Orwell: 2+2=5

Overview

George Orwell was one of the most visionary authors of the 20th century, whose novels 1984 and Animal Farm foretold a chilling, authoritarian future. Acclaimed director Raoul Peck interweaves clips, readings from Orwell's diary, cinematic references, and modern-day footage to craft not only a portrait of the writer, but a fresh take on how prophetic his work has become.

Rating

1 Reviews

• 

  Brent Marchant

  7 Oct 11, 2025

  George Orwell (born Eric Arthur Blair, 1903-1050), author of such legendary novels as the allegorical Animal Farm and dystopian 1984, has been called one of the greatest and most insightful writers of the 20th Century. And, in light of recent history, he’s also been widely regarded as one of the most prescient, a plainspoken scribe who clearly saw the future long before it happened and wasn’t afraid to straightforwardly call it for what it would become. In recognition of that legacy, Orwell’s life, work and outlooks are now the subject of this latest production from prolific activist documentarian Raoul Peck. The film weaves together a biography of the author, the central themes of his journalistic and literary works, and illustrations of how those notions have materialized in the “management” (or, one might more accurately say, manipulation) of social, political and world affairs over the years, with an especially heavy emphasis on the present day. The filmmaker cites myriad examples of these manifestations to show just how on target Orwell was in predicting what would lie ahead, both in the places where he lived (England, Spain and Burma (now Myanmar)), as well as other locales around the globe, including Russia, Ukraine, Haiti, France, Latin America, Asia, and, most importantly, the US. And, while Peck largely targets the policies and practices of the right, he’s not afraid to take on anyone whose dogma is so rigid that it throws circumstances off balance for everyone. Most notably, though, the picture details just how insidious these initiatives can be, agendas accomplished through the skillful “handling” of language, media, beliefs and actions that lead to intentional, calculated and shameful obfuscation, creating purposely misleading impressions in the minds of an unwittingly susceptible public. The narrative places much emphasis on the signature double-talk expressions Orwell features in his narratives (especially 1984), including such meaningless phrases as “War is peace,” “Freedom is slavery” and “Ignorance is strength,” slogans that say nothing but become widely embraced with relentless and intimidating repetition. The director’s inclusion of these references thus depicts the deliberate war on truth being waged by those in power who will do anything to maintain their control over it, particularly when dealing with a compliant, quiescent population. These themes are further supported by an array of clips from other fictional and documentary works, such as the 1954, 1956 and 1984 versions of “1984,” “I, Daniel Blake” (2016), “Land and Freedom” (1995), “Minority Report” (2002), and “Orwell Rolls in His Grave” (2003), to name a few. And further enhancement is provided in numerous voiceover sequences from Orwell’s own writings, deftly narrated by Damian Lewis. All told, these elements provide a comprehensive look at the author and his work, as well as its relevance in today’s world. With that said, however, some aspects of this offering could use some work, most notably in the organization of its content, its overreliance at times on material that needs to be read (and that often flies by too quickly) and an occasional tendency toward redundancy, elements that have been known to intrude upon other films by this director. In addition, “Orwell: 2+ 2 = 5” has frequently been termed (and quite accurately at that) as the scariest picture of 2025, primarily due to its inclusion of some troubling graphic imagery (sensitive viewers take note). Nevertheless, this is an important film for our times, one that viewers should not be afraid to watch considering the stakes involved. Indeed, turning a blind eye might be easier to do in the moment – but probably not in the long run.