Can a work of fiction serve as a weapon for emotional revenge?

Entertainment · Published 3 October 2026 Swipe more like this →

In short: In Tom Ford's 2016 thriller, an art gallery owner receives a manuscript from her estranged ex-husband. As she reads the violent story, she realizes the narrative is a calculated message about their failed marriage. The film explores how art can be used to communicate what words often fail to express.

Tom Ford's second feature film, Nocturnal Animals, adapts Austin Wright's 1993 novel Tony and Susan. The narrative structure is complex, weaving together the life of Susan Morrow, a wealthy Los Angeles gallery owner, with the contents of a manuscript written by her former husband, Edward Sheffield. Susan, who has not spoken to Edward in nearly two decades, finds herself haunted by the book's brutal themes, which mirror the collapse of their own relationship.

The manuscript within the film, titled after Edward's nickname for Susan, follows a man named Tony Hastings whose family is kidnapped and murdered during a Texas road trip. This fictional tragedy serves as a dark reflection of Susan's past choices, including her dismissive attitude toward Edward's literary ambitions and her decision to end their marriage and pregnancy to pursue a more conventional life with her current, unfaithful husband, Hutton Morrow. Ford utilizes this device to explore the weight of regret and the lingering impact of past betrayals.

The production, which began in October 2015, earned critical acclaim for its visual style and performances, particularly from Amy Adams and Jake Gyllenhaal, who plays both Edward and the fictional Tony. While the film won the Grand Jury Prize at the 73rd Venice International Film Festival and grossed over $32 million globally, it also sparked debate. Critics like Victoria Coren Mitchell challenged the film's reception, questioning its dark, violent imagery, while others praised Ford for successfully balancing two distinct, tangible realities within a single narrative framework.

Ultimately, the film concludes on a note of ambiguity. After finishing the manuscript, Susan arranges to meet Edward, only to be left waiting alone as the restaurant remains empty. This final act underscores the film's central preoccupation: the power of fiction to bridge the gap between two people, even when that bridge leads to a painful, one-sided reckoning.

General information, not professional advice. Spotted an error? Flag the card or see corrections and complaints.

Intellect Plus is a visual educational discovery platform for exploring fascinating facts and ideas. Brain Food, Not Brain Rot. What is Intellect Plus?

Related

• Can a single act of violence destroy the bonds of brotherhood forever?
• Is the secret to a literary legacy a lifetime of suppressed resentment?
• Can a thriller survive a shift from London rails to New York suburbs?
• A domestic thriller that became a global literary monster hit
• A fictionalized thriller explores the heavy toll of grief and the pursuit of vengeance
• Can a woman save Christmas when the heir to the North Pole flees?
• How a director captured the haunting reality of children living in total isolation
• A teenage outsider in a remote Icelandic village dreams of a tropical escape
• How a mild-mannered office worker became an unlikely, bone-breaking cinematic action hero
• How a high-stakes action thriller turned an airplane cabin into a claustrophobic puzzle box
• When a retired assassin tries to take a vacation, trouble inevitably follows him home
• Is the monster in Jordan Peele's Nope a biblical angel or a sky predator?

More in Films · More in Entertainment · Latest · A–Z · All topics