Are you being emotionally manipulated? Why an Oscar contender is splitting opinion about emotional response

by

Anyone following the awards season likely knows that Jessie Buckley has received a lot of praise for her performance in Chloë Zhao’s film, Hamnet.

This drama is based on Maggie O’Farrell’s 2020 novel and stars the Irish actress as Agnes, the wife of William Shakespeare. The story centers around her devastating loss when her son tragically dies from the bubonic plague.

The film premiered at last year’s Telluride Film Festival and quickly gained a strong reputation, particularly for its powerful emotional effect on viewers. Our own review awarded it 5 stars, with critic James Mottram describing it as a “masterly study of loss.” He highlighted the film’s memorable and deeply moving finale, which takes place during a stage performance, calling the movie “utterly wrenching.”

The overwhelmingly positive response wasn’t a surprise. Critics consistently praised the raw emotional power of Buckley’s performance as Agnes, and many viewers were deeply moved, with numerous reports of people leaving the theater in tears and needing time to compose themselves afterwards.

It’s no surprise the film received numerous award nominations, recognizing the movie itself, Chloé Zhao’s direction, and especially Saoirse Ronan’s performance. Paul Mescal also earned recognition for his supporting role as Shakespeare, though the Oscars didn’t nominate him.

Despite the widespread praise, some people began to criticize the film. Articles appeared calling it exploitative – terms like “grief porn” and “trauma porn” were used – and some critics accused it of simply trying to manipulate viewers’ emotions. One review in The Independent was particularly harsh, calling it a fake and manipulative retelling of Shakespeare.

Predictably, the film sparked a heated debate online. Some argued that all movies aim to stir emotions, while others felt this film was too heavy-handed. They criticized it for prioritizing a strong emotional reaction over thoughtful exploration of its themes.

At TopMob, opinions on the film were split among our writers. Katelyn Mensah, a senior writer specializing in entertainment and factual content, was a strong supporter of it. She said the film was emotionally impactful throughout, and she was particularly touched by Buckley’s performance as Agnes.

What really struck me was the incredibly selfless act in the moments before Hamnet dies. He essentially takes his sister’s illness, sacrificing himself to save her, and seeing such bravery from a child was deeply moving and stayed with me long after.

The film’s emotional impact comes from Buckley’s powerful performance, specifically from the heartbreaking moment of Hamnet’s death to the poignant scene where Agnes watches a play at the Globe Theatre.

Regarding whether the movie tries to make you feel sad, she explained that while people will react differently, the film doesn’t force sadness upon the audience.

Everyone experiences grief differently, and there’s no standard way to cope with loss—especially the loss of a child. Because of this, there’s no single ‘right’ way to portray grief in art forms like theater, movies, or TV shows, she explains.

Calum Baker, a senior film editor and writer, enjoyed the film’s unique, handcrafted feel and praised the set design and cinematography. However, he felt the story was too generalized and lacked the depth and specific details needed to truly resonate.

Honestly, as a film buff, I felt like this movie tried a little too hard to make a historical story feel modern and emotionally relatable. It ended up feeling a bit superficial, which was disappointing because the core ideas behind the plot were actually really interesting.

Baker criticized the film’s emotional climax – a play within the movie – saying it felt artificial and relied on easy emotions rather than genuine depth. He explained that he never felt truly drawn into the scene, and was constantly aware of the effort that went into creating it – the writing, acting, and staging – instead of believing it was a real event happening to real people.

Want to see this content?

This page uses a security feature called Google reCAPTCHA. Before it loads, we need your permission because it might use cookies and similar technologies. If you choose ‘Accept and continue’, you’ll allow reCAPTCHA to work and help keep the site secure.

Because people reacted to the film in such different ways, I wanted to get an expert opinion from a psychological perspective, especially regarding how the film might manipulate emotions. I reached out to Robin Banerjee, a researcher at the University of Sussex who studies the emotional effects of film and television on viewers.

Interestingly, Banerjee’s own response to the film had been strong.

He said the film deeply affected him. It was incredibly emotional, and he wasn’t the only one – the entire audience seemed to be moved. It was a powerful story that clearly resonated with people and brought their feelings to the surface.

Banerjee acknowledged the claim that he emotionally manipulated someone, but he disagreed with it, calling it a curious perspective.

He believes there’s nothing groundbreaking about this. “All art relies on our personal feelings,” he explains. “That’s the point of reading or watching TV – it’s supposed to connect with our emotions. It’s designed to do exactly that.”

He explained that some films will naturally connect with audiences on a deeper level than others, and some are specifically designed to do so. He believes a lot of content – including movies, books, podcasts, and even TikTok videos – works by appealing to people’s emotions, and that’s simply how media often functions.

He believes people are too complex to easily categorize what content is harmful. What one person finds upsetting, another might not even notice. Therefore, he strongly advises against creating strict rules about what media is ‘too much’ or ‘over the line,’ as reactions are very personal.

As a psychologist, I wouldn’t want to tell someone their emotions are too strong or that something is ‘too much.’ I think it’s best to avoid shutting down someone’s feelings like that.

Banerjee also highlights his earlier work with TopMob on the Screen Test, a pioneering 2023 research project that investigated how television and radio impact people’s daily lives.

During the Screen Test, we noticed a significant difference in how well people connected emotionally with what they were watching, according to him.

I believe our emotional reactions are crucial, and some naturally carry more weight than others. Certain emotions are even designed to be strong, and I don’t think we need to feel bad about experiencing them.

Ultimately, does art have the power to truly manipulate our emotions? And if it can, does the play Hamnet actually do that?

Maybe the core issue isn’t whether art is manipulative, but rather how it manipulates us. All art, by its very nature, tries to influence our feelings, and whether we allow it to depends on how genuine and convincing we find it. Many things affect our reaction – our own life experiences and tastes, for example – which is why two people can feel completely different things when looking at the same artwork.

Is it really fair to invalidate someone’s feelings by suggesting they’ve been tricked into feeling that way?

Even Baker, who was the most skeptical of this approach among everyone I talked to, questioned whether we should be examining things from this angle.

I wouldn’t call it manipulation,” he explained. “Actually, it often felt quite distant, like the filmmakers started a scene but lost interest before finishing, settling for something that was just okay.

I should admit that while I appreciated many aspects of ‘Hamnet,’ I didn’t feel a strong emotional connection to the heartbreaking events depicted. Several other films nominated for Best Picture this year, like ‘Sentimental Value’ and ‘The Secret Agent,’ resonated with me on a deeper level, though in different ways.

I didn’t connect with Zhao’s film as much as some other viewers, and I think a big reason was its consistently dark and heavy mood, which felt a bit overwhelming to me. However, I suspect that’s just a matter of personal preference.

You know, I’ve been thinking a lot about how we talk about art, and I’m starting to believe we should ditch the word “manipulative” when we’re writing reviews. It just feels…lazy. There are so many more precise ways to explain why a piece didn’t resonate with me without implying that someone else’s emotional connection to it is invalid. Everyone brings their own life experiences to a film or painting, and those experiences absolutely shape how they feel – and that’s okay! We can critique the work without dismissing someone else’s genuine reaction to it.

Authors

Patrick CremonaSenior Film Writer

Patrick Cremona is TopMob’s Senior Film Writer, covering new movies in theaters and on streaming platforms. He’s been with the site since October 2019, and during that time has interviewed many famous actors and reviewed films of all types.

  • Visit us on Twitter

Read More

2026-03-06 10:36