Debuting this year at multiple festivals is the extremely innovative documentary Khartoum (2025). This film focuses on the stories of 5 Sudanese people and their relationship with war and resistance. Khartoum’s innovative film techniques and the close relationships formed between the filmmakers makes this documentary like no other.
When Khartoum had its African debut at the 2025 Encounters Documentary Festival in Cape Town, I was lucky enough to attend the screening and Q&A session with one of the film’s directors, Brahim Snoopy. Not to be dramatic, but this film has since changed the way I view the documentary genre. This documentary follows the lives of five different Sudanese people –Lokian (12) and Wilson (11), two young orphaned children; Jawad (30), a Sufi resistance volunteer; Khadmallah (28), a single mother working as a coffee-maker; and Majdi (45), a civil servant who races pigeons; – as they share the goals and dreams that they hope to achieve in their hometown, Khartoum. The initial aim of the documentary was to showcase the beauty of Khartoum through explorations of the town’s places and people. However, during the filming, the Sudan war emerged and displaced not only the subjects of the documentary but the filmmakers as well. After a while the group was able to meet up again and continue making their documentary. However, there was now a new story to be explored. Their displacement created many issues regarding the filmmaking process, one of them being: How do you make a film about Khartoum without access to it?
Well, in true African fashion, innovation is birthed from limitation. The filmmakers were able to use a studio space in Kenya to film the remainder of their documentary using green screen and animation. The participants would reenact their favourite and worst memories of Khartoum whilst the green screen displayed their memory. This innovative use of green screen and animation goes against most traditional documentary conventions, but in my humble opinion, I felt that this use of artificial setting made for the most honest representation of the participants and their memories. When they would describe their happiest memories, they would provide the finest details which was replicated in the setting. Furthermore, the dreamy atmosphere created by the green screen and animation mimicked the nostalgic feeling that the individuals/participants were conveying. In moments where the participants explained some of their worst memories after the war emerged, the creative filmmaking was able to encapsulate the absurdity of war and oppression, leaving the audience with a feeling of anxiety and uncertainty that matched the memories of the subjects perfectly. While Snoopy explained that they would have preferred getting more footage of Khartoum, I think there’s something quite special created in this documentary. Many of the displaced individuals were unable to get back to Sudan, so in many ways these film techniques immortalized the image they shared of a Khartoum before destruction. The audience is also given an opportunity to see Khartoum through the eyes of its people, something which is now very difficult to do due to a lack of media coverage on Sudan as a whole.
Another reason why Khartoum has changed the way I view documentaries is the relationships that were built between the documentary’s participants and filmmakers. Most documentaries, especially ones that cover African stories, emphasize the need for distance between the participants and filmmakers. But Khartoum challenges that. Instead, the filmmakers are part of the narrative and are often seen in the documentary as well. They also form extremely strong bonds with the participants due to their shared memories and trauma, as all directors are Sudanese as well. Even though the participants are seen reenacting their memories, it truly feels as if they are reliving their trauma on screen. Of course this can be seen as a bit controversial, as there is a concern about exploitative film practices. However, that never is the case in Khartoum. The directors and subjects are often seen embracing and encouraging other as they all relive their experiences as a people from a war-torn home. In the case of the two orphaned boys, the director of their story, Rawia Alhag, has become their legal guardian. This cultivation of relationships between filmmakers and participants emphasize that Khartoum is a truly collaborative project and that everyone involved is doing this for the betterment of their people and their home, despite a lack of international support.
The most influential aspect of Khartoum was its ability to showcase Sudan as its people and not just a place of conflict. Often documentaries tend to sensationalize wars and displacements to force an emotional connection, but Khartoum forms these connections through the resilience and beauty of Sudanese people. Throughout the film, the participants are shown as multi-dimensional, complex people with so many things to offer the world besides their trauma. The documentary also emphasizes that Sudan does not belong to war or militias but to the people. Through the film’s depictions of Khartoum as a hub of culture and resistance, it emphasizes that both the peoples’ strengths and weaknesses will free Sudan.