FATHERLAND - MIFF 2026

 

As per the MIFF guide: “In 1949, ageing German Nobel laureate Thomas Mann breaks his long exile from his homeland to honour Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s 200th anniversary in the latter’s birthplace of Frankfurt, West Germany. Next, he plans to visit the city where the literary giant died: Weimar, now in the communist East. Chauffeured by his resentful actor/writer daughter Erika, Thomas crosses a country he barely recognises, even as he waxes poetic about its heritage. Meanwhile, Erika notices in person – as her beloved, tormented brother Klaus does in his fiction – how two divergent but equally compromised regimes are being installed atop the still-festering wounds of Nazism. The country they grew up in is a fading memory; but can this intellectual family even feel at home with one another?”

Pawel Pawlikowski’s latest film “Fatherland” requires you to know both the historical backdrop of 1949's Germany, as well as the famous people that populated it, as all of it's characters are based on real people from that time. You also need to be familiar with the world of literature, music and art of Germany in the 1930's, and to get the most out of “Fatherland” you further need to know whom among those people collaborated with the Nazi's during their time in power, and those who fled the country of their home to survive. Going into the film, I had no idea about any of this, I just thought it was a film set in post-war Germany, rather than being about real people from this time as well as actual events that took place then. I was just excited to see the new film from Pawel Pawlikowski, who seemed to be mining similar themes and visual motifs from his previous films “Ida” (2013) and “Cold War” (2018), both films that enthralled me greatly.

What impressed me the most about “Fatherland” was that even though I had no prior knowledge about any of these people, what they were famous for, and how they were all linked, Pawlikowski still made me care about the journey Thomas Mann was taking alongside his daughter Erika, as he returns to Germany for the first time in over fifteen years. You can tell this is a country he no longer recognises, and he finds sadness in this, while also enjoying the fuss and carry on both sides of Germany are giving him in regards to the ceremonies he is attending. So many names are dropped during the film that I knew that there was a huge chunk of historical resonance that I was missing in “Fatherland”, but I was still enjoying the film on its surface level. Then came a party scene where Erika meets up with a man she obviously knew previous, but was not on great terms with. The two talk about Erika's brother Klaus, as this mystery man states he always liked Klaus, to which Erika replied “so much so that you had his book banned”. The two talk about the contents of the book which is about a stage actor who sells his soul to the Nazi's so he can continue to work while they are in power, and the book is called “Mephisto”, and suddenly my ears pricked up and I saw my entrance into the historical aspect of “Fatherland”. I am a big fan of Istvan Szabo's film “Mephisto” (1981), which is based on the book of the same name, written by Klaus Mann. Whoa! This excited me no end, and once the film was over and I was at home, I started researching the names dropped in “Fatherland” and saw all the connections coming together beautifully, as I suddenly understood the film on a deeper level. Some people may think that you shouldn't need to do homework to enjoy a film, and to a certain point I agree with this, but for some reason I just loved going through the people mentioned in this film, and seeing all the connections between them all. For instance, I had no idea that Klaus Mann based his book “Mephisto” on his former brother-in-law, who was once married to his sister, Erika. Yes, the Erika of this film. Another connection I researched, had to do with Thomas meeting up with the grand children of composer Richard Wagner, who wanted his music to be played once more as it is not the music's fault it was associated so closely with Hitler and the Nazi's. Thomas says something along the lines “I think the Opera House should be razed and your mother tried”. I looked up the daughter of Richard Wagner, of which he had none, whereas his daughter-in-law, Winifred Wagner, turned out to br deeply entangled with the family of Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich. Very interesting stuff.

The other thing that I was in awe of with “Fatherland” was in its recreation of Germany of 1949. It actually feels like you are there, or that the footage was shot when the film was set. Production designers, Marcel Slawinski and Katarzyna Sobanska, deserve all the praise they can get because the world they have created is hugely believable on what I am sure must have been a limited budget. Pawel Pawlikowski has re-teamed with cinematographer Lukasz Zal, and the two of them continue to work with the same visual motifs they began on “Ida” and continued with on “Cold War”. Like the previous two films, “Fatherland” is shot in black and white and in the square 1:37 aspect ratio, and something that I mentioned in my review for “Ida” is the verticality of the shots composed by Zal and Pawlikowski. What I mean by that, is that they are very aware of the up and down space of their frame, not just left to right, and often use this space to highlight tall trees or large columns on buildings. It may not seem like much, but it is very noticeable and I think they use this space better than most directors / cinematographers who use this aspect ratio. One aspect of film making I talk little about is musical scores, because I know little about the art; I only know what I like without being able to talk deeper about it, but I have to say that I loved the organ score from Marcin Masecki which suited “Fatherland” perfectly. Another small detail that I have to mention, which added to the authenticity of the time period, was the sound design, and particularly the sound of the old phone lines which were spot on.

Hanns Zischler is quite wonderful as Thomas Mann, presenting the author as someone chuffed with the attention he is getting while at the same time saddened with what Germany has become since he left, and the fact that so many elite people involved in its destruction are still living life like normal, unpunished. There is also a hint of sadness in Zischler's performance too, as he tries to pretend its business as usual, even after the suicide of his son Klaus. Sandra Huller, likewise, is excellent as his fed up daughter Erika. While it is quite an understated performance, and extremely different from the turn she gave in “Rose”, Huller is great at showing the pure emotion her brother's suicide has caused her, as well as the rage that exists beneath the surface towards collaborators of the Nazi party that saw her family have to leave Germany in the first place. She also gives out the best onscreen slap I have seen in a very long time; damn, that hand connects hard, and the actor on the other end receiving it looks genuinely surprised.

So what is “Fatherland” actually about? It is about an old man, exiled from his birth country for fifteen plus years, finally returning to find the place he once called home no longer exists and in its place are two different ideologies that are forming where Germany once stood. Klaus briefly mentions the division of Germany in a tone of disgust when talking to Erika on the phone at the start of the film: “Mr Mann, which side are you on? Stalin or Mickey Mouse?”. But the film then asks where is home though? Is it where your house is? Where your heart is? Where your family is? Where you were born? Or is it none of these? While looking at a country divided, Pawlikowski also looks at a family divided, and the barriers between them all that stops them from healing or even coming to terms with such a division in the first place. “Fatherland” is an incredible film with so much depth, and a lot on it mind, that it baffles me how Pawel Pawlikowski’s film only runs a brisk 82 minutes long.

Overall, I found Pawel Pawlikowski’s “Fatherland” is be an utterly delightful film, and this is without me knowing the historical backdrop of the times and the people that populated it. Those that are familiar with that information are in for a treat, as this is an amazing film filled with so much depth, as it looks both at a country divided and a family divided. The black and white cinematography is stunning to look at, as is the attention to detail used in the production design that brings Germany of 1949 to life once more. The film also has a really lovely ending too. I really loved “Fatherland” a lot and am stunned at how much Pawel Pawlikowski has been able to cover in a mere eight two minutes.

4 Stars.

 

GENTLE MONSTER - MIFF 2026

 

As per the MIFF guide: “When avant-garde concert pianist Lucy agrees to move her family from the city to the countryside, the goal is to provide her husband Philip with respite following a burnout-induced panic attack. Instead, the move leaves her isolated and emotionally unprepared when the police arrive to execute a search warrant on Philip’s computers. As she struggles to process her shattered new reality and to protect herself and her young son, Lucy must untangle truth from love.”

Back in the early 2020's director Marie Kreutzer was hard at work on research for what she thought would be her next film after “Corsage” (2022). Kreutzer was initially horrified by a news story that she read about the realities of paedophiles Shaken to her core, she felt the topic needed to be seriously examined in a film, but she did not want to commit to making such an important film until she had researched it forensically, despite how hard it would be delving into such dark material for an extended time. After talking to police about how they conduct a warranted search of people under suspicion, the unthinkable happened two days later. Florian Teichtmeister, one of Kreutzer's leads of her film “Corsage”, had his house raided over suspicion he possessed and/or produced child abuse material. Without going into any more detail about this case and the media furore that surrounded it, Teichtmeister ended up pleading guilty, and Kreutzer was rightly horrified and disgusted by her former collaborator's actions, while expressing how shocked she was that he was involved in such a thing. The ramifications for her future film about child abuse and paedophilia were almost drastic as she nearly abandoned the project entirely because she knew it would forever be associated with Teichtmeister. In the end she decided that the film was too important and needed to be told, but she rewrote it with another angle included about how you never truly know someone. After this incredibly long introduction, let me say that I am so grateful that Marie Kreutzer made sure “Gentle Monster” would see the light of day, as I found it to be a truly outstanding film. It is an incredibly hard watch, and to be honest, I found the viewing of it absolutely harrowing to sit through, and I was quite emotional and taken aback by the time it finished, but I was in no doubt that what I just witnessed was an excellent and important film.

Director Marie Kreutzer tells her heartbreaking tale from the wife, Lucy's point of view, as she is shocked and angry that her husband, Philip, has been accused of such a serious crime. Lucy's initial reaction to the situation is to make a joke, asking Philip if he had hacked into a bank, as police officers take away computers, laptops and his phone. Lucy follows to the police station to support the man she loves and asks the person at the front desk whereabouts he is. They tell her he is on level two, and she heads to the elevator, and as she is about to press the button she sees what type of crime is investigated on that level: “child sex crimes”, and in that moment, Lucy's entire world collapses, and her focus turns from her husband to her young son. As I mentioned right at the top, “Gentle Monster” is a harrowing watch, as Kreutzer has done an amazing job of putting you in Lucy's shoes along with her. That moment in the elevator is absolutely devastating, because you know nothing will ever be the same again for Lucy. However what haunts Lucy the most, as I am sure would haunt all mothers, is knowing whether or not her son is a victim of her husband's accused crimes. All the emotions and feelings pouring through Lucy in this one moment from love, anger, hate, betrayal, fear, embarrassment and disgust, are too much to handle and process in a short time frame, and it does not help that the police cannot answer as to whether or not her son is a victim too, because investigating all of the digital material could take months. Through the length of Kreutzer's film we are with Lucy as she has to navigate all of her complex feelings about her husband, fearing what could have happened to her son, while at the same time trying to keep life as normal as possible for her son too. We also get a side plot relating to the female cop who is in charge of Philip's case, as she navigates her own lonely life, trying to deal with her father and his declining condition from Alzheimer.

Right from the opening frame of “Gentle Monster” Kreutzer makes the viewer immediately invested in her film, and you cannot take your eyes away from the screen despite how painful a watch it is. What makes it such a hard watch is because you really feel for Lucy and everything that she is going through and trying to process. This is the man that she loves and is the father of her son, and until the police knock on their front door, she does not think anything is wrong with her little family, with perhaps the move out to the country being a slight cause for friction. You understand why she keeps believing Philip's lies because she wants him to be innocent and for her life to go back to normal. It is easier to believe that he has been falsely accused than to picture him being involved in something so heinous. Philip, being a filmmaker, tells his lawyer that he had access to the child abuse material because he was doing research for a documentary on the subject, and didn't realise this was a crime. However, when Lucy confronts Philip about the documentary, asking him how he could be so stupid, he comes clean to her telling her that there is no documentary, and that he was distributing the material for the money, so they could move from the city to the countryside like they agreed on. This is incredibly manipulative as Philip uses the old “I did it all for you” argument, which Lucy believes despite being disgusted by her husband's actions. A fortuitous meeting with Elsa (the police detective in charge of the case) occurs at IKEA of all places, and Lucy explains that while she doesn't agree with what her husband did, and believes he should pay for his crimes, at least he only downloaded the material to re-sell it at a profit, he only did it for the money. When Elsa gets back to the police station and recounts the meeting with a fellow officer, his response of “what money?”, just makes our stomach drop as we know that Lucy has fallen for another one of Philip's lies, as we wonder how she will react when she finds out the truth.

I absolutely felt so sorry for Lea Seydoux, who plays Lucy in “Gentle Monster”, because to be in the emotional register she would have had to have been in for the entire shooting of the film must have been so exhausting and disturbing for her. She is so damn good in the role though, as you feel everything she does, and this poor woman goes through it all. Shock, denial, anger, embarrassment, disgust, fear and love are just some of the emotions Seydoux has to navigate through, but she commits 100% to it all, that you fully believe in everything Lucy is feeling in any given moment. It is so unfair that Philip is the cause of everything, but it is up to Lucy to hold it all together and to continue to power through life for the sake of her son. In lesser hands, the character of Lucy could have been in tears throughout the whole film, but Seydoux gives a more nuanced portrayal than that, although of course there are scenes when it all becomes too much for the poor woman and she breaks down in tears, with the brief scene after one of her music performances being a great example. Seydoux must also navigate three different languages in her performance too as she needs to speak French, German and English depending on her she is talking to. Laurence Rapp is also very good in his role of Philip, in what also had to be a very difficult role too, but unlike with Seydoux, you do not give this a thought because of the horrible and disgusting things his character is accused of. In other words, this is a role that will see no glory for Rapp himself, despite how good he is in it, but he must give himself over to the film wholeheartedly for “Gentle Monster” to work as well as it does.

There are two very graphic sex scenes between Lucy and Philip within “Gentle Monster” that some may find a little gratuitous in a movie about child pornography, however these are actually very important in regards to the truth of paedophiles Most people assume that paedophiles only want to sleep with children, when in actuality the majority of them have normal, healthy adult sex lives too, which is explained to us via one of the doctor characters in “Gentle Monster”. The point is just because Lucy has regular passionate sex with Philip, it does not discount him as being the paedophile which he is accused of being. For some paedophiles it is less about sex, and more about power, and a child is easier to placate than an adult.

Despite the horrific story in “Gentle Monster”, the film contains a number of complex shots and really impressive cinematography highlighting the countryside beauty. Judith Kaufmann has crafted a slick and classy looking film showcasing the magnificence of the German and Austrian locations (the scenes set in Austria are stunning!), hiding the darkness that exists just below it's pristine surfaces. The fact of the matter is that I doubt most viewers would really notice any of the camera work or cinematography, due to how wrapped up in the film's story they would be. When it comes to Marie Kreutzer's direction, I am happy to say that it is very sensitively handled, and she never over-sensationalised any moments to create false emotion or to highlight any scene. I think she is well aware of how powerful the story within “Gentle Monster” is so she does not need to get in it's way with any unneeded directorial touches. She does use the gimmick of flashback a couple of times, where we go back a couple of years prior, to moments where Lucy missed pivotal clues as to what could really be going on with her husband. Importantly, there is no child pornography recreated within the film, nor any scenes involving children in danger. That said the film is so hard to watch at times, with some scenes almost sickening by “what could be” rather than anything you actually see, and I am primarily thinking of a scene when Lucy plugs in a USB she finds in Philip's hoodie. There is so much suspense in this moment because, like Lucy, we have no idea what is on the device, and thanks to Seydoux's performance in this moment, we understand how painful a moment this is, but also that it is something she has to know for herself.

I briefly want to mention the ending of “Gentle Monster”, or rather what happened when the credits began at my screening. Normally at a film festival, we are rushing from film to film, so when the credits begin we bolt out of our chairs to head to the next cinema, or we need to catch public transport home so need to leave quickly for that too. Also someone will begin clapping which sees the whole cinema clap the film too. When “Gentle Monster” finally finished there was complete silence and no one moved a muscle. The film was such a harrowing experience for us all, it was like we all needed a moment to stop and breathe before we could move on. This is my 31^st year coming to MIFF and this is the first time I can remember a reaction like this after a film. Myself, I had a train to catch home, but I just could not move. I had to sit there in the darkness for a while longer. Eventually someone started to clap which broke the trance, but it was an incredible collective moment I wont ever forget.

Overall, I feel like I have barely scratched the surface of “Gentle Monster” and what makes it such a great movie. It is an incredibly difficult topic, so I can understand some people being hesitant at watching such a film and while director Marie Kreutzer has attacked the topic head-on and truthfully, she has also done so in a sensitive fashion so nothing of a sordid nature is part of her film. The lead performance from Lea Seydoux is heartbreaking, but so impressive, and you have to applaud her for having the courage in taking the difficult role of Lucy. Again, I stress, that I found watching “Gentle Monster” to be a harrowing experience, which left me very emotional when the film ended, and because of this it is hard to say that it was a film that I loved, but “Gentle Monster” was definitely the best and most important film I saw at MIFF this year, that has only gotten stronger in my mind days after seeing it.

4.5 Stars.

 

ROYA - MIFF 2026

As per the MIFF guide: “Iranian teacher Roya is a political prisoner, detained and humiliatingly tortured after her students burned their hijabs. The regime offers her two options: make a televised confession falsely denouncing her beliefs; or face indefinite solitary confinement in her tiny prison cell. But for Roya, choice and coercion blur as she drifts between memories, interrogators’ lies and isolation-driven hallucinations. Is her family really at risk if she doesn’t confess? Is her silence resilience, or will it only confirm her guilt? Will confessing end the terror, or bring it inside forever?”

The opening ten or so minutes of “Roya” are an endurance test for the viewer that actually had me contemplating leaving the cinema, which is something that I never do. The reason for this is because these early moments are shot from Roya's point of view, except for the majority of it she is blindfolded and forced to dress in a traditional chador (thus covered from head to toe), as she is violently escorted from her tiny cell to a room where the State are trying to force Roya into a confession, denouncing her political beliefs. The fact that Roya is blindfolded, we the viewer can see very little from her point of view, as she fumbles around unknown rooms, trying to find her footing, while she is hit, kicked and tripped by her captors. All we can see are the flickering fluorescent lights in her cell, a bit of graffiti on her cell wall, blood stains on the path she is being taken on, a bit of a chair, a swinging leg as it is about to kick her, and the distinctive pointy shoes of her guard. We hear a lot though, and none of it is pleasant, as Roya is being regularly beaten and we can hear the desperate cries of other women from their cells. The camera work is very shaky, and none of it is very cinematic as we can barely see anything, and if the film was going to be shot entirely from Roya's point of view, I didn't know if I wanted to stay and watch it. After watching “Roya”, I read a brief interview with director Mahnaz Mohammadi about this opening scene, who admitted that her producer was also not sure about her visual approach to this scene but she stated that she had to be true to her own experience, and when she was incarcerated in Evin prison, just like Roya herself in the film, she never saw anything of the jail because she was always blindfolded when moved around. As it turns out, I was glad I stayed because what followed this opening scene was a stunning film that examines the struggles of Roya's mind against authoritarian power after she is released (while she is physically out, she still remains a prisoner within her mind), and through all of this, I also got a greater appreciation of the opening moments of the film and why it had to be presented like that.

Roya is a political prisoner sent to jail for her beliefs and for encouraging her students to burn their hijabs, for which she is sentenced to six months in Tehran's notorious Evin prison. She is eventually released on a three day pass to attend what she believes to be her father's funeral, only to find that it is actually her sister's, who mysteriously died the same day she had a violent argument with government agents over the unknown whereabouts of Roya. After the funeral, Roya heads for home where she suffers from constant PTSD as she finds herself lost in memory, hallucination and fantasy, to the point that she can no longer discern what is real or not.

Director Mahnaz Mohammadi is well known for defending women's rights in Iran that has seen her arrested on numerous occasions, where she spent time in the same prison her character Roya does. The point of “Roya” is to show how when you come out of Evin prison, you are a changed person. After all the abuse and manipulation you suffer inside, it is impossible to come out the same as you find you can no longer trust anyone, including yourself as you start to question everything that has happened and is happening. Mohammadi has done an amazing job with “Roya” as she succeeds wonderfully at keeping her audience unsettled and off centre as like Roya herself, they try to work out what is real or not. Did this happen or is it all in Roya's head? When Roya attends her sister's funeral, whilst it is devastating, you start to hear familiar sounds that you had heard in that opening scene, like the sound of Roya's interrogators shoes. He even comes up to wish her well, and then bends down to whisper “you only have two days left”, but was that really him or is Roya imagining him? (Remember, she has never seen his face). Once Roya makes it to her house, that is when things get really crazy, as she is constantly bothered by a flickering light in one of her rooms, “Mr Pointy Shoes” keeps leaving threatening messages on her answering machine, and people are constantly pacing around the fence of her yard. The film plays out like a kind of nightmare where locations and characters suddenly change without warning, so for someone like me who loves dream logic used in film, you can see why I responded so strongly towards “Roya”.

Mohammadi shot “Roya” in secret, because she is technically still not allowed to make films after being given a ban by the regime following her debut feature “Son-Mother” (2019). She shot the outdoor scenes without permits in Iran, while the scenes set in the prison were shot in Georgia. I am always amazed by Iranian film makers risking their lives to tell a story important to them that they feel the rest of the world needs to hear, but I am also amazed at how good and professional most of these clandestine films look. The cinematographer of “Roya” is Ashkan Ashkani, one of the best cinematographers working in Iran today and certainly no stranger to making films in secret as he has made three films with Mohammad Rasoulof. “Roya” looks amazing from the beautiful outdoor scenes, to the creepy and off putting interiors of Roya's own house. Mohammadi and Ashkani use a lot of strange angles that help obscure certain objects in a frame, or have you question whether you saw what you think you saw. There are also a lot of repeated images throughout “Roya” that often reflect back to that opening sequence. An example of this is the button on the elevator being identical to the one Roya glimpses in prison. It is pretty unsettling seeing the same things in a different location or context, and makes you question what is really going on, which is the point of the film.

Melisa Sözen plays the titular role in “Roya” and she is absolutely outstanding, and through her heavy world weary eyes, you can feel the weight Roya is carrying from being in prison and the abuse she suffered while in there. Sözen is a Turkish actress most famous for her role in Nuri Bilge Ceylan's “Winter Sleep” (2014), which is the reason why Mohammadi cast Sözen after being so impressed by her in that film. The other reason why Mohammadi cast her as Roya was because she didn't want an Iranian actress risking her life for what is essentially just a movie. The majority of “Roya” actually sees the title character silent (she has been figuratively silenced by the regime) so most of her performance comes from her body language and eyes. Sözen's eyes are so expressive because they expose Roya's fear, confusion and anger. Something else worth mentioning because it is so rare in Iranian cinema, is the brief nudity form Sözen as she exits her shower and heads to her bedroom. It is a confusing scene because she initially gets dressed only to then remove pieces of clothing as she heads to her room, but I feel this relates to her feeling of literal nakedness when she was humiliated during strip searches while incarcerated, and in this moment it was Roya's attempt at taking back her own body.

As I have mentioned already, “Roya” has a dream-like structure with moments replayed and changed regularly so you never get a grasp of whats going on. The initial interrogation scene is also repeated towards the end of “Roya” although this time not from Roya's point of view, and it is interesting how there are subtle changes this time around, further signalling that Roya is an unreliable narrator, and that her memories may be flawed.

Overall, after re-reading this review, I am not sure I have done a very good job at describing what makes “Roya” so great and why I think it is so important a film. After an incredibly difficult, but necessary first ten minutes, director Mahnaz Mohammadi has created a film that puts you in the shoes of her protagonist once she is released from Evin prison; you find yourself confused and questioning everything. It is actually quite a heartbreaking film because you can sense Roya is a person destroyed from within and through all the torture and hardship she (and her family) have suffered while she was incarcerated, her torture is nowhere near over now that she has been released, and worse that she continually hates herself for being forced to go against her political beliefs so as to finally be released. What makes “Roya” truly special though is its non-traditional storytelling style, particularly in regards to films that come out of Iran. That said, because of the fractured nature of the narrative, “Roya” will not be for everyone, but I personally thought it was a very special film indeed.

4 Stars.