Ancestors premiered at TIFF as part of a year packed with high-profile LGBTQ+ cinema. The review frames the film as a near-miss: it contains elements that suggest a classic in the making, chiefly a magnetic central performance, but the overall film loses cohesion after an arresting opening.
The most consistent praise in the review goes to Éanna Hardwicke. His work in the opening stretch creates the impression of a breakthrough role: the performance is described as captivating and capable of carrying scenes where the rest of the film is less assured. For viewers who respond to actor-driven storytelling, those opening minutes offer a tangible reward.
Directorial approach and where it falters
David Turpin is credited with a distinct vision. The review notes that the director's stylistic and tonal choices are clear and confident at first, contributing to the film's initial impact. However, that vision does not fully coalesce into a sustained, coherent whole. After roughly the first 10–20 minutes, the narrative and emotional momentum weaken. The piece frames the problem not as a lack of ambition but as a failure of integration: promising elements that don't hold together for the full runtime.
Context within the festival and the season
The review situates Ancestors within a "massive year for LGBTQ+ movies," and explicitly calls it "one of the few misses." That comparative framing matters: Ancestors arrives amid strong festival offerings, which makes its shortcomings more apparent. The review implies that expectations were high both because of the film's early promise and the broader quality of queer storytelling on display this season.
The review mentions other notable names attached to the project in passing through tags, including Christina Hendricks and Rupert Everett. While the central focus remains on Hardwicke and Turpin, those names signal the film's casting ambitions and the production's reach within the festival circuit.
Ancestors demonstrates clear sparks: a grabby lead performance and a director with a recognizable style. Those components create a vivid opening that suggests the film could have been a standout. The problem is durability. Where the review registers disappointment is in how the film relinquishes that early authority and drifts into unevenness. For viewers deciding whether to seek this out, the film is worth seeing for the early scenes and Hardwicke's performance, but not as a consistently satisfying whole.