Walking into Alliance Française in Nairobi for the East African premiere of Maoussi on March 17, 2025, I knew exactly what to expect. I had gone through the promotional materials, watched the trailer, and read the synopsis.
But here’s the thing about movies, no matter how prepared you think you are, a film will always find a way to surprise you, catch you off guard, and trigger an unexpected reaction.
I had one of those reactions after watching Maoussi, and to keep it 100 percent real, I didn't like this film.
I’m not saying the film is terrible. It’s an entertaining mix of comedy and drama. But it left me extremely upset.
I am going to try to keep it as spoiler-free as possible.
The basics
Written and directed by Charlotte Schiøler, Maoussi explores love in a multicultural world, touching on themes of identity, migration, and acceptance with maturity and sensitivity.
The film also attempts to debunk cultural stereotypes, portraying its characters as equals and showing that love transcends societal norms.
Synopsis
Babette unexpectedly finds herself sharing her small Parisian apartment with Edo, a Congolese refugee. When Maoussi, an escaped lab mouse, makes an appearance, their lives are turned upside down as they navigate cultural misunderstandings and conflicting expectations about modern love.
Charlotte Schiøler’s
Drawing inspiration from her own personal experiences as an outsider, Schiøler infuses the narrative with a unique perspective. The film is also a nod to her famous great-aunt, the writer Karen Blixen, whose time in Kenya inspired Out of Africa.
Schiøler never met Blixen, who passed away in 1962, but cherishes family stories about her Kenyan roots. “Our family remembers her love for Kenya, which is documented in her books and diaries,” she says during the question and answer session, adding that Blixen, whom Nairobi’s Karen neighborhood is named after, relied heavily on financial support from her well-off uncle back home.
The positives
At its core, Maoussi is a love story that has its comedic moments. Its themes are humane and relatable, making the story easy to follow and invest in, but the humour is what makes it truly accessible.
Jacob Sibi-Okumu said the story was based on Schiøler’s own experiences wich I believe might have helped give the film a cohesive structure, it starts, moves forward with purpose, and concludes definitively with a clear A to Z like the filmmaker knew exactly where they wanted to take the characters.
Edo’s motivations remain clear throughout the film, which is important in justifying his action in the third act.
The casting is decent, though it plays into one of my biggest issues with the movie. Elsa Wolliaston was a standout, conveying so much even with just a stare.
Then there’s the mouse. I was impressed by how naturally Maoussi was woven into the story, though I wasn’t a fan of where the film ultimately took that subplot.
The cinematography fluctuates. Early on, some shots feel unstable, and the framing lacks intentionality. But the colour palette, set design, and location choices help mask some of those rough moments.
By the middle of the film, there are beautifully lit scenes and well-composed shots that pop up and make me question the first half of the film, visually.
Clocking in at just 75 minutes, the movie is fast-paced and a quick watch. While it’s a familiar love story, it still manages to be unpredictable.
During the question and answer session, we also learned interesting behind-the-scenes details, including how much of a passion project this was for Schiøler and the careful attention given to language and dance within the script.
What I struggled with
The music and dance elements felt underutilised. They play a big role in bringing the main characters together, but by the third act, they take a backseat.
The pacing is too fast. The film doesn’t give you enough time to breathe or process key moments. There were several instances where I wished the movie would just pause for a second.
Some of the editing choices felt chaotic, and the lack of wide establishing shots or just cinematic B rolls made it harder to settle into the world of the story.
But the biggest issue, for me? The film’s stereotypical depiction of the African character, Edo, played by Moustapha Mbengue.
I understand that the story is based on the writer’s experiences, but Edo’s characterisation felt distasteful. He is portrayed as illiterate, disloyal, and possessing an almost primitive outlook on relationships. He’s also entirely one-dimensional in his drive which made me wonder if there was no decent way of writing this character.
Even as a refugee, a Congolese man would likely still have a sense of style and charm, yet here, that’s ignored in favour of a reductive, stereotypical portrayal of an African immigrant who can’t read and falls for the white woman.
It’s lazy storytelling. There was no effort to subvert or add depth to his character. I mean yes, the man was illiterate and his motivation was clear but at least he should have been given a backbone, stuck around and tried to come up with a solution rather than immediately rushing for the easy way out.
Yes, stories like this exist in real life, and yes this is more of a festival film but there are far more meaningful, respectful depictions of African immigrants out there. Watching this as an African, I felt apprehensive.
Conclusion
This isn’t a bad movie. It’s dramatic, funny, smart in moments, and engaging. The fast pacing makes it easy to watch, and the love story, while familiar, still feels fresh.
But the way it depicts African immigrants is not just a low-hanging fruit, it’s disrespectful. Even as I write this, I’m still baffled by the idea that I sat through the full film.
