Change Your Image
aruzhansaparbayeva
Reviews
Wadjda (2012)
The girl that finally got her bicycle
A girl who finally got her bicycle
The Wadjda is a picture showing everyday life in Saudi Arabia, including interrelations between family members, educational system, common values and norms, on the example of Wadjda and her family. The production featured team from Saudi Arabia, Netherlands, Germany, Jordan, United Arab Emirates and USA (1). The director of the movie, Haifaa Al-]Mansour, is the first female filmmaker in Saudi Arabia. She is respected for bringing attention to topics within her culture that used to be closed for discussion. Furthermore, she promotes critical view on traditional and strict culture of Saudi Arabian society (2).
The movie portrayed scenes from life of Wadjda including her relationships with her family, friend and school. Her very wish to get a bike so she could play with her friend Abdallah was never supported by her family. The reason was that it was unacceptable for girls in her culture to ride bicycles. Therefore, Wadjda decided to save money for purchasing the bicycle on her own. Fortunately, the school she attends announced a competition of Quran recitation with a prize of 1000 Riyals. So she joined the religion club at the school and won the competition. However, when principle of her school asked on what Wadjda would spend her prize, she answered she would buy the bicycle. The principle got disappointed with Wadjda's answer and told her that no girls rode the bicycles and donated the money.
Of course, this is not the whole plot of the movie, but I think that what was meant by it was to express critique to the traditional culture of Saudi Arabia. The movie did not have aggressive attitude towards customs and traditions, instead, it just showed them in action. It had not made a revolt but politely pointed at particular aspects that were problematic.
I guess, female figure in the production pointed direction into gender interrelation and certain dos and don'ts. The beauty of this movie was in the way they were pictured. For instance, norms of behavior through school principle Ms. Hussa, relationships between men and women through Wadjda's parents and her relationship with adults, classmates and Abdallah.
The way the movie depicted the character of Wadjda was interesting. Wearing converse instead of black shoes, listening to the music in English, earning for her dream bicycle by selling bracelets, which was prohibited in school. All her actions were pointing at her rebellious and unconventional personality. In addition she was persistent with her aim of getting herself the bike, and obstinate despite the opinion of her family. She invested in device for learning Quran and resisted being laughed at in religion club. Wadjda even prepared herself to getting the bicycling by asking the man in shop to keep it for her and Abdallah to teach her how to ride it. All of these characteristics, in my opinion, were leading to a picture of a brave girls who did not filter herself through the prism of her society. I mean that she kept dreaming and working on getting the bicycle even when she was told that it was unacceptable and scolded for continuous asking to lend money for the bike.
One of the scenes that impressed me was a dialogue of Wadjda and her mother. Her mother was saying that she would like her hair shorter and when Wadjda told her to cut it, she replied that she kept them because Wadjda's farther liked them long. Because there was no son in their family, Wadjda's mother was worried of high probability that Wajda's father would marry another women. I saw the problem of value of girls and boys. The progeny was considered progeny when there was a male, and women were not included in family trees. I would not say it was different in my own culture, still, the absence of son in the family as a reason of divorce seemed quite problematic.
In addition, I myself felt offended when Ms. Huss decided to donate Wadjda's prize money to Palestine. Not it was unrighteous thing to do, but that prize was honestly earned due to Wadjda's effort. Just because the in the society it was unacceptable for girls to ride a bicycle, depriving Wadjda of her prize when she was wanted it for so long and worked hard for it seemed unfair for me. But wasn't that a point of a movie? To point at cultural issues. I believe that movie did a great job in engaging and emerging into movie's atmosphere. Moreover, it was filmed in appealing way, related to everyday life, so that it could easily be felt by the viewers.
Aside warm atmosphere, important message, comprehensive plot, and great delivery, the movie was nominated to numerous awards. Among 33 nominations, "Wadjda" won in 22 from 2014 to 2014 (3). In addition, this movie was also included to the list of "1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die" by Steven Schneider (1).
Inside Mecca (2003)
Inside Mecca
"Inside Mecca"
"Inside Mecca" is a documentary movie produced by the National Geographic Television in 2003. It depicts one of the profound rituals in the Islamic religious traditions - hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca (1). The movie is formatted as an interview of three pilgrims from South Africa, Malaysia and USA supplemented with narrations explaining the events in historical and religious context.
The first impression from the movie was that it was very informative. It showed the entire plan of the hajj, including counter-clockwise walking around Kaaba seven time, running back and forth between the hills of Safa and Mrwash, drinking from ZamZam well, going to plains of Mount Arafat, spending night in the plain of Murzalifa, stoning the devil, sacrificing a sheep and visiting a barber. In doing so, there were numerous references to Abrahamic origins and Islamic history that explained where all of those parts of the ritual pilgrimage come from and what they mean.
In addition, the format of the film, which included the actual footage of the hajj, gave me a sense of experience, as if I was a part of that journey. Along with that, I felt that the movie excellently portrayed the message of equity in front of God. The three pilgrims, Ismail Mahbob from Malaysia, Khalil Mandhlazi from South Africa, and Fidelma O'Leary, each had distinct lives, occupation and status. Nonetheless, in Mecca, the place where millions of different people gathered due to hajj, they left everything behind. For instance, all male pilgrims wore special clothing, Ihram, and all females wore humble clothing covering their head. They gave up comfort, staying with numerous people in a room. However, this idea of equity was somewhat paradoxal, and the movie showed that as well. For instance, there were several shelters of premium/luxe/VIP class that had less people in them and different food. The staff told that the in front of God there were no VIP, no reach, no poor. Though not really related to the movie itself, doesn't the difference in the conditions bring difference to the overall experience?
The fact that the movie included the scenes showing how people entered Mecca, Saudi Arabia, how the city prepared for hajj, the conditions at which the pilgrims were placed provided realistic and convincing insight into the entire period of the hajj. The narrator mentioned risks of being run over by pilgrims, having abnormal sleep or being hit by stones. Such episodes left the impression of being objective and showing the full picture with all of the beauty and risks.
Another thing I appreciated in the movie was the cast, or is it better to say its absence? The interviewees were real people with real occupation not related to acting. Therefore, they, I believe, showed their honest attitude, expressed their opinions and feelings. Especially, the moments of them crying when praying or seeing the Mecca, overflowing with genuine emotions left me truly delighted with the strength of their faith and how much the hajj meant to them. In addition, the pilgrims met some racial prejudices, pointing at the human nature of them. For instance, being from the US Fidelma encountered many other people asking is she was truly Muslim. Khalil met some inequity in accommodation and assumed that it happened due to his race. Of course, they were upset and disappointed that such happening took place during the hajj but held their tempers and tried to keep calm for the sake of the sanctity of the ritual pilgrimage they were performing. There is no way that such discipline, devotion, and control could not impress the viewers.
Aside the meaning of the hajj to the pilgrims, the movie included episodes of preparation of Kaaba and other facilities to the hajj. It took the great effort for the officials of Saudi Arabia to host the pilgrims and organize their transportation and so on. Such prior organization process cannot be seen but felt during hajj. From the movie it gave and impression of like a behind the scenes to a full immersing to the atmosphere of the hajj.
Before watching this movie, I have not known that the sheep sacrifice and shaving or cutting hair was the part of the hajj. Although sacrifices and donations are familiar rituals in Islam, it was cognitive to get to know why exactly the ship was sacrificed and donated on behalf of the pilgrims. The religious meaning behind shaving or cutting hair was nice to know as well.
Moving onto the movie editing and production, it worth noticing the included maps that were used during narration to show in which part around the Mecca a particular place was located. Although it was not the most important aspect of the movie, it was interesting to know where the particular stops during the hajj were relative to each other. Accompanied by narrations, they added to general comprehension of the hajj. Another interesting fact about the production, is that this movie is f-rated, "representing women on screen and behind the camera" (1, 2).
Finally, I would definitely recommend the movie to those who wants to get to know the hajj.
Al-risâlah (1976)
The MEssage
"The Message" or "Al-risâlah" is a historical depiction of Islamic genesis. Interestingly, it was filmed simultaneously at two different languages with two different casts. The Arabic version was released earlier in 1976 followed by the English one in 1977 (1). In correspondence with Muslim traditions, the movie didn't portray Mohammed's face and voice, so the main character was his uncle, Hamza ibn Abdul-Muttalib (2).
Produced by Filmco International Production in collaboration of Egypt with Libya, and featuring 28 different nationalities and cultures, it was initially banned in some Middle Eastern countries. The reason was that some religious leaders did not approve the story of Prophet Muhammed being put into a movie (1, 2).
"The Message" told the story the Messenger of God, who received revelations in the mountains. That times, in the 7th century AD, the Arabic world was polytheistic. Therefore, Mohammed's message of the sole God was considered radical. Moreover, it faced harsh resistance. Many episodes of the movie reviled fights between Muslims and conservative Arabs that were willing to stick to idolatry. Nonetheless, it started gathering followers and eventually, became one of the world religions.
In a truly fascinating way, "The Message" had shown that a new for that times religion faced numerous obstacles. Resistance of the Arabs to the new religious idea of a sole God brought a gap between citizens of Mecca - "dividing the city, dividing the generations: children from parents". Such struggles of splitting people at the beginning and reuniting through war reminded me of foundation of the Protestant Church by Martin Luther. His ideas were also considered radical, and he met the resistance in the face of Pope and the Emperor.
One of the first scenes of the movie was a disclaimer asserting its historical accuracy. For instance, the age at which the Prophet started receiving revelations, the Hijra - migration of Prophet Mohammed and his companions from Mecca to Medina, and other depicted events corresponded to agreed scholar's findings.
Though the movie was filmed far after the events it depicted, it fully immersed to the atmosphere of the 7th century AD. The setting of ancient city of Mecca took more than four month (2). The scenery of deserts, camels and slaves gave the insight into lifestyle of the population. Moreover, the accompanying music was dramatic and full of wind instruments, which gave that Middle East mood. Especially, at the ending, when the Mohammed's army marched into Mecca, enhanced sounds of drums conveyed powerful feeling of victory. Noteworthy, the costumes of people on two sides - Muslim and Polytheist portrayed disagreement between them. The Muslims, robed white pilgrimage clothing stood out from the others. Turns out, it had a particular meaning. The Ihram clothing of the white color implied equity of everyone in front of the God. Mohammed taught that "slave is equal to his master", "before God, all men are equal as the teeth of a comb". These ideas sounded ridiculous to the population, and were considered very convenient for slaves and beggars to have an illusion of equity. Apparently, equity was not the feature of Arabic community at that time. For instance, newborn girls were buried, slaves were bought and sold.
Going back to the movie, the production team and cast have done a great job. Memorable episode in my mind was when a slave, even ordered, did not whip Ammar. For refusing to follow the order, he was punished with a heavy hand. Even being beaten up, he would claim that the God was one. Seemingly, this scene showed that the faith was not given up in the fear of human authority; despite all the beatings and anger, the man stuck to his faith.
Talking about teaching of Prophet Mohammed, it was thrilling how a man that could not read and write transmitted words of God to those who could. Moreover, encouraged his companions to learn reading and writing, and further, teach others. Same as me, Arabs were surprised with illiterate man who conveyed words of God in Quran. Prophet Mohammed was suspected for conveying his own ideas and actually receiving the revelations. Later, his companions delivered that those were the words of God, similarly to Christianity and Judaism. It also worth noting, that spreading of the Islam went through conquering. Notably, the battles were within Arabs, not from someone outside. From the movie, it seemed that there were no political interest in conquering Mecca. Indeed, it was an intended transmission of religion through forceful destruction of relics of idolatry.
Not only the movie depicted events happening in Mecca and Medina, but also narrated other historical events. These narrations gave a context of all of the events, and enhanced comprehension. The same narration was observed in above mentioned "Martin Luther" film, which I guess is a common feature of majority of historical movies. Finally, "The message" lasted for almost three hours portraying early Islamic history in its best, including all of the struggles and battles.
Martin Luther (1953)
The Man That Didn't Want To Split The Church
"Martin Luther" is a biographical movie that gives insight into one of the schisms in the history of the Christianity - the Protestant Reformation. It was initiated by the German priest and theologist Martin Luther. Produced by RD-DR Corporation, Lutheran Church Productions and Luther-Film-G.M.B.H., the movie was released in 1953. It was the fourth best movie of 1953 according to the National Board of Review and nominated for two Academy Awards for the Best Cinematography and Art Direction/Set Decoration (1).
The movie portrayed the story of Martin Luther from a student of Law School at the University of Erfurt to a historical figure in the Church. There were different episodes demonstrating the attitude and views of Luther towards the faith and salvation. The events took place in 16th century Rome Empire ruled by Pope Leo X and Emperor Charles V. The predecessor of the Leo X had lied the foundation of the St. Peter's cathedral. So, Pope was gathering resources for the construction via releasing indulgences. This fact became important as a trigger for spreading the Luther's doctrine. From the beginning of his monastic life, Luther was seeking something missing. As he confessed later, his "unpardonable sin" was not loving the God. This state of search brought Luther to the Scriptures. At that time, his interpretations were considered radical, particularly because they did not correspond to those of the Church. For example, one of the scenes in the movie, when Martin Luther encountered a drunk man who told him that his sins were forgiven as he had spent good money on the indulgences had triggered a cascade of important events. Luther tried to deliver to people the idea that "when indulgencies are peddled, bartered and sold - this is not a salvation, this is a damnation of the soul". In short, his point was that people "cannot buy God's mercy". Luther explicitly put his reply into Ninety Five Theses written in Latin and nailed into the church door. It became the most read and printed writing that time in Germany. These actions rose conflict in which the emperor and Pope accused Luther of introducing new heretic dogma.
Luther's dogma gathered numerous followers and profound changes were introduced. For instance, marriage of nuns and monks, and translation of Bible into German. So, the main difference of Luther's position and Catholic Church became the authority of Pope, with Luther's being "We must serve God, not people".
In the first place, the story of a man who brought changes into Church left very empowering impression. From my perspective, the movie very accurately represented fundamental principles of the Protestant Church by drifting the plot around central ideas - God's mercy cannot be bought and the ultimate truth lies in Scriptures. For instance, during the debates at Leipzig, Luther interfered the authority of Pope, for which he was proclaimed a heretic. Moreover, his senior, the vicar general, released his vows as Augustinian monk. Nonetheless, Martin Luther took a stand on his beliefs regarding the indulgencies and Pope's authority.
Whole story, accompanied with appropriate music, decorations, clothing, cast's and production team's work immersed into the atmosphere of the Germany in 16th century. The white and black cinematography brought seriousness and drama to the picture. Dramatic music, especially during dialogues of Luther with the vicar, emperor and mass made his every word sound. Niall McGinnis starring Luther delivered confusion with value of symbols, Pope and indulgences, and persistence in views that he believed to be the truth with a convincing genuineness. I still remember the facial expression of Luther (Niall McGinnis) when he refused to retract his writing and tried delivering what he thought to be true to the Emperor Charles V.
In addition, I would like to bring attention to the script of the movie. The lines of Luther, Frederick, Pope, Emperor and the vicar conveyed their position regarding the Church and politics as well as their emotions. Moreover, they were catchy, impressing and convincing.
Above the cinema scenes, there different pictures with narration of the events not only of Luther's life, but also of Germany and the Empire at that period of time. This allowed to relate all of the portrayed events and see what where the effects of the actions of a just one man.
Aside such a powerful plot, decorations, script, music and cast, the movie had minor historical inconsistencies. For instance, the movie said that the man who bought the indulgences was not required to confess. In the reality, however, one who bought the indulgences for oneself must confess. Still, the movie had a great consistency with significant historical dates. Furthermore, the flow of the portrayed events facilitated the overall perception. Finally, it was inspiring and empowering to watch a man that did not give up on his believes and faith, who was not scared of authority and led the mass.