‘Heads of State' movie review: Priyanka Chopra Jonas, Idris Elba, and John Cena go all out to save the world (and partly succeed)
The film opens with Noel Basset (Priyanka Chopra Jonas), a tough MI6 agent, leading a covert operation in the middle of Spain's Tomatina festival. However, things quickly go sideways when her team is sabotaged, and we are led to believe that she has died.
On the other hand, in the land of the free, President Derringer and Prime Minister Clarke's hostility only grows. After fumbling a press conference, a staff member suggests that they travel on the same flight and make amends during the journey. And obviously, a Russian is going to swoop in to upend their plans — Air Force One is attacked by Viktor Gradov (Paddy Considine), a Russian-born arms dealer turned extremist, and the two gentlemen quickly find themselves stranded in a Belarusian forest. The duo must devise a plan to get out of the woods and reach the NATO conference in Italy in time for an important vote, all while being chased by Gradov's ruthless killers.
Heads of State (English)
Director: Ilya Naishuller
Cast: Idris Elba, John Cena, Priyanka Chopra, Paddy Considine, Sarah Niles, Jack Quaid
Runtime: 116 minutes
Storyline: When Air Force One gets shot down over enemy territory, the President of the USA and the Prime Minister of the UK find themselves on the run and working together to thwart a global conspiracy.
Watching Cena and Elba crawl their way back to civilisation with their larger-than-life personalities in full display makes for an entertaining watch. The sequence featuring the President and the Prime Minister crouched in a truck transporting livestock, with Hang Me, Oh Hang Me playing in the background, is one for the ages.
The leads' slick action sequences cushioned by the acting chops of the supporting cast ground this movie. Basset's partly funny puns and surprising comeback midway through the film, Derringer's heart-breaking honesty, and Clarke's hard shell that eventually cracks help steer the movie to its shore. A special mention to the restrained Sarah Niles, as the top aide to the President, and Jack Quaid, the CIA safe house watchman, who brings brevity to the frame. However, by robbing the audience of a chance to experience this high-octane thriller in theatres, Amazon Studios is doing a big disservice to the craft of action movies.
There is more than enough fun and frivolity in this summer movie, but its nonchalance (or wilful ignorance?) concerning the current global order left me feeling uncomfortable; it somehow manages to walk a tight rope of self-aware satire and fantastical politicking.
Championing NATO as 'friends who stand up to a bully' is disingenuous and makes one sad at the thought of another movie from the West working as a propaganda vehicle. Ilya Naishuller's 120-minute-long film, in the end, feels like an attempt to whitewash the international groups and organisations that have caused instability across the developing world.
Heads of State is currently streaming on Prime Video
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
21 minutes ago
- Mint
Mel B marries Rory McPhee: From Cara Delevingne, Daisy Lowe to Emma Bunton — guests at Spice Girl singer's BIG day
Melanie "Mel B" Brown, the former Spice Girls member tied the knot with hairstylist Rory McPhee on Saturday, July 5, at the historic OBE Chapel at St Paul's Cathedral in London. The wedding gala was a star-studded affair. Surrounded by their family and friends in a fairytale setting, the couple took their vows and set off a new chapter in their lives. The dreamy ceremony was attended by several known personalities from the industry, including Cara Delevingne, Daisy Lowe and Katherine Ryan, The People reported. Joining the wedding gala as Mel B's bridesmaids were her three daughters — Phoenix Chi, Madison and Angel Iris. The Spice Girls, the best-selling girl group of all time, comprised Mel B, Melanie C, Emma Bunton, Geri Halliwell, and Victoria Beckham. However, Emma Bunton, also known as Baby Spice, was the only Mel B's former bandmate who made it to the wedding. The couple hosted an extravagant reception at the Shangri-La venue inside London's famed landmark, the Shard. Mel B revealed that Rory McPhee proposed her during a getaway in 2022 and said, 'He said, 'I love you, you're my best friend and I want to spend the rest of my life with you,'' during her appearance at the British TV series Celebrity Gogglebox. The America's Got Talent judge walked down the aisle in Josephine Scott's design. During later part of the day, she was spotted gleaming in Justin Alexander's dress. Fashion designer Victoria Beckham missed Mel B's wedding as she was out of the country, but she found a special way to be a part of Mel B's big day. For the celebrations, Victoria Beckham gifted Mel B's daughter, Phoenix Chi, an elegant blue ensemble. The custom-designed silk dress featuring a matching fascinator made heads turn as Phoenix Chi walked in with her mother.
The Wire
32 minutes ago
- The Wire
Trump's Big, Brutal Bill Entrenches US Empire
Inderjeet Parmar 3 minutes ago Presented as a 'beautiful' fix for growth and security, HR 1 actually funnels wealth to America's richest, arms a $1 trillion war machine and thickens domestic repression, all with the aim of propping up a waning imperial hegemony. The 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' (H.R. 1), heralded as a transformative economic and security package for the United States, is less an economic stimulus than a manifesto for American supremacy. It weds two imperatives of the US ruling class: an upward transfer of wealth and a vast expansion of militarised power, thereby entrenching its domestic and global dominance. Cloaked in rhetoric about jobs, growth and border security, the Bill arrives at a moment when Washington's hegemony is fraying thanks to rising multipolarity, domestic inequality is at an all time high fast – the top 1% hold 32% of wealth – and popular discontent is increasing. Ruling elites secure dominance not merely through coercion but by manufacturing consent via ideological control over civil society—media, politics, and cultural institutions. The Big Brutal Bill, framed as a 'beautiful' solution to economic and security challenges, exemplifies this process. Its proponents, including Republican leaders and sections of the corporate media, have deployed neoliberal and nationalist narratives to mask the legislation's true aims: redistributing wealth upward, strengthening coercive state mechanisms and escalating militarism to sustain US global primacy. This demands the US power elites discipline both domestic and global populations. The bill's economic provisions constitute a brazen transfer of wealth from the working and middle classes to the ultra-rich. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the bill reduces household resources for the poorest 10% by 4% ($940 annually) while boosting incomes for the richest 0.1% by $389,000 for those earning over $4.3 million. Extending the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which directed two-thirds of benefits to the top 20%, the bill amplifies a historical trend: since 1975, the top 1% have sapped $79 trillion from the bottom 90%. Cuts to Medicaid ($930 billion) and SNAP (affecting 4.5 million people) further impoverish the working class, with 15–16 million potentially losing healthcare. This wealth transfer is not merely economic but ideological. Ruling elites, through Fox News and various well funded corporate think tanks, frame the bill as a universal economic boon, echoing neoliberal myths of 'trickle-down' prosperity. Yet, the bill's regressive tax structure and social cuts weaken the economic base of the working and middle classes, limiting their capacity for resistance. Such policies fragment the potential for a radical 'historic bloc' – a unified working-class alliance capable of challenging capitalist dominance. The bill's economic impact aligns with America's global imperial strategies. By prioritising corporate tax breaks, it mirrors US strategies in the Global South, where austerity and privatisation entrench elite power. This domestic imperialism treats the US working class as a colonised population, extracting wealth while offering ideological platitudes about 'growth.' Militarism and War: Coercive Pillars of Hegemony The bill's $1 trillion military budget, the largest in US history, is a cornerstone of its aggressive imperial agenda, escalating war risks while consolidating ruling-class power. Allocating $400 billion for nuclear warheads, hypersonic missiles, and 200 new bombers, the budget aims to counter multipolar rivals like China and Russia. Yet, this spending dwarfs the military budgets of the next ten states across the world. What this bill shows is the degree to which the US empire relies on military dominance and violence to maintain its increasingly precarious global hegemony. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute notes that such military modernisation lowers conflict thresholds, with arms races historically preceding wars 70% of the time. This leads to escalating fears of military miscalculation in regions like the South China Sea. The budget has a dual role: coercion abroad and control at home. Abroad, it reinforces U.S. primacy by projecting power against adversaries, a response to the declining legitimacy of the US-led liberal imperial-international order. Domestically, $50 billion for militarised police and National Guard equipment, alongside $8 billion for 10,000 new ICE agents and private prisons, equips the state to suppress dissent. The bill's provision barring courts from holding officials in contempt further enables authoritarianism, echoing post-9/11 trends where domestic repression accompanied foreign wars (e.g., Iraq). Imperialism is not solely an external phenomenon; it disciplines domestic populations to ensure compliance with elite agendas. The military-industrial complex benefits immensely, with $250 billion in contracts to firms like Boeing and Raytheon. Since 2001, some arms firm stocks have outperformed the Standard & Poor 500 by 600%, and contractor CEOs earn $20–$30 million annually. This economic-militaristic nexus incentivises instability, geopolitical tensions, and war, as historical examples like Iraq ($39 billion to Halliburton) demonstrate. Ruling elites are leveraging coercion to secure economic power, with war profits reinforcing their hegemony. Ideological Consent: Nationalism and Distraction The bill's militaristic and economic aims are cloaked in nationalist ideology, a classic tactic to secure consent. Its $10 billion for 'countering foreign disinformation' doubles as domestic propaganda, while border wall and ICE funding ($8 billion) symbolise 'defending America.' These measures rally nationalist sentiment, particularly among the 55% of Republicans who support the budget for 'security'. Such symbols unify subordinate classes under ruling-class leadership, diverting attention from wealth transfers and social cuts. Put crudely, American elite nationalism is little more than an instrument to mask class conflict. By demonising immigrants and foreign adversaries, the bill aligns segments of the working class with elite interests, dampening class consciousness. SIPRI data suggests nationalist surges increase war risks by 15–20% within five years, as publics tolerate aggression. The bill's narrative of 'preventing a recession' and 'securing borders' obscures its role in impoverishing millions, a hegemonic sleight of hand. Crisis of Hegemony and Resistance It is not a coincidence that the bill has emerged in a moment of hegemonic crisis. Rising inequality, multipolarity and public opposition signal eroding consent. Yet, the ruling elite counters this through intensified coercion (military, police) and ideological manipulation (nationalism, neoliberalism). Crises of hegemony require constant renewal, explaining this aggressive consolidation. However, cracks exist: there are widespread denunciations of the bill as a 'wealth transfer' and 'war machine'. Without a unified and organised counter-hegemonic movement, however, this resistance remains fragmented. The Big Brutal Bill is a masterclass in imperial hegemony, blending wealth transfers, militarism, and nationalism to entrench the power of the American Establishment. Its $1 trillion military budget escalates war risks by fuelling arms races and domestic repression, while its economic provisions siphon wealth from the working and middle classes to the ultra-rich. The bill is an example of what Gramsci would call a 'war of position' – fortifying US capitalism amid crisis, reflecting the American state's dual nature: coercive abroad, exploitative at home. Resistance requires exposing these truths and building a historic bloc to challenge the ruling class's grip. Inderjeet Parmar is a professor of international politics and associate dean of research in the School of Policy and Global Affairs at City St George's, University of London, a fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences, and a columnist at The Wire. He is an International Fellow at the ROADS Initiative think tank, Islamabad, and author of several books including Foundations of the American Century. He is currently writing a book on the history, politics, and powers of the US foreign policy establishment. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
India Today
34 minutes ago
- India Today
US sends 8 deported migrants to South Sudan after Supreme Court clearance
Eight men deported from the United States in May and held under guard for weeks at an American military base in the African nation of Djibouti while their legal challenges played out in court have now reached the Trump administration's intended destination, war-torn South Sudan, a country the State Department advises against travel to due to 'crime, kidnapping, and armed conflict.'advertisementThe immigrants from Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Vietnam and South Sudan arrived in South Sudan on Friday after a federal judge cleared the way for the Trump administration to relocate them in a case that had gone to the Supreme Court, which had permitted their removal from the US Administration officials said the men had been convicted of violent crimes in the US.'This was a win for the rule of law, safety and security of the American people,' said Homeland Security spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin in a statement Saturday announcing the men's arrival in South Sudan, a chaotic country in danger once more of collapsing into civil war. The Supreme Court on Thursday cleared the way for the transfer of the men who had been put on a flight in May bound for South Sudan. That meant that the South Sudan transfer could be completed after the flight was detoured to a base in Djibouti, where they men were held in a converted shipping container. The flight was detoured after a federal judge found the administration had violated his order by failing to allow the men a chance to challenge the court's conservative majority had ruled in June that immigration officials could quickly deport people to third countries. The majority halted an order that had allowed immigrants to challenge any removals to countries outside their homeland where they could be in danger.A flurry of court hearings on Independence Day resulted a temporary hold on the deportations while a judge evaluated a last-ditch appeal by the men's before the judge decided he was powerless to halt their removals and that the person best positioned to rule on the request was a Boston judge whose rulings led to the initial halt of the administration's effort to begin deportations to South Friday evening, that judge had issued a brief ruling concluding the Supreme Court had tied his men had final orders of removal, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials have said. Authorities have reached agreements with other countries to house immigrants if authorities cannot quickly send them back to their homelands.- Ends
