Pillion has emerged as one of the most talked-about British indie releases of the year, not because of shock value alone, but because of how critics across global publications describe its emotional intelligence beneath a deliberately confrontational surface. Written and directed by Harry Lighton and starring Alexander Skarsgård and Harry Melling, the film arrives positioned as a queer romance that foregrounds power, consent, and intimacy with unusual directness. Yet, as many reviewers have been quick to point out, Pillion ultimately registers less as provocation and more as a carefully calibrated character study.
Adapted from Adam Mars-Jones’ novel Box Hill, the film centres on a relationship defined by control and submission, but Lighton’s framing keeps the focus firmly on emotional negotiation rather than explicit mechanics. Critics consistently note that the story is driven by the shifting internal states of its two central figures, not by sensational incident. Screen Daily observed that the film is more interested in the “emotional contract” between its characters than in the physical specifics of their arrangement, while The Hollywood Reporter similarly remarked that Lighton’s gaze remains fixed on the psychology of power rather than its surface expressions. This approach establishes early that Pillion is asking audiences to read between gestures, silences, and boundaries, rather than react to spectacle.
Across global publications, the critical consensus has been largely positive, albeit thoughtful and measured. Variety described the film as a provocative work handled with “unexpected tenderness,” a phrase echoed in different forms by several outlets. The Guardian framed the film as one that resists easy provocation, choosing emotional precision over shock, while IndieWire characterised it as a daring but grounded character study that wears the appearance of extremity without indulging in it. Even where critics diverge on their level of enthusiasm, there is broad agreement that Pillion is a serious, deliberate piece of adult filmmaking rather than a stunt-driven exercise.
Much of that seriousness is credited to the performances. Alexander Skarsgård’s work has been singled out by multiple critics as one of the most emotionally exposed turns of his career. Variety noted how the actor strips authority of obvious signifiers, playing dominance as something opaque and withholding rather than demonstrative. The Hollywood Reporter expanded on this, observing that Skarsgård’s character is defined as much by what he refuses to offer emotionally as by what he controls. The performance has been widely read as a departure from the actor’s more overtly charismatic roles, relying instead on restraint and internal tension.
If Skarsgård provides the film’s stillness, Harry Melling supplies its emotional volatility. IndieWire referred to Melling as the film’s emotional revelation, while The Guardian praised the performance for its painful sincerity and lack of self-pity. Critics repeatedly point out that Melling’s character grounds the film’s abstract power dynamics in recognisable vulnerability, allowing the audience to track how consent, desire, and dependence evolve over time. It is this performance, several reviews suggest, that prevents Pillion from drifting into conceptual distance.
Lighton’s direction has also drawn consistent attention for what it withholds as much as for what it shows. Screen Daily noted the confidence of a filmmaker willing to trust absence and restraint, suggesting that the film’s most powerful moments come from what is delayed rather than delivered. Variety described the adaptation as faithful in spirit rather than in literal detail, praising Lighton for translating the novel’s interiority into a visual language of pauses, repetition, and controlled framing. Rather than expanding the story outward, the film tightens its focus, a choice that many critics view as central to its impact.
Comparisons to other recent films exploring adult intimacy have been inevitable, but critics have largely dismissed them as superficial. IndieWire noted that parallels drawn with films such as Babygirl collapse under closer inspection, while The Guardian argued that where some contemporary works seek provocation, Pillion seeks understanding. These distinctions are important to how the film has been received: critics appear keen to separate Lighton’s intentions from broader trends, framing the film as inward-looking rather than exhibitionist.
The major praise clusters repeat across reviews with striking consistency. Variety described the film as remarkably controlled, The Hollywood Reporter called it unsentimental but deeply humane, and Screen Daily highlighted its trust in the audience’s willingness to sit with discomfort. These assessments suggest that critics are responding not just to subject matter, but to tone — a sense that the film knows precisely how far to go, and when to stop.
Reservations, where they arise, tend to focus less on craft than on alignment. IndieWire cautioned that the film’s narrow emotional and narrative focus may test the patience of some viewers, while The Guardian acknowledged that its emotional distance will not work for everyone. Importantly, these critiques are framed as questions of audience fit rather than failures of execution, reinforcing the idea that Pillion is deliberately selective in whom it speaks to.
Audience response appears to mirror this pattern. Trade coverage from Screen Daily suggests that the film has exceeded expectations for a niche British indie, translating curiosity and critical buzz into a moderate-to-good box office performance relative to its scale. Variety’s trade reporting similarly notes that theatrical interest has held steady, indicating that the film’s reputation has not deterred audiences willing to engage with challenging material. The response points to a crossover appeal that extends beyond festival circuits into wider adult audiences.
Within a broader industry and cultural context, critics have positioned Pillion as part of a wave of contemporary queer cinema uninterested in affirmation or simplification. The Guardian framed it as adult queer storytelling that prioritises complexity over comfort, while Variety suggested the film serves as a reminder that intimacy-driven cinema still has a place in theatres. Rather than presenting itself as a manifesto, Pillion has been received as an invitation to conversation.
In the end, the global critical response converges on a similar conclusion. As IndieWire put it, the film lingers longer than its most confrontational moments, and The Hollywood Reporter described it as a work that invites discussion rather than resolution. For all the attention paid to its surface elements, Pillion has ultimately been received as a restrained, performance-led drama that trusts its audience to engage with ambiguity — a quality that explains both its divisive reputation and its quietly solid reception.
Pillion is directed by Harry Lighton, stars Alexander Skarsgård and Harry Melling, and is based on Adam Mars-Jones’ Box Hill.
Read More Review Roundups on POF
