(and why the 2025 film “The Ballad of Wallis Island” is fantastic)
Key Point: Initial theories for product development, marketing, culture, etc., should be made by you, the human, not AI. Treat what comes from your mind as sacred. AI can be brought in after the groundwork is laid.
Spoiler alert: I reveal the main plot elements of the film in discussion.
My wife and I were scrolling the movie options on Amazon Prime a couple weeks ago, and she settled on a quaint-looking 2025 film entitled “The Ballad of Wallis Island.” We don’t usually like newer movies, so I was skeptical, but we decided to give it a shot. To say we were pleasantly surprised would be an understatement. The film is amazing, shockingly good. If you’re looking for something that will make you laugh and cry, this is the film for you. Not being a film critic myself, I will refrain from attempting a genuine movie review. However, I will provide my 2 cents, simply because it applies to a broader point about AI that I will make below.
The film is a comedy drama that centers around a rich recluse, Charles, who lives on an island and decides to commission a private concert from his favorite musical duo, McGwyer Mortimer, simply for himself. He keeps details about his background and the gig secret even from the musicians he invites. While the beginning of the film portrays him as an unserious man who has more money than sense, over the course of the film it is revealed that the musical duo was not just his favorite band, but also his late wife’s favorite band, and they had enjoyed a deep connection through music. The real purpose of the concert was for Charles to re-connect one more time with that feeling that he shared with his wife who died five years prior. The friction that develops between Charles and the group’s guitarist-singer Herb yields to a shared humanity, even in the face of clashing personalities, and a realization of the need to move on from lost love.
Themes explored in the film include, as mentioned, moving on from lost love, finding deep human connection in unlikely social scenarios, the irony of elite experiences, and the challenge of consumerism to art. In a civilizational sense, we could say the film deals with the difficulty that the wealthy West has in investing in genuine artistic expression as well as social connection.
In light of the above, it occurred to me that this film would be an excellent test of AI. How so? AI is purported to “understand” and to therefore be able to generate (generative AI). But the film presents a conundrum: The impetus for the film is hidden in the subtext. Part of the hidden nature of the film is due to the fact that the main character Charles hides his reasons for the concert, which are revealed gradually, from midway to the end of the movie. I’d like to think such a character in real life would also hide his reasons, at least to a certain degree, given the awkwardness and pressure that the shared intimacy would induce. Related, I think the other aspect of the film’s subtext is that the viewer would hope that deeper human connection can be derived at without showing every card in the hand so to speak. All this is to say that the subtext is absolutely integral to the film. On the one hand, the film wouldn’t work if Charles simply remained a silly rich recluse through the entire film. There would be no sympathy from the audience. At the same time, the film doesn’t work well if the characters reveal their true intentions early on. Ironically, they would come off as similarly unserious.
So where does the test for AI come in? Well, the linchpin for the film is hidden in plain sight, so it begs the question: Can AI spot it? If I were to ask ChatGPT a few questions about the film in a prompt, could I get it to reveal the subtext adequately? As it turns out, no. At least in this case, AI was not able to identify the subtext well. The part that made the film great was lost on AI.
I posed three tests to ChatGPT: 1. Testing for general plot understanding. AI did get the topline plot and themes and so passed this lower bar test. 2. Finding the crucial subtext of the film. AI did not get this (more below). 3. Comparing this film to other films to indicate a perspective on quality of film-making (another lower bar test). AI presented this film as a viable option among others but didn’t stake out a firm perspective on quality. If I were to grade, I would say AI passed only the lower bar tests adequately but only half-passed the quality test. AI did about half the work I asked it to do and could not do the critical part of the job. Score 1 for humanity.
For the critical test (2. above), AI frames Charles’s purpose in commissioning the concert as “an attempt to domesticate grief by purchasing a memory.” This is an especially cynical way to look at the character. Any average human viewer would implicitly understand that the intimate purpose that Charles expressed toward the end of the film was actually present all along, though hidden. AI didn’t get this. Charles wasn’t trying to manufacture something. It was present all along. He wasn’t engaging in “transactional logic” as AI puts it – he was deconstructing the transaction to get to something deeper that always existed.
Granted, for the second theme of consumerism vs. authenticity, AI did a fairly good job. However, it should be noted, this is explicitly revealed in the film. There is no hidden subtext here.
Finally, AI again gets it wrong when dealing with the theme of elite experiences. The concert did not expose “how curated luxury can intensify loneliness rather than erase it” as AI states. Simply the opposite: The concert attended a closure that gave way to an emotional opening up. Even just in terms of plot, the local shop clerk (a potential new love interest for Charles) is invited to the concert in the end to share the experience with Charles. Indeed, AI took what was a question and obstacle of the film and elevated it to a meaning it did not attain. Charles was not attempting to “script meaning through exclusivity…ultimately shown as compensatory” as AI suggests. Instead, his original intent was to enjoy the meaning that he had previously shared with his wife, privately, without necessarily revealing it to anyone else. The meaning already existed. AI missed the subtext, which is only the most important part.
Before I conclude, I should reiterate, The Ballad of Wallis Island is fantastic. Go see it if you can and are in the mood to laugh and cry.
So the big question: Should we utilize AI for Theory and Strategy creation, Product development, Purpose and Meaning statements, and the like? No, don’t do that. AI will often miss the point. Use AI for derivative work as needed but not for the core impetus of your endeavor.
Now you know the reason why I develop market culture theories myself and don’t use AI for that (in my FAQs as well).
If you’re interested in what AI “thinks” about The Ballad of Wallis Island, see the entire output below.
My prompt:
Provide a cultural analysis of the 2025 film The Ballad of Wallis Island. Describe the film’s plot, and analyze the film’s use of Western cultural themes of wealth, consumerism, and elite experiences. Also, compare this film with other similar films of 2025 in terms of quality.
From ChatGPT:
Cultural analysis — The Ballad of Wallis Island (2025)
Brief plot (straightforward)
An eccentric lottery-winner, Charles Heath (Tim Key), hires a faded folk musician, Herb McGwyer (Tom Basden), to reunite his old duo—McGwyer & Mortimer (Carey Mulligan)—for a one-off concert on the remote Wallis Island. Charles spends a small fortune (a suitcase of cash is explicitly offered) to curate a private, intimate experience in memory of his late wife; the visit forces the musicians to confront stalled careers, old romances, and the gap between artistic integrity and commercial survival. The film ends quietly: a performance that is less spectacle than emotional closure, and a small, human reckoning for all involved.
How the film uses Western themes of wealth, consumerism, and “elite” experience
Wealth as curatorial power, not fulfillment.
Charles’s lottery windfalls let him buy experiences rather than relationships: he retires to an island, flies a musician in, and literally pays for a private concert. The cash-on-the-table moment (and the gig being arranged as a bespoke, one-person show) frames wealth as the means to stage intensely personal, elite rituals—an attempt to domesticate grief by purchasing a memory. That literal transactional logic is central to the film’s emotional friction.
Consumerism vs. authenticity in art.
Herb’s backstory—his transition from earnest folk to commercially oriented pop and the attendant compromises—works as a microcosm of the larger cultural tension: music (and culture) as commodity versus music as meaningful practice. The movie consistently places the stripped-down, communal act of singing on a beach against the polished, market-driven career path Herb once took, inviting viewers to weigh what gets bought and what gets lost. Critics highlight this nostalgic/folk authenticity as one of the film’s emotional anchors.
Elite experiences as isolation and compensation.
The private concert—an “elite” event by definition—is visually and tonally small, which undercuts glamour and exposes how curated luxury can intensify loneliness rather than erase it. Charles’s attempt to script meaning through exclusivity is ultimately shown as compensatory: wealth creates a stage but not connection, and the film privileges everyday human gestures (lanterns, small talk, a shared song) over spectacle. Reviews stress the film’s tenderness in revealing that difference.
Comparison with other 2025 films (quality and place in the year)
Critics repeatedly treated The Ballad of Wallis Island as a small-scale gem of 2025: it appears on Roger Ebert’s mid-year “best of” roundup and is praised for its gentle humor, performances and music. That placement puts it alongside other quiet, character-driven indies of the year (the list pairs it with films like Familiar Touch and Eephus), meaning it’s judged on craft, warmth and emotional honesty rather than spectacle. In short: while it’s not a blockbuster or an awards behemoth, it’s widely regarded as one of 2025’s most charming and well-acted intimate films.
Aggregate coverage (AP, NPR, Guardian, Tom’s Guide) positions the film as a critical favorite and a sleeper hit for viewers who seek “low-volume” movies that emphasize character and music over high concept thrills. If you prefer films that trade scale for subtlety and human texture, this sits near the top of 2025’s offerings; if you’re looking for large thematic reckonings or visual bravura, other headline titles on best-of lists will offer that instead.
Final take
The Ballad of Wallis Island uses a small, carefully staged story to interrogate what Western wealth often buys—curated experience, privacy, control—and what it cannot: reparative human intimacy. Its moral is modest rather than moralizing: money can summon a perfect night, but music and presence are what stay with you. Critics rewarded the film’s restraint, acting, and soundtrack, making it one of 2025’s most satisfying quiet dramas.