First They Killed My Father (2017)

Bradshaw calls the film an accomplished, artistically assured work that confronts the horror of the Khmer Rouge era. He praises its eerily beautiful overhead cinematography and the way it evokes the psychological effects of terror.

Rife finds the film an accomplished, overly long mood piece that works better as art than as a history lesson. She praises its quiet, child-centered perspective and impressionistic imagery for conveying the Khmer Rouge’s dehumanization.

Collin finds the film vivid and lyrical, though ultimately more instructive than moving. He praises the striking images captured by cinematographer Anthony Dod Mantle.

The page is blocked, so the critic’s verdict cannot be established. Its praise or criticism of any particular aspect is likewise unavailable.

The page was inaccessible, so the critic’s verdict cannot be verified. No specific praise or complaint can be reliably identified from the available text.

Bowen finds the film uneven but ultimately stirring, praising Jolie’s increasingly physical, intimate depiction of a child’s survival. He criticizes the early sequences as impersonal and rote.

The review describes the film as sincere but glum, suggesting a mixed yet mildly positive verdict. It singles out the film’s chronicle of the Khmer Rouge’s rise as sincere, while noting its gloomy tone.

The headline suggests a thoughtful portrait that does not fully achieve its force. The accessible text singles out its quiet study of war through a child’s eyes.

Debruge finds the film earnest and cinematically impressive, but ultimately less compelling than its subject warrants. He praises its vivid Cambodian landscapes while criticizing its lack of context and underdeveloped characterization.

Turan finds the film impeccably made but ultimately more disturbing than moving, and says it fails to make the story emotionally compelling. He praises its meticulous historical recreation and the atmosphere of dread, while noting that Loung’s role as a watcher creates distance.

The critic finds the film well-crafted but too repressed and repetitive to become a searing work of art. He praises the cinematography and haunting score, while faulting the limited perspective and lack of visceral impact.

The critic finds the drama earnest but superficial, with limited access to Loung’s perspective. They praise a late scene of children caught in crossfire for briefly and powerfully conveying the chaos of war.

Yoshida finds the film worthy in subject but artistically inert, wishing it had been told with more inventiveness. She praises Sareum Srey Moch as watchable, but criticizes the film’s emotionally blank portrayal of Loung’s childhood perspective.

Ellwood gives the film emphatic praise, calling it a moving and masterfully crafted account of Cambodia’s darkest period. He especially praises Sreymoch Sareum’s expressive performance and Jolie’s visual storytelling.

Goble considers the film Jolie’s most effective directorial work yet, praising its humane, emotionally daring approach. He singles out the child-centered perspective and Anthony Dod Mantle’s vivid cinematography for making the horrors intimate without exploiting them.

Kermode calls the film a devastating and important perspective on the Khmer Rouge genocide. She particularly praises Sareum Srey Moch’s expressive, believable performance as Loung.

The critic finds the film admirable but ultimately less affecting than it should be. They praise its striking visual imagery while faulting the direction for favoring spectacle over emotional impact.

The critic finds the film worthwhile for its subject but ultimately frustratingly impersonal and boring. He praises its respectful handling of an important story, while faulting its lack of individual character and inner life.