Ein einfacher Unfall

Jafar Panahi has been a thorn in the side of the Iranian regime for decades. Banned from filmmaking by house- or real arrests he kept finding ways of making films nevertheless.

"It was just an accident" is his last film. It is about a man walking into his torturer from years ago. He follows the man and kidnaps him, but what to do next? The answer to this question breaks the film in two.

In the first half the man tries to accumulate enough evidence to be sure that it really is his tormenter he has catched. Because in jail they were blindfolded he has to collect a couple of fellow sufferers who all have a different recollection about the perpetrator. One recognizes the sound of his footsteps, the other his smell, yet another the feeling of his scars.

After enough evidence has been collected, the second half of the movie poses an important ethical question: revenge or no revenge? The man has ruined their lives in different degrees but would revenge not lower them to the same moral standards?

A film about important ethical questions, that sounds like heavy stuff. The comedy element is not entirely absent though. The fellow sufferers the man collects in the first half of the movie turns out to be a rather colorful bunch of people giving their quest a touch of "Riders of justice" (2020, Anders Thomas Jensen). The difference is of course that the fellowship in "Riders of justice" was pursuing a redicilous complot theory while the tortures in "It was just an accident" are very real. The film cannot be seen in Iran itself for a reason.

The title of the movie is derived from the opening sequence when the torturer (his identity still unknown to the viewers) hits a dog with his car. At the end of the movie he says to his former victims / present kidnappers that "He was just doing his job". This sentence hints at the "banality of evil" of Hannah Arendt and maybe it would have been a better title for the movie.

It Was Just an Accident, directed by Jafar Panahi, effectively challenges the audience through its evenly paced narration, drawing them into the moral dilemma of whether the victims should seek revenge - and, more importantly, whether they have the right to do so.

With its open ending, the film raises a powerful question: what happens if the cycle of crime and revenge never ends? This ambiguity keeps viewers engaged long after the credits roll.

However, the scenes in which the victims argue among themselves could have been more compelling if they didn't directly reference political divisions and concepts such as "tolerance" and the "cycle of violence." Those moments feel somewhat clichéd and shift the film's tone from metaphorical to allegorical.

It's also essential to remember that in Iran, every filmmaker must obtain permission from the autocratic regime before making a film. Jafar Panahi, however, created It Was Just an Accident without such approval - courageously defying censorship. By portraying the taboo subject of brutal interrogators, he demonstrates remarkable artistic bravery. For that, we should all admire and celebrate his courage.

Watched on Sydney Film Festival 2025

Jafar Panahi's Palme d'Or winner, It Was Just an Accident, isn't just a film; it's a gripping, morally fraught journey that grabs you and refuses to let go long after the credits roll. Forget a simple fender bender - this story ignites when a minor traffic scrape leads former political prisoner Vahid to believe he's cornered "Peg Leg," the man who brutally tortured him years before. Talk about wrong place, wrong time... or is it?

Panahi plunges us straight into the suffocating tension. Vahid gathers fellow survivors, each etched with their own raw pain and simmering rage, turning a car ride into a claustrophobic tribunal. Their desperate mission? To confirm the terrified captive Ebrahim Azizi's identity and decide his fate. It's here the film truly digs its claws in, forcing you to grapple alongside them: Where does the desperate need for justice end and the cycle of vengeance begin? Can victims ever be justified in mirroring their oppressor's cruelty? Panahi masterfully blurs these lines, offering zero easy outs.

The brilliance lies in the raw humanity. While exploring the primal pull of revenge - that fierce, almost instinctive reclaiming of power - the film never loses sight of the complex, painful possibility of forgiveness. It's not presented as some saintly virtue, but as a messy, agonising internal battle played out on the faces of a stunningly authentic, mostly non-professional cast. Their barely contained fury sits right alongside profound vulnerability. Can empathy survive such deep scars?

Don't mistake this for unrelenting gloom, though. Panahi weaves in moments of sharp, absurdist gallows humour that land perfectly, highlighting the surreal contradictions of life under the boot. Visually restrained but emotionally potent, the film relies on evocative camerawork and powerhouse subtle performances. The deliberate pacing makes you sit with every gut-wrenching dilemma and fleeting connection.

Ultimately, It Was Just an Accident transcends revenge thriller territory. A pivotal, unexpected third-act twist delivers a stunning gut-punch: a stark reminder that even amidst profound trauma, a flicker of human compassion can endure. The devastating climax and its haunting final moments linger, leaving you with a fragile sense of hope wrestled from the jaws of despair. Panahi crafts a defiant, unforgettable cinematic challenge - a film that doesn't just tell a story, but forces you to confront the darkest corners of justice, power, and whether healing is even possible. It demands your attention and refuses to offer simple answers. Fair crack of the whip, this one sticks with you.

It Was Just an Accident, directed by Jafar Panahi, has garnered global acclaim and was awarded the Palme d'Or at the 2025 Cannes Film Festival. With a minimalist and seemingly simple form, the film begins with a quiet roadside incident, but what unfolds is far more than a tale of revenge-it is a layered exploration of truth, illusion, repressed fury, and the echoes of collective trauma.

Panahi, as always, avoids overt exposition and invites the viewer into an internal journey, led by characters who are deeply wounded yet still burning with unrest-characters who, to his credit, are masterfully developed and each embody a fractured dimension of contemporary Iranian society. However, the viewing experience, especially in the first fifteen minutes, is far from easy. The film opens ambiguously, with minimal context and a slow rhythm that leaves the viewer disoriented. Even seasoned international audiences may find themselves unsure of why they should stay engaged-unless they rely on the prestige of the director's name or the film's award credentials.

Formally, the film carries a somewhat fresh structure, occasionally weaving in moments of dark humor. But the acting-particularly in emotionally intense scenes-lacks consistency and depth in places, sometimes undercutting the emotional weight the story strives to deliver. These execution flaws lead to missed emotional connections where the film clearly intends to strike.

While the film seemingly critiques violence and seeks justice and moral clarity, its focus on a singular "culprit"-rather than addressing the systemic, institutional apparatus of repression-renders its outlook surprisingly aligned with a refined version of reformist rhetoric. This softened, left-leaning moralism bypasses major political upheavals in Iran's recent history-most notably the 2022 "Woman, Life, Freedom" movement-and replaces structural critique with a narrowly personalized narrative. In doing so, it risks creating an unintended sense of appeasement with the status quo for international viewers.

What heightens this sense of ambiguity in a parallel world beyond cinema is the fact that the cast and crew of this "underground, unauthorized film" have returned to Iran without consequences-something that remains a distant dream for many independent artists, journalists, and political dissidents in exile. This contrast raises an unsettling question: is the film, knowingly or not, offering a palatable narrative of pain-tailored more for international festivals than for confronting the deeper truths of repression?

It Was Just an Accident is bold in form yet cautious in substance. It reveals fragments of truth with cinematic skill, yet avoids engaging with the roots of the trauma it depicts. For international audiences, it may feel emotionally powerful and thought-provoking. But for Iranian viewers, the film is less of a mirror than a carefully trimmed reflection-diluted, fragmented, and ultimately incomplete in its portrayal of wounds that are still very much alive.

Nousha Saidi France - May 2025.

• 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.