As brown people we constantly urge greater authenticity in fiction films about brownistan. But authenticity comes at a price, as the producers of The Kite Runner movie have found out as some people are alleging that it may endanger the life of one of the main actors in the film. [SPOILER ALERT]
The novel The Kite Runner was written by an Afghani-American from Fremont about two boys growing up in Kabul: a wealthier child (the protagonist) and his servant who is also his best friend.
The producers of the movie went out of their way to try to make the movie as authentic as possible. They filmed in nearby Kashgar (in China, for security reasons), filmed in the vernacular, and they tried to use mainly local kids.
The problem comes because a critical scene in the novel involves a rape, in particular the rape of the protagonist’s best friend. This made the father of the actor playing the best friend uneasy:
“When I told them I would not let Ahmad Khan take part in this film, they said: ‘We won’t film that scene’,” … [the father] says. [Link]
<
p>However, what the producers did was to shoot the scene without showing very much:
Because this key scene was filmed in a non-explicit way, it seems that at the time Ahmad’s father did not even realise it had happened. I called up one of The Kite Runner’s producers, Rebecca Yeldham, in Los Angeles… “The scene contains no nudity. It’s rendered in a very sort of impressionistic way. But it’s also important in being faithful to that story – that there’s no confusions that the attack in the alley that took place on that child was a sexual violation…” [Link]
<
p>She also denies that the father was promised that the scene would be removed. Still, even this compromise has touched off a controversy over whether the scene should be included at all, and whether even this indirect shooting of the scene will endanger the safety of the actor involved:
“This scene, in an Afghan context, can be interpreted as a dishonour to one community, to one ethnicity,” … [a local human rights advocate] says. “In a tribal society, people don’t distinguish between fictitious or real things.” That means that a piece of fiction or a joke could be taken with deadly seriousness. [Link]
<
p>The actor is also quoted as saying he is afraid he will be shunned by others who believe he has been raped. Advocates for the families say they have been exploited.
<
p>The producers think that this is a big misunderstanding, fanned by internet rumours, and that it will all blow over once people see the film:
… she says the fears – which have spread to expatriate Afghans using internet chat rooms – are based on a mistaken belief that the scene in the film is explicit while, in fact, it was filmed discreetly in deference to Afghan feelings.“We don’t believe the kids’ lives are at risk. We don’t believe we’ve put them in that position,” she says. But the producers’ concerns are such that they have just decided not to release the film in Afghanistan – although DVD versions are bound to circulate there.[Link]
<
p>Some of the other actors are asking for the scene to be cut, while the writer has simply said that he is “very concerned.”
<
p>It’s hard to see a way out that will make all parties happy. Can you make a film in a society where some people don’t recognize the difference between fiction and reality?
<
p>Related posts: The Kite Runner
See also: Save the Kite Runner Boys, a website that claims to be advocating for the children.
What if the actor had really been raped? Why should he be shunned? How strange the human mind that it shuns the victim of crime and generally gives the perpetrator a free pass (or at least abhors them less)! This seems true in all societies – just a matter of which crime.
How sad. The actor and his family were obviously misled and to them it doesn’t matter if the scene is gratuitous or “impressionistic”..if it’s been at all suggested that the actor’s character has been sexually molested (which it has to since it’s integral to the book), then I can certainly see why there would be a fear for his reputation, particularly in less educated areas.
I’m not sure what should be done save short of refilming with another actor. Tough call overall though.
I’m wondering if this post needs a spoiler warning?
To those of you who have not read the book, the painful incident is important because it makes a very strong impression on a young mind, that haunts him all his life. The author of the book having lived in a different society most of his life may not have analyzed the subtlety of the situation among Afghan audiences, however I believe he couldn’t have presented it more painfully without being too explicit or undignified (I’ll reserve the term vulgarity to bollywood’s actresses). From a humanistic approach, I think for people outside Afghanistan to understand the reality in Afghanistan this particular scene must be included in the movie, maybe they can release an Afghani version with the scene cut, or edited, or changed to suit a certain audience. I understand that the DVD version will still go there, but there’s a chance a theatrical version with a changed scene in Afghanistan might be less offensive to that particular community and might gather less opposition against the movie, because I believe it’s a story that has to be told to people in the world to highlight the plight of children through the eyes of these two Afghan boys.
Assuming that the film advocates for the victim, I find this statement disingenous. Why would I be pissed that an actor from my tribe portrayed a victim? I might target the kid for some harmless ribbing, but threaten to kill him?
Heck, if its so much of an issue, give him a green card. We need these “authentic” faces in our movies and tv shows.
IS any one else reminded of the “Hounddog” controvery last year at Sundance? :Dakota Fanning played a child rape victim and there was a hue and cry over the filming of the rape scene …
The discomfort with depiction of sexual crimes against children is universal I guess.
Yeah, I agree with Kurma. My gut reaction was, “so just the depiction of rape carries a stigma? What, and being raped carries a stigma that’s somehow more understandable?” In this case, neither the fiction nor the reality should be shameful at all!
These Iron Age memes are outta control.
I find it a little strange that the Book was so popular and a Best seller, so why should the movie run into problems like this. If there is any uproar, why now? As far as Kite Runner is concerned, since the whole plot is on redemption, it will be very difficult to reason out if the chapter of betrayal is left out.
I think whether the family of the actor was misled or not will never be known. Had the kid’s father not known about this scene’s inclusion, it’s somewhat unethical. That’s one issue. And discomfort over scenes depicting the rape of a child are understandable, but not as an excuse or a rationalization for demands to pull the scene. Clearly, this is an issue that needs more light, not less.
But the bigger issue remains, why is the victim of a rape stigmatized? In this case, the stigma is so strong that the claim is even the fictionalized depiction of it in a film will haunt this child.
Much, as many will no doubt point out, as it did to the character in the novel.
It’s well-known that controversy/publicity (potentially) leads to increased ticket sales at the box-office. The cynical part of me wonders if it’s nothing more than that – an attempt to create controversy or blow up a minor issue.
Whether or not the film’s rape scene will be offensive to American viewers is irrelevant to me; all we have to do is get up and leave the cinema. What I’m concerned about is the little boy. You’d think that we’d have learned to stop exploiting people without the means to protect themselves. Disgusting. I loved the book but am considering not going to see the film.
Can’t comment on Afghan society but … Slate had interesting analyses here and here / I quote from the second ” According to federal law, you’re not allowed to show anyone under the age of 18 engaging in a sexual act. You’re also forbidden from creating a scene that even appears to depict a real kid having real sex; in legalese, you’re in trouble if “an ordinary person viewing the depiction would conclude that the depiction is of an actual minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct.”
but is getting raped sexually explicit conduct? and what if the event is central to the plot? do we not make the movie then?
whether one agrees/disagrees with the afghan view on rape/stigma/fiction as reality etc., the main concern is the boy and his family. they have to live in that society and the filmmakers should understand the nuances of their norms as much as possible before filming. one hopes the producers really didn’t mislead the family – but i’m sure it’s been done before, especially when foreigners film in countries or among populations (as extras etc.) that aren’t seen as “sophisticated” or worthy of equal pay for equal work to their western/other foreign counterparts. or it could be that the family took the money earlier and is now getting cold feet under pressure. couldn’t they include a disclaimer at the beginning of the movie before showing it afghanistan?
This movie was awesom. I just saw a screening.
So tell us how it depicts the rape scene.
I was on edge b/c I knew it was coming up. But it wasn’t graphic at all. You see a fight between Hassan and Assef and his gang. You see Assef undo his belt. Hassan is pushed onto the ground. And then you see Amir run away. Afterwards the boys walk home togheter and there’s some blood on the snow as Amir walks away.
Skepmod, Check the second article linked to on Slate for further legal analysis. Some of the laws surrounding this were ruled unconstitutional in 2002.
I guess the point I was trying to make is that the loathing/stigma around child sexuality is universal.And one has to tread really carefully even in fictional depictions. Its not just confined to Afghanistan .This was in response to Ennis’ question” Can you make a film in a society where some people don’t recognize the difference between fiction and reality? ” – its not that simple as a ociety unable to distinguish between fiction and reality,
The movie was seriously amazing. It was in the spirit of the book. I urge all of you to watch it.
Can you make a film in a society where some people don’t recognize the difference between fiction and reality?
i recall a piece in the new york times magazine years ago where a pathan cab driver in pakistan asked the reporter how he tolerates the way american women behave. when he asked what the cabby meant it turned out that he’d watched american pornography, and assumed that that’s how americans behave.
Well, Razib, you do have to admit that in the case of porn, the fiction is the emotion or arousal of the actors, and not the actual sex act itself. 😀
So the Pathan might want to spruce up his video collection to get a more accurate depiction of “how Americans behave.”
And he should probably also avoid spring break in Cancun.
“…a film motivates thought and action and assures a high degree of attention and retention as compared to the printed word. The combination of act and speech, sight and sound in semi darkness of the theatre with elimination of all distracting ideas will have a strong impact on the minds of the viewers and can affect emotions. Therefore, it has as much potential for evil as it has for good and has an equal potential to instill or cultivate violent or good behaviour. It cannot be equated with other modes of communication.”
-Central Board of Film Certification of India link
I guess according to him, it’s fine for american men to behave that way. 🙂
Is this an appropriate place to discuss what one felt about the Kite Runner in general? I’m going to wander into the murk. I felt the book fell short in one important area. The portrait of the Taliban could have been more fully explored; I don’t think that all Taliban are a simple and one dimensional as Assef- sociopathic killers that enjoy violence and torture. I do feel that an honest exploration of why a person joins the Taliban would have been really powerful and revelatory- and controversial in the West- with a political impact that this book completely skirts.
At the risk of sounding completely cynical, I’d venture to suggest that (a) because people will read anything ducks for cover [I thought the book was OK, if a little trite and one-dimensional for the most part, but that’s just me I’m sure], and (b) because most people don’t necessarily (have to) visualise or actually mentally depict the scene of rape. In a movie, the visual impact of something along those lines is much more “in your face” and pushes many more buttons than most people would care to admit. Rape is vile, but in a book you have the option to sort of gloss over it in the flow of reading. In a movie theatre, you can close your eyes, but it’s tougher to subsume that concept/aural/visual stimulation into the course of the film as a whole. That’s what I’d suspect, anyway.
I do agree with Jasmine though. Even though I like to think I have a handle on how the Taliban managed to set itself up in Afghanistan, there was much more scope to perhaps explore the hows and whys of that establishment. For me, Hosseini’s narrative lost steam about a third of the way through the book, and became really simplistic. “This evil child is now an evil man, and I shall martyr myself so that I can be redeemed”, and now we end. shrug I’m hoping that the film will move me more than the book did, but I’m a bit of a bastard, so it’s unlikely 😀
My heart goes out for that pathan. He bravely watched infidel Amreeki women even though they offended his delicate sensibilities. I can only imagine the horrific scene. Oh no. Funk soundtrack. Please stop. NO. Must. Keep. Watching.
sidhu @ 3
Vital to the story, but like Runa says re Houndog, I can see that rubbing off on the actor in any society– even if it wasn’t violent, because early sex generally carries a stigma– although I don’t know how many of us remember Brooke Shields as Pretty Baby.
Another thing about books v. films is that you can pretty much count on a reader being pretty well educated and no other humans being involved in creating his/her interior vision of the action depicted in print.
hounddog, sorry
Yeah, I think this is the most salient point. No children were harmed or pretended to be harmed in order to write and publish the book; if this child actor is stigmatized because of his role in the movie, whatever we think of the reasons for that, it’s harmful to him. I’m impressed that the filmmakers went to such lengths for authenticity– filming in Dari, etc.– and I can understand why it was important to them to find a child actor who is a native Dari speaker. (I work in the translation industry, and trust me, there aren’t a lot of Dari-English resources out there– training an actor or finding a voiceover actor or some other workaround would be really hard to do.) But I hope they recognize that these are real people’s lives they are affecting.
Is anyone else reminded of the allegations about Sacha Baron-Cohen exploiting Kazakh villagers during the filming of ‘Borat’?
The 2 important points to me are:
1) The boy’s life may be in danger because he will have participated in a portrayal which implies he (and by extension his ingroup) is rapable.
2) The boy and his family may not have agreed to his participation in this portrayal.
In that society (as in all, more or less) dishonor attaches to the victim of an actual rape. So much so that a simulated rape, watched by the public worldwide on big screens, is apparently detrimental to the fake victim. So much so that the dishonor attaching to the victim in a real or simulated rape attaches to the victim’s ingroup. Perhaps more so with the simulated rape since millions of people worldwide will see/infer it. So apparently there is fear that the dishonor felt by the ingroup will cause some of its members to kill the boy, to excise the dishonor. The logic seems to be the same as in honor killings.
Our opinions about free speech, freedom of artistic expression, how important this story is to be told, our rejection of the idea of the victim being to blame, our criticism of all that is wrong about the society’s attitude toward rape victims and its treatment of them, whether the ingroup should feel dishonored, etc. seem to me to be irrelevant to what is being reported as the reality on the ground there – that the boy and his family feel themselves to be in physical danger because of the ingroup’s reaction to “its” “dishonorable” portrayal in this movie.
I don’t know if it can really be sufficient in the internet age to try to release one version here, another there.
sin, i just wanted to note that the reason you noticed a change 2/3 of the way in is because hosseini had difficulty with concluding the tale so his editor helped him write the last 1/3.
JT, thanks for clarifying, I felt the same way Sin did about the last 1/3, does Hosseini admit this anywhere? I just want to shove it my girlfriend’s face because she loves it and I just didn’t quite understand the hype. The man can draw a character as well as other published authors, but the thought of sitting through an adapted version of that boring plot gives me boils. As for the rape scene, I’d imagine that if my son were to play a role in a book-to-movie, I would read the book which simply wouldn’t make sense without that scene.
I agree, but I doubt that Hosseini writes his novels with the intention of creating controversy. It would be wonderful if people could learn about history, perhaps even a different perspective of history, from these kinds of films and novels, and some might argue that authors and filmmakers have a responsibility to teach people. But fiction is fiction – a story, even if it’s set in a real time and place.
Anyway, the film was quite lovely, although not perfect. I felt a deeper understanding of Hassan and Amir’s friendship from the book (but I felt the same about the portrayal of Harry’s friendship with Ron and Hermione in the first Harry Potter film so…), and Hosseini’s emphasis the importance of kite flying/running to Afghanis and Hassan and Amir wasn’t expressed as strongly in the film.
iABD:
I agree with your points, but disagree with your conclusions. Granted, I have the luxury of sitting several thousand miles away from the family in question, but the pragmatic thing is not always the right thing. The movie brings attention to an issue that is often overlooked. That issue will never be resolved by simply hoping for the best and keeping your mouth shut. On the other hand, the depiction of the abuse in the movie should at least spur some attention to the issue of child molestation and rape. The child may not understand this fully, and his family may have understood it imperfectly, but there it is.
Furthermore, it’s already released. More harm would come from trying to stifle it out of any sense of shame than would from just hiring good bodyguards and giving your idiot family members a stern talking-to.
Is it not their whole ethnic community, not just their family, that holds these beliefs? How are you going to live a normal life, if they really do feel this strongly against his participation in the rape scene?
It should never have been released this way, I think. I can see though your point about given that it’s already released, won’t it just lend validity to the community’s views to stifle it. (sorry about this last sentence 🙂 )
It’s the physical danger thing that I can’t get past, it’s hard for me to advocate for ideas when a boy’s family believes his life is at stake.
just an update– http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/04/movies/04kite.html?em&ex=1191643200&en=9d330ee61e93a43e&ei=5087
according to the ny times, they’re trying to get the boys and their families out of afghanistan (to uae) before releasing the movie