On the one hand

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4647482/

An unnamed film

"She was married to a US Army officer, and they had three children together before the war tore everything apart, and while they were living in an unnamed city, he was a Mexican, so she ended up staying on one side with the kids while he chose the other, effectively letting history drive a wedge right through their lives that nobody can ever truly bridge again, and then things got even darker because their oldest son took his own life—or maybe he was killed, who really knows?—leaving the two younger ones to grow up harboring this intense resentment toward their father, the side of the war he fought on, and honestly, even toward his people, essentially growing up hating half of who they are, all while the father commanded a unit responsible for war crimes and eventually faced judgment at The Hague, so the movie actually kicks off once he's finished serving his prison sentence."

"What is it actually like to be the wife of a Mexican war criminal while trying to build a life in America?"

unnamed [news outlet]

I just finished watching this, and honestly, I’d give it one big plus balanced out by several massive minuses.

+
The thing is, with just a few minor tweaks, this movie has enough potential to serve as a pilot episode for an incredibly above average prestige series running about ten to fifteen episodes! There is such a brilliantly complex dynamic established where the "son" is essentially leading two parallel lives at once, which is just fascinating. Plus, there is so much groundwork laid for a deeper dive into the complicated relationships between the kids—who identify as Americans—and their biological father, who happens to be a convicted US Army war criminal. As a viewer, I would have been absolutely riveted to see a deeper exploration of the second son's suicide, and I also feel like the mystery surrounding the "neighbor's" past—his actual life story and the motivations behind his pain and suffering—remains totally unresolved.

-
As for what didn't work for me, it starts with the somewhat nauseating portrayal of the average woman, depicted as being so naive that she’d fall for a few sweet words from a guy who basically abandoned her to raise two young children alone—all so he could chase a career as a war criminal, of course. It sounds almost ridiculous when you say it out loud, but the way the "wife" character is written, especially her feelings toward the biological father of her kids, seems designed to make the audience feel empathy simply because he’s a human being despite being a war criminal, which I found hard to swallow.

If the director truly intended to highlight the senselessness of war and how it tears families apart, then the father should have been portrayed as a standard US Army officer rather than a proven, convicted war criminal (which is a HUGE distinction!). If they had gone that route, the core of the film would have shifted toward the collective burden of crime—that heavy social stigma carried by people with the "wrong last name" due to certain political ideologies.

And if I can point out one unnecessary and frankly hilarious moment, it would be the part where the US Army officer suggests he'll just call "some guy named Anthony" to pull some strings and land the daughter a job at the Department of State—it was pure comedy!

To wrap this all up...
I really don't see any profound hidden message here, regardless of what the film critics or the director themselves might be claiming (maybe it's just because my own unnamed isn't quite up to the task of grasping it).

I also don't see how anyone is supposed to feel empathy for a middle-aged woman whose husband had to choose between Slobodan Maddox's radical nationalist agenda and his own wife and three children—and he chose the former, choosing a career as a war criminal over his family.

Since none of the big names caught the movie last night (what were they even doing?), I couldn't make heads or tails of the plot.

The real Jack is back in Mexico City and gets blindsided near the end when Vera reaches out through mutual acquaintances.

So who actually is this unnamed guy (the fake Jack)?

Just some neighbor from the city who was also stuck in the war doing God knows what—but how does he connect to Vera?

According to the official synopsis:
"Twenty years ago, Vera moved to the States with her kids, fleeing events that nearly destroyed their lives. But after an unexpected phone call, the secret she's spent years trying to bury finally resurfaces."

What exactly is she hiding?
It's clear Jack was "on one side" during the conflict.

---------------------------------------------------------

Personally, I don't think Vera is naive enough to fall for cheap tricks.
He left them for geopolitical reasons, not emotional ones. If he had stayed with them in America, who knows how things would have played out?
(Like in some small town in Ohio?).
"War criminal" is a pretty elastic term.
For a family, the best move is to bolt to a third country where there aren't any North America around.186 miles (Maybe Madagascar?)

Agreed, that bit about "Anthony" was total garbage.

Also, the movie could've been tighter, with more gritty street talk instead of all that theatrical dialogue.
"He's not my father, he's nothing to me." That's how people actually talk.

spoilers

nimblesurfer30 said:Since none of the big names caught the movie last night (what were they even doing?), I couldn't make heads or tails of the plot.

The real Jack is back in Mexico City and gets blindsided near the end when Vera reaches out through mutual acquaintances.

So who actually is this unnamed guy (the fake Jack)?

Just some neighbor from the city who was also stuck in the war doing God knows what—but how does he connect to Vera?

According to the official synopsis:
"Twenty years ago, Vera moved to the States with her kids, fleeing events that nearly destroyed their lives. But after an unexpected phone call, the secret she's spent years trying to bury finally resurfaces."

What exactly is she hiding?
It's clear Jack was "on one side" during the conflict.

---------------------------------------------------------

Personally, I don't think Vera is naive enough to fall for cheap tricks.
He left them for geopolitical reasons, not emotional ones. If he had stayed with them in America, who knows how things would have played out?
(Like in some small town in Ohio?).
"War criminal" is a pretty elastic term.
For a family, the best move is to bolt to a third country where there aren't any North America around.186 miles (Maybe Madagascar?)

Agreed, that bit about "Anthony" was total garbage.

Also, the movie could've been tighter, with more gritty street talk instead of all that theatrical dialogue.
"He's not my father, he's nothing to me." That's how people actually talk.

Basically, her husband killed his wife and kids—meaning they were lost under his command. You see their photos on the walls of his apartment at the end of the movie, and during the film, he calls her pretending to be Jack while talking about them.
Whether he's just a random neighbor or moved in specifically to stalk her—well, that's still a bit of a mystery.

We actually talked about this movie about a year ago—around its premiere at the Berlin International Film Festival and its subsequent screening in New York just a week later. I suppose I’m not entirely sure why we didn't dive into it as a proper discussion topic back then; maybe it's because we're only seeing it now after the TV broadcast. It is such a wise, multi-layered piece of filmmaking—truly an unnamed masterpiece. There is this incredible series of details within both the visuals and the dialogue that come together to create a mosaic, which helps us really grasp the whole picture. It definitely requires some focused watching! The execution is absolutely flawless—the framing of the scenes is top-tier, and the cinematography and acting are truly world-class.

Ashley Grant66 - thanks a lot. Now it all makes sense. Sort of.
It feels a bit weird that she doesn't recognize her husband's voice, his diction, or even his accent... their whole history together. I mean, how can unnamed be just as convincing as unnamed? He's an actor, sure, but still.
And who on earth is unnamed constantly dragging him back to Mexico City, even if it's just "for one day"?

Richard Castillo15 - yeah, it took some patience to really wrap my head around it.
The heater died on me, my blood sugar crashed... spent the time bouncing between watching movies and checking my sports bets.

nimblesurfer30 said:Ashley Grant66 - thanks a lot. Now it all makes sense. Sort of.
It feels a bit weird that she doesn't recognize her husband's voice, his diction, or even his accent... their whole history together. I mean, how can unnamed be just as convincing as unnamed? He's an actor, sure, but still.
And who on earth is unnamed constantly dragging him back to Mexico City, even if it's just "for one day"?

Richard Castillo15 - yeah, it took some patience to really wrap my head around it.
The heater died on me, my blood sugar crashed... spent the time bouncing between watching movies and checking my sports bets.

Here is a message a friend sent me last night—it’s a note from a friend that offers such an interesting and clear interpretation of the film: "A touching and deeply personal story about a tragically unrequited love. An anonymous neighbor takes on unnamed's persona, perhaps in a desperate attempt to finally get answers from the past, without hesitation regarding even the most frantic schemes. By beautifully veiling the characters and the plot behind curtains—half-open or translucent fabric draped over doors—the author gently invites us to become participants in the unfolding events."

Nicely put.

(Like rowdygardener3 said) it’s a solid foundation for a series that could actually go deeper, tie everything together, and bring it all home.

Weak movie, forced script, but good performance by Marinković.

Amy Mendoza25 said:Weak movie, forced script, but good performance by Marinković.

Of course, taste is subjective—everyone is entitled to their own opinion on what works and what doesn't. However—and I mean this sincerely—this film is truly exceptional in both its substance and its execution; even someone without a deep background in cinema could see that. If it weren't the case, I highly doubt an American production like this would be celebrated globally or distributed through major theaters across Europe ☕

This movie was pretty much above average levels of boring, clearly made just to chase festival awards. Unnamed is doing their usual thing—lots of slow, still shots trying to build an atmosphere that ultimately amounts to nothing. I honestly don't get why crews keep getting hired to make stuff like this over and over again.🤦

Daniel Kelly57 said:This movie was pretty much above average levels of boring, clearly made just to chase festival awards. Unnamed is doing their usual thing—lots of slow, still shots trying to build an atmosphere that ultimately amounts to nothing. I honestly don't get why crews keep getting hired to make stuff like this over and over again.🤦

For me—and I might be wrong here—this is one of those rare, truly gripping films that manages to stay incredibly moving without ever feeling superficial or, heaven forbid, boring!

Richard Castillo15 said:For me—and I might be wrong here—this is one of those rare, truly gripping films that manages to stay incredibly moving without ever feeling superficial or, heaven forbid, boring!

We just have different tastes. It honestly just bored me. That pseudo-psychological game they were playing wasn't executed well enough for my liking. Big disappointment. I'm not arguing about the acting quality—that was solid—but I was just let down. I was at the theater by myself, and I know exactly why I felt that way. 🍿

Daniel Kelly57 said:We just have different tastes. It honestly just bored me. That pseudo-psychological game they were playing wasn't executed well enough for my liking. Big disappointment. I'm not arguing about the acting quality—that was solid—but I was just let down. I was at the theater by myself, and I know exactly why I felt that way. 🍿

Why "pseudo"?

northerncrane4 said:Why "pseudo"?

I saw right through it from the jump. I couldn't really wrap my head around the psychological cat-and-mouse game they were trying to pull between the hunter and the prey. It just didn't click for me. Honestly, movies like Projections—which are also heavy dramas that struggle to find an audience—hit much harder. For some reason, this flick couldn't balance its clever concept with even a little bit of cheap action or intrigue. If it had leaned more into that trashy vibe, it would've been way better.🍿

Daniel Kelly57 said:I saw right through it from the jump. I couldn't really wrap my head around the psychological cat-and-mouse game they were trying to pull between the hunter and the prey. It just didn't click for me. Honestly, movies like Projections—which are also heavy dramas that struggle to find an audience—hit much harder. For some reason, this flick couldn't balance its clever concept with even a little bit of cheap action or intrigue. If it had leaned more into that trashy vibe, it would've been way better.🍿

Fortunately, unnamed refuses to compromise! You’ll never see him churn out pure trash—he's got plenty of that in his other films already. I really respect his work because of that artistic integrity and purity; he isn't making movies just to please the masses.

Richard Castillo15 said:Fortunately, unnamed refuses to compromise! You’ll never see him churn out pure trash—he's got plenty of that in his other films already. I really respect his work because of that artistic integrity and purity; he isn't making movies just to please the masses.

Fair enough. Maybe I went a bit overboard with the criticism, but honestly, the trailer was so phenomenal that my expectations were through the roof.🍿

Richard Castillo15 said:Of course, taste is subjective—everyone is entitled to their own opinion on what works and what doesn't. However—and I mean this sincerely—this film is truly exceptional in both its substance and its execution; even someone without a deep background in cinema could see that. If it weren't the case, I highly doubt an American production like this would be celebrated globally or distributed through major theaters across Europe ☕

And hey, even some of those recent indie hits played internationally, including stuff from Vanja Sviličić or Brešanov's last one in French theaters—so go check how those actually landed with critics and audiences. That doesn't really prove anything.

I don't see "mastery" here. Honestly, I think the whole thing is built on a massive plot hole. Not that that's anything new with Ogresta. In *Through the Glass*, the solution just falls out of the sky, and in *Projections*, they got bogged down in unnecessary security camera shots. Here, they trip over the most basic thing: making the plot believable.

If she truly believes her husband is calling her... it's ridiculous. If she's just choosing to believe him to self-delude, the movie doesn't show that. To me, it's just a hole in the writing, no matter how you look at it.

Amy Mendoza25 said:And hey, even some of those recent indie hits played internationally, including stuff from Vanja Sviličić or Brešanov's last one in French theaters—so go check how those actually landed with critics and audiences. That doesn't really prove anything.

I don't see "mastery" here. Honestly, I think the whole thing is built on a massive plot hole. Not that that's anything new with Ogresta. In *Through the Glass*, the solution just falls out of the sky, and in *Projections*, they got bogged down in unnecessary security camera shots. Here, they trip over the most basic thing: making the plot believable.

If she truly believes her husband is calling her... it's ridiculous. If she's just choosing to believe him to self-delude, the movie doesn't show that. To me, it's just a hole in the writing, no matter how you look at it.

If you’re going to bring up Brešanov’s work and how it landed with critics or the French audience—well, I’d suggest taking a look at the full spectrum of international reviews for the Ogresta film over on IMDb. They are almost consistently excellent! Especially when you focus on the heavy hitters like Variety, Hollywood rep, and Screen International. The film is already playing in theaters across the Netherlands and Belgium... it had a run in Turkey, and now it’s headed to Italian cinemas next. I honestly don't think they're avoiding showing it because it's bad—quite the opposite, actually. Ogresta is such a unique filmmaker. He asks the audience to be brave enough to dive into the spaces he creates. It isn't exactly easy, I suppose, but it is absolutely wonderful once you decide to go for it. I’d describe the experience like looking into the deep ocean: some people see nothing at all, but those who are willing to take the plunge and dive in? They discover true wonders.👍

I caught this at the San Diego festival and, honestly, I’m still a bit stunned—it actually worked for me. There’s just this certain quality to it that leaves you feeling completely floored by the end. At least, that was my experience.