Un simple accidente

This was surely a sentimental choice for the top prize at Cannes, a tribute to Panahi's undoubted achievement in getting it made rather than a recognition of truly outstanding cinema. Tonally uneven, indifferently acted and its script peppered with on-the-nose dialogue that daubs highlighter on its 'cycle of violence' theme, I found it all rather tedious. It's only in a long static shot in the last 15 minutes that the film comes to any dramatic life, but even this scene fails to truly convince.

Will this be in anyone's list of the best films of the 2020s when we get to that reckoning, or will it have been largely forgotten like that other Palme Dud, 'Dheepan'? I think I know the answer.

• Watched at the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) one Sept. 13, 2025 (First Watch)
• Format: Regular theatre
• Rating: 8.5/10

It Was Just an Accident starts off with a heavy and confusing situation. But the deeper you get into it, the more intense and emotional it becomes. Director Panahi fills the movie with small details that tie back to the title. Most of what happens in the story feels like an "accident," but those accidents carry a lot of meaning. I especially liked how stray dogs kept showing up-they weren't random, but connected to different characters and the film's bigger message.

The story follows five people whose lives cross. What they all share is one thing: a hunger for revenge. The movie doesn't use flashbacks or jump back in time. Instead, it tells the story through long takes, monologues, and conversations. This makes the acting even more powerful. Vahid Mobasseri really stood out-his expressions and body language brought so much tension to the screen. And that final shot at the end... it was the perfect way to close the film.

There's no music at all in the movie, which at first felt strange. But then I realized that the silence made it feel more real and raw, almost like you were right there with the characters. My only small complaint is that the first hour is a bit slow, and some people might lose interest early on. But if you stick with it, the payoff in the end is worth it.

Overrated. Linear narrative with no twists. Evens seem expected ' or too banal to be expected, or useful. Dialogue is average or below average. At times reduced to mere rant. Characters seem caricaturic at times. Photography is as average. Way overrated. I Don't understand how it won Palm d'or. Politics I guess.

I really hope Panahi watches his back cause boy oh boy does he upset the Iranian regime... I mean the topic of this story IS the reason to watch it. People demanding their rights are suppressed, held up hostage, tortured, terrified and traumatized for the rest of their lives.

As for the movie it's a little too loose and as expected of Panahi very talky. The characters are a motley crew of personalities, behaviours, compulsions and obsessions. And damn all these people pick their pockets dry just cause there's a bride. And a newborn. Tipping culture (sorry gift giving) run amok.

Frankly wasn't high up there with the rest of his celebrated movies.

But I really did not expect the twist in the story, I really thought these guys were just crazy. And I found the ending very uncomfortable. But maybe the best choice cause it makes sense for this type of world.

It's supposedly meant to be a powerful film, and I do acknowledge its historical and political importance. But it simply didn't move me.

All the doubt and tension set up at the beginning seems to dissolve into mildly comic situations that never quite become truly funny.

The secondary characters come across as caricatures, and I couldn't bring myself to care about them.

In the final part-which I had expected to be dramatic and genuinely impactful-I found myself only wondering where it was all supposed to lead. The acting felt forced and didn't moved me.

Within minutes, people who were determined to kill suddenly give up in a comical outburst, and a villain suddenly seems to have a change of heart.

I really wanted to like this movie.