5 actors in bad sequels
Advertisement
Coverage of what is truly interesting in the film world

TOP STORY:

RSS Feeds:All posts by this author|All comments for this post

Toronto 2007: Operation Filmmaker

Karina Longworth
By Karina Longworth posted 1 year ago
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • Reddit
  • Ma.gnolia
  • YahooMyWeb
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon

operationfilmmaker.png

As a portrait of post-Sadaam Iraqi youth, Operation Filmmaker doesn’t have the “wow!” factor of that other Toronto movie about Iraqi kids looking for refuge in American popular culture. But although I have some issues with director Nina Davenport’s treatment of her subject, for a film that began life as a vanity project designed to document an act of kindness on the part of a Hollywood star, it’s a surprisingly evocative examination of privileged, well-intentioned ignorance.

In 2004, an MTV documentary featured a nine-minute segment on Muthana Mohmed, a twenty-something Iraqi with a passion for Hollywood film. MTV’s cameras followed Muthana as he toured a giant street market, searching in vain for cinema books; they captured a pile of bombed-out bricks, which Muthana said was once the site of a school in which he was studying film. Actor Liev Schreiber saw this documentary as he was preparing to travel to Prague to shoot his first film as a director, an adaptation of Jonathan Safran Foer’s Holocaust-memories-as-cultural-bridge novel, Everything is Illuminated. Schreiber decided to contact Muthana and invite him to come to Prague and work on the set of the film as an intern. Undoubtedly wanting a document of his own cross-cultural generosity for the Illuminated DVD, Schreiber hired filmmaker Davenport to trail Muthana and document his experiences on set.

Schreiber and his producer Peter Saraf undoubtedly went into the Muthana endeavor with the best intentions, but their cultural naivete is apparent from the outset. Schreiber says he wants to encourage Muthana’s filmmaking ambitions because “Baghdad needs artists”; Davenport lets the obvious follow-up question of, “Yeah, but don’t they need, like, safety, running water and electricity first?” hang in the air unsaid. When Muthana chooses an evening of clubbing over working on an editing assignment, Saraf begins to doubt Muthana’s true ambitions. The producer notes that if he really wants a Hollywood career, he should be making himself “invaluable” on the set by making sure the actors never lack for coffee. But Muthana, who has never spent a night outside of Iraq or away from his childhood home, has no concept of the Hollywood ladder and has a hard time seeing how fetching snacks is going to improve his art. The conflict is compounded by politics: both Schreiber and Saraf are self-professed “left-wing American Jews,” and both are visibly distressed with Muthana’s insistence that he “loves George Bush.”

As shooting on Illuminated nears completion, Muthana makes an impetuous declaration that he should go back to Iraq to be with his family, and to his apparent surprise, Schreiber and Saraf agree with him. But Muthana’s friends back home, who have been taping video diaries with cameras sent to them by Davenport, tell Muthana he should do whatever he can to stay in Europe. One of Muthana’s friends describes being virtually imprisoned in his home by violence, and unable to do much to entertain himself in between the frequent blackouts. In other words: if going outside doesn’t kill you, the boredom of staying inside just might.

Muthana eventually goes back to the producers and tells them that he can’t go home because local militias have threatened his family upon learning that Muthana has been working for American Jews. Davenport keeps the truth of the matter ambiguous: it doesn’t seem like totally implausible, but Muthana’s employers write Muthana off as untrustworthy. Davenport doesn’t press the issue, but it seems likely that once Schreiber and Saraf realised that they could no longer count on being canonized as saints for rescuing the Iraqi Spielberg, Muthana’s fate no longer fell within the realm of their concern.

With his visa about to expire, Muthana makes a last ditch effort to ingratiate himself with a third producer, and lands himself a visa extension and a P.A. gig on the Prague set of Doom. Though her closest collaborator chooses to quit the project, Davenport sticks with Muthana and continues to build her portrait of a first-class manipulator with no qualms about taking advantage of white liberal guilt.

With the exception of Davenport, no one on these film sets really takes the time to get to know Muthana, and that amplifies his ability to serve as a projection screen for their disappointments. Still, it would be impossible to call the guy an A+ employee–throughout, he shows himself to be far more interested in girls and drinking than in filmmaking, which comes to seem less like his life-long passion and more like his chosen hook for attention as the film goes on. Whether her subject is serious about the movie business or not, Davenport gives Muthana’s plight extra resonance by cross-cutting between footage of real, blood violence in Iraq, and scenes of Muthana on the fake blood-soaked set of Doom. Can you blame the guy for pulling out all the stops to stay in the realm where the piles of corpses are only make-believe?

It’s too facile to lump the director of this film in with the Hollywood types who blindly offer Muthana assistance out of liberal duty, and yet aren’t prepared to commit to a long-term mentoring relationship. But by focusing the final act of the film on her personal struggles with Muthana, the director makes herself a target. You do have to cut Davenport some slack–she’s been a constant in Muthana’s life throughout the course of the filming, and after many months of watching through the lens of the camera, she’s clearly frustrated with her subject’s never-ending series of bad and/or selfish choices. But Davenport also plays into Muthana’s bad behavior. Via first-person inter-titles, the director explains that “despite serious reservations,” while waiting and hoping that Muthana’s story would naturally evolve into an happy ending, she gave her subject several loans. This is a fascinating breach of documentarian/subject etiquette, and it’s too Davenport’s credit that she owns up to it on screen.

But not long after that admission, the film’s final title card seeks to neatly wrap up Muthana’s story with a glib rejoinder, which simultaneously reduces Muthana to a charicture of a nagging, unwelcome hanger-on, and positions him as a stand in for all of Iraq. As Schreiber before her, Davenport seems to be projecting her disappointments concerning the entirety of the Iraq situation onto Muthana, thereby excusing herself from culpability in his individual plight.

It’s a puzzling turn in position for the filmmaker. Davenport is surely conscious that she encouraged Muthana’s narcissism by putting a camera in his face; she surely understands that his two options are to either go back to Iraq (where, whether because he’s been working for American Jews or just because he’s walking down the street, he’s got a fair chance of getting killed), or to milk the guilty generosity of Americans for all it’s worth. That’s a powerful concept, even if it doesn’t offer an immediate resolution. I’m disappointed that rather than let that incredible conundrum say it all, Davenport felt the need to close her otherwise productively provocative film on an easy joke.

Add your comments

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.

  • Enrique said

    Very Nice Review, I saw the movie and I was confused myself. Most of my friends seems to think of him as a villain in the documentary but I saw it otherwise. I could clearly see him being manipulated and naively fall into all the traps. Though his ambitions are questionable too but seriously, what did you think was going to happen?

  • bandt said

    I watched this documentary last night and set out on a mission to read all I could about it online. While I think Muthana could have worked harder, I also believe the Hollywood Types involved weren’t exactly genuine in their motives. I mean, what did everyone think this KID was supposed to do? I also blame the person who came up with the concept; you take an upper-middle-class kid our of Iraq, make him get coffee for spoiled Hollywood types while his country is being blown to bits - and expect him to be totally magnanimous? Not too much forward thinking on the parts of the producers…….

  • gypsy said

    So glad to read this outsider’s view of this documentary…what just dumbfounded me was how abruptly the film ended, with NO RESOLUTION after being drawn into this young man’s life, the complexities, his stories — is there an update anywhere?
    I hope so! Please email me if there is! Thanks!
    Gypsy

  • James said

    I just saw this last night, although not from the begining.. I cannot say I feel any kind of sympathy for this kid, although I do agree that he needed more mentoring on film set and understanding of how things are done. Throughout the film I found myself trying to understand this kid little more and more but in the end came to a conclusion that his true intentions are NOT honorable to say the least. He was not ready to take this opportunity seriously, I think his friend back in Iraq was better suited than him. After he moved to London, he doesn’t want to get a job out of his pride?? and throws all sorts of guilty conscious to people and when they don’t deliver what he wants he throws hissy fits.. his also using the situation in Iraq to manipulate those around him. Ungrateful, Undeserving and Dishonest to describe this pathetic human being. My country was also went through a war and know too well what it does to people, his roommate in London had the right idea. I can understand director’s fraustration and wanting to end in happy ending since she probably understand the consequences of this film.. (how it can ruin one’s career, if filmmaking really is what he wants to do). Hence she putting up with his nagging and giving him money..

    anyways in the end, yes hollywood didn’t really give it much thought and this kid isn’t right for this opportunity and too bad for the director’s approach but very interesting to watch.

  • Robert said

    Are you kidding me? Someone needs to wake this kid up! They need to tell him that the real world. He never wanted to grow up and realize that he needed to work for his own dreams and goals. He only wanted the world to fall into his lap. Ask yourself, when “The Rock” gave him the money to attend the London school, do you really think he truly deserved that money? It could’ve gone to many other people more deserving that that. He is not only the villain, but he was annoying like no other person. The way I see it, if he complained about his “struggle” in life, ship him back to Iraq so he can see what “struggle” is really all about.

  • Brit Columbia said

    I saw this last night on TV, although I didn’t see the beginning or the end. I wasn’t impressed with anyone in this film. Privileged Hollywood types from the first world magnanimously decide to do a Huge Favor for a poor third world Object (I mean ‘person’, of course) whose country is at war? They should have done their homework, first.

    Although Muthana didn’t emerge as a particularly likable or committed filmmaker-wannabe, who can blame him? He’s plucked out of a WAR, fresh from life in an Arab culture, put in a radically different cultural situation without any guidance or moral/spiritual support, and expected to adapt overnight?

    Everyone expected him to have levels of fortitude and personal drive that his upbringing could in no way have prepared him for. Everyone is blaming him for not being more noble under what was for him (not them) extraordinary circumstances.

  • crabbygirl said

    i saw this doc last night on PBS and has been thinking non-stop about it since!
    so many things to comment on:
    it was amazing to witness how people will ‘act’ for the camera - the 2nd immigration laywer near tears about muthana’s situation, that acting coach (?) reading muthana’s email like a dramatic soliloquy and the acting agents watching muthana’s attrocious audition but refusing to admit the poor quality… instead talking about his ‘face’ being perfect for law and order type shows
    now - what all that acting for the camera? a fear of being negative before a camera? a fear of appearing racist? a fear of actually being racist and overcompensating?
    i mean look at the Rock - why would he give 12 and half thousand pounds to someone if the camera wasn’t involved?
    personally, i found muthana to be a victim of his own lack-of planning/goals (and as such, no different than a petulant western teenager). he was ‘chosen’ to leave iraq; it was not a goal, not a plan. so it’s no surprise that he found himself in a panic the week before his visa expired. the real lesson is that generosity cannot make up for lack of ambition.
    i also found it noteworthy that davenport’s partner gives up on the film when muthana’s selfishness and manipulation escalates. here is my take on the partner’s motives: he wants to like muthana. he wants to maintain his ideals but muthana himself is making this impossible. when muthana, as a person, is no longer compatible with muthana, the concept - the partner abandons the film in order to keep his ideals
    (because isn’t it true? we are all rooting for him, and it’sdifficult to feel our sympathies shift away from him - like it’s a betrayal)
    as for the ending - i didn’t see it as a trite joke. it was a truth. how can you extrocate yourself from your good intentions?

  • Margie said

    ptsd baby.

  • P. said

    Saw the movie last night on PBS.

    I would like to say first that I think that, even though Liev Schrieber had good intentions, he didn’t think this through. I also think this Muthana guy is a total d-bag.

    It seemed to me that Muthana is always looking for a handout and is ungrateful for what he has been given. He had no sense of direction on his own and even when he was given the gag reel project he blew that off by going to a party. One would think that if the opportunity was presented to oneself, one would have enough integrity, determination, self-discipline and sense to take advantage of the opportunity and would do something positive with it rather than mindlessly throw it in everybody’s face.

    Muthana is a victim of himself. His manipulative, ungrateful, imposing nature and lack of responsibility shines throughout.

  • MD said

    Having come to USA from a 3rd world country myself I kinda see both Muthana’s and the film makers points of views. True, Muthana doesn’t do anything to help his cause but after watching the documentary I came with the feeling that his insistence that he loved George Bush rubbed the wrong way with the two liberal filmmakers. His fortunes dove southwards after that incident. Maybe he couldn’t be used by the filmmakers in a way they intended to use him.