Being married to a literary genius might sound romantic, but Anna Dostoevskaya would probably disagree. Her husband, Fyodor, is one of Russia’s most celebrated novelists, yet he seems far more interested in gambling, drinking and breaking promises than being a decent author and husband. Directors Małgorzata Szumowska (The Other Lamb) and Michał Englert (Never Gonna Snow Again) have plenty of fun with this turbulent relationship in The Idiot(s). This colorful period drama mixes comedy, romance and some unusual creative choices. Johnny Flynn (Emma.) and Aimee Lou Wood (Living) make an entertaining couple, but the film eventually becomes as exhausting as the man at its center.
Based on Andrew D. Kaufman’s book The Gambler Wife: A True Story of Love, Risk and the Woman Who Saved Dostoyevsky, the story follows Fyodor Dostoyevsky (Flynn) and his second wife, Anna (Wood), as they travel across Europe while he works on his novel The Idiot. Or at least, that’s what he’s supposed to be doing. Instead, he gambles away their money, drinks and becomes distracted by Natasha (Vicky Krieps), leaving Anna to keep their finances and marriage from falling apart. Not exactly the romantic European getaway she might have imagined.
A Brilliant Writer and a Terrible Husband
Flynn clearly enjoys playing a man who can’t seem to make a sensible decision. His Dostoevsky is loud, impulsive and frequently unbearable, whether he’s throwing another tantrum or gambling away money the couple desperately needs. Even when Anna confronts him, he somehow acts as though he’s the one being treated unfairly. Flynn throws himself into these outbursts, making Fyodor both ridiculous and strangely entertaining.
Yet he also reveals vulnerability beneath all that bravado. When Fyodor’s confidence slips, he seems to genuinely regret his mistakes, even if he can’t stop making them. These quieter moments add welcome depth and make it easier to understand why Anna hasn’t given up on him.
Wood takes a more restrained approach, which works particularly well opposite Flynn’s outbursts. Anna has every reason to lose her patience, but Wood never plays her as someone who exists purely to complain about her husband. She’s intelligent, determined and perfectly capable of standing up for herself. Some of her funniest moments don’t even require dialogue. A single look when Fyodor announces another terrible decision says everything.
The contrast between their performances — larger-than-life versus understated — makes the relationship convincing. Flynn brings the chaos, while Wood often gets the bigger laugh just by reacting. When the arguments stop, their natural chemistry makes it easy to see why Anna fell for Fyodor. They have genuine affection, even after everything they’ve been through. These quieter exchanges are among the film’s strongest moments.
Too Much Chaos, Not Enough Development
Unfortunately, The Idiot(s) starts to lose its appeal once the initial amusement wears off. Fyodor gambles, Anna gets furious, he apologizes, and they make up. Then he does something equally stupid, and the whole thing starts again. Flynn’s exaggerated reactions are funny at first, but there’s only so much entertainment in watching him make one terrible decision after another. As the arguments pile up, the humor becomes predictable, and the couple’s problems lose some of their emotional impact.
The bigger disappointment is how little attention Anna gets outside her relationship with Fyodor. Dostoevsky’s literary achievements are well known, but the woman who supported him through his personal and financial troubles has a fascinating story of her own. Wood gives Anna enough personality to carry the film, yet much of her screen time is spent dealing with her husband’s latest mess. We see how much she sacrifices for him, but learn little about who she is beyond their marriage. Given that the book puts Anna at the center of the story, the film leaves most of her unexplored.
Szumowska and Englert clearly aren’t interested in making a conventional period drama. Their version of 19th-century Europe is full of theatrical moments, exaggerated situations, and surprisingly modern humor. This playful approach suits Fyodor’s larger-than-life personality, although the dialogue occasionally sounds too contemporary. Certain expressions feel out of place, briefly pulling you out of the story.
A Beautiful Film with a Messy Story
Visually, The Idiot(s) has plenty going for it. Englert, who also serves as cinematographer, gives the film a rich, almost painterly look, with carefully composed shots and color-filled interiors. The production design and costumes create an elegant world that looks far more orderly than the lives of the people inhabiting it. That contrast is where the visual storytelling works best. The carefully arranged surroundings make Fyodor’s behavior even more ridiculous, letting the cinematography and production design contribute to the comedy rather than serve as an attractive backdrop.
The Idiot(s) has plenty to admire, from its excellent performances to its beautiful cinematography and playful approach to historical drama. At its best, it’s genuinely funny and surprisingly touching. But the film never quite makes the most of Anna’s story, leaving Wood to do much of the emotional heavy lifting. Dostoevsky might have been a genius at writing novels. Still, after spending so much time in his company, you can hardly blame Anna for occasionally looking as though she’s had enough.
The Idiot(s) is part of the BFI London Film Festival 2026, courtesy of The Match Factory. No U.S. release date has been announced yet.
The Idiot(s) has plenty to admire, from its excellent performances to its beautiful cinematography and playful approach to historical drama. At its best, it's genuinely funny and surprisingly touching. But the film never quite makes the most of Anna's story, leaving Wood to do much of the emotional heavy lifting.
-
GVN Rating
Freelancer by day. Film journalist by night.
