MINOTAUR - MIFF 2026

 

As per the MIFF guide: “In the immediate wake of his nation’s invasion of Ukraine, wealthy company CEO Gleb is directed to provide cannon fodder for Russia’s war machine. As he is ‘volunteering’ men to be drafted from within his employee pool, he learns that his wife Galina is having an affair with a handsome young artist. This intersection of Gleb’s professional and private crises becomes a trigger point for a shocking showdown.”

My most anticipated film at this year's MIFF is none other than Andrei Zvyagintsev's “Minotaur” which is his first film in almost a decade. You may be wondering why Asghar Farhadi's “Parallel Tales” wasn't my most anticipated film at MIFF when it was number one on my list for the entire year, a list where “Minotaur” failed to even get a mention. The simple reason is because I was under the (incorrect) assumption that Zvyagintsev still hadn't even begun filming “Minotaur” when I wrote that list, thus expected it to be a 2027 release, otherwise it definitely would have taken the top spot from Farhadi's film. Imagine my surprise and excitement when “Minotaur” was announced as part of the Cannes Film Festival, and that we were now getting a new Zvyagintsev film a year earlier than I expected. A lot has changed in Andrei Zvyagintsev's life since the release of his previous film, “Loveless”, in 2017. Most importantly Zvyagintsev very nearly died during the Covid pandemic and then further suffered the debilitating effects from long Covid, making him unable to work. He also now lives in exile in France due to his strong anti-war stance and general opposition of Putin. What has not changed though is his brilliant level of film making and the fact that he is still one of the bravest directors working throughout the world today. His latest film, “Minotaur”, is actually a remake of Claude Chabrol's 1969 classic “La Femme Infidele” (The Unfaithful Wife), with the story re-purposed to today's Russia, complete with a scathing attack against the current war that is taking place against Ukraine.

I actually happened to see “La Femme Infidele” and “Minotaur” within twenty four hours of each other, and found the experience to be more than a little odd, and I am not sure it was for the better of “Minotaur”, as I was constantly comparing it to the original French film. While it was good to be so familiar with the details and story beats of the original film, I think some distance from it would have been beneficial in seeing “Minotaur” as its own thing. I admit I was actually surprised at how faithful a remake “Minotaur” turned out to be, as I was expecting Zvyagintsev to use the original Chabrol piece as a jumping off point and then for him to go his own way with the story, tackling his own themes. Instead, Zvyagintsev is totally faithful to “La Femme Infidele” with all of the main beats of the story being recreated in this new film, although he has changed the ending to fit the Russia of today.

With “Minotaur” running forty five minutes longer than “La Femme Infidele”, you may think that a lot has been added to this new version but really the main addition is Andrei Zvyagintsev's angry condemnation of the current war taking place, and in particular how it is the ordinary, every day folks that are being chewed up by the war machine in progress. The biggest plot extension of “Minotaur” is that Gleb is forced (by the Mayor) to choose fourteen members of his staff to be drafted for the war. This is actually where the title of the film comes from, as it is a dark political metaphor for the war machine in Russia, and relates to the Greek myth where Athens was forced to regularly sacrifice fourteen young people to the monster within the labyrinth as retribution for the death of King Minos's son. This is mirrored in the film by Gleb's dilemma of who to give up from his workforce to essentially be killed in a pointless war. This is also the reason for Gleb's heightened stress throughout the film, as he needs to work out who to choose, and also not let it disrupt his workflow or business. Gleb ultimately comes up with a diabolical plan to hire brand new staff (for work his company does not have), just so he has people for his draft quota. These poor unsuspecting men believe they have found employment, but instead they are about to be shipped off to their deaths. Gleb also adds another cruel wrinkle to his solution by including the name of his security manager, who was the man he got to investigate and confirm his wife's infidelity, as a way of tying up loose ends. Andrei Zvyagintsev is clearly saying that in the corrupt Russia of today, life is cheap, and that the men in power are willing to do some despicable things so they themselves are not affected by the war. It is certainly something when a main character in a film can kill a person in cold blood, and it is still not the most reprehensible thing he does in that film. This part of the story is front and centre of “Minotaur” so it is impossible to miss, but Andrei Zvyagintsev also shows the reality of this war in a number of smaller ways throughout his film. Visible images of anti-war graffiti on buildings, soldiers and amputees walking the streets, and trains transporting tanks passing by, are just a few examples of this.

The other key difference between “Minotaur” and “La Femme Infidele” is that in the Russian version none of the characters are happy. In fact, I think the only time you see anyone smile is during the night Gleb, Galina and a group of their friends go to a club, in an attempt to unwind. However post-party, Galina declares that even this moment of “fun” was nothing but a facade; a way for people to pretend they are not affected by the world they are currently living in. While there is never confirmation either way, in “La Femme Infidele” you never know if the wife strays because she is unhappy or if she is just bored. In “Minotaur” there is no doubt that it is because Galina is miserable in life, and looking for any sort of distraction from it or the slimmest hint of potential happiness. There is a scene towards the end of the film where Galina delivers a line of dialogue that may be the most important of the entire film: “I want to live, not endure, live.”

It is so good having Andrei Zvyagintsev healthy and active in cinema once more, and a relief that he did not lose his touch while dormant for close to a decade. “Minotaur” looks and feels exactly like an Andrei Zvyagintsev movie; it is slow paced, impeccably shot and acted, and very, very politically angry. Zvyagintsev has always been great at tackling tough subject matter but doing it in a digestible format for the audience, so the message never overpowers the entertainment of the film. He once again reunites with cinematographer Mikhail Krichman, and the pair continue using the visual style they have developed and been successful with over the past few films. Working with a cool colour palette , slow deliberate camera moves and Zvyagintsev's exquisite camera placement, “Minotaur” is a stunning film to look at, like you would expect, with Latvia filling in here for Russia.

Andrei Zvyagintsev also has a fantastic knack of eliciting brilliant female performances in all his films, even in the most minor roles, with Iris Lebedeva continuing that trend by giving a heartbreaking performance as Galina, a wife and mother, deeply unhappy in the world she is stuck in. What I love about Lebedeva's performance is that she exhibits real emotions, confronting her daily life whilst everyone else around her tries to ignore it, and pretend that none of it is affecting them. However by doing this, it opens herself up to so much more pain, but at least she is being true to herself and her situation. Conversely, I was not a fan of Gleb, the husband, at all and through Dmitriy Mazurov's performance, he comes across as too masculine or headstrong and rather unsympathetic compared to the same character in the Chabrol film. Because of this, his motivation for confronting his wife's lover feels totally different, as in “La Femme Infidele” it is to try and understand why his wife would stray, while in “Minotaur” it feels like it is just because he doesn't like other people playing with his toys, and he does treat his wife like an object often, rather than anything close to an equal.

Overall, I am so happy to have finally seen a new film from Andrei Zvyagintsev, as he is still one of the best film makers working today. His latest, “Minotaur” is a very interesting remake of Claude Chabrol's “La Femme Infidele” that is very faithful to it's source, complete with a new ending that highlights the absolute corruption of today's Russia. “Minotaur” is exactly what you would expect from a Zvyagintsev film; it is slow, cold, very angry but above all else, has been stunningly put together. As good as the film is though, I would actually probably rate it the weakest of Zvyagintsev's career so far, but coming from anyone else, it would likely be their best; that is how high a bar he has set for himself. I look forward to re-watching “Minotaur” in the near future.

3.5 Stars.

 

THE CURRENTS - MIFF 2026

 

As per the MIFF guide: “Argentinian designer Catalina has just won a prestigious award in Geneva, but something within her has clearly come unmoored. She drifts aimlessly through city streets in her turquoise coat, then casually throws herself off a bridge into the river below. Though she survives the attempt, back home in Buenos Aires she can’t shake a new, debilitating fear of water, which she’s too ashamed to share with her husband Pedro and small daughter Sofia. Her hair becomes increasingly bedraggled – one of the few visible signs of an inner turbulence that buffets Catalina between mental agony, dissociation and an almost sublime sensitivity.”

Milagros Mumenthaler’s “The Currents” is one of those films that I knew was for me just from looking at one key image. The image of a young woman in a turquoise dress (which actually turned out to be a coat) conveyed enough mystery and intrigue within me, that I was determined to see the film. Whilst I had also watched the film's trailer, like I often do with most foreign films, I obscured the subtitles so I could get a feel for the film and it's images, without ruining any of its plot. Going into my MIFF screening of “The Currents”, the only thing I knew about the film was that it came out of Argentina, and yet I was still very excited to see the film, and expected it to be great.

There is so much to like in “The Currents”; the film has some incredible moments and scenes within it, but ultimately I found the whole thing a frustrating experience. The main reason for my frustration has to do with the fact that director Milagros Mumenthaler refuses to give any concrete answers within her film. After her impulsive suicide attempt in Geneva that she survives, we know all is not right with Catalina when she returns home to her husband and daughter in Buenos Aires. She has a newfound fear of water and finds herself constantly distracted to the point that she is essentially sleepwalking through her life. It is obvious that something has triggered an immense sadness within Catalina and that she is going through some sort of mental health episode, and while we are given hints and clues to what may be the origin of her pain, unfortunately Mumenthaler never reveals the true source.

I am not against a film that asks more questions than it answers and I do not fear having to do a little work to fully understand everything in a film, but this is one case where I felt the main question needed an answer to it. However this uncertainty may be exactly what director Milagros Mumenthaler is going for as Catalina herself is struggling to find her footing in life, grasping at anything to keep her afloat, rather than be washed away by the currents of her life. You can sense even Catalina is unsure why she is feeling the way she does, and that it has seriously unbalanced her, but instead of dealing with it properly she prefers to “play act” through her life, trying to convince everyone that nothing is wrong. However this causes even more angst amongst her family and friends because it is so obvious that the opposite is true, and even though Catalina is physically there, she is never mentally present or in the moment; again, she is sleepwalking through her life. At one point her husband even says to her “it is like you never returned [from Geneva]”. (I should mention that outside of one childhood friend, Catalina does not share the details of her suicide attempt to anyone due to the shame and guilt she feels). I would say that for the first hour of “The Currents” I was totally onboard with it, but things then go from bad to worse for this poor woman until she is hospitalised and then forced to confront her trauma and look within herself to find the source of all her pain, so she can finally begin the healing process. It is through this journey that the film lost me, as Milagros Mumenthaler suddenly adds a layer of magic realism to “The Currents” that I felt did more to confuse than to illuminate. It is funny that I should use the word “illuminate” there because it is an extended scene set in a lighthouse that caused my break from the film.

What is interesting about this scene, that in and of itself is incredibly beautiful and so well done, but as a part of this film, it has a jarring effect because it is so stylistically different from everything that has come before it. While Catalina does have some flights of fancy or dark imaginations earlier on, this whole sequence is presented in a completely different fashion, and like I mentioned earlier, it becomes rather confusing. I assume Catalina is searching through moments, places and people that were / are important in her life, looking for either the source of her trauma or for the person that will help ground her once more.

You may think that following a character in the depths of depression and despair may end up being something of a hard watch, however “The Currents” is strangely mesmerising and this is no doubt thanks to Isabel Aimé González-Sola's stellar lead performance and the always beautiful cinematography from Gabriel Sandru. I can imagine that the role of Catalina would have been incredibly hard to perform being in such a dark place for the entirety of the film. González-Sola is fantastic though, in what is mainly an internal performance, be it that her character is always trying to hide her true feelings. Dialogue is limited too so most of the work is done behind the eyes or through her body language, and I think in particular she does an excellent job of coming across vacant. Unfortunately I was not a fan of Esteban Bigliardi's performance, who plays Pedro, Catalina's husband, as he comes across as far too cold and angry towards his wife as opposed to the appropriate worry and concern he should be showing for her. In fact he has a real abrasive quality on the film, as I really wasn't a fan of most of the scenes he was involved in. I must briefly mention Emma Fayo Duarte who plays Sofia, the couple's young daughter, who is very fun in the role and brings a real cheeky edge to her. She also has an utterly heartbreaking scene at the end of the film when she instinctively understands what her mother is up to and does anything to make her stop.

Overall, whilst there is a whole lot of good within “The Currents”, due to the way director Milagros Mumenthaler handled the second half of her film and refused to give any concrete answers, I ultimately found it to be a frustrating experience. Both the lead performance from Isabel Aimé González-Sola and the cinematography are top notch, and make “The Currents” well worth watching just for that, but the inclusion of magic realism towards the end causes a jarring effect that makes the whole film more confusing than it should be.

3 Stars.

 

THE UNFAITHFUL WIFE - MIFF 2026

 

As per the MIFF guide: “In this exquisitely calibrated homage to Hitchcock, Parisian insurance executive Charles Desvallées begins to suspect that his wife Hélène is having an affair, sending him into an escalating state of paranoia – and towards a plan that will rupture the bourgeois calm of their existence.”

Aside from showcasing the latest cinema from around the world, MIFF also regularly shows a number of older films too, either as part of one of their sidebars, director retrospectives or due to a new restoration of the film just being made available. Claude Chabrol's 1969 classic, “The Unfaithful Wife” (La Femme Infidele), was part of MIFF's “Critical Condition” sidebar with this year's edition being dedicated to the art of performance. This sidebar sees a critic from around the world introduce a classic film, which is then discussed by a panel after the film is finished, and “The Unfaithful Wife” was chosen as one of the films this year due to it's connection to Andrei Zvyagintsev's “Minotaur” (2026), which is a reinterpretation of the Chabrol film, and which is also playing at MIFF this year. Whatever the reason for its inclusion, I was not missing a chance to see a Chabrol film on the big screen, which after thinking about it, may in fact be a first for me.

When it comes to the French New Wave directors, I often cite Francois Truffaut and Claude Chabrol as my favourites, but the truth of the matter is that I have barely scratched the surface of Chabrol's filmography. Unlike some of the New Wave directors, Chabrol never took himself or the films he made too seriously. He loved making films, and he made a lot of them, and he was not ashamed to make a film just to pay the bills. Throughout his career he made over fifty films, (and by his own account not all of them great), and of those fifty plus, I have seen around twenty four of them. Not bad, but there is a whole lot more to see, which is also quite exciting as there is so much greatness to still find within them. “The Unfaithful Wife” is regarded as one of Chabrol's very best films, and I would have to wholeheartedly agree on that sentiment. It is the second film of what is known as Chabrol's Golden Period which began in 1968 with “Les Biches” and ended with “Just Before Nightfall” in 1971; a period of three years that saw the director churn out six classic thrillers all considered amongst his best.

Obviously I had seen “The Unfaithful Wife” before, but it was such a treat to see this brilliant film finally on the big screen. It is such a simple film, with a very basic premise, but it has been so stylishly executed that you cannot help but be impressed by it. The thing that I really noticed more this time around was just how incredible Pierre Jansen's music for the film is, and how it does an amazing job of highlighting the character's (mostly Charles') hidden emotions. I particularly love the early scenes in the film where Charles is only suspicious of his wife, but without concrete proof, and the music gives a nervous energy to the whole film. I was also greatly impressed by the camera work in the film, which on home video, I found rather flat. The big screen experience opened my eyes to just how well done it is, with Chabrol's use of camera movement and point of view shots being so much better than I had remembered. Jean Rabier's cinematography has a really glossy look to it all that I loved, and you cannot help but notice the shine off of the expensive surfaces of the married couples belongings like Helene's earrings.

Claude Chabrol is often called the French Hitchcock, but this is something that I have never really agreed with (surely that is Henri-Georges Clouzot?), as they have completely different styles despite most of their films dealing with crime, and both having a wicked (and dark) sense of humour. That said, “The Unfaithful Wife” has a number of extended sequences within it that are filled to the brim with suspense. It is true though that Chabrol was a huge fan of Hitchcock himself, and the murder scene and following clean up in this film is almost an homage to a very famous scene from “Psycho” (1960). The thing that I love so much about the murder scene is that it comes out of nowhere. One second two men are having a casual conversation, the next second, one of them is dead, with the other forced to clean up after his impulsive decision. As you might be able to tell, this is the key scene of the entire film, but there is a little moment during this scene that I also absolutely loved in its bourgeois pettiness. Charles decides to go and confront Victor, Helene's lover, at his small Parisian apartment under the guise that he is okay with the affair, as he and his wife have an open relationship. However, when Victor has the gall to tell Charles that his wife actually hates her country home, and suggests that they should move to Paris, Charles is so incensed that he immediately goes on the attack asking Victor how many rooms he has in his apartment, all in an attempt to make his competitor feel small. It is such a tiny, tiny moment in the film, but deliciously dark and petty.

The whole reason for the inclusion of “The Unfaithful Wife” at MIFF this year was due to “the art of performance” so I guess I really need to talk about the actors now. Stephane Audran, who incidentally was Claude Chabrol's wife at this time, can often come across as a very cold actress onscreen, but I thought during the first half of this film that she displayed a loving and warm presence within the film. She comes across as a respectful wife and caring mother to her son. During the second half of the film, when her life begins to spiral downward, the trademark coldness does materialise but works perfectly for this part of the film. Audran also has a brilliant moment towards the end of the film when she finally works everything out, and gives a kind of half smile, that I thought was so impressive. Again, it is a tiny moment, but expressed so much in that one little gesture. Michel Bouquet, playing Charles, does an excellent job of carrying the film and going through a whole range of emotions throughout it's duration. He starts as a husband and father who assumes he has everything in life and as happy as can be, before suspicion, jealousy and paranoia soon ruptures the tranquillity of everything he holds dear.

Overall, it was an absolute pleasure to revisit Claude Chabrol's 1969 classic “The Unfaithful Wife” on the big screen. It is a masterclass in suspense and truly deserves the high reputation that it has achieved. While the film moves slowly, it also moves precisely and is never boring. After being impressed all over again by “The Unfaithful Wife”, I now look forward to seeing Andrei Zvyagintsev's reinterpretation, “Minotaur”, and seeing what he does to make this classic story his own.

4 Stars.