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.

 

 

ROSE - MIFF 2026

 

As per the MIFF guide: “From the battlefields of the Thirty Years’ War, a soldier arrives in a small German village carrying a document proving his inheritance of a local farm. Facially scarred by a bullet wound, this mysterious figure proves himself to be hardworking and brave, and slowly but surely insinuates himself into the community. But the soldier has a secret: he is, in fact, a woman named Rose masquerading as a man. When she is married off to a neighbour’s daughter – with children expected from the union – Rose’s deception is put to the test.”

Markus Schleinzer's “Rose” is an outstanding look at gender inequality and gender privilege that sees Sandra Huller's titular character pose as a man to further her life in Germany after returning from being a soldier in the Thirty Years' War. It is an incredibly simple but powerful tale, told exceptionally well, that particularly focuses on the hardships and lack of propriety women had back in the 1600's, which then makes us ask the question just how far have we come since then. Sadly, the answer is not very far at all.

The first thing you notice about “Rose” is its striking black and white widescreen photography and the attention to period detail in the production design. It immediately paints a picture of a hard world, a world where no one gets anywhere without rolling up their sleeves and committing to the hard work to come. You really feel the dirt, mud and grime of this world forever at the mercy of the elements of any given season, and I think fans of Robert Eggers' work would get a lot out of “Rose” as it has the same kind of feel to his films and is made with the same exacting detail. Once you become immersed in the world of the film, that is when you then began to take notice of Sandra Huller's performance and at just how great she is here. Make no mistake about it, “Rose” is Huller's film and its success is owed to her full commitment to the title role.

I must admit that when films have women playing or posing as men, I usually have a hard time believing the other characters within the film would truly see that person as “male”. However, for once I found it very believable here, thanks entirely to Huller's performance. A huge part of this has to do with the gate of her walk and posture when she stands, as it comes across as quite masculine and rigid. Huller is also aided by some smart make-up design, where her character took a bullet through the right side of her face, leaving a massive scar across her cheek, which helps in hiding her femininity.

The power in the story comes from the fact that Rose succeeds in everything she tries to do whilst posing as a man, which benefits the rest of her community greatly. She farms her land so crops can grow strong once more, she teaches the locals how to read and write, not to mention that during the war, she fought for her country and survived, being wounded in the process. Furthermore, she marries a local girl and even father's a child (!); there is no denying it, as a man Rose is not only a success, but a model citizen and an important member of the local community. Her only “sin” is that she was born a woman, so should not have any of these things to begin with. It is then beyond frustrating when the town turns on Rose, who the locals call “The Soldier”, when suspicions fall upon her gender, because it is so obvious how much good she does for the community, and yet they all look past this just because she is a girl. Having two daughters of my own, the plight of women and the way they are treated in the world is quite a big concern of mine, and for anyone who thinks this story doesn't relate to the present is kidding themselves. Sure, things are better today, but gender inequality still exists. There is a moment late in the film when Rose is asked why she did what she did and whether or not she actually wanted to be a man. She sternly but quietly replies “No, I did not want to be a man, but there is more freedom in pants”. As I have just stated, sadly this is still true today. Think about it though, this is a film set in the 17^th century and yet it is still so relevant today; that is just shameful, I think.

Besides the physical hardships women had to face back then and the total lack of propriety, it was also the constant sexual abuse they suffered that is explored within “Rose”, although in this facet, director Markus Schleinzer is very subtle in his approach. To help disguise herself as a man, Rose wears a number of, what we would call today, “strap-on” devices. Nicknamed “the horn” is the flaccid device that rest between her legs posing as her penis, while “the spike” is the erect version of the same disguise that Rose had to use on her fallen enemies to “show them who their master was”. This is quite a shocking moment when we learn that Rose, while pretending to be a man, had to rape enemy women because to refuse would have been more dangerous to her than to commit such a heinous crime. She has to see the horrors men are inflicting upon women to exert some power or control over them, but then commits these same crimes first hand, all in an attempt to survive. That is some seriously heavy material, but through Schleinzer's sensitive handling thankfully it is never sensationalised. It is also alluded in the film that Rose's wife, Suzanna, is a victim of rape at the hands of her father, as she now bears a child which obviously cannot be Rose's.

While writing this review, I have only just realised that the director of “Rose”, Markus Schleinzer, also directed the brilliant (but horribly disturbing) film, “Michael”, back in 2011. What made that film so hard to watch, despite how well made it was, was the fact that it was a serious look at a paedophile and how in normal life, they come across as everyday people, whilst turning into the monsters they truly are behind closed doors. What is so impressive about “Michael” is that Schleinzer never over-sensationalises any of the shocking or controversial moments within the film, which makes them and the film more powerful, and he stays true to this approach in “Rose” as well. Whenever a female posing as a male is unmasked in cinema, it usually comes in the form of crass, graphic nudity as if to signpost the fact that yes, she is a woman. Schleinzer eschews this impulse, shooting said scenes respectfully from angles that expose nothing (because after all, we the audience already know she is a girl and need no confirmation of this fact), and when it comes to the rape or sex scenes of the film, he usually deals with these moments off camera. One moment that he does capture on camera that highlights just how hard living on the land was back then, is a scene involving a bear attack during a torrential storm, that sees Rose also need to help save a flock of sheep. It is a fantastic scene, and one that looked enormously difficult to shoot. I briefly want to mention the ending of “Rose” as it descends into something of a courtroom drama where Rose is forced to defend her actions, but which also shares a curious pictorial connection to Carl Theodor Dreyer's classic 1928 silent film “The Passion of Joan of Arc”, which I am sure is more than just coincidental. Make of that what you will, but I think the connection between Jeanne and Rose is obvious.

Overall, Markus Schleinzer's third feature film, “Rose”, is another outstanding film from this very talented German director. Whilst visually it is very beautiful with its stunning black and white photography courtesy of cinematographer Gerald Kerkletz, conversely it is a dark and tragic tale highlighting the inequality women have felt since the beginning of time. “Rose” is not an easy film, but it is a bloody good one, with another outstanding performance from Sandra Huller in the title role.

4 Stars.

 

 

YELLOW LETTERS - MIFF 2026

 

As per the MIFF guide: “Playwright Aziz and actor Derya are a husband-and-wife pair known for their avant-garde theatre works. But when they receive menacing ‘yellow letters’ – official government edicts – labelling their work “too political”, they swiftly lose the platform and careers they’ve spent so long building, and their life begins to unravel. As the couple move from Ankara to Istanbul with their 14-year-old daughter, relationships begin to fray and ethics become compromised, the hostility of the Turkish regime infecting the family dynamic.”

“Yellow Letters” was not actually part of my original line up of films that I had chosen to see at MIFF this year. However after finalising my schedule and realising it was a little light, I decided to do a final deep dive through the guide in an attempt to find a few extra films worthwhile to see. I came across “Yellow Letters” and was almost embarrassed that I had initially missed it, as it is the brand new film from director Ilker Çatak. His previous film, 2023's “The Teachers' Lounge” impressed me greatly and after watching the trailer for “Yellow Letters”, it became a no-brainer to be added to my list. I just had to hope that I could find a session that would fit nicely within my schedule, which ended up working out perfectly.

Ilker Çatak's “Yellow Letters” is an absolutely cracking drama about the realities of living under a totalitarian government where artists and intellectuals are systematically silenced by the State for criticising the current regime. It has been superbly written, filled with complex drama throughout, powerfully acted by the entire cast, and beautifully directed by Ilker Çatak. I can safely say, even this early in the festival, that “Yellow Letters” will be one of the highlights. The thing that I loved so much about the film was the way that it begins as a story of resistance and fighting against the State, censorship and being silenced, before it slowly morphs into a family drama looking at the reality of life after the State has systematically denied every luxury they are used to, as a consequence of their resistance. How do you live when you are left with nothing and blacklisted from your work that you are so passionate about? How do you survive? How long does it take to bend your ideals and how does that change if you also have a child to look after? This is such a smart (and angry) film that asks many, many questions that really get you thinking about the techniques totalitarian regimes use to crush resistance and how far people are willing to go to stay true to their ideals and beliefs.

The performances in “Yellow Letters” are out-of-this-world good, particularly from Tansu Biçer and Özgü Namal who play the artistic married couple, Aziz and Derya, persecuted by the State, but who are also parents to 14 year old Ezgi (beautifully and sassily played by Leyla Smyrna Cabas). I have never seen Özgü Namal in anything prior to “Yellow Letters” but she is an absolute powerhouse in this film. A very headstrong woman who is willing to fight for what she believes in, even if that fighting means going against her husband at times. Yes, she is married to Aziz, but Derya refuses to give up her individuality, and refuses to let anyone speak for her. Namal also gives Derya an incredibly tender and maternal side when she is in the company of her daughter. The hard exterior softens when Ezgi needs a friendly shoulder to cry on, or someone to laugh with or to share boy secrets with, although she never loses her parental power also. As good as Virginie Efira and Tao Okamoto were in Ryusuke Hamaguchi's “All of a Sudden”, I found Özgü Namal's performance in “Yellow Letters” to be even better; she is just incredible! She also has fantastic chemistry with Biçer, and the two of them together share many scenes together showcasing a huge gamut of emotions from tender and supportive to combative, as well as moments from a work perspective when they relate to each other in a playwright to actress capacity. There is an absolutely fantastic scene late in the film, set in the family car, when Aziz and Derya go head to head and have a highly combative fight as the frustrations of their current reality all comes bubbling to the surface.

As I mentioned earlier, “Yellow Letters” is a beautifully directed film shot in a very classical style focusing on perfect camera placement, simple camera moves and exquisite editing. There is nothing flashy in Ilker Çatak's directing style as he knows his story is the star of the show and his actors are strong enough to do the heavy lifting of the film, without the need of any visual fireworks which would take away from the drama. One trick Çatak did have to resort to was shooting the film in Germany rather than in Turkiye where the story is set. The reason for this is so that he could shoot the film with as much freedom as possible without the fear of suffering the same fate as that of his characters in “Yellow Letters”, which would likely have been the case if he shot it in Turkiye, due to the political nature of the film. Here, Berlin plays Ankara, with Hamburg filling in for Istanbul, and Çatak is not shy about the fact, crediting both cities as if they were actors in big bold letters during the opening titles for “Yellow Letters”, showcasing just how dangerous the situation can be, which his characters will soon be facing for themselves.

Sadly, “Yellow Letters” feels like a film perfect for our times, although until recently I must admit that I had been relatively naïve in the ways a totalitarian regime would censor artists and intellectuals, who have the knowledge and platform to react against them. However seeing this played out now on a daily basis, thanks to Donald Trump and his Republican government running the US, it has really opened my eyes to the reality of the situation and how dangerous it really is and how easily a person's human rights can be quashed by people in power. This is why I think “Yellow Letters” is an incredibly important film that hit me hard, and I was not surprised to learn that it took away the Golden Bear (top prize) at the recent Berlin Film Festival.

Going into “Yellow Letters” I was expecting much more of a thriller, with the family fighting and resisting until the end as the regime's grip on their lives got tighter and tighter. Therefore, I was quite surprised when instead it morphed into the family drama it becomes, but I say this with no disappointment attached. Instead of a thrilling portrayal of heroism and rebellion, we get a study of the true cost of standing up and fighting against the State. Sometimes there is no reward and your ideals become murky when you have to worry about more than just yourself, but the lives of your children and family too. This, of course, is exactly what the State wants, to break a person down until they are forced to conform, and through this family, director Ilker Çatak is able to look at both sides of the coin, in highlighting the cost of continued rebellion versus conformity, as well as the tensions involved within a family facing both. It is incredibly powerful and at times poignant, and one remarkable aspect of “Yellow Letters” is that even with the high stakes nature the family and film deals with, it never falls into melodrama.

“Yellow Letters” is an outstanding film that sadly reflects a chilling story of today's times. It is an incredibly powerful piece of work with an absolute standout performance from Özgü Namal; she's dynamite! It has been beautifully directed by Ilker Çatak, and I think it will end up being one of the stand out films of MIFF this year. Days after seeing “Yellow Letters”, I cannot stop thinking about it, and I am continually realising just how intricate and complex the story and emotions within it really are. Highly Recommended!

4 Stars.