as shitty as the rest of them.

The list of characters I could have featured could have been much larger. These are a few I thought represented n interesting range of the LGBTQ+ experience, especially in roles like Cyrus’s and Taylor’s where they are/become morally corrupt people. Other characters I would have loved to include are Rosa (Brooklyn Nine-Nine), Kurt and Santana and Britney (Glee), Emily Fields (PLL), Eric (Sex Education) and Clare (Derry Girls).

If there’s any characters I missed that you love, please do let me know in the comments below. And again, Happy Pride!

Jesse Armstrong has long cemented himself as a great satirical writer with credits on TV shows such as Peep Show, Succession, The Thick of It and films like In the Loop. His newest release, Mountainhead carries on his legacy. I was able to catch a preview of Mountainhead at the BFI Southbank accompanied by a Q&A. Throughout the screening, there was rapturous laughter. In response to a film which feels absurd, yet uncomfortably close to the reality and world we live in today. This is a film about the ‘tech bro’, but more than that, it’s about the weird balance of power we find ourselves in. Open up Twitter and news story about men like Elon Musk and Donald Trump will certainly grace your timeline and dominate headlines. It’s concerning how billionaires have tightened their grip on politicians and the sheer power their wealth affords them. When Trump was sworn in as President, he was flanked by Musk, Bezos and Zuckerberg, a scene which felt like it should have been a NYT cartoon. But it wasn’t. The American oligarch are brazenly showing off their proximity to the most powerful man in the free world. Where else would you find someone with Elon Musk’s track record leading a government department? Mountainhead taps into that uneasy space between reality and farce using its cast, incredible production design and sharply written dialogue to portray its themes

Mountainhead follows a group of ultra-wealthy tech moguls on a weekend retreat in Park City, Utah set during a pivotal moment in global politics. Fictional social media site ‘Traam’ has unleashed a swathe of AI features which has led to deep fakes and AI-generated disinformation spreading like wildfire. The group of friends consists of Ven (Corey Michael Smith), Randall (Steve Carrell), Souper (played by Jason Schwartzman) and Jeff (Ramy Youssef). Ven, the richest of all the friends, is directly responsible for unleashing the AI tools which fuel the chaos we watch unfold. Randall is the the second wealthiest having made his money in infrastructure, and his age positions him to be the mentor and father figure. At the beginning of the film, he has been diagnosed with terminal cancer after a long period in remission. He’s keen to use AI’s capabilities to accelerate human-kind towards a cure and living beyond our planet. Souper, the least wealthy of the group plays the host. He’s chasing billionaire status and hoping to convince his friends to fund his new lifestyle app in a bid to finally crack the $1 billion net worth he has failed to achieve so far. Jeff, the youngest of the group, runs an AI company. Where Ven’s use of AI is reckless and has the capabilities to pose much harm, Jeff’s AI company is the complete opposite with features like moderation and fact-checking in place to prevent misuse, deep fakes and disinformation.

The house itself is our main location for the film. It is Souper’s new modernist home and from our introduction to him, he is anxious to impress his friends despite being the poorest of the group. Armstrong cleverly throughout the film interrogates the financial hierarchies that can dominate friendships, particularly male ones. Throughout the film, the others poke fun at Souper for his lack of taste when commenting on his house, his millionaire status and his name is of course, reminiscent of the term soup kitchen. Mountainhead feels like a fifth character. Over the weekend, it insulates the group far away from the collapse of society and the violence following.

Breaking news clips they flick through on their phones and push notifications are our only point of reference, alongside various discussions. We see the riots, the murders and assassinations of world leaders through this lens. The characters use the design of the house to scheme and plot. At one point, in fear and paranoia the Chinese government are after them, they retreat to Souper’s basement. A world map is positioned opposite the two lane bowling alley (one lane would be too constricting, of course!). The friends discuss potential countries to target for a series of coups. Souper at one point has serious conversations with a government in an attempt to launch a coup in South America and install himself as a technocratic leader. This is of course, conducted in the safety of his own home in a home movie theatre. As the weekend progresses, the four friends get increasingly hostile. Their scheming ways take place in hushed whispers and spirited discussions in rooms with ceiling to floor windows. They are annoyed by the sheer inconvenience and volume the news of world disorder poses to their weekend and net worth.

In TV shows and films, production design is a useful tool to delve into our characters in subtle ways. Posters on a wall, the selection of furniture and the interiors can tell us about a character’s personalities, their psyche and their histories. Mountainhead is a mansion purposefully constructed to suit a tech millionaire who is insecure about his status and wealth. The physical location where it juts out from a mountain is imposing. It feels unnatural, artificially constructed. During the Q&A, Jesse Armstrong revealed the house was selected because it felt unsettling to the production designer who toured it. As I watched the film and observed features of the mansion’s interior, I wondered, are rich people bound by an uninspiring aesthetic? It feels like we’re living in the age of dull. Mountainhead’s interiors like many other wealthy mansions are bland. A sea of grey, white and dull. Colours are added to rooms through the paintings that adorn the walls. A few well-placed art pieces from semi-famous artists signal that the owner is wealthy enough to afford those and also, wise enough to know that the minimalist approach of wealthy homes barely works with tasteful accessories. The production designers were able to create a home with a sterile atmosphere. Nothing feels comfortable or colourful. It's deeply uninspiring and sad. Like Souper.

AI’s position in this film, is as its central theme. It stokes the tension and sets the backdrop for political instability. Mountainhead is smart enough to know there is no hopeful resolution to the issue of AI and deepfakes. When AI first became popularised, a lot of its outputs were discriminatory. Microsoft famously had to shut down its AI chatbot in 2016 when the bot posted antisemitic content. The film and that incident is a harsh reminder that AI does not exist in a vacuum, it is influenced by those who create it and reflects their biases and hate. Ven does not have a substantial change of heart or a coming to Jesus moment. There is no moral turnaround or lesson learned. Ven is reckless, driven by his net worth, AI’s role as a disruptor and his own power and influence. He does not care for the real-world consequences, he’s shielded from them.

As deep fakes emerge and AI is misused, the demand for Traam increases. Ven does not resolve to roll back his AI tools and have them go through iteration to ensure they cannot be exploited, but rather, he looks to Jeff’s AI technology which is able to discern misinformation, misuse and prevent deep fakes. The sense of irony is not lost on the audience. A man is confronted by the evils caused by his own invention, and instead of trying to resolve, the solution to buying Jeff’s AI is far easier. There is no impetus to do better. Jeff, to his credit, is deeply unsettled by the global disorder. He recognises the costs of what is unfolding and sees through his phone, the vast human tragedy. As the nation-state across many countries collapses and technocratic dictatorships threaten to emerge in the form of the other three men, he hesitates to sell his app. He is unable to put away his feelings towards Ven for the greater good. It is accurate and depressing that he with his faults, remains our most morally upstanding character. It plays into the ever-creeping sense that the wrong people are in charge.

Mountainhead is a film which truly interrogates the perverse nature of wealth, influence and power and the toxic masculinity in male friendships. The weekend retreat of four tech bros sets the scene for an unexpected turn of events. They are above nothing and their wealth shields them from the consequences. Its relevance to the current political climate cannot be understated. Are we anywhere close to confronting the role of billionaires in our politics? With the rise of ChatGPT and generative AI (I remember that Barbie doll AI trend on TikTok), will the dangers of AI through deep fakes force our most powerful and wealthy to confront its ability to harmful and begin conversations about regulating it? It’s hard to say. This film does an incredible job at positioning these questions to the forefront of your mind. You can stream the film on Sky Entertainment and Now TV, it’s worth the watch.

Thank you for reading this post, I loved the film a lot and I would be so interested to see thoughts and opinions from others. Did you enjoy it? Did you see the parallels I saw with The Big Short?

Was it too on the nose? I do think it suffers a similar fate to The Apprentice, both well-crafted films with incredible performances, but because of its relevance, it feels as if it’s come too soon.

Like many of you, I’ve been following Cannes. From the iconic photo calls and red carpet moments like Elle Fanning’s wonderful Joachim Trier Summer t-shirt to the gorgeous outfits from Simone Ashley, Elle Fanning, Viola Davis, Renate Reinsve and many others on the red carpet. As someone who loves film, I await the tweets which follow the premieres of films and the reactions from my favourite critics. I live vicariously through their videos, their posts and their photos. It reminds me of attending London Film Festival last year. I was working at the time, but I remember so clearly.

Rushing to Southbank to Royal Festival Hall to catch a premiere. Pushing past all of the tourists annoyed at their slow pace. The Costa Coffee in Waterloo Station which became my sanctuary to read between films or grab a quick lunch or dinner where I felt like time was running away from me. It was two weeks of constantly riding a GWR or Elizabeth Line train, messaging people I met at the festival to see if they were going to the same films or perusing through Letterboxd to see reviews for the films I had no time for.

The celebration of film as an art form by hundreds and thousands of people who take time to be away from work, school or life and those who have made it their vocation remind me that both film and cinema is a shared experience. Geography be damned. This year, despite not being in Cannes, I’ve been able through the wonderful power of the internet to pick out ten films that I am eagerly awaiting.

Sentimental Value

Starring Renate Reinsve, Stellan Skarsgård and Elle Fanning, Sentimental Value is Joachim Trier’s next film following his acclaimed 2022 film, The Worst Person in the World. The film premiered at Cannes in competition to widespread acclaim and won the Grand Prix. The film also received a 19-minute standing ovation at Cannes, making it the third longest ovation in the festival’s history.

The plot follows estranged sisters Nora and Agnes who reunite with their absent father Gustav following their Mother’s death. Gustav is a once popular film director and is hoping to reclaim his legacy and reconnect with his daughters, Gustav begins a film about his own mother's tragic past. He eyes Nora (played by Renate Reinsve) for the role and when she refuses, he casts Hollywood actress Rachel Kemp (played by Elle Fanning). The process of making this film stirs up old wounds between the family.

Un Simple Accident

Director Jafar Panahi has returned with Un Simple Accident, a film about state violence and the morality of revenge, seven years after his previous film Se Roth (Three Faces). Panahi has faced multiple prison sentences, travel bans and house arrests for protesting against the detention of two filmmakers critical of the Iranian regime, supporting anti-government protests and for creating his films, which have been dubbed by the Iranian government as “propaganda against the system”. The film was awarded the Palme D’Or at Cannes, the festival’s highest honour. Panahi used his speech to encourage Iranians to unite against the regime.

Un Simple Accident was inspired by Panahi’s time in prison where he took inspiration for the main characters from conversations he exchanged with other prisoners and stories he heard about the violence and brutality of the Iranian regime. The film follows Eghbal who is driving at night with his pregnant wife. After hitting a dog and breaking down on a remote road, Eghbal seeks help at a garage, only to be mistaken for a former torturer by the owner, Vahid. Vahid kidnaps him and gathers other victims of the man's past cruelty. As they drive through the night, debating revenge, they begin to question his true identity and their own morality.

My Father’s Shadow

My Father’s Shadow is Akinola Davies Jr’s feature length director debut from a screenplay co-written with his brother. The film has been developed over a decade drawing inspiration from the loss of their Father at a young age. The film debuted in the Un Certain Regard section and was a huge moment for Nigerian cinema, as it marks the country’s first ever entry in official competition. The debut film won a Caméra d’Or Special Mention, an award provided to the best first feature films in all sections.

The semi-autobiographical coming of age drama film follows two young brothers travelling through Lagos, as they reconcile with their estranged father. The film is set during the 1993 presidential election crisis. We follow the boys as they witness the city's chaos, beauty, and the quiet weight of their father's life as unrest threatens their journey.

Sirât

Oliver Laxe has returned to Cannes six years after his film, O Que Arne (Fire Will Come) took home the Un Certain Regard Prize with Sirât. Sirât is inspired by the Sirât Bridge, an Islamic tradition separating hell from heaven where the soul is confronted with its true nature. The film was the joint winner for the Jury Prize along with Sound of Falling.

The film follows Luis, a middle-aged father and his son, Esteban who search for Luis’s missing daughter at a desert rave in Morocco, after military forces come to break up the gathering. Luis and Esteban meet a group of misfits travelling through the desert to another event and join them to find Luis’s missing daughter.

The Secret Agent

Director Kleber Mendonça Filho’s has returned to fictional filmmaking following his documentary feature Pictures of Ghosts with his third feature film, The Secret Agent. The film premiered at Cannes in the main competition and won Best Actor for Wagner Moura, Best Director for Mendonça and the FIPRESCI Prize. The film like many of Mendonça’s films is set in his hometown of Recife.

Set in 1977, Marcelo, a technology agent is fleeing from a mysterious past and returns to his hometown of Recife to find peace and reunite with his son. He soon realises the city is far from the non-violent refuge he sought.

Urchin

Urchin, revealed at Cannes in Ruben Östlund’s 2022 Palme d’or Triangle of Sadnes, marks Harris Dickinson’s feature-length directorial debut. The film was presented in the Un Certain Regard selection where Dickinson won the FIPRESCI Prize and Dillane (who stars as Mike, the main character) won the Best Actor award.

The film focuses on a homeless person in London struggling to break free from a cycle of self-destruction while trying to turn his life around.

Sound of Falling

Sound of Falling marks director Mascha Schilinski first time in the Official Selection of Cannes, after making a series of three short films between 2012 and 2015 and feature film, Dark Blue Girl. Sound of Falling was awarded the Joint Jury Prize along with Sirât.

The film spans the course of a century following the lives of four girls Alma, Erika, Angelika, and Lenka from different historical periods. They all live at the same farm in Northern Germany and their existences are mysteriously connected.

Die, My Love

Die, My Love marks Lynne Ramsay’s eight selection at Cannes and premiered in competition, seven years after her last film You Were Never Really Here. The film received a nine-minute standing ovation at Cannes.

The film is adapted from Ariana’s Harwicz’s 2012 book, Matate, Amor which was translated into English as Die, My Love in 2017 being long listed for the 2018 Man Booker International Prize. Die, My Love is set in the countryside and focuses on the mental health issues of a mother struggling as her marriage breaks up.

Promised Sky

Promised Sky opened Cannes Un Certain Regard, Erie Sehiri’s third feature film. Sehiri took inspiration from the way sub-Saharan migrants in Tunisia are labeled “Africans,” while Tunisians often overlook their own African identity. Sehiri flips this perspective, and explores how migrants see Tunisia and reframing migration as a largely intra-African reality.

The film follows four generations of Ivorian immigrant women featuring a pastor, a student and an exiled mother and four-year survivor of a shipwreck. As the unorthodox found family forms, crises make each women reconsider her place and sense of belonging.

Splitsville

Splitsville from director Michael Angelo Covino from a screenplay co-written by Covito and Kyle Marvin debuted at Cannes to a six-minute standing ovation.

The film is an open marriage comedy and follows two couples. The couples are brought together when Ashley (played by Adria Arjona) asks for a divorce from Carey (played by Kyle Marvin). Carey runs to his friends, Julie and Paul for support (played by Dakota Johnson and Michael Angelo Covino) to discover that the secret to their happiness is an open marriage.

There are so many more films I couldn’t include in this post which I am eagerly awaiting, Cannes has brought an incredible mix of original films, many of which I am sure I will love. As they come out in the UK and I watch them, I will endeavour to review some of the films in detail (or via a Letterboxd review!).

Are there any films you’re looking forward to from Cannes?

I love The Simpsons. Not surprising from the picture I’ve painted of my ideal Friday night growing up. As a child it was one of my favourite shows to watch with my family and as an adult, I can unashamedly say to you that I have rewatched the show more times than I can count. I remember pouring over the annuals and obsessively playing Tapped Out when it came out on the App Store.

The earlier seasons of the Simpsons are a stark contrast to the absurdity in the newer seasons. Heavy topics such as depression in children, alcoholism, death, religion and mental illness feature in a variety of episodes found in The Simpsons Golden Age. As a child, I never could appreciate them fully until I started to revisit the show as a teenager and as an adult. The show excels in its earliest seasons, because it is not afraid to balance the comedy and laughter with characters who are afforded depth and are in fairly realistic scenarios. In episodes such as Lisa’s Substitute or Bart Gets an F, viewers can see their experiences in these episodes. Losing a treasured mentor or teacher in the case of the former and in the latter, trying your best at something to fail. The writers and animators are able to make Homer, Marge, Bart and Lisa feel like real people with flaws and virtues with plot lines with stakes. And it is why, many of the examples I have detailing below the best episodes on parenting and family are from those earlier seasons.

Moaning Lisa (S1, E6)

In ‘Moaning Lisa’, we observe Lisa’s deep and unexplained sadness which nobody around her can seem to understand. Despite a supportive (albeit dysfunctional at points!) family, a gifted intellect and her talented saxophone playing, none of these factors can shield her from how she is feeling. Throughout the episode, we see her grappling with those feelings at school and at home. Nobody can understand her and The Simpson’s attempts to cheer her up fall short. Eventually, she cheers up meeting a jazz musician who encourages her to express her feelings through her saxophone.

This episode is one of my favourite episodes across the show’s 36 seasons. Often shows and films can position parents and children in a very one-dimensional relationship, villain vs hero or without covering the complexities a parent-child relationship demands. Marge and Homer are imperfect parents and the episode makes it clear that they are not helping despite their best efforts, without dehumanising either of them. In an effort to help, Homer does what he does best and attempts to offer some light-hearted distractions whereas Marge passes down what she was told, to smile and suppress her feelings following a nightmare where we discover this was her own mother’s advice. It’s a timeless reminder that parents are never going to be perfect and cannot be expected to be, but in how they interact with their children and learn, they have the potential to choose to do better and learn different ways of parenting that their parents did not pass along.

The ending of this episode is truly beautiful and feels refreshingly honest. For a 1990s era show to tackle mental health and depression in a way which does not use its 20 odd runtime to find a solution was truly groundbreaking. We see this through Marge’s realisation that advising Lisa to smile and suppress her feelings is not a solution which will help her daughter, rather, it would make her sadness more palatable to others. There is no moment where Lisa is cured or suddenly happy. As Marge admits she was wrong to Lisa, it marks a shift in Lisa’s mood. She is happier, because she is able to have space to be sad. People often try in earnest to fix sadness or offer solutions to depression. But when that depression doesn’t have a clear cause, when you can’t explain why you feel the way you do, it can make you feel like a burden just for feeling it. This is why Marge’s acceptance and validation of her daughter means a lot to her.

Bart the Daredevil (S2, E8)

In ‘Bart the Daredevil’, Bart attends a monster truck rally where he sees a daredevil, Captain Lance Murdock performing his most daring stunt to date. As Bart watches this daredevil stunt (being the only person in the audience capable of watching without closing his eyes), he is stunned by the display and keen to pursue a career as a daredevil. Murdock is exactly the type of hero someone like Bart would love as a mischievous and scheming child and this lesson is a good depiction of why we should be careful of who we idolise. And the consequences of a parent not knowing their child.

As Bart announces his dream to become a daredevil, Homer proclaims “kids say such stupid things”. A funny tidbit, but through failing to engage with his son, he implicitly encourages this harm-seeking behaviour. Kids can both say stupid things and be driven to do them through imitating what they see. Bart in this moment needs a parental figure to be a sensible to guide him away from this thrill-seeking behaviour. This has implication, where Homer and Marge’s fails to quell Bart’s ambitions, before he reaches a point of no return. Lisa (sensible as always) tattles on her brother, and her parents suddenly realise how far Bart will go to fulfil his dream and how blind they’ve been to it.

Instead of engaging with his son, he sends him to his room and makes desperate pleas to Bart to implore him to find sense. But Bart doesn’t. He proceeds to Springfield Gorge ready to attempt this deathly stunt to only be stopped by Homer who takes his skateboard and tries to make his son see sense. Homer threatens to jump over Springfield Gorge on a skateboard. With this wild move, Bart is able to understand the panic he has caused his family and goes to embrace his Father after pledging to never do any form of daredevil stunt. A tender moment until Homer forgets he’s on a skateboard and proceeds to fall down. The episode represents the danger of not taking your children seriously, had Marge and Homer nipped the daredevil ambitions outright, they would have saved a minor hospital trip for Bart (after a first attempt at being a daredevil) and a major one for Homer.

And Maggie Makes Three (S6, E13)

As the Simpson children ponder why no photos of Maggie are in the house, Homer tells the story of her birth and Marge’s pregnancy in flashbacks. Let’s set the scene. It’s 1993 and Homer has received a pay check allowing him to quit the job he hates at the Springfield Nuclear Power Plant. He’s ready to pursue his dream job at a bowling alley run by his best friend’s uncle. On his way out, he humiliates Mr Burns and burns whatever good will he had with him and the power plant. After celebrating the new job, Marge becomes pregnant. Homer finds out in an extremely funny sequence where various citizens of Springfield congratulate Homer who is still unaware she is pregnant until Maude Flanders congratulates him on his new job. The panic sets in. His salary cannot provide for the now family of five, and in a desperate attempt to receive a raise from the bowling alley, Homer tries to fire a shotgun to drive up more business so his boss can afford his raise. This of course leads to a panic and police response and Homer has not found a way to make more money at his dream job.

Homer is forced to quit his dream job and return to the nuclear power plant where he begs for his job back and is given a plaque which reads "Don't forget: you're here forever". To serve as an eternal reminder that he is one of many clogs in the machinery of work. As the episode ends, we find out where those photos of Maggie are. Homer has dotted the plaque with pictures of Maggie in a place where Homer “needs them the most”. The episode is a sweet reminder of the selflessness needed to be a good parent. Giving up his dreams and returning to a place of work he hated to provide for his family was a sacrifice he knew he had to make. It’s a refreshing depiction of a man who is usually depicted as a buffoon and stupid. His actions in this episode shows this sense of fatherly responsibility and what it truly means to try to be a good parent. To do things you would rather not do. The episode reveals the tender side newer seasons of The Simpsons fail to understand what made the show so great in its earliest seasons - its character-driven storylines.

Mother Simpson (S7, E8)

Homer fakes his own death to avoid collecting litter with his co-workers and everyone believes him to be dead. He soon must correct the record as the family’s utilities are shut off and Marge forces him to go to the Springfield Hall of Records. Whilst explaining this, he discovers that his Mother who he has believed to be dead is alive. He soon meets his Mother whilst he tries to find what he thinks is his Mother’s grave. Instead, he falls into his own grave which has been dug up and his Mother (unaware it is Homer) chastises him. They reunite and the rest of the family enjoy her company and wonder about her extended absence. However, Mona begins to act suspicious around the police and the family proceed to confront Mona. We learn she was part of a hippie movement to protest a germ warfare lab owned by Mr Burns and has since been on the run from the FBI. As Mona and Homer go to the post office to get some packages, Mr Burns informs the FBI Mona is alive and in Springfield. With thanks to Chief Wiggum’s anonymous tip, she manages to escape leaving her son once again.

The episode ends with one of the most beautiful frames in The Simpsons with Homer sitting on top of his car and watching the stars silent. Losing a parent is devastating. But to lose them as a child and proceeding to spend 26 years believing they’re gone, only to learn they were alive all along and then lose them all over again a kind of grief layered with confusion and longing. For Homer, that pain sits just beneath the surface, unspoken but deeply felt. He aches for something he cannot have. Later episodes across several seasons touch upon this relationship. It is abundantly clear that Homer deeply loves his Mother and needs her, but simultaneously, has been left by her and unable to depend upon her.

Simply put, Mona chose a cause over her child. Whether you believe it to be merited, the emotional implications of abandoning her child are vast. We learn that Homer’s overeating and dependence on food for emotional fulfilment began as she abandoned him and left him with his Father. It becomes a stand-in for the love he should have had. The impact our parents have on our mental and emotional health is limitless, they have the capacity to shape how we build our relationships, our sense of self worth and who we are as people. And when Mona later dies, Homer is angry. Angry he never had his Mother as a constant and relied upon presence. Angry that there is a version of his life where she stayed that he cannot experience.

Grampa vs. Sexual Inadequacy (S6, E10)

In Grampa vs Sexual Inadequacy we begin with learning that Marge and Homer’s sex life is fizzling out and they're looking for ways to spice up their marriage. At first, they try an audiobook which recommends having a couple bath. But in true Simpsons fashion it collapses under the weight of both Homer and Marge. They then try to book a room at a hotel but are forced into a utility room, as the rooms are sold-out. Homer soon learns that Grampa has concocted a tonic, which he is sure will spice up their marriage. And it does! Not to be stopped at spicing up his marriage and seeing a bigger business opportunity, Homer and Grampa sell the tonic at a travelling show. During their travels, they visit the farmhouse Homer grew up in and after an argument, Grampa reveals Homer was an accident who ‘ruined his life’. It’s not merely an insult, it is a gaping wound. To not be wanted by the only parent he had is truly scarring. After kicking his father out of the car, Homer returns to the farmhouse, alone with his thoughts. It’s there he finds a photograph of himself as a child, sitting with Santaand realises that the man behind the Santa beard was his father. That he hadn’t been as absent as Homer had always believed.

The father-son relationship throughout the series is often underpinned with a common trope that Grampa is an annoying old man who is ‘useless’ or a ‘burden’ to the family. This episode is a good depiction of the father-son relationship in many ways. When Grampa admits Homer was an accident, Homer resolves to never be like his Father. Instead, he swings to the other extremes and begins to smother his children with love and attention. But the show is smart enough to realise that neither neglect nor smothering is the answer. They are both bad for children. Parenting is challenging, there is no instruction manual or formula or perfect way to raise a child. Grampa Simpson is part of a generation of fathers often portrayed in media such as That '70s Show and F is for Family as emotionally distant, hardened by war or circumstance. And most importantly, ill-equipped to offer tenderness to their children. With Grampa Simpson, his situation is further complicated by his wife and Homer’s Mother leaving. It raises quiet, uncomfortable questions: Do we give him credit simply for staying, after Mona left? Is it any less damaging to raise a child without ever learning how to love them properly? The show doesn’t offer easy answers, because there aren’t any.

I hope to do more posts like these unpacking some of my favourite TV shows through focusing on specific episodes, and some more Simpsons posts focusing on episodes which touch on love, relationships and also grief. The beauty of loving a show with 36 seasons is that there are endless possibilities when thinking of posts to write.

I’d be keen to know if anyone reading this is also a keen fan of the show and if there are any episodes which stand out to you that I’ve not mentioned.

As the teasers and trailers have come out for Fantastic Four, Superman and Thunderbolts* - it is clear that 2025 will be an incredible year for superhero fans. The cast of the all three films are incredible performers who have graced the screen in some of my favourite films. But with the Thunderbolts, the choice to promote that their team included the editor of Minari, the production designer behind Hereditary and cinematographer of The Green Knight signalled to me, this was a film which signalled a different change to their previous films. And I was right. Thunderbolts* is the MCU’s most grittiest, most emotionally complex and raw film. In this line-up of Misfits we have Florence Pugh as Yelena Belova, Sebastian Stan as Bucky Barnes, Wyatt Russell as US Agent, Hannah John-Kamen as Ghost, David Harbour as Red Guardian and Olga Kurylenko as Taskmaster and introduces Lewis Pullman to the MCU who is Bob Reynolds aka The Sentry aka The Void. The film brings together a group of antiheroes forced to come together after being ensnared in a death trap by a cunning Valentina Allegra de Fontaine (played by Julia Louis-Dreyfus). As the film progresses, they are forced to confront the darkest and most vulnerable traumas.

At the heart of the film, we have Florence Pugh who is Yelena Belova (adoptive sister of Natasha Romanoff) who was also trained in the Red Room as a Black Widow assassin. Following the death of her adoptive sister in Endgame, she feels empty. She continues to navigate her life, only now it feels as if she is going through the motions working as a hitman for hire for Valentina de Fontaine. Pugh is captivating and is the film’s greatest strength. Yelena is witty, sarcastic, angry and clearly in need of a purpose, which the Thunderbolts* provides her. She processes her trauma piece by piece revisiting dark places in her past. It would be easy for the story or performance to be fairly one-dimensional given portrayals of trauma and mental health in film, let alone a superhero film where these themes have not been covered in a substantial way that does justice to the theme.

Pugh is able to do so drawing on her own skill and talent which is in abundance, but is also able to do so through the development of relationships with the other characters. In the film, the scene which stood out to me is where Yelena confronts Red Guardian. Tears streaming down her face and an outburst which culminates in her calling out each member of the newly formed team, we are confronted with her loneliness and how deeply hurt she is to have been ignored by her own father. As Red Guardian, David Harbour often provides funny moments but in this scene, he struggles with how to respond to her. How do you help someone when you’re not sure what to do? As father and daughter, Harbour and Pugh in this scene are able to show the desperate need for support from Pugh and the inability to understand how to be a father from Harbour.

The relationship which shines through and carries the film is the one Yelena builds with Bob. Yelena’s own loneliness manifests in a protective nature as she meets Bob, a seemingly helpless and useless guy who needs protecting throughout the film. In the first act, from the threat others pose to him through protecting him at all costs from the swathe of bullets and weapons which are launched at the group from combatants ordered by Valentina. As Bob’s powers are fully realised and erupt into the monstrous Void and the threat it poses to the public at large is discovered, Yelena doesn’t call for back-up or the rest of the team, she steps into the void. The decision to enter the void has been debated. Did she enter because she wanted to die? Did she enter for Bob? To me, it was clear from the outset that Pugh was the one who fully understood Bob. She was the first one to realise that the Void contained the darkest thoughts and feelings Bob possessed and the only way to overcome this, was through addressing the deep loneliness and helplessness he felt. Whatever that may take.

As Bob Reynolds, Lewis Pullman’s introduction to the MCU is as an incredibly vulnerable and fragile man who is clearly haunted. Reynolds is a superpowered individual suffering from memory loss, when we meet him, we’re struck by him. He’s awkward, anxious and shy and sticks out like a sore thumb amongst the other powerful people around him. He first transforms into Sentry, a superhero conceived of by Valentina de Fontaine for her own purposes and goes head to head with the Thunderbolts. He’s smug, confident and one of the strongest characters. Yet, he is also self aware enough to stop short of eliminating them acknowledging that his abilities mean his strength is not a threat. As the film progresses, Pullman becomes the Void. We see this awkward and anxious and hard on himself guy turn into a smug cocky superhero and then turns into a powerful villain. Invincible, able to spread darkness and turn people into shadows. Switching between three different characters can feel reductive, where time and attention is not afforded to doing so. But in the Thunderbolts*, it works.

Bob: I’m stronger than you.

The Void: Let’s see.

Lewis Pullman’s introduction in the first act as just Bob automatically differentiates him from the other superpowered individuals, as a seemingly average guy who doesn’t remember much. He’s endearing and the puppy dog eyes add to this image of a wholesome and awkward guy. So when we reach the third act, because we are invested in and care for Bob, the stakes feel so much higher. Pullman’s performance demands so much as he plays both the Void and Bob in the third act - the Void’s appearance allows us to fully understand and see the weight of Bob’s illness, guilt and trauma. As he battles himself in the third act and is forced to confront his demons, we see this broken man who is desperate to feel better and has exhausted all of his options. The Void’s commanding voice reminds us that these are Bob’s most darkest and innermost thoughts and fractured psyche manifesting in the form of a monstrous villain. Lewis Pullman clearly understood the role to play and the depth to his characters and how they represent different parts of one individual, and news of him being cast in Avengers Doomsday is incredibly promising and great news for the MCU.

The new era of the MCU is underway and what better way to start this with Thunderbolts*? As someone who has struggled with mental health a lot and in some cases, this has manifested into really bad depressive episodes, I felt that the cast and crew behind the film were able to pull off a touching and delicate take on the subject matter. There is no one experience of depression or anxiety or mental illness in real life, but there is a beautiful story written and portrayed here which does a good job at introducing the theme to audiences.

I have been always been a keen fan of superhero films. ‘How many times must I mount the Batman 2?” has entered my vocabulary as a commonly uttered phrase as the news about the script being unfinished and delays to filming have been announced. As I’ve grown older, there are many superhero films I love and adore and fewer which have touched me deeply and made me energised about the genre. The Thunderbolts* has joined that list. It is refreshing to see a film franchise tackle mental health and illness in a film without making it feel like lazy writing or poorly executed as a concept. We often watch these films to enter Worlds that are foreign to us. Who in real-life can say Captain America has saved them from an alien supervillain? But Thunderbolts manages to bridge the gap between the World we live in and the significant uprise of people suffering with poor mental health and illness, and the imagined Worlds we see on the big screen.

Please feel free to share your take on the film in the comments below or share your excitement for the upcoming films (superhero or not superhero themed!).

I carved out a version of myself in Birmingham that my family at home did not know. I had study rooms that felt like home (J.G. Smith), where I spent many hours frustrated and annoyed at my university work and where I spent many a moment closing over 30 tabs whilst finishing an essay. I felt like a proper grown-up keeping a diary filled with society events, plans with friends and my seminars and lectures. The feeling of being on campus and sending a message to a group chat to see if anybody was up for a study session, or a coffee or a meal at Joe’s Bar. And we would do those things. We would spend hours groaning over our essays, gossiping and enjoying the culinary expertise of the various cafes across the university. My friends would humour my various trips to the cinema and love of film. Even when I fractured my ankle, I took comfort in the fact that my favourite Lucy and Yak dungarees could hold a Tango Ice Blast comfortably in my pockets. Sometimes these trips involved going around a museum or gallery or out for a meal, but sometimes, we just went to the cinema and hung out at one of our places. The freedom of the university schedule meant I could go into whatever daytime screening I wanted to.

Starting over, even if it was in a place that had raised me for eighteen years and made me into the person who could move away and make the most of the university experience was difficult. There was a distance between the person I had become and who I used to be. I found myself angry that life did not fall as easily as it did at university. I could not magically conjure up a set of friends to boot, like I did at university. Even now, nearly two years later, I can feel lonely. It wasn’t until I rewatched Past Lives after graduating that I could name the grief I was carrying. The film doesn’t shout, it lingers. And in its silences, I could see myself through Nora’s ache of trying to move forward whilst still mourning the versions of herself that once was whole.

Past Lives follows Nora and Hae Sung, childhood friends in Seoul who are separated when Nora’s family emigrates to Canada. For twelve years, their connection lives only in memory. When they reconnect as adults over Facebook, the initial spark is still there. But it’s filtered through time zones and screens. They begin calling trying to rebuild something over late-night conversations and clinging to the idea that love can survive in this vacuum of Skype. But reality sets in quickly. The screens freeze and the awkward moments waiting to see if the other is unfrozen remind each other, that this connection is built off of calls that come at unsociable hours and the realisation that neither can inhabit the other’s world. As Hae Sung repeatedly calls Nora, whilst it’s early morning her time, it is clear that pursuing a relationship would require constant compromise. Playing catch-up to a life you’re not really a part of. So Nora ends it. They drift again, for another twelve years, until Hae Sung visits her in New York for a few brief days. Only now, Nora is married to a fellow writer (Arthur) and after twenty-four years, she is not the same girl Hae Sung knew in Seoul.

Celine Song captures the pain of words left unsaid. It captures a feeling you realise as you become older, that the passage of time has a strange elastitcity. Simultaneously moving like a slow breath, and vanishing in the blink of an eye as one of my favourite song describes, “I swear sixteen was yesterday. But now I'm closer to twenty-eight”. Time lingers here. Across the 106 minute runtime, the film covers twenty-four years of their lives, but does not feel burdened by the chronology. Instead, the film distills these decades into various moments. A childhood goodbye at a set of stairs to some may signify to some how Nora’s emigration to Canada begins her journey of an upward mobility and is a metaphor for how she will live her life. But for me, it signifies her ambition and drive to be someone spectacular and moving on from her childhood self.

Past Lives draws much of its power from its screenplay with a beautiful style of writing, an un-chronological structure, and dialogue which is sparse. Before we are properly introduced to the main characters, the film opens with a pair of unseen, gossiping narrators who speculate on the relationship between the three people at the bar. This moment pulls us in and we are eager to understand the dynamics between Nora, Hae Sung, and Arthur. We are then taken back to Seoul, where Na Young (Nora’s name at that point in her life) is a schoolgirl in Seoul spending much time with her friend, Hae Sung. When she learns she is emigrating with her family, there are no outbursts or melodramatic farewells with Hae Sung. Instead, the emotional weight of this turning point is conveyed in the quiet goodbye they exchange on a set of stair. An image that becomes iconic in the film’s emotional landscape. The scene’s restraint allows us to feel the disruption in Nora’s life not through what is said, but through what is left unspoken. Song shows us how emigration quietly reshapes the trajectory of a life.

The bar scene in one of the Past Lives series is the most memorable parts of the film that shows us the trio of characters of Nora, Hae Sung, and Arthur together hanging out with each other in a very close and personal way, with unseen narrators speculating as to the nature of their connection towards the start. The initial impression may be a casual get-together of friends, but as the film progresses, we experience that conversation. We see through Nora’s emotional tension and her conflicting identities having to switch between both her Korean and American selves. Greta Lee as Nora communicates with Hae Sung in Korean and Arthur in English, and with this code-switching manages to completely change who Nora is in that moment. By talking to Hae Sung, Nora uses the language of her childhood and talks in that manner which in a way reflects not only the connection to Seoul but also her past. In front of Arthur, she uses English, the language she used and adapted to, the symbol of the life she built in Canada and later America.

Hae Sung's relationship with Nora is a symbol of the old memory of the young girl from Seoul. The girl is the part of her she left behind, a shadow of her former self. With Arthur, the relationship is a demonstration of her present and relationship her capacity to transform further and carve her own path. By the quick change of words and language, we can see that Nora is not only choosing one man out of the two, but navigating which Nora she is. Each version associated with a particular time and place. Hae Sung will never comprehend fully what has changed inside of Na Young, though he remembers her as a child. Arthur will never truly understand Nora as Na Young, but he knows Nora and will continue to know her as they grow older together.

In the film, the quote captures the core theme. Accepting what is and acknowledging it, instead of questioning why. As Nora explains the concept of in-yun to Arthur, it is a symbolic reminder of connection, time, destiny and our roots. The need for her to explain this also highlights the cultural differences between the two. The Korean belief in-yun is foreign to Arthur, this belief that people are connected across the past, present, and future by something much bigger than themselves. As one of my favourite Taylor Swift songs calls it, a sort of invisible string tying people together. As Nora and Hae Sung reconnect through Facebook, the chances of it happening feel minuscule. The fact they are able to is proof of this in-yun, their bond being undeniable and awaiting a moment to be reawakened. Past Lives lets us consider that maybe Nora and Hae Sung’s connection is rooted in something bigger than either of them. Maybe their reunion is not a result of the digital world and its ability to bring close together, what was previously lost.

The universe has created this opportunity for them to reconcile and take up the thread of their relationship, as if time hadn’t stopped. For Hae Sung, this belief is bigger than a cultural notion. The concept of in-yun becomes the way he perceives his relationship with Nora. Their bond is untouched by the years and distance and cultural differences as they both have grown up. Hae Sung takes in-yun to mean that they are meant to be together. Time and circumstances are obstacles that they can navigate to achieve this version of the future together. Ironically, his attachment to his imagined future holds him back by reminiscing on their past connection. He cannot move on and accept the reality of the present. In-yun for him is the idea that their relationship was predestined in a romantic sense.

Nora feels the strength of their connection, but not in the way Hae Sung does. As a child, she emigrated to a foreign country and learned a language she hadn’t spoken before, because of her parents’ choices. She had dreams and hopes, even as a young girl. She has built this life in New York, one that is completely her own. She has become the person she wants to be. The Nora that Hae Sung reunites with is not the same twelve-year-old girl who left Seoul. Their reunion and the time together really shows this gap between who Nora was and who she is now. Hae Sung’s presence in her life serves as a mirror to her past self, reminding her of the girl she was and most importantly, a crucial part of her Korean identity. By the time the film reaches its end, Nora has a profound realisation. She is aware that is loves Hae Sung and understands the nature of their connection and the power in its withstanding the decades and distance. But, she also realises the in order to move forward, she needs to release that part of her past.

Nobody likes to say goodbye. In films, books and TV, we often see these big moments where someone confesses their feelings. Or maybe the main character realises the error of their ways and rushes to pursue the right person. In the finale of Friends, I was sat bracing myself during the chase to the (ultimately wrong) airport Ross took with Phoebe to pursue Rachel, in Notting Hill it was William chasing after Anna and in The Notebook, it was Noah’s proclamation of love for Allie. These moments are satisfying when they come and I love them. But Past Lives is not that sort of film. It would do a disservice to the incredible performances, the writing and direction to end it like that. Celine Song leaves us with the weight of the futures not experienced, the unsaid words and what could have been. The final goodbye is an acceptance that they share this undeniable bond which has weathered thousands of miles and a few decades, but the paths they have taken have made it impossible to be together and Hae Sung realises this.

As the film ended and the credits rolled, I didn’t burst into tears with some huge realisation, I just sat through. Numb. The film lingered and still has to this day. I often think about the decisions I made and what version of me would have been had I chosen a different degree, a different university or a different graduate scheme. Even choosing different A-Levels or a different sixth form. I thought my reflections on the film were unfounded, because I had not moved countries, only cities. But to understand Past Lives, you just need to have lived. To look at yourself or someone and really wondered, what if? What if I continued talking to the stranger on the tube who complimented my outfit? Would I have a close friend? Would we have gotten along? Or maybe in some version of my life, I chose to go to KCL instead of the University of Birmingham. What friends would I have? Would I have taken the same post-university path? These are questions I think of, after coming out of a film like Past Lives or late at night when I can’t sleep. But why spend all of that time wondering? I asked myself that question and realised that Past Lives shows us that every version of who we are, be it past or present or future or our imagined selves is a part of who we are today.

The young woman who left the University of Birmingham in July 2023 crammed in a car amidst a sea of boxes hastily packed is not the same woman who wrote this post. Since that pivotal moment, I started and finished an internship and began my graduate scheme. I lost my Baba. I felt as if everything was lost. I came to the bittersweet realisation, I could love and enjoy life even in the context of losing one of the most important people I loved. I travelled to Japan for two weeks on my own, something that would have been unthinkable whilst I was at university. I have experienced beautiful springs, summers, autumns and winters at home and over the next couple of years, I will experience more of the seasons here than I will have at university. I have favourite restaurants and cafes, a favourite seat on the Elizabeth line and have the perfect spot to stand at to be by the doors. I have friends I catch-up with, either regularly or as often as possible. Life has taken us in different directions and I feel the connection to them everyday. I have a life here that I have crafted, one that is undeniably mine and it is a good one.

In the Mood for Love

I felt like such a fake cinephile having taken 24 years to watch this masterpiece. My film club hosted a hangout event at the very iconic Prince Charles Cinema to see this.

• Five stars!

• Watched at the Prince Charles Cinema

• Watched this with my Film Club (if you’re a woman in / near London, check them out via this link).

This film had the most breathtaking cinematography in a film that I had seen in a long-time. Every shot looked carefully composed to feel as if you were staring at a painting. There is nothing to complain about with this film, Maggie Cheung and Tony Leung Chiu-wai portray this love with all of its restrained passion and sensitivity in shared moments of silence.

Four Mothers

Heavy topics can often make films that feel really hard to sit through and uncomfortable, but in Four Mothers this is done with such a sensitive, funny and delicate touch. The result is a funny and heartfelt film.

• 4 stars

• Watched at the BFI Southbank with my friend, Sam.

This received 4 stars from me, because it felt as if the arc of our main character Edvard felt incomplete. He suffers through so many demands and he has an explosive scene where he lays his feelings out… but it doesn’t pay off. Jean’s character was my favourite as it felt like she was the only character who had a true arc where you could emphasise with her, understand her hostility and demanding nature and see her change.

Cloud

A film examining the greed, revenge and the art of the persona in the digital sphere focusing on a reseller within the Japanese resale market who sells extortionately priced goods (some real, some fake) seems a bit obscure as a concept, but it works!

• 4 stars

• Watched this at the BFI Southbank at a preview screening

This was a slow-burn thriller which paid off with great tense and action filled sequences towards the end. It was really interesting to see how the internet and social media gave the characters hell bent on revenge the ability to band together to try and seek revenge on Yoshii. You never know what’s coming around the corner and the beauty of Cloud is that in an age of ‘depop girlies’ selling 1990s/2000s/2010s clothes for an extortionate price and the rise in people drop shipping cheap goods to sell for a high mark-up (looking at you almost every stall in Camden Market), this film feels like it has come out at a perfect time.

Sinners

I did a longer review on this, but oh my god, I walked out of this so confidently it would be film of the year. And I have not been swayed in another direction. This is such an incredible film with every part being perfectly crafted. I went for a second watch and even though the cinema was not the BFI IMAX, I enjoyed myself as much as I did on my first viewing.

• 5 stars

• Watched this first at the BFI IMAX alone and then Vue Cinema Reading with my siblings

Sinners is a masterpiece in filmmaking. In this film, we have incredible one-liners, well-developed characters and a plot which is slow to start with to introduce us to our swathe of supporting characters to make the stakes once the danger comes in the second half, even higher. Ryan Coogler and Michael B. Jordan are a match made in heaven and this film is the sum of all of its incredible parts.

Tangerine

I loved Anora and the Florida Project, but I had never seen Tangerine and my Mubi watchlist is growing a bit too quick for my liking. So I watched Tangerine. Before I begin with my thoughts, it was so incredible to see a film entirely shot on an iPhone.

• 4 stars

• Watched at home

• Available on Mubi

If you’re a fan of Anora, you will appreciate the premise of this story. One of my favourite parts of Anora was the chase to find Ivan and Tangerine has a plot that takes us in a similar direction. Alexadra and Sin-Dee are characters who are compelling, intimidating and as we throughout, extremely funny! This film really shows off what Los Angeles is really like and portrays it honestly.

Marriage Story

Knowing Joaquin Phoenix won the Oscar for Joker over any of the nominees made me so annoyed, but after watching Marriage Story I was even more outraged!

• 5 stars

• Watched at home

• Available on Netflix

I was lost for words after watching this film. Scarlett and Adam as Nicole and Charlie are able to portray the process of falling out of love, so intimately and in a real way. Although they’re divorcing, you can see just how they rely upon each other and how they become distant over the course of the film. You will root for both of them, find them both insufferable and feel so much sympathy for them as they begin the process of separation.

As May approaches, I am so excited for Tom Cruise season at the BFI Southbank and IMAX where they are screening many of his films! I’ll also be eagerly anticipating Marvel’s Thunderbolts* which I will be seeing with another film club I’m part of (link to their socials here). They do monthly film clubs watching a wide range of films which come out in the cinema, if you’re in or near London or want to make the journey.

I’m also hoping to catch The Wedding Banquet which I missed at the BFI at Flare and of course, Wes Anderson’s The Phoenician Scheme. Here’s to a sunny and film-filled May.

Sinners, directed by Ryan Coogler, stars Michael B. Jordan alongside Hailee Steinfeld, Li Jun Li, Wunmi Mosaku, Jayme Lawson, Delroy Lindo, Jack O’Connell, and introduces Miles Caton in his debut role. Set in 1930s Mississippi, Sinners is a Southern Gothic vampire film that follows twin brothers (both played by Jordan) as they return to their hometown to start again by opening a juke joint. At the heart of the film is their cousin Sammie who is a gifted guitarist caught between his family’s church (led by his strict preacher father) and his ambitions to play the blues and forge his own path.

Jordan delivers a compelling performance, proving once again that Ryan Coogler is a director who truly understands how to tap into his full potential. As both Smoke and Stack, Jordan carefully distinguishes the two characters whilst preserving the seamless bond that ties them together. Smoke is the more pragmatic of the two, grounded and emotionally open, especially in his relationship with Annie. Stack, by contrast, is more rebellious and guarded, and his dynamic with Mary which is initially restrained gradually reveals layers of vulnerability as the film progresses. Jordan captures Stack’s inner turmoil with subtlety, particularly in portraying the pain of having to walk away from Mary, a white-passing woman (who is one-eighth black) he once loved, because their relationship would never be accepted in 1930s Mississippi.

Ryan Coogler’s direction shines most in his development of character with each one not only propelling the story forward but adding rich emotional depth. The characters feel fully realised, with every line of dialogue and every gesture made revealing layers of personality and the history and complex dynamics between them. This is made possible through the slow build-up of the film in the first half. We observe Smoke and Stack’s interactions with our supporting characters, as they realise their ambitions to open a juke joint and return to their roots. We meet these characters who they left behind and what their absence meant. This slow-build up means that as the film progresses, we are struck by the fear our characters have towards the looming threat. I could write for hours about the his direction, but this film is one that has been crafted with care and delicacy.

Although Sinners is a film where every element be it the cinematography, direction, performances, score, costumes, and editing works in harmony to create a truly exceptional film, one of the film’s most vital components is Jack O’Connell’s performance as Remmick who is an Irish vampire serving as the film’s main antagonist. When we meet him, he’s desperate and we feel as if we need to sympathise for him or root for him, yet after a few moments we are kept in a state of tension as he reveals his true intentions. To our characters, he is disarmingly charismatic (even poetic), but it becomes apparent that there’s something far more beneath the surface.

Coogler’s decision to make Remmick Irish is an interesting one. Historically, they were colonised and subjected to oppression and hardship in their home country and their new homes, once they arrived. Whilst their experiences are not equivalent to those of Black Americans, they offer a revealing contrast because unlike black Americans, Irish immigrants were eventually able to assimilate into whiteness gaining access to social and economic privileges that remained systematically denied to black communities. This is not to say that they did not face discrimination, because they did, but rather that they could use their skin colour in a way black Americans could not.

Remmick doesn’t grow stronger by simply turning others into vampires. His power comes from feeding off the pain, legacy, and culture of those around him. His hunger is not just physical but symbolic, a parasitic need to consume the very essence of the black experience, explained by his attachment to the juke joint and Miles. In his interactions, he is sympathetic by positioning himself as someone who understands oppression, yet his actions prove otherwise. He speaks about his family’s oppression and frames assimilation into his vampire cult as an act of solidarity, when in truth, it is submission to his control.

As the film finished and the title cards passed by, I felt so much pride and joy in seeing “Introducing Miles Caton” something which I have not experienced since I saw “Introducing Rachel Zegler” in West Side Story. Miles Caton is the heartbeat behind Sinners. His performance provides the film with an exceptional emotional arc and despite acting alongside industry veterans, he commands your attention and focus. His portrayal of Sammie, from the son of a preacher belonging to a religious family which stifles and does not reward his love of the blues and guitar to a young man. A young man who is hardened by his experiences with the vampires and who ultimately uses music as a way to express himself, and as a tool to free himself from the expectations placed upon him.

Sinners is a film which is a love letter to the blues, to the South and to black history. Coogler weaves together many interesting characters which the film has in Smoke, Stack, Annie, Mary, Sammie, Pearline, Delta, Grace and Bo with a piercing villain which the film has in Remmick to create this character-driven story. As many will have seen, his ten-minute video explaining the format clearly expresses his passion for filmmaking. See Sinners in 70mm IMAX if you’re near a 70mm IMAX theatre, because that experience is truly remarkable and I could not imagine experiencing it for the first time anywhere else.