Breaking Norms and Reimagining Power in Genevieve Nnaji’s Lionheart

 

Breaking Norms and Reimagining Power in Genevieve Nnaji’s Lionheart

 

Introduction:

The movie Genevieve Nnaji’s Lionheart shows us an interesting story of tenacity, gender (male and female, and culture in modern Nigeria. The film made mark as the country’s first Netflix original and Oscar submission, Lionheart uses relatable family and business themes to subtly put to test rooted norms in the society.  The review shows four critical lenses—Formal Media Analysis, Oppositional Gaze, Marxist Critique, and Stuart Hall’s Encoding/Decoding Model to analyse how the film passes its messages via cinematic style and symbols. This lens shows how Lionheart act as a cultural tool that balance entertainment with social reflection.

Section A: Formal Media Analysis:

The film cinematography supports its warm tone by portraying Nigeria in a visual and uplifting way. Bright, natural lights and rich colours are used throughout the movie to make locations like Enugu feel vibrant. Camera angles often place Adaeze in central, frames, emphasize her importance as the narrative focus. Shots of cityscapes and interior spaces balance the local setting with a sense of national pride.

The mise en scène in Lionheart match modern way with culture to create a true and impactful environment. The costumes, furniture, and set designs represent a mix of culture and modern values. For example, Adaeze’s wardrobe shows stylish attire with African fabrics, showing her role as a modern woman rooted in her culture. Props like family photographs and Igbo calligraphy reinforce cultural pride without feeling forced.

Sound design in the film is nuanced but with purpose, enriching the atmosphere without distracting from the dialogue. The use of traditional Nigerian music during key emotional moments adds depth. Environmental sounds, such as office chatter and more, are realistic and make the scenes feel relatable in everyday life.

Editing choices aid the story to flow smoothly and maintain a balance tone in the film. The cuts are not jarring, and scenes transition naturally from one to the next. During moments of tension such as boardroom meetings the editing slows down allowing viewers to focus on character reactions and main dialogue.

Actors’ performances in Lionheart contribute greatly to the film’s emotional depth and believability. Genevieve Nnaji gives a subtle yet strong performance as Adaeze, portraying strength and controlled frustration. Pete Edochie’s character is stern but loving, while Nkem Owoh offers comic relief without reducing the seriousness of the storyline. These performances help balance humour and drama well.

The film follows a culture narrative, which helps keep message clear. The story starts with a disruption, Chief Obiagu’s illness which follows Adaeze’s journey to save the company and concludes with a satisfying resolution. This three-act makes the film stays focused on Adaeze’s growth as a leader, making the story both inspiring and easy to follow and recommend.

Section B: Oppositional Gaze (bell hooks)

The lens of the Oppositional Gaze, Lionheart gives voice to the Black woman who is often silenced in mainstream cinema. bell hooks explain the oppositional gaze as how Black women reclaim power to define and resist how they are portrayed. In Lionheart, Adaeze is not seen as a helpless figure, but rather as the centre of her own story.

Throughout the film, Adaeze observes actively her environment and responds with intelligence and authority. Whether she’s in the boardroom she makes wise decisions, pushes back against doubt, and stand on her opinions. Her gaze is fixed, not submissive. She does not simply react to others she leads.

The film resists harmful stereotypes by showing Adaeze as a confident professional who doesn’t rely on male validation.  Her relationship with her father is rooted in respect and mentorship, and even her comic uncle comes to respect her leadership by the end.

 Adaeze the viewer’s main point of identification, Lionheart encourages audiences to see from her perspective. She defines herself, and we follow her lead. In this way, the film aligns with bell hooks’ vision of a resistant gaze that challenges dominant cinematic norms.

Section C: Marxist Critique:

Using Marxist theory, Lionheart shows change in power and class differences present in Nigeria’s capitalist economy. The story centres on a family-owned transport company and the challenges they face from debt, competition, and internal power struggles.

Although the Obiagus are of Nigeria’s upper-middle class, their wealth does not demarcate them from systemic problems. Chief Obiagu’s illness pose a serious concern the stability of the company, and Adaeze must find a capitalist system dominated by sexism, and corporate rivalry. Her challenges are not just personal but are structural.

The workers and drivers in the company are mainly invisible, showing us how labour is usually exploited in a capitalist economy. This focuses on boardroom decisions and business deals highlighting how the upper-class controls production and profit, while the working class remains relegated.
Instead of promoting radical change, Lionheart shows how individuals can rise through merit and negotiation. Adaeze’s success comes from strategic thinking and compromise—not from dismantling the system.

In the end, we see the film offer a critique of capitalism by showing that class privilege alone does not guarantee success, instead power must be shared to survive.

 

Section D: Stuart Hall’s Encoding/Decoding Model:

Stuart Hall’s model shows us how Lionheart can have different meanings depending on who is watching. The film is encoded by its creators with certain values, example: female empowerment, cultural pride but it may be decoded in different ways.

A dominant reading of Lionheart might agree to it as a positive portrayal of a successful Nigerian woman breaking boundaries. This is likely how the filmmakers intended it to be seen, and many international viewers may accept this message. The bright visuals, tone, and family themes make it easy to digest.

However, some Nigerian audiences may produce a negotiated or even oppositional reading. While they may appreciate Adaeze’s journey, they might also question whether the film oversimplifies the challenges faced by most Nigerian women

The film is open-ended enough to invite personal interpretations based on background or culture. Viewers might focus on the culture, while others focus on its subtle critique of capitalism. Hall’s theory shows us that meaning is co-created by the viewer and the text.

However, Lionheart succeeds in communicating its values, while also allowing room for different perspectives.

 

Conclusion:

 Lionheart is seen as a powerful contribution to African cinema. With its use of formal elements and storytelling, the film challenges dominant gender roles, reveals class tensions, and encourages critical thinking about how we interpret media. Using Formal Media Analysis, Oppositional Gaze, Marxist Critique, and Stuart Hall’s Encoding/Decoding, I have explained from my point of view how the film reflect not only on Adaeze’s journey, but also on the social structures that shape our lives.