The reviews lean positive on Steve, though enthusiasm is far from uniform. Praise centres on Cillian Murphy’s strained, committed performance, with Jay Lycurgo and the young ensemble also drawing strong notices. Several critics find the drama deeply affecting and compassionate in its treatment of care under institutional pressure. The restless cinematography earns praise for conveying that strain, although even some favourable reviews find individual flourishes excessive.
The divide is over whether that intensity gives the characters depth or crowds it out. More cautious reviews describe a scattered, cluttered film whose emotional force is weakened by divided attention. The AV Club argues that the abbreviated storytelling leaves characters underdeveloped, while IndieWire objects to the lack of detail about teaching and the students’ lives. The spread is wide: admirers find the film’s urgency moving, while detractors see frantic technique trying to compensate for too little substance.
O
The Observer
19 September 2025 · Wendy Ide
90*
Ide delivers a strongly positive verdict, calling the film gripping and exhausting and Murphy’s performance devastating. She especially praises the frazzled tension created by the cinematography and the standout performances from Murphy and Jay Lycurgo.
The critic calls the film an emotionally powerful, rallying portrayal of a broken education system. They praise its forceful emotion and disorienting cinematography, while noting that some aerial shots overreach.
The review presents the film as powerful and stylish, with Cillian Murphy in awards-worthy form. It particularly praises the drama’s responsible and intelligent approach.
Bradshaw finds the drama fiercely affecting and ultimately hopeful, while noting that its ending softens some of its earlier ferocity. He praises Cillian Murphy and Jay Lycurgo’s performances, which lead an outstanding cast.
11 September 2025 · festival review · David Rooney
75*
Rooney finds the film harrowing but deeply moving, and ultimately compassionate rather than despairing. He especially praises Cillian Murphy’s riveting performance as a teacher whose care for his students persists through personal strain and institutional neglect.
Baughan’s headline signals a positive verdict, describing Cillian Murphy as impressive. The standfirst also characterizes the film as propulsive, but the review’s details are behind a paywall.
Abele finds the film sincere and energetic but too scattered to deliver its full emotional impact. He praises its vivid performances and especially its moments focused on the vulnerability of Steve and Shy.
The page identifies this as a review of the film, but its article text is unavailable. The critic’s verdict and any specific praise or complaint cannot be verified.
Oller finds the film a frustratingly abbreviated, cluttered drama that leaves its characters and story underdeveloped. He praises Cillian Murphy’s magnetic performance as the weary headmaster, but says the film’s short runtime and split attention undermine it.
Lawson finds the film a frustrating, hollow exercise that mistakes frantic style for meaningful realism. He faults its failure to show the school’s educational work or give its students nuance, despite Cillian Murphy’s energetic performance.
The review finds the film frantic and overstuffed, with too little detail to make its emotions convincing. It praises Tracey Ullman’s appealing, nuanced performance.
Wise finds the film thoughtful, affecting, and a bittersweet celebration of caring for people in their darkest moments. He praises Cillian Murphy’s immersive performance and the ensemble, especially Tracey Ullman.
Hassenger finds the film unfocused and only half-successful as a character study. He praises the chemistry, charisma, and humor of the young performers, and notes that Murphy’s unusual outbursts have novelty.
The review finds Steve powerful but flawed, with a premise and direction that never quite come together. It praises the performances, especially Cillian Murphy and Jay Lycurgo, and the student ensemble.
Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate