It's a sad statement on America's worldview that it took a horrible tragedy on Sept. 11, 2001, to awaken Americans to the brutality of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Until then, most Americans didn't care about the vicious and ruthless nature of those who governed that country.
Former President Bill Clinton said his one regret during his presidency was that he did nothing while nearly one million people were slaughtered in Rwanda. True. But he should also consider why the U.S., this beacon of democracy, did nothing while the Taliban mistreated women and massacred Afghanis. Even George W. Bush gave the Taliban nary a thought until that horrific day in 2001.
When it was initially released, Iranian director Mohsen Makhmalbaf's film, "Kandahar," probably had little chance of finding an audience in the U.S. After all, at the time, the majority of Americans wouldn't have been able to find Afghanistan on a map, let alone know where Kandahar was. But then Sept. 11 happened and Kandahar, like Kabul and Spin Boldak, became household words in American homes. U.S. TV networks rushed out experts on Afghanistan and reported on the Taliban's brutality as if they'd uncovered a previously unknown fact.
Of course, all that's changed now. We don't care about Afghanistan anymore. Not after this administration concocted evidence and launched an unjust war against Iraq, gaining support for it by frightening Americans. Paranoia is patriotic. Also, covering the downfall of a barbaric regime that didn't put up a fight isn't as sexy as giving round-the-clock coverage on a pop star accused of child molestation or a yet another rich, young, white woman gone missing in California. Watching "Kandahar," you'll no doubt wonder why we didn't intervene years ago. If this film doesn't make Americans truly appreciate their lives and rights, which they take for granted, nothing will.
The film's inspired by true events. Writer and star Nelofer Pazira, who fled Kabul with her family, tried to enter Taliban-ruled Afghanistan to search for her best friend who stayed behind. Pazira never got beyond the Iranian-Afghan border. But filmmaker Makhmalbaf, whom Pazira had contacted earlier, decided two years later to fictionalize Pazira's story.
I admit I was in two minds after watching "Kandahar." The acting's amateurish - they're all non-actors - and the storytelling is, at times, a bit heavy-handed. I don't know whether it was a good idea to cast Pazira. Her character carries the entire film and it needs someone who can pulls us into her plight. Pazira's narration occasionally gets ponderous. The film relies heavily on that narration to serve as exposition; a good example of tell don't show, when films should be otherwise. Pazira never varies her voice and her monotone can be off-putting. A stronger actress could have done wonders with the role.
However, these flaws could be ignored because of what the film's trying to tell us. Maybe we're too spoiled by professional-looking Hollywood films to appreciate something like this. The film's beautifully shot and contains several wrenching moments. I shan't spoil it for you, but there's an unforgettably potent moment in a Red Cross camp.
"Kandahar" makes a good double feature with Siddiq Barmak's "Osama" (2003). Also, do yourself a great favor - read Khaled Hosseini's powerful novel, "The Kite Runner," a film adaptation of which will be directed by Sam Mendes.
"Kandahar" proves great nations should help oppressed people even if the assistance doesn't fall into the narrow category of national interest. That would be an acceptable reason than scaring an uninformed populace with fake evidence about nonexistent WMDs. "Kandahar" might not look polished, the acting not brilliant. But I'll take this film any day over huge, glossy Hollywood clunkers - "Be Cool" and "Hostage," for instance - showing in theaters right now.
Former President Bill Clinton said his one regret during his presidency was that he did nothing while nearly one million people were slaughtered in Rwanda. True. But he should also consider why the U.S., this beacon of democracy, did nothing while the Taliban mistreated women and massacred Afghanis. Even George W. Bush gave the Taliban nary a thought until that horrific day in 2001.
When it was initially released, Iranian director Mohsen Makhmalbaf's film, "Kandahar," probably had little chance of finding an audience in the U.S. After all, at the time, the majority of Americans wouldn't have been able to find Afghanistan on a map, let alone know where Kandahar was. But then Sept. 11 happened and Kandahar, like Kabul and Spin Boldak, became household words in American homes. U.S. TV networks rushed out experts on Afghanistan and reported on the Taliban's brutality as if they'd uncovered a previously unknown fact.
Of course, all that's changed now. We don't care about Afghanistan anymore. Not after this administration concocted evidence and launched an unjust war against Iraq, gaining support for it by frightening Americans. Paranoia is patriotic. Also, covering the downfall of a barbaric regime that didn't put up a fight isn't as sexy as giving round-the-clock coverage on a pop star accused of child molestation or a yet another rich, young, white woman gone missing in California. Watching "Kandahar," you'll no doubt wonder why we didn't intervene years ago. If this film doesn't make Americans truly appreciate their lives and rights, which they take for granted, nothing will.
The film's inspired by true events. Writer and star Nelofer Pazira, who fled Kabul with her family, tried to enter Taliban-ruled Afghanistan to search for her best friend who stayed behind. Pazira never got beyond the Iranian-Afghan border. But filmmaker Makhmalbaf, whom Pazira had contacted earlier, decided two years later to fictionalize Pazira's story.
I admit I was in two minds after watching "Kandahar." The acting's amateurish - they're all non-actors - and the storytelling is, at times, a bit heavy-handed. I don't know whether it was a good idea to cast Pazira. Her character carries the entire film and it needs someone who can pulls us into her plight. Pazira's narration occasionally gets ponderous. The film relies heavily on that narration to serve as exposition; a good example of tell don't show, when films should be otherwise. Pazira never varies her voice and her monotone can be off-putting. A stronger actress could have done wonders with the role.
However, these flaws could be ignored because of what the film's trying to tell us. Maybe we're too spoiled by professional-looking Hollywood films to appreciate something like this. The film's beautifully shot and contains several wrenching moments. I shan't spoil it for you, but there's an unforgettably potent moment in a Red Cross camp.
"Kandahar" makes a good double feature with Siddiq Barmak's "Osama" (2003). Also, do yourself a great favor - read Khaled Hosseini's powerful novel, "The Kite Runner," a film adaptation of which will be directed by Sam Mendes.
"Kandahar" proves great nations should help oppressed people even if the assistance doesn't fall into the narrow category of national interest. That would be an acceptable reason than scaring an uninformed populace with fake evidence about nonexistent WMDs. "Kandahar" might not look polished, the acting not brilliant. But I'll take this film any day over huge, glossy Hollywood clunkers - "Be Cool" and "Hostage," for instance - showing in theaters right now.