--- title: "The Mauritanian" year: 2021 kind: "film" canonical: "https://film.one/film/the-mauritanian" fi1m_id: "the-mauritanian" imdb_id: "tt4761112" tmdb_id: 644583 wikidata_id: "Q83726435" fi1m_score: 58 critics_score: 55 critics_reviews: 22 published: "2026-10-03T01:46:00.062889+00:00" updated: "2026-10-03T01:46:00.632602+00:00" region: "BG" licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # The Mauritanian (2021) Directed by Kevin Macdonald · 2h 09m · Drama, Thriller ## Identity The Mauritanian - **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/the-mauritanian - **Type:** Film - **Fi1m ID:** the-mauritanian - **IMDb ID:** tt4761112 - **TMDB ID:** 644583 - **Wikidata ID:** Q83726435 - **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4761112/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/644583, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q83726435 **Fi1m score: 58** · Critics 55 from 22 reviews *In a sentence:* Tahar Rahim makes us care, then the lawyers start talking again > Kevin Macdonald’s *The Mauritanian* is a frustrating legal drama with a moving central performance. Tahar Rahim gives Mohamedou Ould Slahi humour and individuality; the film keeps interrupting him for a less interesting account of the lawyers. ## Synopsis At Guantánamo, Mohamedou Ould Slahi (Tahar Rahim) wants to get out of detention and have his account heard. Nancy Hollander (Jodie Foster) takes up his case, while military lawyer Lt. Stuart Couch (Benedict Cumberbatch) approaches it from the opposing side. The dispute turns on what can be established about Slahi and his treatment, and on the documents the lawyers can obtain. Slahi has to tell his story within a process controlled by the authorities holding him. Hollander and Couch face the task of establishing what those authorities have done and what the evidence can support. ## Review Kevin Macdonald’s *The Mauritanian* has a persuasive central performance and a legal story that repeatedly loses its way. It wants to make the abuses at Guantánamo comprehensible through the people trying to establish what happened there. That is a reasonable approach, but the repeated attention to legal procedure leaves too little room for Mohamedou Ould Slahi. We kept wanting the film to let him talk for longer, rather than send us back to the case. Tahar Rahim gives Slahi enough humour and personality to resist the narrow role of a man whose suffering must instruct us. His account matters because we become interested in the person giving it, whose life cannot be reduced to what has been done to him. We were moved by his wryness in the exchanges with Nancy Hollander, played by Jodie Foster. He makes that humour feel like something Slahi has chosen to retain, and the effort matters. Jodie Foster is effective at keeping Hollander’s professional determination from becoming a request for our admiration. Her exchanges with Slahi have an ease the rest of the film struggles to find. Benedict Cumberbatch, as Lt. Stuart Couch, gives the military lawyer’s concern with the truth some weight, though the writing supplies him with too little complication. The supporting characters too often seem to exist to state a position and leave it at that. The screenplay by Michael Bronner, Sohrab Noshirvani and Rory Haines never makes the legal work as absorbing as the presence of its central prisoner. Documents and arguments should give a procedural its movement, but here the explanations accumulate without enough sense of discovery. Justine Wright’s editing has to negotiate both the legal narrative and Slahi’s backstory, and the movement between them becomes wearing. We can understand why the lawyers matter without needing to spend quite so much time being reminded of it. Alwin H. Küchler’s cinematography is most effective when our attention stays with Tahar Rahim, whose performance needs little visual assistance. Michael Carlin’s production design makes the detention camp convincing, though we rarely learn much about the people working there. The surroundings cannot make an underwritten encounter interesting. Tom Hodge’s music contributes to the prevailing seriousness, sometimes pressing for an emotional response that the acting has already earned. The depiction of abuse is forceful, although the emphasis can feel badly judged. The harsher material is distressing, but its insistence risks making Slahi’s ordeal more vivid than Slahi himself. Tahar Rahim’s restraint is often more affecting, because we can attend to how he responds rather than simply endure another illustration of cruelty. The film has already established enough of his character for his suffering to matter; it does not need to work quite so hard. A legal thriller can make us feel the difficulty of proving something we already believe. This one too often treats our agreement about the wrongness of abuse as sufficient drama, and 129 minutes gives that weakness time to become a problem. There is enough feeling in the central performance to make the missed opportunities frustrating. Approach it for the acting, with limited expectations of the investigation. *Fi1m score 58, published 3 October 2026.* ## What the critics say The reviews are mixed, but praise for Tahar Rahim is remarkably consistent. Critics across the divide find that his performance gives Mohamedou Ould Slahi humour, dignity and humanity, keeping the personal cost of detention in view even when the drama falters. The more favourable reviews describe a compelling account of abuses of power, with the Evening Standard particularly valuing the attention paid to Slahi’s personality and storytelling. The disagreement centres on whether the film gives that performance enough support. Reservations recur around a formulaic legal narrative, sluggish pacing and a lack of dramatic tension. The spread is wide: some critics find the treatment forceful and accessible, while others see worthy material reduced to a conventional procedural. The Los Angeles Times makes the sharper objection that the legal-thriller focus sidelines Slahi himself. Even several of the least persuaded critics regard Rahim as a strong reason to remain engaged. ## Straight answers **Is The Mauritanian worth watching?** *The Mauritanian* is worth considering for Tahar Rahim’s moving performance, but we find it a frustrating legal drama and score it 58 out of 100. It suits viewers drawn to character and acting more than those seeking a gripping investigation: the repeated legal explanations interrupt the film’s strongest scenes and make its 129 minutes feel long. **How long is The Mauritanian, and what is it rated?** *The Mauritanian* runs 2h 09m. It is a drama and thriller film. **Where can I watch The Mauritanian in Bulgaria?** *The Mauritanian* is not on any streaming or rental service in Bulgaria at the moment. It is available in 33 other countries; change your country at the top of the page to see where. Availability is checked daily. **How violent or frightening is The Mauritanian, and is it suitable for children?** *The Mauritanian* has a UK 15 certificate and contains forceful, distressing depictions of abuse, making it unsuitable for children under 15. We find the repeated emphasis on cruelty sometimes excessive; older teenagers and adults sensitive to suffering in detention should approach with caution, even though much of the film concerns legal procedure. **How does The Mauritanian compare to In the Name of the Father?** *The Mauritanian* is the less satisfying legal-injustice drama; we recommend [*In the Name of the Father*](https://film.one/film/in-the-name-of-the-father) for the difficult father-and-son relationship that makes its imprisonment story painfully immediate. Both feature affecting performances and sometimes press too hard for emotion, but *The Mauritanian* repeatedly draws attention away from its central prisoner towards less absorbing legal explanations. **What should I watch after The Mauritanian?** After *The Mauritanian*, try [*In the Name of the Father*](https://film.one/film/in-the-name-of-the-father) (1993, Fi1m 83): A prison drama whose family relationships make the legal injustice painfully immediate. Then [*The Battle of Algiers*](https://film.one/film/the-battle-of-algiers) (1966, Fi1m 93): For a harder examination of state violence, without reassuring legal heroes; and [*The Lives of Others*](https://film.one/film/the-lives-of-others) (2006, Fi1m 84): For another account of conscience struggling inside an institution built on coercion. ### Reviews we read (22) - **Evening Standard**, Charlotte O'Sullivan (4/5): The critic finds the film compelling, led by a mesmerising performance from Tahar Rahim. She especially praises how the film keeps Mohamedou Ould Slahi’s personality and storytelling at its centre. [Read](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/the-mauritanian-review-tahar-rahim-guantanamo-mohamedou-ould-slahi-serpent-b900614.html) - **Radio Times**, Andrew Collins (4/5): Collins presents the film as a forceful reminder that Guantánamo remains open. He praises its full-blooded representation of the detention camp’s victims. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-vml6lw/the-mauritanian/) - **Sight and Sound**, BFI (78/100, inferred): The critic finds the film powerful and authentic, with a quiet dignity at its centre. Tahar Rahim’s performance is singled out for conveying Slahi’s integrity and wry humour through the abuse he endures. [Read](https://www.bfi.org.uk/sight-and-sound/reviews/mauritanian-2021-kevin-macdonald-mohamedou-ould-slahi-guantanamo-internment-jodie-foster-benedict-cumberbatch) - **Variety**, Peter Debruge (75/100, inferred): Debruge finds the film a tough but ultimately gripping argument against abuses of power. He singles out Tahar Rahim’s gentle, dignified performance as its emotional anchor. [Read](https://variety.com/2021/film/reviews/the-mauritanian-review-tahar-rahim-jodie-foster-1234883447/) - **Screen Daily**, Tim Grierson (64/100, inferred): The accessible page does not reveal the critic’s verdict. It provides no details about what the critic praised or criticized. [Read](https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/the-mauritanian-review/5155985.article) - **The New York Times** (64/100, inferred): The page could not be read, so the critic’s verdict is unavailable. No specific praise or complaint can be confirmed from the accessible text. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/11/movies/the-mauritanian-review.html) - **The i Paper**, Geoffrey Macnab (60/100, inferred): Macnab finds the film powerful but one-dimensional, with insufficient dramatic tension. He praises Tahar Rahim’s charismatic performance and the cast’s overall excellence. [Read](https://inews.co.uk/culture/the-mauritanian-amazon-prime-video-review-a-powerful-but-one-dimensional-story-of-injustice-935422) - **IndieWire**, David Ehrlich (C-): Ehrlich finds the film righteous but flat and scattered, with its closing title cards making a stronger impression than the drama. He praises Tahar Rahim’s humane performance as the film’s main strength. [Read](https://www.indiewire.com/criticism/movies/the-mauritanian-review-1234609425/) - **Slant Magazine**, Chuck Bowen (2/4): Bowen finds the film formulaic and emotionally impersonal, shortchanging Slahi’s experience. He praises Tahar Rahim’s restrained, empathetic performance as more powerful than the lurid torture scenes. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/review-the-mauritanian-relates-story-of-u-s-torture-with-an-impersonal-touch/) - **Vulture**, Bilge Ebiri (50/100, inferred): Ebiri finds the film a noble but staid effort, nearly rescued by a striking ending. He praises Tahar Rahim’s performance and the final formal gambit, while criticizing the muddled legal narrative and disjointed backstory. [Read](https://www.vulture.com/article/movie-review-the-mauritanian-jodie-foster-and-tahar-rahim.html) - **Little White Lies**, David Jenkins (3/2/2): Jenkins finds the drama dramatically unsteady and dated, despite its clear condemnation of Guantanamo’s abuses. He praises the chemistry between Jodie Foster and Tahar Rahim. [Read](https://lwlies.com/reviews/the-mauritanian) - **The Guardian**, Peter Bradshaw (2/5): Bradshaw finds the drama worthy but frustrating, criticizing its fence-sitting approach and lack of answers about Guantánamo. He praises Tahar Rahim’s performance as perfectly decent, while faulting the film for congratulating itself instead of confronting unresolved history. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2021/jan/13/the-mauritanian-review-guantanamo-bay-mohamedou-ould-salahi-tahar-rahim) - **The AV Club**, Ignatiy Vishnevetsky (35/100, inferred): The review finds the film’s critique of Guantanamo’s legal machinery worthwhile but ultimately generic and overly shouty. It singles out the torture sequence as briefly approaching an inspired insight into the country’s nightmares. [Read](https://www.avclub.com/the-mauritanian-transforms-a-memoir-of-unlawful-detenti-1846230239) - **Empire**, Ian Freer (30/100, inferred): Freer finds the film well-intentioned but dull, flat and formulaic. He singles out Tahar Rahim’s humane, affecting performance as its saving grace. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/the-mauritanian/) - **Los Angeles Times**, Justin Chang (30/100, inferred): Chang finds the film well-meaning but fundamentally miscalculated, criticizing its conventional legal-thriller focus for sidelining Slahi’s story. He praises Tahar Rahim’s extraordinary, nuanced performance and says it reveals the story the film should have told. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2021-02-11/the-mauritanian-review-tahar-rahim-jodie-foster) - **The Hollywood Reporter**, David Rooney (30/100, inferred): Rooney finds the well-intentioned legal procedural strangely flat and lacking dramatic momentum. He singles out Tahar Rahim’s dimensional performance as Slahi for praise. [Read](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/the-mauritanian-film-review-4111377/) - **Collider**, Matt Goldberg (B+): Goldberg finds the film a compelling reminder of American injustice, though it occasionally relies on one-dimensional supporting characters. He singles out Tahar Rahim’s nuanced, unforgettable performance as the film’s central strength. [Read](https://collider.com/the-mauritanian-review-tahar-rahim/) - **Eye for Film**, Jennie Kermode (75/100, inferred): Kermode finds the film highly watchable despite occasional clumsiness. She particularly praises Benedict Cumberbatch’s compelling portrayal of a military lawyer wrestling with his duty to the truth. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/the-mauritanian-2021-film-review-by-jennie-kermode) - **Paste**, Andy Crump (6.3/10): Crump finds the film rote and dull despite its compelling central performance. He singles out Tahar Rahim for giving Mohamedou Ould Salahi humanity and making him the film’s emotional heart. [Read](https://www.pastemagazine.com/movies/jodie-foster/the-mauritanian-review) - **NME**, Alex Flood (★★★): The review finds the film solid but occasionally generic, with a softened impact despite its important subject. It praises Tahar Rahim for keeping the story’s human cost in focus. [Read](https://www.nme.com/reviews/film-reviews/the-mauritanian-review-2911913) - **The Skinny**, Tom Charles (★★★): The review finds the film ponderous and often inert, though Tahar Rahim gives it a compelling centre. It praises the humanity he brings to Slahi’s story as a fresh and needed perspective. [Read](https://www.theskinny.co.uk/film/new-releases/the-mauritanian) - **The Wrap** (30/100, inferred): The critic finds the film an unsuccessful, sluggish drama that struggles to turn Guantanamo’s abuses into compelling storytelling. They praise Tahar Rahim’s empathetic performance and single out a searing sequence in which lawyers read the documents they have pursued. [Read](https://www.thewrap.com/the-mauritanian-film-review-jodie-foster-tahar-rahim/) ## Details - **Director:** Kevin Macdonald - **Director:** Kevin Macdonald - **Screenplay:** Rory Haines, Sohrab Noshirvani, Michael Bronner - **Story:** Michael Bronner - **Cinematography:** Alwin H. Küchler - **Editor:** Justine Wright - **Music:** Tom Hodge - **Production design:** Michael Carlin - **Producer:** Leah Clarke, Adam Ackland, Lloyd Levin - **Cast:** Tahar Rahim as Mohamedou Ould Slahi; Jodie Foster as Nancy Hollander; Benedict Cumberbatch as Lt. Stuart Couch; Shailene Woodley as Teri Duncan; Zachary Levi as Neil Buckland; Langley Kirkwood as Sergeant Sands; Saamer Usmani as Arjun; Corey Johnson as Bill Seidel - **Runtime:** 2h 09m - **First release (the US):** 12 February 2021 - **Genres:** Drama, Thriller - **Also in:** [BAFTA Best Film winners](https://film.one/collections/bafta-best-film.md) (Nominee, 2020) - **Box office:** $8 million - **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N00DwEsSSYU ## Where to watch in Bulgaria Not streaming, renting or buying in Bulgaria at the last check. Also available in: AE, AR, AT, AU, BE, BR, CA, CH, CL, CO, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, GB, HK, IE, IN, IT, JP, LT, MX, NL, NO, NZ, PA, PL, PT, SE, UA, US. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country. ## Awards - European Film Award for Best Actor 2021: European Film Award for Best Actor (nominated) ## If you liked this - *In the Name of the Father* (1993), Fi1m 83: A prison drama whose family relationships make the legal injustice painfully immediate — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/in-the-name-of-the-father.md) - *The Battle of Algiers* (1966), Fi1m 93: For a harder examination of state violence, without reassuring legal heroes — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-battle-of-algiers.md) - *The Report* (2019): Another investigation of sanctioned abuse, more attentive to the labour of uncovering it - *The Lives of Others* (2006), Fi1m 84: For another account of conscience struggling inside an institution built on coercion — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-lives-of-others.md) - *Court* (2014): For a quieter, sharper look at how ordinary legal procedure can sustain injustice --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/the-mauritanian