Rating: 3.5/5 Stars
TIT FOR TAT (2025), directed by Sarian Martin, positions itself as a modern morality play wrapped in the glossy packaging of contemporary Nollywood drama. Clocking in at a substantial 1 hour and 47 minutes, the film is a weighty examination of cruelty, deceit, and, ultimately, the difficult path toward genuine redemption. But does it succeed in balancing its initial lighthearted "wife-material" premise with the devastatingly serious themes of class exploitation and domestic abuse that emerge later?
As a critic specializing in the evolving landscape of Nigerian cinema, I find the film's ambition both its greatest strength and its most significant structural challenge. This is not a simple story of a spoiled girl learning to cook; it is a dramatic indictment of societal power dynamics, driven by a central performance that is as grating as it is ultimately moving. Our analysis must move beyond Marian’s domestic woes and focus on the film's true core: the realization that the petty "tit for tat" of her class-based spite pales in comparison to the violence faced by the woman she victimizes.
I. The Shifting Sands of the Protagonist: Marian's Unconvincing Transformation
The film hinges entirely on the character of Marian, played with initial gusto and later, genuine humility, by Destiny Etiko. We are introduced to her as the quintessential Nollywood antagonist—spoiled, wealthy, and condescending. Her defining moment, drenching the food vendor In Kiru (a masterclass in restrained acting) out of petty spite, immediately establishes the high stakes of her arrogance.
The narrative demands a radical transformation for Marian to move from villain to protagonist, but this is where the film’s structure falters. Marian’s decision to deceive her fiancé, George, by hiring In Kiru to cook for her—a direct consequence of her initial "tit for tat" cruelty—is motivated purely by self-interest and a desire to secure her privileged future. Her transformation only begins when she witnesses the brutality of In Kiru’s life, specifically the domestic violence she endures.
Critically, the shift from self-preservation (deceit) to genuine empathy (redemption) is rapid and largely unearned. The film relies heavily on Etiko's ability to convey profound shock and subsequent guilt through silent contemplation rather than allowing the audience to witness a gradual, internal moral struggle. While Etiko delivers the emotional payoff, the script shortcuts the complex process of a character dismantling her lifelong sense of entitlement.
II. George: The Blind Idealist and Plot Device
Eddie Watson’s George, Marian's fiancé, serves less as a nuanced character and more as the narrative’s emotional tripwire. His blind devotion and insistence on finding "wife material" defined by superficial domestic capabilities are crucial to setting up the comedic dramatic irony that permeates the film’s middle act.
Dramatic Irony and the Failed Proposal: The climax of this deceit—George's elaborate proposal, which collapses as Marian is publicly exposed as a fraud—is arguably the film’s most impactful structural moment. The audience knows the truth, watching George wax lyrical about Marian’s supposed culinary skills is agonizing, and the subsequent reveal delivers a necessary, painful public humiliation. However, the critic must question if George’s love was ever truly believable given Marian’s consistently appalling behavior. He loves an idealized fantasy, not the real Marian, positioning him as a tool for the plot’s exposé rather than a fully realized partner. His eventual return to Marian, post-redemption, feels more like an affirmation of the script’s desire for a neat resolution than an organic development of their toxic relationship.
III. The Core Thematic Pivot: From Petty Revenge to Systemic Abuse
The true gravity of Tit for Tat lies in its unexpected thematic pivot. The initial conflict is the "tit for tat" exchange between Marian and In Kiru: Marian's cruelty leads to In Kiru's reluctant participation in the deception, a form of financial revenge. This feels like standard Nollywood fare.
The story drastically shifts when the narrative moves the camera away from Marian’s pampered life and focuses squarely on In Kiru’s harrowing reality. By revealing the extent of her systemic poverty and the routine, agonizing cycle of domestic abuse she suffers at the hands of her husband, the film successfully achieves two things:
It re-contextualizes Marian's crime: Her earlier cruelty (the drenching, the deceit) is suddenly revealed as trivial—a mere upper-class tantrum—when placed beside the visceral, life-threatening struggle of a working-class woman.
It elevates the narrative: The film stops being about a spoiled girl and starts being about awareness and intervention.
This transition is bold, yet structurally jarring. The audience is asked to abruptly switch gears from enjoying the setup of a comedic deception to confronting a harrowing social issue. While the film manages to pull it off thanks to the grounded performance of In Kiru’s actor, the editing feels strained. The transition suggests the filmmakers realized the shallowness of the "wife-material" plot and deliberately deployed the heavy topic of abuse as a mechanism to force Marian’s spiritual awakening.
IV. In Kiru and the Power of the Silent Performance
The emotional anchor of Tit for Tat is the performance of the actor portraying In Kiru. She embodies the resilience and quiet pain of the working-class Nigerian woman who, despite being marginalized and abused, maintains an unshakable core of dignity. Her strength, not her victimhood, is the catalyst for Marian’s final awakening.
Her character successfully represents the often-unseen human cost of class exploitation. Marian’s redemption is not achieved through simply apologizing; it is achieved through her choice to use her privilege (money and status) to actively intervene and save In Kiru. The final, symbolic gesture—handing over the keys to a newly secured house—is a powerful affirmation of the film's ultimate message: true "wife material" is defined not by domestic skill, but by human empathy, courage, and the willingness to support and empower fellow women. It transforms the narrative from one of individual comeuppance to one of social responsibility.
The film successfully argues that the most profound form of "tit for tat" is not revenge, but the ethical obligation to pay kindness forward and redress an initial wrong with a monumental act of restorative justice.
V. Technical Review: Dialogue, Pacing, and Production Standards
For a 2025 Nollywood release, Tit for Tat largely meets the expected high production value. The cinematography is clean, favoring well-lit, sharp images that emphasize the aesthetic contrast between Marian’s opulent home and In Kiru's humble, struggling environment. The sound design is mostly competent, though some of the transitional music cues feel overly dramatic and push the audience's emotion rather than letting the scene speak for itself.
The primary issue remains pacing. At 1 hour and 47 minutes, the film is long, and the deliberate drag of Marian’s early spoiled antics could have been condensed. The script over-relies on expository dialogue in the early scenes, telling us Marian is terrible rather than showing us, which contributes to the slow burn before the core conflict emerges. However, once the domestic abuse storyline takes center stage, the pacing tightens, delivering swift, brutal emotional punches that justify the latter half of the runtime. The dialogue during the emotional confrontation scenes is notably more authentic, driven by the desperation of In Kiru and the emerging conscience of Marian.
Verdict: A Flawed But Essential Social Drama
Tit for Tat is a messy, sprawling film that attempts to execute a three-act structure designed for two different movies: a social comedy of manners and a heavy social drama. While the structural shifts are jarring, the thematic payoff is ultimately rewarding.
The film deserves recognition for successfully pivoting from a shallow premise to a powerful call for awareness regarding domestic abuse and class inequality. It forces the audience to confront the superficiality of its initial conflicts and acknowledges that the real-life stakes for the poor are infinitely higher than the petty grievances of the wealthy.
Go watch this film, but be prepared for the emotional whiplash. It’s a compelling, if imperfect, testament to Nollywood’s continued evolution in tackling relevant social narratives, proving that sometimes, the most challenging films are the ones that stick with you the longest. It’s a mirror held up to societal double standards, showing that the only true "tit" that deserves a "tat" is justice for the vulnerable.
Did Marian's redemption feel earned to you? Should George have taken her back? Let us know in the comments below and share your thoughts!
#NollywoodTimes
#NollywoodRedemption
#TitForTatMovie
#ClassAndCruelty
No comments:
Post a Comment