A new film from 90-year-old director Roman Polanski titled Palace, featuring Russian actor Alexander Petrov, drew immediate attention at its Venice Film Festival premiere but did not earn any fresh reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. At the time this was written, none of the ten early reviews credited the film with a positive verdict, and critics opted not to assign a fresh rating, which is typically used to gauge overall cinematic quality.
One observer described Palace as a staggering display of brutality that misses the mark so completely that it could be ranked among the year’s least convincing productions, perhaps even the decade’s disappointment. The critique underscored a sense of disorientation and abrupt tonal shifts that left some viewers unsettled rather than engaged, a reaction that heavily influenced the immediate reception among festival-goers and press alike.
The narrative unfolds inside a luxurious hotel perched in the Swiss Alps, where the turn of a new millennium becomes a catalyst for intertwining destinies among the guests. In addition to Petrov, the cast includes Oliver Mazucci, Fanny Ardant, Mickey Rourke, John Cleese, Joaquin de Almeida, and Fortunato Cerlino. The film places Petrov in the role of a bandit who shaves his head for the part, a choice that adds to the movie’s stark visual language and its themes of control, vulnerability, and power dynamics within opulent spaces.
Palace made its festival debut before a curious international audience. While the screening generated its share of buzz, the response from critics was far from enthusiastic, with many noting a disconnect between the film’s ambitious visuals and its storytelling pace. The reception suggested that Polanski’s latest work may appeal more to viewers who relish cinematic risk and provocative choices than to those seeking a conventional thriller or drama. As the festival circuit continues, the film is scheduled for release in Russia on November 23, a timing that could influence international conversations about its reception and reception trajectories across markets.
Observers have also weighed the film against Polanski’s celebrated body of work. Some viewers may see Palace as a bold attempt to explore ethical boundaries and the fragility of human relationships within luxury settings, while others view it as an uneven project that overtaxes its premise. The presence of a diverse cast, including Ardant and Rourke, adds layers of performance that invite analysis, yet the overall impression remains unsettled for many critics who judge the film on its narrative coherence and emotional resonance rather than its visual style alone.
Beyond the main narrative, a separate discussion emerged about the inspiration and context behind the production. Industry observers have noted the film’s intent to paint a portrait of decadence and the ways in which wealth can intensify conflicts among strangers who share spaces but not values. This backdrop provides fodder for dialogue about the ethics of art, the responsibilities of filmmakers, and the impact of a director’s career on contemporary reception. The conversation extends to how audiences interpret the film’s provocations, especially within festival atmospheres that reward ambition and risk-taking.
Meanwhile, commentary from other performers and public figures has touched on the challenges of balancing creative audacity with audience accessibility. Some perspectives highlight the film as a snapshot of a moment in cinema where prestige and performance quality collide with a narrative that many feel does not fully justify its stylistic choices. In this climate, Palace’s premiere and subsequent screenings will likely remain a point of reference for discussions about modern festival cinema and the continuing evolution of Polanski’s filmography, as critics and fans alike assess whether the project represents a meaningful addition to his oeuvre or a controversial misstep worth revisiting critically in the years ahead.
As the film moves toward wider release, industry publications will likely publish follow-up analyses that examine the interplay between setting, character dynamics, and the director’s long-standing thematic interests. In the end, Palace arrives as a conversation piece, inviting debate about taste, technique, and the role of controversial filmmakers in shaping contemporary cinema. The broader reception will unfold over time, with audiences and critics returning to the questions the film raises about power, aesthetics, and moral ambiguity in high-end environments. The discussion will not only measure the movie against Polanski’s past work but also consider how it stands on its own within the current landscape of film artistry and festival culture. This evolving discourse will be marked by ongoing reviews, audience reactions, and scholarly consideration as Palace settles into the broader conversation about modern cinema’s willingness to push boundaries.