Papillon (2017) | How Woke Is It?

Our VerdictNot Woke

Papillon2017

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

Papillon (2017) is about as non-woke as modern Hollywood gets. It prioritizes strong storytelling over ideology and steers clear of identity politics or forced messaging. For those tired of the usual preachiness, this is a rare throwback.

Score Breakdown

Compromised:Narrative Integrity

Not Woke

What is this?

Papillon (2017) stays remarkably true to classic storytelling by focusing on personal grit and survival. There’s little emphasis on identity politics or modern ideological themes. Characters are developed through action and hardship rather than identity markers, offering refreshingly pure character arcs unlikely to please the Twitter mob.

Compromised:Cultural Foundations

Not Woke

What is this?

The film depicts masculine friendship, loyalty, and perseverance without derision. There’s no effort to subvert or mock traditional values, religion, or gender roles. If anything, it could be seen as almost nostalgic for old-school virtues, something you hardly see out of Hollywood these days.

Compromised:Ideological Monoculture

Not Woke

What is this?

Alternative worldviews aren’t really the point here, the story is focused on survival and injustice rather than pushing modern ideological narratives. There’s no blunt villainizing of tradition, and the film avoids using characters as strawmen for contemporary debates. Ideological subtlety is a breath of fresh air.

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

15%

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.