WASHINGTON: “Munich” and “Paradise Now” — two of the hottest Oscar contenders this year — have brought the Middle East conflict, and controversy, to Hollywood.
“Munich” has five Oscar nods, including best picture, while “Paradise Now” has been nominated for best foreign film, ahead of Sunday’s awards gala.
Both were touted by their creators, American movie mogul Steven Spielberg and Palestinian director Hany Abu-Assad, as pleas for peace, but many have objected to the tone of those appeals.
A group inspired by Yossi Zur, whose 16-year-old son Asaf was killed by a suicide bomber three years ago on March 5 — the same day on which the Academy Awards ceremony is to take place — collected over 20,000 signatures seeking to have “Paradise Now,” nominated for best foreign film, barred from the Oscars.
In an essay published in the New York Daily News, Zur dubbed the film an “extremely dangerous piece of work” that aims to legitimize suicide attacks.
Meanwhile, some have slammed “Munich” for giving voice to Palestinian extremists or mischaracterizing Israel’s response to the killing of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics as vengeance rather than “pre-emption.”
Now that Hamas — a group that relied on suicide attacks to get its message across — has won a landslide victory in Palestinian parliamentary elections, the issues explored in the films are being brought into sharper focus.
The movies’ timing could be right on target for encouraging dialogue on the conflict, experts say.
Film historian David Slocum of New York University said he hopes the films will “expand our dialogue about political violence, about what it means to be living under occupation, about what it means to feel threatened and take pre-emptive action” — issues that he says have been “marginalized” from public discourse.
“Paradise,” the first Palestinian film ever nominated for an Oscar, tells the story of Said (Kais Nashef) and Khaled (Ali Suliman), two mechanics from the West Bank city of Nablus who are selected for a suicide bombing mission.
Faced with doubts and fears as their mission in Tel Aviv starts to go awry, one man ultimately carries out his assignment, while the other backs out.
Both Israelis and Palestinians are fed up, Slocum said, and “being fed up is one of the reasons that Hamas is there and in the position that they are.”
He said the movie powerfully portrays the frustration and dehumanization experienced by those living under occupation.
“That’s not to say that the Israelis are the evil-doers here. But it is to say that there are real and understandable reasons that Hamas was voted in so overwhelmingly,” he said.
“That’s why I believe ‘Paradise Now’ is so powerful, because this is a hole in our understanding of that situation.”
Bill Daddio, a sociology professor at Georgetown University here, said Westerners’ view of suicide bombers is that they are driven by humiliation, sorrow or poverty.
But “the truth,” he said, “is that suicide bombers tend to be very altruistic in that they engage in that endeavour because they feel the need or responsibility to act on behalf of people who are disadvantaged.”
Films like “Paradise Now” — which won the Golden Globe for best foreign-language film — “may encourage somebody to learn more, to understand (the situation) more factually,” he said.
“I think it’s wonderful that there are two movies up for Academy Awards that face these issues,” Daddio said. “That in itself is telling that there may be changes in the air.” “Munich” explores the hunt for Palestinians from the radical group Black September who were behind the killing of 11 Israeli athletes and coaches in Munich, and the internal struggles of the Israeli assassins.—AFP
