Paradise Now and the Oscars

Reel Whirled Peas



I suppose it is reasonable to expect controversy to surround a film about suicide bombers. In the U.S., we have been accused of unfairly labeling "freedom fighters" as "terrorists", and "martyrs" as "murderers". Outrage erupted following a Gloden Globe win for Paradise Now, as an internet signed by 36,000 was presented to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences by Arab-American peace activist Nonie Darwash. She claimed that the film "did not show the evils of terrorism enough".

Darwash presented the petition in hopes of revoking the film's nomination for Best Foreign Film at this year's Oscars. The petition was initiated by Yossi Zur, the parent of a 16 year-old boy killed by a suicide bomber in 2003. Zur's petition prompted another internet petition, this one supporting the film's nomination. Zur contended that the film legitimized suicide bombing as a valid form of protest, and portrays the film's characters as victims. Zur wonders whether a film about Saudis training to fly planes into New York buildings, or one showing an operative releasing a biological agent killing 10,000 would also portray the instigators as victims. To Zur, the killing of 17 or 17,000 is still mass-murder.

The opposing view states that the film attempts to explain the other side of the story. It shows how a "life of desperation can lead to an act of desperation". They imply that the living conditions of Palestinians under the "Israeli occupation" have forced protesters to use the only form of resistance available to them - their bodies. The petition claims states that the film does not legitimize the actions. It should be, they claim, widely seen in order to balance what they consider to be a one-sided view of the conflict presented by Western news media.

I have to admit that Zur's argument has some merit. As I watched the film, and saw Said and Khaled interacting with one another and their families I started thinking about how hard it would be to go through a day knowing that it is your last. I felt sorry for Said's mother. I wondered how Jamal could idly talk to Said's mother knowing that tomorrow her son would die, and Jamal would have a hand in that. I felt sympathy for the Said. And then I came back to my senses and remembered that this is one of those mass-murderers that kill indiscriminately - children, women, the elderly. Are they different than the 9/11 terrorists, Lieutenant Goeth from Shindler's List, the Khmer Rouge, the Hutu interahamwe, or General Dyer who ordered the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in India? I agree with Zur that they are not.

But I do not agree with Zur that the film should be withdrawn or censored in any way. Filmmakers assume many roles in developing their craft. Sometimes they provide sheer entertainment, sometimes they tell an important story. Often they are social commentators, sometimes critics, and sometimes propagandists. America has a long tradition of making films whose content is controversial but most Americans support a filmmaker's rights. I agree with the counter-petition suggestion that the film be seen and allowing viewers to draw their own conclusions about the story and its value.