IMANE KURDI IMPORTANT news: the Iranian government has hired a lawyer and intends to sue Hollywood. Yes, the time has come to say stop to all this “Iranophobia”. The Iranians are fed up with seeing Hollywood films depict their country in a distorted and insulting manner. Last week they hosted a conference called The Hoax of Hollywood just to prove it. Several films were singled out, but one in particular raised their shackles: the recent Oscar winner Argo. Argo, the Iranians claim, is “a propaganda attack against our nation and entire humanity”. Seeing Michelle Obama announce the award for best film to Argo can't have helped, it must all be part of an elaborate plot by the American government and the CIA to demonize and humiliate Iran. Hey, who could argue with that? But the “entire humanity”? They don't half have a taste for exaggeration those Iranians. The idea of suing Hollywood is rather entertaining. Who exactly is going to be sued and where – an international court we are told – and on what grounds? The whole thing is rather farcical, but underneath it all the Iranians do have a point. It's not news that Hollywood films have a tendency to portray Muslims as violent, dangerous and threatening. We are the terrorists, the extremists, the barbarians, essentially the bad guys. There are notable exceptions of course, but on the whole when a Muslim character makes an appearance in a film, it's not to save the world. Some of this is political, not in the sense suggested by the Iranians of American authorities instructing Hollywood to make propaganda for them, but in a much more commercial sense. Easily identifiable bad guys are great for storytelling, they help create drama and entertainment. From the evil witches of fairy tales to the James Bond villains bent on world destruction, they provide the opportunity for that age-old feel-good ending of good beating evil. Arabs, Muslims, and dark foreigners in weird clothes have long provided Hollywood with easily-identifiable villains. Even back in the days of silent films, they were the brigands and the thieves. Later, we saw the “oil sheiks”, wearing the odd combination of Western suits and Arab headdress, wandering into films as gratuitous characters who were either ostentatious or licentious toward women. Even as early as 1994, we saw Arabs as terrorists; back then Arnold Schwarzenegger told us True Lies, and is that not exactly what Hollywood is set up to do: sell true lies? But things took a turn for the worse after 9/11. Hollywood producers identified a thirst among the American public for payback. The terrorists provided them with the perfect bad guys. Casting Muslims and Arabs in roles where they were seen to be evil, ruthless, uneducated, violent, backwards or just plain ugly became fair play. You could insult them, hit them, shoot them, heap mass destruction upon them and everyone could cheer. It's not pleasant but it was to some extent to be expected. Iran, however, has got off lightly. There aren't that many films that demonize Iranians as compared to Arabs or generic Muslims in beards. However, that Argo should pique them is understandable. The thing about Argo is that it is a good film. It's not unwatchable like “300”, nor plain hilarious like “The Kingdom”. I found it beautifully constructed: the plot kept the dramatic momentum going in a breathtaking manner, the dialogues were witty and interesting, the characters were nicely drawn, the Hollywood story was wonderfully wacky and the re-creation of that era felt nostalgically authentic. However, this was based on a true story, could it really have happened that way? The answer is no. In real life, 80 percent of the operation was due to the Canadians, yet the film gives almost all of the credit to the CIA. Even small throwaway lines take liberties with the truth: we are told the six Americans went from embassy to embassy and were turned away by the British and the New Zealanders before being taken in by the Canadians. False, it turns out, and the diplomats concerned are none too pleased about it, neither was Ken Taylor the Canadian Ambassador depicted in the film. Ben Affleck has said that the film is “loosely based” on real events, and that is where I take issue. If you are making a film on real political events based on something that really happened with people who are still alive to tell the tale, you have a duty to stay faithful to the truth. This does not mean being forced to tell a dry tale. I did not have a problem with the final runway scene with Revolutionary Guards running madly after a plane on a runway. It was beyond belief, so ludicrous that it was clearly fictional, but changing the main thrust of the story when the events involved are politically significant makes me feel uneasy. Argo is not propaganda, but the writers of the film sacrificed historical truth in favor of popular entertainment, and that is where the Iranians have a point. But suing Hollywood? Really? — Imane Kurdi is a Saudi writer on European affairs. She can be reached at [email protected]
