Hollywood and the Middle East
- From: pmayer995@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: 28 Dec 2005 22:11:09 -0800
From
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-boot28dec28,1,4772649.column?coll=la-news-columns
(reg. req.):
Hollywood's bad guy problem
WHEN YOU THINK about it, World War II was far from black and white.
Sure, the German and Japanese militarists were evil, but Britain and
the United States did terrible things too. They killed hundreds of
thousands of German and Japanese civilians, and they allied themselves
with the Soviet Union, which was every bit as awful as the Axis. The
outcome was ambiguous because, although Germany and Japan were
defeated, the Iron Curtain descended from Eastern Europe to North
Korea.
Yet for 60 years, Hollywood has had no problem making movies that
depict World War II as a struggle of good versus evil. Rightly so.
Because for all the Allies' faults, they were the good guys.
For some reason, Hollywood can't take an equally clear-eyed view of the
war on terrorism. The current conflict, pitting the forces of freedom
against those of Islamo-fascism, is every bit as clear cut as World War
II. Yet fashionable filmmakers insist on painting both sides in shades
of gray, as if Israeli secret agents or American soldiers were
comparable to Al Qaeda killers. Two of the most serious holiday flicks
"Syriana" and "Munich" are case studies in mindless moral relativism
and pathetic pseudo-sophistication.
"Syriana" purports to shed light on the relationship between oil,
terrorism, the United States and the Middle East. Unfortunately, the
plot makes almost no sense. Even the title is puzzling. Writer/director
Stephen Gaghan claims that he heard "Syriana" used in "think tanks in
Washington" to refer to a "redrawing of the boundaries in the Middle
East." I work in a think tank with a large D.C. office, and I've never
heard that term. Neither have Middle East experts I consulted. In any
case, the movie has nothing to do with redrawing boundaries. In short,
the title is an attempt at a knowing insider allusion that only
illuminates Gaghan's cluelessness.
To the extent that "Syriana" has any message, it seems to be that
greedy oil companies, corrupt politicians and malevolent CIA big shots
are the bad guys in the Middle East. Two of the most positive
characters are a Hezbollah kingpin, who offers CIA operative Bob Barnes
(George Clooney) safe passage, and a Pakistani laborer who is driven to
become a suicide bomber after being laid off by an American oil
company.
The Bob character is said to be based on former CIA officer Robert
Baer, but "Syriana" has nothing in common with his memoir, "See No
Evil," which depicted his struggles in the 1980s against Hezbollah and
in the 1990s against Saddam Hussein.
In real life, Baer got into trouble for plotting to kill Hussein, a
terrible dictator. In reel life, Bob gets in trouble for trying to kill
a nice Persian Gulf prince who apparently offends Washington by wanting
to sell oil to a Chinese, not an American, firm. That's quite a
difference. News flash to Gaghan: Canada has agreed to sell oil to
China, and the CIA isn't bumping off Canadian leaders.
"Munich" is a more compelling film but just as specious morally. It
tells the story of a Mossad hit team sent to avenge the murders of 11
Israeli athletes at the 1972 Summer Olympics by eliminating 11
Palestinian terrorists. The Israelis become tortured by their
assignment. As one team member says: "All this blood comes back to us."
The movie reinforces this cycle-of-violence theme with constant
references to all the terrorist attacks carried out by the PLO after
the Olympics. The implication is that if the Israelis weren't killing
PLO operatives, they would stop killing Jews.
Director Steven Spielberg has made clear that's his view, telling Time
magazine: "A response to a response doesn't really solve anything. It
just creates a perpetual-motion machine. The only thing that's going to
solve this is rational minds, a lot of sitting down and talking until
you're blue in the gills."
Where has Spielberg been for the last 15 years? Israel tried his "blue
in the gills" approach in the 1990s, but the Oslo process only led to
greater bloodshed. Israel defeated the second intifada not by chatting
with terrorists but by fighting them. "Munich" depicts assassinations
as pointless. In reality, Israel's policy of targeted killings has
dramatically reduced the threat from Hamas and other extremist groups.
The lesson of World War II still stands: Civilized countries must use
violence to defeat barbarians. Why is that so hard for Hollywood to
understand?
MAX BOOT is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
.
- Prev by Date: "Stavisky" Jean Paul Belmondo
- Previous by thread: "Stavisky" Jean Paul Belmondo
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
