You are here:

Turks & Caicos

Name: Turks & Caicos
Director: David Hare
Released: 2014
Duration: 95 min

Representation Score

5.2/10

Fair

2014

TV-PG

Director

David Hare

Runtime

95 minutes

Average Rating

No ratings yet

New Showbiz Analysis

Turks & Caicos succeeds as a sophisticated critique of global hegemony and institutional fragility. It moves beyond standard thriller clichés by interrogating the intersection of individual ability to act and systemic power. The film's primary strength lies in its deconstruction of capitalist and post-colonial dynamics. By juxtaposing local populations against an expatriate tourist class, it avoids the typical 'paradise' clichés of Western cinema. However, the film lacks representation for LGBTQ+ identities and disability. While it offers a rigorous critique of political and financial systems, these specific demographic narratives are absent.

Watch this, not that →

Category Breakdown

Does Turks & Caicos have LGBTQ+ representation?

Minimal

The film focuses on geopolitical intrigue and socioeconomic tension but lacks LGBTQ+ character arcs or critiques of the assumption that everyone is straight or cisgender, operating within a traditional framework.

How does Turks & Caicos portray gender?

Fair

Female characters, particularly in financial PR, demonstrate a significant role in driving the story and intellectual presence. The film avoids submissive clichés, offering a nuanced view of gendered power.

How racially and ethnically diverse is Turks & Caicos?

Good

The Caribbean setting facilitates an exploration of post-colonial dynamics. A diverse local cast provides a necessary counterpoint to the dominant white interests of the financial elite.

How does Turks & Caicos represent religion and culture?

Excellent

The narrative critiques Western institutional integrity and the corruption of global capital. It portrays Western-driven structures as inherently corruptive to local autonomy.

Does Turks & Caicos include disability representation?

Minimal

There is no significant evidence regarding the portrayal of physical or neurodivergent disabilities within the narrative.

Present on Screen

Meaningful exploration of post-colonial dynamics through its Caribbean setting.
Nuanced portrayal of female characters who play a significant role in driving the story and intellectual presence.
Sophisticated critique of global capital and the corruption of Western institutions.

Limited or Absent

Lack of discernible LGBTQ+ character arcs or non-assuming gender matches what was assigned at birth identities.
Absence of representation regarding physical or neurodivergent disabilities.

Official Synopsis

The second movie in David Hare's Johnny Worricker trilogy. Loose-limbed spy Johnny Worricker, last seen whistleblowing at MI5 in Page Eight, has a new life. He is hiding out in Ray-Bans on the Caribbean islands of the title, eating lobster and calling himself Tom Eliot (he’s a poet at heart). We’re drawn into his world and his predicament when Christopher Walken strolls in as a shadowy American who claims to know Johnny. The encounter forces him into the company of some ambiguous American businessmen who claim to be on the islands for a conference on the global financial crisis. When one of them falls in the sea, their financial PR seems to know more than she's letting on. Worricker soon learns the extent of their shady activities and he must act quickly to survive when links to British prime minister Alec Beasley come to light.

How are these scores produced? →