19 January 2011 By Dr.
Bouthaina Shaaban On New Year's Day, 2011, members of the family
gathered around the lunch table, or around a hot tea
pot which summed up the warmth of the hearts happy to
be together after long absences because of work, study
or travel. After some conversation and after
exchanging best wishes and aspirations for the New
Year, a family member suggests watching a film in
order to extend this cozy atmosphere which once or
twice a year. They choose Presidential Decision shown
on Fox Movies. They all take their places ready to
watch the film which appears from the beginning to be
a political propaganda film in the context of the
campaign aimed at spreading hatred against Arabs and
Muslims. The movie shows in the beginning nice human
relations between the crew and passengers on board an
airplane heading to Dallas airport in Washington.
Then, it is revealed that the plane, carrying over 200
passengers, is also carrying a nuclear device in the
possession of a terrorist group which hijacks the
plane. The group demands the release of other
terrorists. They kill in cold blood the beautiful
hostess and some other innocent passengers. Soon, it
is revealed that this bloody and ruthless terrorist
group consists of Arabs and Muslims: some of them
shout in Arabic; and one terrorist hands another a
Quran. The groups does not hesitate to kill a
congressman who tries to mediate; and when the battle
heats up, a terrorist kills the captain and his
assistant. This is one of numerous movies produced by
Hollywood about Arabs and Muslims, And in this way,
this image of Arabs and Muslims takes root in the
minds of people in the West to the extent that they
can no longer distinguish between the image and the
civilian innocent Arab victims of American and Israeli
wars. It becomes so difficult to correct this image;
particularly that Hollywood spares no effort in
targeting Arabs and presenting them always as violent,
treacherous and backward villains. On the other hand,
Arab movie makers have not invested sufficient money
and effort in resisting these poisonous movies by
producing alternative movies which depict Arab
reality, their rights, their tolerant religion, their
suffering a s a result of Western wars, the Israeli
occupation, genocide, racism, assassination and
torture in Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and Boca at the
hands of Western and Israeli intelligence agencies,
like the Mossad and terrorist firms like Black Water
and many others. The late Mustafa Akkad was the First Arab to rise
up to this difficult and important challenge when he
directed movies like The Message, about Prophet
Mohammad's call to Islam, Lion of the Desert about
Omar Mukhtar and others. He became an important
reference point in the United States where his movies
were screened to university students and discussed in
seminars which in themselves became important venues
for correcting the distorted image of Muslims in the
minds of Americans and Westerners in general. For this
reason, terrorists killed him by exploding the wedding
he was attending in Amman, and thus an end was put to
a career in which he tried to redress the imbalance
and fill a gap in world cinema by portraying Arabs and
Muslims in a realistic manner. The problem is that wealthy Arabs do not invest any
money in producing movies in the footsteps of Akkad to
show the reality of Arab civilization, their
historical contribution and their tolerance. The
paradox, however, lies in the difference between the
image of the Arab in American cinema and the official
Arab money spent annually on film festivals without
achieving the desired objectives. Film festivals
started in the United States and Europe as a way of
promoting the films they produce and sell to make the
profits which enable them to continue developing their
industry. But for film festivals to proliferate in the Arab
world, sometimes with the host country not having
produced a single film which it tries to market is
difficult to understand. If Arabs are good at
producing drama series, why do not these series
portray the suffering of Arabs and Muslims as a result
of Western terrorism and wars for over a century and
their suffering at the hands of ‘civilized'
Westerners, and the settlers of the ‘oasis of
democracy' in the Middle East? Why don't these
festivals focus on what we produce and need to market
and pass to young generations? What is the point of
all these film festivals held in Arab capitals and
cities in light of the miserable conditions of the
film industry? Wouldn't it be better if those
responsible for film festivals in Damascus, Dubai,
Cairo, Wahran, Beirut, Abu Dhabi, Doha, Alexandria,
Carthage, Rabat, Marrakech and others, agreed on
holding one Arab film festival a year in one of these
cities and mobilized all energies and capacities for
producing Arab films with significant artistic and
political import, like Presidential Decision, and
market them using a single Arab marketing strategy?
What is happening instead is that Arab cities are
competing with each other to show foreign films in
their festivals. It is a typical Arab competition
which strengthens, most of the time, country biases
and uses criteria far from being objective and have
nothing to do with world cinema. Every day a Palestinian tells a story of martyrdom,
heroism and belonging that is worth being the material
for creative artists and producers concerned about the
causes of their nation. But this needs a new vision
which aspires to put Arab movies on the global scene
instead of competing behind closed doors far from the
real impact of world public opinion. Comments 💬 التعليقات |