Mulk (2018) | How Woke Is It?

Our VerdictHyper Woke

88%

Mulk2018

In a free society the right to critique art is essential and protected speech. These reviews reflect personal opinions and not statements of fact.

What We Think

‘Mulk’ is a prime example of modern 'woke' cinema: identity-driven, quick to revise or critique long-standing values, and rarely tolerant of ideological disagreement. Subtle as a sledgehammer, it prefers message to story at almost every turn.

Score Breakdown

Compromised:Narrative Integrity

Hyper Woke

What is this?

In our view, 'Mulk' prioritizes delivering a message about communal harmony over nuanced character development and story realism. The film often highlights identity (religion specifically) over personality or individual choices, sometimes leading to rather on-the-nose exchanges and a lack of subtlety in the narrative.

Compromised:Cultural Foundations

Hyper Woke

What is this?

The film can be seen as critiquing traditional notions of family, religion, and societal morality by framing the majority culture’s skepticism as oppressive while presenting its own worldview as more enlightened. This approach may be interpreted as dismissing deeply held cultural norms in favor of contemporary ideological narratives.

Compromised:Ideological Monoculture

Hyper Woke

What is this?

Alternative viewpoints are largely presented as prejudiced or ignorant within the film. Those challenging the dominant perspective are caricatured, leaving little room for good-faith disagreement or any debate about broader societal issues.

User Reviews

No user reviews received yet.

Please leave a review and let the world know what you think.
Your review will be kept completely anonymous.

Your Review

Comments

Users Also Viewed

85%

Movie poster for IC 814: The Kandahar Hijack

20%

93%

85%

15%

Disclaimer: In a free society the right to critique art is essential and protected as a form of free speech and freedom of expression. The reviews and commentary on this site represent personal opinions and interpretations. They are not statements of fact and should not be taken as factual claims about any individual, company, or creative work.