The 2026 Cannes Film Festival starts Tuesday, May 12th, running through May 24th. The Ebert team returns this year with coverage of all of the major films in review and video form. In this video dispatch, Scott Dummler interviews correspondent Zachary Lee about some of his highlights from the fest, from “Karma” to a restoration screening of Ken Russell’s “The Devils.” Watch the video and enjoy an edited transcript below.
Scott:
Thanks for joining us here again for Cannes 2026. My name is Scott Dummler, sitting in for the irreplaceable Chaz Ebert. Today, we have Zachary Lee from RogerEbert.com with us. Hi, Zachary. Thanks for coming in today.
Zachary:
Of course, it’s a joy. Thanks so much for having me.
Scott:
How long have you been coming to Cannes yourself?
Zachary:
Yeah, this is my second year coming to Cannes. So still very new, you know.
Scott:
Oh, you’re a veteran now. Second year. You know, all the tricks.
Zachary:
I’ve gotten over the jet lag a little more easily, I will say. I feel like last year, I was just like, I felt bad. I was like, can I even say I saw some of these movies? Because I was asleep for so long, I’m awake. That’s a good start.
Scott:
That’s a good start. Absolutely. Yeah. Well, we’re going to talk about a few movies today. The first one is a title in competition by acclaimed director Asghar Farhadi. Tell us a little bit about “Parallel Tales.”
Zachary:
I was trying to think about the best way to summarize it. I feel like it’s about voyeurs watching voyeurs who then watch the other set of voyeurs, and then they all make stories about each other. It’s like my unofficial way of summarizing it.
Scott:
Not a bad way to do it.
Zachary:
Yeah. And, you know, there’s a lot of we’re like “Rear Window” viewing that’s kind of going on. There’s lots of audio equipment. So I was like, this is kind of giving Blow Out too.
Scott:
It’s a “Rear Window” plus “Blow Out” kind of feeling. Absolutely.
Z:
Yeah. But I think what I found, I mean, and I, you know, those are apt comparisons that I think the way to use this audio technology is really interesting. But it’s really about, I think, the power and stewardship of storytelling in a lot of ways that I feel like you kind of see that a lot in the way that this movie set the rules and things like.
S:
For sure. Did you feel like it all held together? Because it’s a very, I would almost say convoluted type of story, because there are so many twists and turns and stories that kind of weave back on each other and loop back and forth, and do you feel like it all held together for you as a viewer?
Z:
It’s a good question because there are parts of it that I was wondering about the design of the show. Right. Like, is it meant to be a little confusing or inaccessible because you have these stories that are folding in on themselves in that way? So it’s one of those areas where I think it might have been less convoluted if it were a little tighter and maybe didn’t feel like it needed to kind of repeat the same ideas or motifs, you know, to really drive its point home.
S:
I agree with you 100%. I think it really could have held together a little bit better, just as a tighter narrative. Yeah, a little bit more for sure.
S:
So there’s another film I want to talk to you about that you’ve seen, which is the out-of-competition film “Karma.” I have not seen that. So, can you tell us a little bit about “Karma”?
Z:
It’s a movie I want to describe. It kind of morphs and shifts before your very eyes. It begins with, you know, this character Jean, played by Marion Cotillard. Amazing.
S:
I wouldn’t be Cannes without Marion Cotillard.
z:
So funny, because I was watching her and I was like, I may not have been caught up to date. Like where she, like, it’s so. Oh, okay, I just maybe haven’t caught up on the films she’s done in the past couple of years. So it was one, it was just great to see her back on screen again.
And it starts off with, you know, her character’s godson going missing, and she is the suspect. And then, without giving too much away, it kind of morphs into this religious thriller. The whole escape story is quite interesting. And there’s a lot going on there. It was thrilling, and I feel like seeing Marion on screen is always a joy.
S:
So Canet is known for thrillers. He did one about 20 years ago, “Tell No One,” which was a big international hit. How did you feel it worked as a thriller?
Z:
What I feel about “Karma” is that, in the beginning, it’s most formally interesting. I think, you know, I’m dealing with a lot of interesting ideas. He’s talking about how religious trauma manifests in our bodies, not just in our souls. I think he’s talking about what horrible things people will do in the name of God, right?
But it’s not like we don’t know that. And so it feels a little more didactic and a little more like it’s pontificating, whereas at the beginning, there’s this really interesting element to what’s going on. We don’t really know. So I think to myself, that’s just the interesting part of it, it kind of shifts into something that is a little more, maybe conventional, still exciting.
I think I always enjoy seeing cults get their comeuppance, you know, so you certainly get some of that here. But maybe it’s not quite as daring as I might have liked in the first one.
S:
So one more film I want to talk to you about is Ken Russell’s “The Devils,” which is in Cannes Classics from 1971. It had been banned in many countries for a long time and didn’t have much of a physical release. And so it was sort of tough to see. So there’s been a lot of excitement about people getting to see a 4K director’s cut.
What did you think of the film? Was this the first time seeing it?
Z:
Oh yeah, definitely. It’s funny, I come from a faith and religious background, but that’s probably why Karma also, now that I’m thinking about it, that and “The Devils” have been a really interesting pairing from the past couple of days, but yeah, I mean, this is a movie I had heard about people. I have some really close mutual friends who had seen it and loved it, and so this is also, I mean, I just want to make sure people know that, like, this was probably the hardest ticket to grab because it was in the Buñuel theater, which I think only seats about 300 people. And so I know, like, there are a lot of really amazing premieres we’ll get to see. But I felt very favored and grateful. I’m like, maybe it was a divine gift that I was able to get this ticket, you know? But yeah, I mean, it very much lived up to the hype for me.
So, this is kind of the unvarnished, full vision that Ken really wanted for this movie. And so there was a real, I think, emotional weight to being able to see it, you know, at a festival like Cannes.
S:
Very interesting. So, Roger’s review from 1971, he hated the movie. He gave it zero stars. It’s actually a hilarious review because it’s incredibly sarcastic. It’s probably the most sarcastic review I remember reading from him. But yeah, I think he felt like all the religious imagery and some of the things that took place in the film were just an excuse to have blood and sex.
And so what did you think about it? Did you think that there was more to the film than just that? And, maybe if he had revisited the film later, he might have reconsidered?
Z:
Even when he’s being sarcastic and he’s critiquing, he’s always so eloquent, like he has that line about, “You have to look into the devil’s mouth to see his teeth” or something like that. And I’m like, I wish when I’m being sarcastic and critiquing like this, I could be this, this funny. Anyway, I just wanted to say I love reading that.
I thought it was really funny, and I certainly share that critique. In a lot of ways, I think like seeing everything that happens to that movie, like, made it makes sense. Like, I think I was thinking like, in order to have any sort of faith in what you can’t physically, tangibly grab or hold, like, it kind of requires a certain madness.
And in order to stick to what you believe, you have to really, you know, test whether storms of controversy and critique, you have to really stay rooted and be certain of what you hope for. And I think we really see powerful depictions of that in this film. And so, I don’t know, for me, it rattled me in the best way.
And as much as I love Roger’s critique, I want to say both things can be true.
S:
Absolutely, absolutely. Well, thank you again for being here with us, Zachary, and have a great rest of your Cannes.
Z:
Of course. Thank you.
Scott:
And in today’s Cannes flashback, we’re going to look back to 2014 with one of my personal memories from Cannes.
It wasn’t your usual Cannes screening, and the dragon was the least shocking thing. In 2014, DreamWorks unveiled its animated sequel, “How to Train Your Dragon 2,” on the red carpet. As I filmed the cast starting their walk, everything seemed normal enough. But soon after, a self-proclaimed red carpet prankster crawled onto the carpet and into America Ferrera’s dress. It was so odd.
No one was really sure what was happening… Before security swiftly pulled him away.
Ferrara laughed it off like a pro, but everyone else was left shaking their heads.
That’s all for now. But don’t forget to check back each day at http://RogerEbert.com/festivals for more reviews, news, and reactions from the Cannes Film Festival. We’ll see you then.
