Monthly Archives: March 2022

The last programming that viewers of RT America saw, on the morning of March 1, was a half hour of BoomBu$tthe Russian-funded networks business show. That day, cohost Rachel Blevins, a 27-year-old from Mineral Wells, an hour west of Fort Worth, had led with a roundup of economic fallout from Western sanctions against Russia over, as she put it, its ongoing military operation in Ukraine, using Vladimir Putins euphemism for his war.

Though that days coverage of the conflict on BoomBu$t was mellow compared to the previous RT America show, which had featured one guest averring that not all Ukrainians are Nazis and another complaining that Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky was being hailed as a hero. Blevins focused on the negative impacts from the sanctions: higher oil prices, a potential 2008-style global financial crisis, recession fears, and even tensions over the International Space Station. Next: a plug for The World According to Jessehosted by Jesse Ventura, the wrestler, conspiracy theorist, and former Minnesota governorfollowed by a cheeky house ad that said, RT is not alt-left or alt-right, but we are a solid alternative to the bullshit. Then, abruptly, the screen went dark and a message appeared: This channel is no longer available. DirecTV.

It was another blow to a network that was seeing its reach drastically curtailed due to government bans in Europe (an EU ban took effect the next day) and restrictions imposed by big tech companies such as Facebook and TikTok. Two days later, RT America announced that it was suspending its operations altogether. Launched in 2010, the channel was the Washington, D.C.based offshoot of the network formerly known as Russia Today. RT had begun broadcasting in 2005, soon expanding into a globe-spanning network of TV channels and digital media funded by the Russian government and run by close affiliates of Vladimir Putin. RT America became a home for iconoclasts, second-act pundits, and opportunistic apparatchiks, many of whom pretended not to notice their employers alignment with the Kremlin.

Blevins, along with most of the staff, was out of a job. She hadnt been the most prominent host at RT America, but she was one of its most loyal. She started working at RT America in 2018, just over a year after graduating from Texas Tech University with a degree in journalism. Her last BoomBu$t show was her 196th. In the early days of Russias invasion, Blevinss coverage had been highly diversionary; while the Russian military pressed into Ukraine on February 25, the second day of what RT called a special operation, Blevins led the program with a story about a Russian investigation into genocide in the breakaway Donbas region of Ukraine that had purportedly been carried out by Ukrainian neofascists. Analysts had warned just a week before that Putin would use exactly such a fabrication in order to justify invading Ukraine, as he had done in the lead-up to the annexation of Crimea in 2014.

As RT was systematically deplatformed in Europe and America, Blevins became one of the loudest voices defending her employer. On Twitter, she batted back at a legion of critics who saw her as a fitting target for their rage over RT and Russias war. A representative example: Your profile bio has a typo, it says Opinions are my own, it should say Opinion are from Vlad. Fixed it for you, I take payments in euros or dollars (sorry no rubles atm).

On February 27, as Russian troops bore down on Ukraine, Blevins took to Rokfin.coman Austin-based subscription platform similar to Patreon that mostly features wrestling and conspiracy contentto address RT critics. Ive never been told by RT what I should or shouldnt say. Ive never been told I needed to follow any sort of narrative and thats why I work for the network I work for, she said. She went on to defend the way RT covered the war in Ukraine, referring to the so-called invasion and linking the conflict to U.S. policy. For all the people sitting there saying, Well, Ukraine is a sovereign country, they should be able to do what they want to dowell, to a certain extent, sure, however, thats not whats happening now. Ukraine is not acting as a sovereign nation...it is acting under the influence of NATO.

On February 28, when Twitter slapped a label on her account warning that it constituted Russian-affiliated state media, Blevins fired back, insisting that she is an individual journalist who does not speak for Russia or Russian media. After being bombarded by what she describes as a flurry of hate mail, Blevins deleted the tweet only to surface the next day to address her critics. If youre one of the people pushing to ban RT and threatening myself and my colleaguesI hope you know that youre not achieving what you think you are. And when RT America shut down on March 3, she was one of the few RT employees to speak out, writing on Twitter that she was heartbroken and signing off with a George Orwell quote: Journalism is printing what someone else does not want publishedeverything else is public relations. When I talked to her on the phone the next day, she said she felt as if she was in a nightmare I still havent woken up from.

Blevins, for all her pro-Kremlin messaging, had never quite fit the stereotype that might leap to mind when one thinks of Putins American puppets. For lack of a better term, she came across as a normal young American journalist, passionate and seemingly sincere. But shed been with RT America for three and a half years, and she continues to vociferously defend its journalism. All of which raises some questions, foremost among them: how did a young woman from a small town in Texas end up as the face of RT America as the network spectacularly imploded?

Blevinss family moved from Colorado to Mineral Wells, an economically struggling town of around 15,000, when she was eleven. She attended Community Christian School, a small, private religious institution, where she graduated as valedictorian in 2013. A scholarship landed her at Texas Tech, where she began taking journalism classes. After her professors warned that young journalists usually have to toil for years covering local crime and local elections, Blevins said she planned to switch majorsthat is, until one of her professors assigned her and her classmates to conduct an official interview with a source. She chose the topic of government control of media. Her father, a regular listener of talk radio, suggested she interview Ben Swann, a TV journalist originally from El Paso who has alternated between stints as an award-winning major-market local TV anchor and an enthusiastic promulgator of conspiracy theoriessometimes at the same time. When they met, Swann had a short-lived radio show on the Republic Broadcasting Network, a fringe Texas-based outlet that has repeatedly featured hard-core white supremacists and Holocaust deniers.

Blevins says the interview helped open her eyes to what she terms independent journalists and independent networks. Facebooks algorithm had catalyzed the explosive growth of viral content farms, many of them seat-of-the-pants publishers that specialized in sensational and conspiratorial storiesand it just so happened that Swann was launching a website, Truth in Media, that needed writers. I was kind of in the place of saying, Okay, well, I dont have much experience, but I can try. And so I started out writing for him. By June, she was regularly freelancing for the site.

Swann was also a regular guest on RT America at the time, sometimes echoing Kremlin propaganda. In one 2014 segment, he averred that any credible evidence does not seem to exist that Russian-backed insurgents in Ukraine were responsible for shooting down Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17an argument that was part of a larger campaign by Putin and RT to sow confusion about who was responsible for the 298 deaths that resulted. (An RT reporter resigned on air in disgust over the outlets coverage of the incident.) Years later, when Blevins had her own RT America show, Swann would pop up as a guest; in one of her last shows, he was introduced as a crypto analyst.

It didnt take long for Blevins to get noticed by RT higher-ups. Just a few months into her freelancing gig at Truth in Media, during the fall semester of her sophomore year, the news director for RT America saw one of Blevinss stories and reached out to offer her a job as a reporter. I said, Hey, Im still in college; Im going to get this degree. I will reach back out, and lets keep in touch and basically keep the networking going until I graduate. The offer might seem odd, or premature, but it was standard practice for RT. A 2020 Oxford study, based on interviews with 23 RT journalists, found that the networks management deliberately recruited journalists with little to no experience, in order to be able to mold the newly hired journalists and shape their minds.

The Truth in Media site no longer exists, but from what I could find, Blevinss work was fairly tamemostly write-ups of headline news with a libertarian bent. But it introduced her to a wider community of conspiracy-prone, Russia-credulous outlets. Soon she was freelancing for two more such sites, the Free Thought Project and We Are Change, the latter of which is run by Luke Rudkowski, an associate of Alex Jones who got his start as a leader of the 9/11 Truth movement in New York and came to viral YouTube fame in 2007 for yelling that former national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski was New World Order scum. Blevins produced stories that mostly focused on police brutality in the U.S. and American atrocities abroad, but bore the hallmarks of the RT style: persistent whataboutism, fury at the mainstream media, and a reflexively pro-Putin posture.

For a newsletter for Texas Techs College of Media and Communication, Blevins was writing articles with headlines like Department of Public Relations Presents Student and Faculty Member of the Year Awards. At the same time, for We Are Change, she was writing articles with all-caps headlines like WHY ITS TIME FOR THE WASHINGTON POST TO GIVE UP THE ANTI-RUSSIA CAMPAIGN, WHY THE U.S. IS DEMONIZING RUSSIA TO COVER UP FAILURE IN SYRIA, and RUSSIAN PRESIDENT VLADIMIR PUTIN WARNS DONALD TRUMP OF COUP DETAT, the latter of which published in January 2017 and argues in the lede that Putins latest sensational comments put the nail in the coffin of this whole Russian hacking scandal that we have been hearing about for the past two months.

Two Texas Tech journalism professors I spoke to said they knew nothing about Blevinss unusual freelance gigs during her time there. But they praised her as a top student. She was one of the sharpest young girls that came through the program, said Mary Ann Edwards, who taught her news writing. She was diligent; she was so conscientious about everything she did. Professor Randy Reddick recalled that she got a 94 on a paper criticizing media coverage of the 2016 presidential campaign. His main criticism to her: Be careful, this is opinionatedyou might rephrase.

After graduating in 2017, Blevins kept churning out freelance pieces as well as making her own videos for Facebookat least until the platform began cracking down on misinformation in the wake of Trumps election. In 2018, Facebook scrubbed the Free Thought Projectwhich was reaching 20 to 30 million people per week, according to one of its foundersfrom the platform. Later it zapped Blevinss own Facebook page, where she had accumulated close to 70,000 followers and posted videos, some of which she claims had a million views. With her freelance work drying up, Blevins turned to her next best option: the network that had made her an offer three years earlier.

I was reaching out to RT America, saying, Hey, you know, Ive been very vocal about foreign policy. Ive been very vocal in my frustration with some of the things that the U.S. government is doing and with the way the media landscape is today. And for me, RT America was the only option where I could actually cover the stories that I was passionate about, and it was the only place where I was seeing that coverage happen. She got the gig.

Part of the appeal for Blevins, she says, was RTs version of the old Fox News Fair and Balanced slogan: Question more. And indeed, RT wasnt left-wing or right-wing in the style of so many U.S. outlets. Thats because, as RTs own top leaders have acknowledged, the outlet is intended to impress Kremlin talking points on its audiences, particularly during times of war, and to sow division among Americans. It attracted American viewersand some of its editorial staffthrough a resonant critique of the failings and moral outrages of mainstream media and U.S. foreign policy. On some days, RT sounded like Noam Chomsky, on others, like Steve Bannon. The one constant theme was that America is a failing empirea contention that many Americans find appealing and absent from mainstream media.

Plus, as Bloomberg put it in 2017, referring to another young RT America anchor: Where else on cable news could a 27-year-old inveigh against U.S. imperialism on a nightly basis?

In conversations I had with Blevins, she had no qualms about working for RT and seemed mostly mystified by the backlash toward the networks coverage of the war in Ukraine.

It frustrates me that taking the stance of providing context to a conflict is automatically seen as supporting that conflict or supporting what the Russian military is doing, said Blevins, who calls herself incredibly anti-war. She added: And I think that its frustrating to come from a standpoint of everything has to be one way or the other. Everything has to be left or right, right or wrong, whatever.

Does Blevins really think Putin invaded Ukraine to fight Nazis? Had she used the Kremlins euphemistic phrase military operation because that was the Kremlins preferred phrasing for its war?

She admits to being surprised that Russia actually went through with an invasion, but cant quite process the criticism over the networks terminology. It feels like Im in a place where I cant win, she said. Every single thing I say, every term I use is going to be blown up in one way or another. And at the time, RT as a whole had been using that phrasing, and that was what we continued to use for our show just because we were in a position of trying to find the best way to navigate it, and we may not have chosen the best way to navigate it.

Blevins kept returning to context she said had been omitted by the mainstream media. In her account, its the U.S., not Russia, who is the primary aggressor. Russia did not wake up and decide that it was going to just take over Ukraine. I dont necessarily think that theyre fighting to take over Ukraine from what Ive heard and from what Ive paid attention to. But the way that the media coverage has been, that, you know, Putin is someone who wants to go in there and to overthrow the Ukrainian government and to install someone who he agrees with. And what weve actually seen happen is that the Russian government has two main demands from the moment that they lead this invasion in the country. Their demands have been that Ukraine be a neutral state and that it be a demilitarized state.

Moreover, she said, the U.S. media had turned a blind eye to the American financing of neo-Nazis in Ukraine. Russia understands the threat of having Nazis on their doorstep, she said. Exaggerating the threat of the far right in Ukrainewhich elected a Jewish president, Zelensky, in 2019 has been a consistent Kremlin messaging tactic at least since Russias annexation of Crimea in 2014. Like most propaganda, there is an element of truthUkrainian nationalists with neo-Nazi views played a prominent role in fighting Russia in the Donbas region in 2014. But outside Russia and the hallways of RT, Putins claim that his goal in waging war on Ukraine to denazify the country is greeted with ridicule.

With RT America off the air, perhaps forever, Blevins is trying to reboot as a freelancer. Her Twitter account, still bearing that Russian-affiliated state media label, looks scarcely different than it did when she was employed by RT. Shes making weekly videos for a tiny paying audience on Rokfin; the most recent had her explaining to fans that she had struggled with my coverage of the Ukraine conflict and conceding that she may not personally agree with exactly the way [Russia] has gone about invading Ukraine, while arguing again that Putin is taking on neo-Nazis.

But as for her time at RT, she says she has few regrets. The opportunities that I was given theregoing from being straight out of college into a reporter position, then going on to hosting an international business-finance showthose are opportunities I would not have gotten anywhere else, she said. I will always be so grateful for that.

More here:

How a 27-Year-Old Texan Became the Face of Russias American TV Network As It Imploded - Texas Monthly

As millions of Brazilians watched the live images of the U.S. Capitol insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, in disbelief, many commentators in the United States and Brazil were quick to agree that then-U.S. President Donald Trump had overplayed his hand. They believed the attackwhich failed to accomplish its objective of obstructing a democratic transition of powerwould damage the outgoing presidents political fortunes and complicate the U.S. Republican Partys future.

One year later, however, the way Brazilians interpret that day and its meaning has changed as the Republican Partywhich failed to condemn Trump and now propagates an increasingly revisionist narrative about the Jan. 6 eventslooks set to take back control of the U.S. Congress in Novembers midterm elections. Guga Chacra, an influential Brazilian political commentator, flatly stated in a recent analysis that we were wrong to assume Trump would be ostracized in the attacks aftermath, pointing out that the Capitol invasion didnt debilitate Trump. This shift in perspective among Brazilians is buttressed by the real possibility of Trump returning to the White House in 2025.

Today, Trumps decision to incite a violent mob to disrupt an electoral certification process no longer looks like a high-risk gamble but one of several carefully planned steps to consolidate the false narrative of a rigged election among his followers and maintain control of the Republican Party. Indeed, while the Democratic Party is currently in power at the national level, Trump retains de facto control of the GOP and its agenda. On Feb. 4, the GOP declared the Jan. 6, 2021, riots legitimate political discourse and censured Reps. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger for taking part in Congresss inquiry into the attacks.

As millions of Brazilians watched the live images of the U.S. Capitol insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, in disbelief, many commentators in the United States and Brazil were quick to agree that then-U.S. President Donald Trump had overplayed his hand. They believed the attackwhich failed to accomplish its objective of obstructing a democratic transition of powerwould damage the outgoing presidents political fortunes and complicate the U.S. Republican Partys future.

One year later, however, the way Brazilians interpret that day and its meaning has changed as the Republican Partywhich failed to condemn Trump and now propagates an increasingly revisionist narrative about the Jan. 6 eventslooks set to take back control of the U.S. Congress in Novembers midterm elections. Guga Chacra, an influential Brazilian political commentator, flatly stated in a recent analysis that we were wrong to assume Trump would be ostracized in the attacks aftermath, pointing out that the Capitol invasion didnt debilitate Trump. This shift in perspective among Brazilians is buttressed by the real possibility of Trump returning to the White House in 2025.

Today, Trumps decision to incite a violent mob to disrupt an electoral certification process no longer looks like a high-risk gamble but one of several carefully planned steps to consolidate the false narrative of a rigged election among his followers and maintain control of the Republican Party. Indeed, while the Democratic Party is currently in power at the national level, Trump retains de facto control of the GOP and its agenda. On Feb. 4, the GOP declared the Jan. 6, 2021, riots legitimate political discourse and censured Reps. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger for taking part in Congresss inquiry into the attacks.

Taken as a whole, the remarkable successes of Trumps party in controlling the narrative surrounding Jan. 6 since his tumultuous exit from the White House makes emulating his strategy seem all the more attractiveand far less risky.

Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro is no doubt watching closely. Bolsonaro has never hidden his authoritarian ambitions and admiration for Trump, whom he described as his greatest international ally. Ahead of the 2020 U.S. election, Bolsonaro often expressed his hope that Trump would win reelection. This year, the Trump of the Tropics, as Bolsonaro is often called abroad, is headed into a presidential election of his own.

In addition to frequently embracing Trumps argument that the 2020 U.S. election was rigged, Bolsonaro has eagerly promoted conspiracy theories about Brazils electoral system in recent years, leading electoral officials to say they consider a challenge by Bolsonaro to the outcome of Octobers vote inevitable. In particular, Bolsonaro seeks to systematically discredit electronic voting, which has been used across Brazil since 1996.

Bolsonaro frequently argues without evidence that Brazils electoral system is susceptible to fraud, calling for the reintroduction of paper ballots. After Jan. 6, 2021, Bolsonaro warned supporters, If we dont have the ballot printed in 2022, a way to audit the votes, were going to have bigger problems than the U.S. Pro-Bolsonaro WhatsApp and Telegram groups are rife with fearmongering about election fraud.

For Bolsonaro, the events of Jan. 6 initially held more lessons of what to avoid than what to emulate. To succeed where Trump had not, the Brazilian president would have to co-opt the armed forces, further erode public trust in the electoral system, and mobilize a larger number of followers to act. Although all of these options seemed possible, they could have posed serious risks for Bolsonaro and his family, such as being prosecuted for sedition or losing control over Brazils conservative camp.

In the aftermath of Jan. 6, Bolsonaros son Eduardoa congressmanfocused on the attackers mistakes while presiding over the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies Commission on Foreign Affairs and National Defense. The younger Bolsonaro said if the invaders had been better organized, they would have taken the Capitol, ominously adding that if the riotersdescribed as good citizens by Ernesto Arajo, Brazils foreign minister at the timewould have had a minimal war power [none of them] would have died, allowing them to [kill] all the police inside or the congressmen they all hate.

But now, the second coming of Trumps party may lead Bolsonaro and his advisors to believe that rejecting electoral resultseven if futile where maintaining power is concernedcould provide him with long-term benefits, including by helping to consolidate a core cadre of loyalists. After all, the fact that the Republican Party today remains in lockstep with Trump despite his 2020 electoral loss suggests Bolsonaro could utilize his own stop the steal myth to prevent the emergence of rival politicians on the right, labeling anyone who accepts his opponents victory as a traitorous false conservative.

Put differently, Bolsonaro may now reason that, even if he incites an armed revolt that ultimately fails to prevent the transition of power after an electoral loss in October, doing so could still be worth it.

Pollsters agree that Bolsonaros chances of winning reelection in October against his likely opponent, leftist former Brazilian President Luiz Incio Lula da Silva, are relatively low. Current polls show Lula, who governed Brazil from 2003 to 2010, ahead by 9 percentage points. Yet despite the Bolsonaro governments numerous woesa pandemic response likened to a crime against humanity and a sluggish economic recoverypolls have started tightening in recent weeks, and even Lula allies publicly acknowledge that the presidents approval ratings are likely to improve as public spending increases ahead of the election. A narrow loss, then, would make Bolsonaros claims of voter fraud seem more credible in the eyes of supporters.

Granted, Brazils electoral system is not like the United States. Unlike the United States, Brazil has a Superior Electoral Court, which concentrates the authority to confirm electoral results and is less vulnerable to outside pressure. Due to the absence of an electoral college, Bolsonaro and his supporters also cannot bully lowly state officials into submission to sow confusion about an electoral results legitimacy. Moreover, the Brazilian president lacks firm control over a large national political party, which Trump has achieved. And Brazils multi- (rather than two-) party landscape may make it more difficult for Bolsonaro to monopolize his influence among conservative voters.

Still, if Bolsonaro loses Octobers election and refuses to accept the resultwhich I believe to be the most likely scenario as of nowhe may succeed in turning support for his narrative into a proxy for patriotism in the eyes of his followers. Erstwhile Bolsonaro allies in Brazil who broke with him to position themselves as center-right presidential candidates are so far faring just as badly as U.S. Republicans who questioned Trumps claim that the 2020 U.S. election was stolen. Both Sergio Moro, Bolsonaros former justice and public security minister, and Joo Doria, governor of So Paulowhose views are comparable to those of the Republican Partys moderate wingare currently stuck in a political no mans land, vilified by both the left and Bolsonaros supporters. Despite Dorias notable successes as governorincluding taking the lead on vaccine procurement while Bolsonaro embraced COVID-19 denialismpolls suggest fewer than 5 percent of Brazilians support his presidential bid.

Even without an insurrection, Bolsonaros quest to undermine public trust in the Brazilian electoral process poses a severe threat to the countrys democracy. Assuming he will cry fraud if he loses in October, millions of Brazilians will not consider the presidents successor legitimate. A poll conducted last year confirms that the percentage of Brazilians who share Bolsonaros concerns about electronic votingseen by the vast majority of specialists as baselessis on the rise, currently standing at more than 45 percent.

What is particularly worrisome in this contextand what makes copying Trumps strategy even more attractive to Bolsonarois that parts of Brazils armed forces are eagerly embracing Bolsonaros narrative about possible voter fraud and his call for electoral reform to reintroduce paper ballots. Last year, Brazils defense minister, Gen. Walter Souza Braga Netto, reportedly told the president of Brazils Chamber of Deputies, Arthur Lira, that the Bolsonaro government would not allow the 2022 elections to go ahead without the reform. The day before Brazils National Congress voted on the proposalintroduced by a Bolsonaro allythe armed forces organized a military parade outside the legislature, a gesture largely understood as another thinly veiled threat. Refusing to be bullied, lawmakers rejected the measures, which experts believe would have sown the seeds of chaos on election day.

Brazils armed forces are unlikely to support a classic self-coup that involves surrounding its National Congress and the Supreme Federal Court with tanks. However, provided that the elections are close, a narrative about voter fraud similar to that promoted by Trump in the United States may allow pro-Bolsonaro elements in the security forces to frame their support for the president as a defense of democratic order. This may involve appealing the results in court, asking for a rerun of the vote, or declaring a state of emergency should protests break out. Some generals have publicly criticized the president, yet generous budget increases and access to power assure most continue to support Bolsonaro, who likes to refer to the military as my armed forces.

There are currently more than 6,000 members of the armed forces working in the Bolsonaro government, about half of whom are on active duty, and some are concerned that Lula could adopt a revanchist posture vis-a-vis the armed forces if elected. The former presidents attempts to reach out to the armed forces have so far been unsuccessful. Lula recently commented that the armed forces would return to the barracks in his governmentmeaning many would lose their political appointments.

Just like in the United States, countless Bolsonaro supporters are thus susceptible to considering a violent post-election insurrection not as an attack on democracy but as a heroic attempt to defend a righteous leader from a corrupted system. In this context, Bolsonaros attempts to centralize power over the military could be interpreted as setting the stage for a coordinated uprising after the election, if needed. The Brazilian president has also overseen the deregulation of gun ownership in the country, which worries many observers.

Bolsonaro and his allies do not even need to study Trumps strategy from afar. Brazil has become a global battleground for the proliferation of U.S. alt-right values, and Trump strategists and supporters like Steve Bannon, Jason Miller, and Mike Lindell have established an ample dialogue with the Bolsonaro administration.

At a cyber symposium in August 2021 organized by Lindell and attended by Eduardo Bolsonaro, Bannon described Brazils upcoming presidential elections as the second most important election in the world (presumably after those of the United States) and predicted that Bolsonaro would win unless the election were stolen. Donald Trump Jr., who also attended the meeting remotely, argued that Brazil provided hope for the conservative movement.

Although its tempting to focus on Brazils risk of experiencing its own Jan. 6 in the aftermath of its 2022 presidential elections, the true lesson Bolsonaro derives from Trumps staying power is that eroding democracy is a long-term effort, involving years of systematically sowing seeds that may produce tangible results down the line. The specter of a Trump-dominated Republican Party triumphing in November could thus provide even greater inspiration to Bolsonaro and other populists with authoritarian tendencies than the 2016 election that brought Trump to poweror even the 2021 attack that saw him out.

Read more here:

Challenging an Election Trump-Style Looks Attractive to Brazil's Bolsonaro - Foreign Policy

The Power of the Dog, the story of a troubled family of ranchers in 1920s Montana, is an essay in dysfunction, a film in the business of upending social and generic norms. It is a hugely satisfying, intriguing, stimulating drama with a whiplash of an ending that took us from the realm of alt-western to alt-body horror. It was this films mythic quality, its dreamlike knights-move away from the world generally represented in westerns, that no doubt resonated with Bafta voters, who awarded it best film and gave best director for the increasingly celebrated Jane Campion.

On an evening that celebrated dissident, revisionist westerns, the outstanding debut prize went to the ultraviolent gonzo revenge movie The Harder They Fall, starring Jonathan Majors, Zazie Beetz and Idris Elba. It is a headbangingly, flesh-splatteringly freaky debut from Jeymes Samuel that reclaims the African American side of the genre. The drumbeat of brutality became a bit too uniform for me, but it is stylishly made.

Denis Villeneuves colossal science fiction adventure Dune, taken from Frank Herberts classic novel, is a big film in every way and appropriately it was a huge winner at the Baftas, including for Hans Zimmers thrumming musical score. This was a movie that benefited from the reopening of cinemas, a movie about a doomed colonial tyranny on a mineral-rich planet, a movie whose ineffable vastness has to be experienced on the big screen. These awards feel like justice, although they might reinforce the impression that Dune was a cloudy impressionistic experience: one giant visual effect whose actual narrative is fading in the memory. But its a massively audacious film and part of a vibrant tradition of epic movies.

I was very pleased to Kenneth Branaghs enormously warm subversively warm movie Belfast pick up best British film, and maybe its a measure of how emollient this movie is that labelling a film about the Troubles as British isnt as controversial as it might have been. This is a film whose streak of sentimentality has alienated some: some Belfast-dwellers have written it off as inauthentic, others from Belfast have found it entirely real. I personally responded to its richness and heartfelt humanity.

As far as the acting prizes went, Joanna Scanlans Bafta for best actress in the fascinating After Love was a reward for work of the very highest quality: a complex, painfully real and honest study of a woman who makes terrible discoveries about her husband after he has died. It is a career-best for Scanlan, and hugely well deserved.

Will Smiths best actor Bafta for King Richard (beating the early favourite, Benedict Cumberbatch for The Power of the Dog) was a testament to his old-fashioned movie-star potency and an emotional connection to movie audiences. Its impossible to overstate just how much warmth Smith can generate in the right role and this one was the juiciest.

The crowdpleasing heart-of-gold dramedy Coda (remade from the French film La Famille Blier) had a really good night, with wins for best adapted screenplay and supporting actor. It is a film about a young hearing girl with hearing-impaired parents: a CODA or child of deaf adults. Its a movie widely felt to be well-intentioned if a tad micro-engineered perhaps it played well on streaming video with Bafta voters at home. Ariana DeBose was a thoroughly deserving winner of the best supporting actress prize for her fiercely engaged and theatrically exuberant performance in Spielbergs West Side Story.

Elsewhere, it was good to see Paul Thomas Anderson win best original screenplay for his satirically outrageous and gorgeously atmospheric age-gap comedy Licorice Pizza, set in 70s LA. It deserved more, but this unclassifiably brilliant film was always in danger of slipping through the cracks entirely. And it was pleasing to see Ryusuke Hamaguchis wonderfully intelligent Murakami adaptation Drive My Car named as best foreign-language film.

I was sad to see nothing for Guillermo del Toros noir thriller Nightmare Alley (a film superior to his much prize-garlanded The Shape of Water) and nothing for Joel Coens outstanding version of Shakespeares Macbeth. But this was a well-judged and satisfying Bafta list of winners.

Join Peter Bradshaw and fellow Guardian film critics for a Guardian Live online event ahead of the Oscars on Thursday 24 March.

See the rest here:

Jane Campion leads roll-call of worthy winners as Baftas hit all the right notes - The Guardian