Intel

We still haven’t seen the movie ‘Paradise Now’, which has received the Golden Globe award for the best foreign movie, and is nominated for the Oscar in the same category. However, we do have to say a few things on the controversy around it.

The movie describes the process that leads two young palestinians to commit a suicide attack in the city of Tel Aviv.

“Each has his own reasons — and neither of them fits the image we have of the fanatical suicide bomber”.

 (from the Jerusalem Cinemtheque website)

Few moments ago we received an email from a friend. The friend, who lives in a settlement in the West Bank, forwarded a large number of recipients a petition calling “The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences” to withdraw the nomination of the movie for an Oscar. The petition is supported by a letter from a mother who lost her son in a suicide bombing.
The Main argument behind the petition and the letter, is that “giving an Oscar to this film will glorify these murderers & the groups that have sent them [and] may even encourage more murders of this type”. If the movie represented the executers of the Twin Towers’ destruction, argues the petition, it would have been severely condemned and certainly wouldn’t be nominated for such a prestigious prize.

It is possible to understand the logic behind this petition. It is also possible to understand why a mother who lost her son in a suicide bombing, will not like to see that kind of film nominated for (or winning) the Oscar. However, it is important to remember that the film’s dealing with the issue of a suicide attack doesn’t mean that it legitimizes the act of doing it. On the contrary, a complex, serious and insightful treatment of the issue can help to promote a fresh approach and a critical thinking in both sides of the conflict.

Judging by the comments and reviews we’ve read of the film, it doesn’t idealize the suicide bombers and attacks but

“without letting anyone off the hook, examines the most horrific phenomenon of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict”.

(Jerusalem Cinemtheque)

The attempt of the petitioners to cause an avoidance of the issue will not make it disappear, but will prevent awareness and thwart serious discussion of it. Both sides still have to do a lot of learning and thinking on the issue, which this film could catalyze.

This is not the film that evokes protest for dealing with controversial issues. One of the most prominent examples is the film ‘Trainspotting’. The movie presents an unprecedented point of view of youth’ consumption of drugs, and especially heroin, in Scotland. The film doesn’t explores the question whether taking drugs is good or bad, but presents a sharp and unique description of an existing phenomena. The critics of ‘Trainspotting’ argued that the movie encourages the use of class A drugs.

One cannot control the personal interpretation of the viewers to every film. However, the very possibility of a problematic interpretation should not prevent films from dealing with controversial issues. Any art work should not be restricted by the common norms of good and bad, neither should be censored when it contradicts those norms.

Pushing the borders of the legitimate has always been the prime factor behind every intellectual and cultural development.
Thus, preventing ‘Paradise Now’ from an Academy Award nomination, will narrow its chances to become an incitement of critical thinking and re-evaluating of the accepted stereotypes.

Written in cooperation with Dina Fainberg.

Update: We have seen the film and we stand strong behind what we said!