Gone are the days where brown skinned actors are typecasted to play the thick accented T-Mobile kid. These days, if you are brown, Hollywood is looking for you to play the role of a terrorist. United 93, the movie about the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania on 9/11, hits the big screens today and The LA Times did a great article on the men that play the terrorists.
As filmmakers tell a number of stories about Sept. 11 and other attacks both real and fictionalized — a rapidly growing list that includes “Munich,” “Syriana,” “Paradise Now” and Friday’s “United 93” — there’s increased demand for young Middle Eastern actors. But directors and their casting agents must convince those actors that their cinematic cause is more noble than that of directors a generation ago, who routinely depicted Arabs as cartoonish, fanatical madmen.
Mazhar Munir from Syriana
When writer-director Stephen Gaghan was casting “Syriana,” his ensemble drama about the political and personal costs of America’s dependence on foreign oil, he struggled to find a young actor of Pakistani descent to play a suicide bomber… “I had found a couple of terrific young actors who simply weren’t allowed by their families to take the part,” Gaghan said. “One young man’s family said he would be cut out of the family” if he accepted the role. He held casting sessions in Los Angeles, New York, Paris, Damascus, Bahrain, Dubai and Karachi without success before he finally found Mazhar Munir in London.[link]
I haven’t watched ‘Syriana’ yet, and personally, have absolutely no desire to watch ‘United 93’- just watching the trailer makes me queasy. I can only imagine the conflict that these actors feel, especially when it comes to starring in a film about the events around 9/11, a day that impacted so many people in so many ways around the world.
[T]he actors say they are thankful to be rid of the clichéd Middle Eastern villains of the late 1980s and early 1990s (in films such as “Delta Force,” “Navy Seals,” “Iron Eagle”), who were far more likely to be bearded, wear kaffiyehs and shout Arabic insults than resemble a real person. It was precisely those clichéd depictions that made Abdalla so nervous about trying out for “United 93.”“The reputation of representing Arabs by Hollywood is a stereotype, and it’s an incredibly hurtful stereotype,” says Abdalla, who was born in Scotland to Egyptian parents… “The idea was to put all of those people on the plane and try as best as we can to tell that story,” Abdalla said of his meeting with the filmmaker. “[United 93] wasn’t to be a film about stereotypes.”
[link]
#1 Mutineer Crush
Though playing a terrorist these days tremors actors with trepidation, the role of playing an Iraqi terrorist ex-Republican Guard soldier Lost on an island was one that Naveen Andrews picked. It has served him well as it has now landed him as one of the World’s Most Beautiful People in 2006.
“I feel a sense of responsibility to the Iraqi community and to the Arab world,” Andrews told us…. “I was concerned that the way Sayid was going to be perceived would not be negative or peripheral in any way. The audience is reaching out to the so-called enemy in a way that the government and the media won’t allow them to do.”[link]
If I thought airport security was too constraining for me, I can’t imagine what it must be like for these actors when they go through security. “I’m sorry, officer. But I’m really not a terrorist, I just play one on T.V.”
so where are the pix of chix???
Commercials are definitely a place where desis are gaining some equilateral treatment. Rice krispies treats, tmobile, mastercard, tcby’s, kelloggs, playstation, and others have had ads that casted fellow browns with no over-the-top reference to the fact that these actors were of south asian origin. Am I more likely to buy these products now.. hell yes!
If anyone lives in the DC area, they’ve probably seen the Washington Post Personals ad with this uncle-aged cabbie talks casually on what kinda woman he’s looking for. Although he has a mild accent, it isn’t the stereotyped Apu-esque sound that many of us would expect. I thought it was a cool idea and props out to someone for thinking outside of the dreaded ‘box’..
Why? Because I think the ad agencies know that the brown pound (dollar) is on the up. Desis have higher than average incomes, a lot of purchasing power, disposable cash and frequently a penchant for showing off their wealth.
Yeah, cause that isosceles treatment was really infuriating.
Interestingly the social behavior towards dark skinned black women can be deemed very similar to social behavior in India towards dark skinned Indian women. Men for the most part have started to gain acceptance “as is” but women still need to be “light and hot”. Hence my love for Parminder Nagra but she is considered hot in the white world. In India she couldn’t land a role in Bollywood.
Oh and Wesley Snipes (I used to be in love with him circa Passenger 57, White men can’t jump & Money train) last was heard using some fraudulent documents trying to pass thru South Africa or some kind of immigration fraud. He had some woman also claim that he fathered her child in a crackhouse or something and there was some arrest warrant out for him at some point and a paternity suit. I think it all blew over and he wasn’t guilty.
Off topic: I read somewhere that Wesley Snipes is a method actor. So when he was filming Blade everyone actually had to address him as Blade while he stayed in character the entire time, heehee!
So cheezy – lol. I wonder how his wife/gf had to address him? tee hee
Blanket question for the Mutineers,
Is anyone going to go watch United 93? Does anyone else feel this queasiness about going to watch this movie, like I am?
speaking of method acting, an oft-told story (but denied by Hoffman) is one of Laurence Olivier and Dustin Hoffman during filming of Marathon Man. Hoffman the method actor stayed up all night to look like his character (who stays up all night). when Olivier found out what he did, he asked Hoffman why not just try acting?
Not going. I am told, btw, that the movie portrays the passengers as being the cause of the plane coming to earth, leaving out the role of the military planes that shot flight 93 down.
“Blanket question for the Mutineers, Is anyone going to go watch United 93? Does anyone else feel this queasiness about going to watch this movie, like I am?”
to be honest, i’m now wary of going to see it (even though i was wary before because of the sadness of the story itself) after reading some of the comments in the bbc comment section on the movie. one person said something to this effect: watching this movie will make you mad and will make you feel like going out and doing something about it. i’m not exactly sure what they meant, but it was disturbing.
Taz
I’m going to watch United 93 and I don’t feel any queasiness at all.
My own worry is if they show the hijackers as human, instead of the sick gutless coward they really are.
oh oh
I think that was just a speculation and a wild one at that. If thats the case why should the movie show that angle. Besides the human story is more powerful.
Just read a review today, the opener was, “It begins with a scene of a man holding an open book and praying softly in Arabic” and that was about it for me. The rest just unfurled in my mind and I almost passed out from rolling my eyes too hard. Could be a download for me sometime in the future, for now I would rather put money into Tom Cruisazy’s pockets. But that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t want to hear what you thought of it, Taz, give us the goods gurl!
My worry is that people like you think that sick gutless cowards are not human.
But of course they are. Just as Rumsfeld and Cheney are humans. And it gives us a big problem in thinking about what it really means to be a human being. I don’t think that’s a problem to be avoided.
As bad as Cheney and Rumsfield[I’m no fan of them] are you can’t compare them to the 19 hijackers on 9/11.
Yes I can. I just did.
And I’ve also been known to compare apples with oranges.
Showing that the terrorists are human is not a problem. Just don’t ask me to sympathize with them or their apologists. From most of the reviews I’ve read of the film, the film-makers do not set out to demonize the hijackers (if such a feat were possible). But they do not hold back in their depiction of what they were, namely, men who believed that the crime they were committing was sanctioned by God. While I will have no time to see United 93 this weekend, I do plan on seeing it in a theater.
I will absolutely not be seeing it. I lived thru that day and watched it in front of me and nearly lost my brother. I am pissed that a commercial movie is being made about this tragic event. And I hate to be crass but all the people that were there are dead. So other then the bits of conversations had with people on the ground the rest is all fictional. That makes me even more annoyed. By the way the conversation from the flight recorder was apparently only heard by family and no one else and the director only has that to go with. I have a problem with that.
Like what? Take it out on the next brown person you see. Thats a bullshit claim.
I think my quesiness isn’t in that- I think it lies in the fact that I don’t trust Hollywood. Obviously, given the stereotypical roles given to brown folks as an example, Hollywood just doesn’t have a clean track record with me. Then again, sounds like some of the reviews you guys have read and commented on here don’t seem like Hollywood did a bad job this time around…I’m still sketch.
Don’t know, still not watching it. But I don’t watch any movie with violence if I can help it, in an effort to be as non-violent as possible, and well, cuz my active imagination gives me nightmares.
Taz
Any movie about 9/11 that will come out is not gonna make islam look good. The may not be fair, but islam and 9/11 will always be connected.
Annnnd… that has to do with Hollywood misrepresentation and cheap stereotypes and easy soundbytes, right? Right? Please tell me that’s what you mean.
“I will absolutely not be seeing it. I lived thru that day and watched it in front of me and nearly lost my brother. I am pissed that a commercial movie is being made about this tragic event. And I hate to be crass but all the people that were there are dead. “
I was living in DC at the time, and I recall that there were all sorts of rumors flying about that day (a car bomb at the State Department was one). But I do want to see this film. I want to remember what I felt when I was calling my dad in NY from my office at GW, to make sure he was OK, and that all NYC bridges were intact, and how he heard the Pentagon was on fire, something even I did not know at the time. I want to remember the panic-stricken cries of my aunt in Chicago, when I called her and she cried in Bengali, “It’s happening all over again!” She lost her brother-in law in the Bombay blasts of 1993. I want to remember how I called my brother in San Francisco, who was driving to work, and did not hear the news. I want to remember how I called a friend in Fairfax, whose father worked in the WTC, and the tone of his voice when he did not know if his dad was dead or alive. Only two hours later did he find out his dad escaped in time before the South Tower fell. And I want to remember how I slept with the TV on that night, in the event something else should happen.
Hollywood does not always have a great track record when it comes to filming history. But that it has been done poorly in the past should not discourage them. Judge each individual film on its merits.
KXB with all due respect. Why do you want to remember all those things? Are the memories of having experienced it once not enough?
I still live that reality some days when I wake up in the middle of the night and look for the towers in the odd skyline downtown or when I drive down 7th Avenue and outline them against the blank sky where they used to be or when I look for the towers when I come out of the Lincoln tunnel. I still feel a strange twinge of pain in the pit of my stomach when I see them in movies or look at old pictures. I am reminded of it everday when I pass my doorman who has a picture of his sister who died on that day on his desk. I don’t want to remember nor relive that day. I went to two funerals with no bodies and cried for months and my TV was on 24/7 for 4 weeks before my brother came over and pulled the plug and threatened to throw it out if I didn’t stop. I feel intense pain now thinking back on that day and having to hold my silence with my parents for 3 and a half hours because I couldn’t tell them my brother was in the building that morning. I died a 1000 deaths in those 3 hours and don’t wish for it again.
Why would you want to remember something so painful so soon?
Have to say it again: the movie leaves out the role of the military planes that brought Flight 93 down.
i agree w/ janeofalltrades.
I wouldn’t see it in the theatre out of concern that some idiot would pounce upon me, announce, “i’ve got one!”, and then proceed to rally fellow moviegoers into take turns kicking the shit outta me. It IS too soon, just b/c the raw emotion from the terrorist attacks still lingers with most Americans (even the normally level-headed ones!).
And how many times do you plan on saying it today?
“Why would you want to remember something so painful so soon?”
I want to remember for the same reasons Jews want us to remember the Holocaust, for the same reasons Armenians are still demanding an apology from the gov’t of Turkey, for the reasons that post-apartheid South Africa set up a truth and reconciliation comission – because such records reduce the space for revisionists to operate. When you put pen to paper, or in this case, words to film, you challenge those who want to simply want to move on. This story deserves to told on film because it showed that the first organized response to this attack was not from our military, but a plane-load of ordinary men and women. We can understand self-sacrifice on a small scale, like a parent sacrificing themselves to save their children – evolutionary biolgists would tell us that the parent wants his genes to survive. But these people were sacrificing themselves for people they never met. I’ve never been the most religious of men, and after 9/11, you often heard, “How could God allow this to happen?” To me, the actions of those passengers was proof of God’s existence.
Art is never exploitation.
Haha. I think math jokes don’t get nearly enough credit around here.
Deepa, do you have a reputable source on the military planes? I’m not disputing–I usually avoid any 9-11 discussion like the plague, so I haven’t been keeping up and want to know more. The last I had heard this was a conspiracy theory, but apparently it’s gained traction in the last couple of years.
janeofalltrades: the families signed off on this. Many of the families were in attendance at the premier.
KXB: well put. I think the families have ‘never forget’ on their minds.
And my art is never exploitation comment was directed at the comments this film is crass: art should never shy away from or be afraid to wrestle with the most difficult questions there are. This film apparently is, well, it’s apparently something particular and unique in trying to depict a moment in time. The filmmaker should explore this – it should be explored.
There an movie about the Komagata Maru incident of 1914 about sikh’s coming out soon.
such a nice day soon, what if some white person said he was afraid to watch that movie cause he afraid some sikh’s might take it out on him, would that be any different then you post #77 when you said you were afraid of some movie go kicking the shit out of me.
Art is never exploitation.
I completely agree.
Often, it becomes a symbol of change, statement, healing, and later closure – like Guernica. I missed it in Madrid but if you ever talk about Guernica to a Spainard – they really get very emotional and see as an enduring statement that stood for half a century.
Or Bob Dylan’s song “Blowing with the wind” in a concert in Madrid in Franco’s Spain.
I will see the movie.
Thats a interesting POV KBX. More power to you. I am not religious. 9/11 did not make me more religious. It did make me believe in people and humanity more and it wasn’t because of Flight 93.
I personally don’t feel the need to be reminded. It is something that will forever in my heart and shape who I am. I was very deeply and profoundly moved by it. I don’t need to see the story of Flight 93 to believe in the good and sacrifice of people. I see it around me everyday in small doses.
I do strongly concur with you that it is important to remember tragedies in history, learn from them, understand them and respect them. However I think 4 and a half years later is too soon. No one has forgotten. The hurt is still fresh.
And not to sound crass but we as the people who were affected by this still do not know the details of what happened that day. Why the secrecy? Why were the flight recordings not released to the public? Can I be the judge? I’m tired of the conspiracy theories that sound so terribly true. I’m tired that the government has done nothing to dispell them. I am bothered by the lack of footage of the Pentagon attack. I’m bothered by not seeing debris from the flight in the hole Flight 93 made. I’m bothered that the government did not allow media to cover the process and it was never made publically available. Do I only get the Hollywood version of these events? IMO that is what makes me uncomfortable with this movie.
Wanted to hear a response to that. If the military was involved, they should be as zealous in portraying that as they are in portraying anything else. Do you need any other assistance?
someone else, you’re right…it’s gained traction but I guess is not commonly accepted. I thought it was more established than it is.
janeofalltrades: Popular Mechanics (believe it or not 🙂 ) has several articles ‘debunking’ 9-11 myths. It is supposed to be a factual, straightforward, and well put together series and to counter the proliferation of myths that have, well, proliferated around the events. Perhaps in those articles you will find some answers?
*I can’t remember where I saw the Popular Mechanics articles first, but it is eye-opening.
Yeah. With so much obfuscation any retelling of the official story looks an awful lot like propaganda (like Jessica Lynch). The passengers’ intent to stop the hijackers is unmistakeably heroic. Whether they had assistance from the military does not change that.
I’m a bit surprised at the labels that it’s “too soon.” Too soon for what? Art has already taken up the challenge of understanding and depicting 9/11 and the emotional fallout.
A&E has already made a film called Flight 93 that remains the networks highest watched movie ever. Same with The Discovery Channel’s The Flight that Fought Back. Not sure if it was their highest rated program, but it was a major success. (None of which guarantees that United 93 will be successful, however.)
Spike Lee made The 25th Hour about a New York still reeling from the attacks just over a year later. Anne Neslon wrote a play called The Guys a few weeks after the attacks that was performed less than a year later. Authors such as Ian McEwan, Jonathan Safran Foer, and Art Spiegelman have found ways of incorporating the attacks into works of fiction. John Adams won a Pulitzer Prize for writing “On the Transmigration of Souls,” which was a response to the WTC attacks. And there have been plenty of art exhibits dealing with the attacks.
And consider this. Movies about Pearl Harbor were being made in less than a year after the attacks. The first movies about the Vietnam war was being made four or five years after the troop pullout, etc.
I’m not trying to minimize anyone’s pain from that day. If the movie is going to be too harrowing to watch, then no one should watch it until they are sure they are ready. That is a personal choice that only the individual viewer can make. But to speak on behalf of the rest of the country strikes me as myopic.
Frankly, I’m more disturbed by the announcement that Brangelina are going to make an adapataion of Atlas Shrugged. But I guess every generation gets the epic they deserve.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=7&c=y
Here’s the Popular Mechanics article.
‘TO INVESTIGATE 16 OF THE MOST PREVALENT CLAIMS MADE BY CONSPIRACY THEORISTS, POPULAR MECHANICS assembled a team of nine researchers and reporters, who together with PM editors, consulted more than 70 professionals in fields that form the core of this magazine, including aviation, engineering and the military.”
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842/html
(I can’t click on the link-thingie for some reason?)
Thanks Deepa, we must have simul-posted 🙂
Thank you. I will search for it. My dad subscribes to it but he’s a rabid liberal nontheless 🙂
We all speak for ourselves here. I don’t see anyone here speaking for the rest of the country.
Ha, so was I! (Not because of Brangelina but because the movie will cause more people to go out, read it and get their heads screwed up.)
Between the two of us, not me, thanks. Toodles!
“I’m a bit surprised at the labels that it’s “too soon.” Too soon for what? Art has already taken up the challenge of understanding and depicting 9/11 and the emotional fallout.”
Marshall McLuhan coined the term “The medium is the message.” It’s one thing to watch a documentary or film about 9/11 in the comfort of your home, with the phone ringing, kids running about, etc. But to sit in a darkened theater, looking at a huge screen, with THX sound can be far more scary. I will ask some friends to go, but if they say no, I will understand and not force them, in which case I will go alone.
But you don’t even seem to know your own name…
Well, one person has already said “It IS too soon, just b/c the raw emotion from the terrorist attacks still lingers with most Americans (even the normally level-headed ones!).” And you yourself has said “However I think 4 and a half years later is too soon. No one has forgotten.” “No one” being the collective pronoun. If that wasn’t your intented meaning, then I accept that.
Sure I do, but am I obligated to share it with you? I’m in good company with KXB and technophobic and Pearl Jam Fan and another guy, so don’t play like I’m unique here.
G’day and Peace out, y’all!!
I guess I’d like to hear what annoyed you so much to delurk. Is it because I was claiming a military involvement for which there is no material proof? I understand that because I now realize I thought I knew something which I don’t know.
Or is it because you are angry when someone brings up the possibility of military involvement?
You were angry enough to respond (so you’re not “above” discussion) but you chose the most uninformative moniker and kept your remarks rather uniformative as well (other than that you were feeling some strong emotion).