Hijabtrendz: What made you decide to become a filmmaker? Where did you go to school and what did you major in?Lena Khan:I went into college thinking I wanted to be a professor. Just before finishing undergrad I got a feeling that there was such a large bulk of America that received most of their education on the world and social issues not from professors but from movies.

I had already known and had regularly bemoaned the portrayal of Muslims in cinema, whether it was in “The Siege” where a man is obviously shown making wudu` (ritual ablution) before hijacking a plane, or in “Black Hawk Down” where militants and “enemies” are shown while the call to prayer rings in the background.

I figured instead of complaining about it I would just be the one to make the movies myself and educate the public through films that entertain but have a message.

So after I received my bachelors degrees in political science and history I went to the UCLA School of Theater, Film and Television.

Hijabtrendz: Did you find it hard as a Muslim or as a woman to enter the field?

Lena Khan: Entering the field as a woman and as a Muslim definitely comes with its share of obstacles. Whether at my previous production job or even as a filmmaker, there are so many moral dilemmas that come with the territory.

Will I feel okay green-lighting a script that is a high quality piece but that has licentious scenes in it or demeans Muslims? These sorts of questions often come into play and I find myself constantly having to evaluate my own position.

Also, there is some reserve in hiring a Muslim. When I would interview for a position, sometimes it would be clear that they viewed me as a foreigner, and I would have to prove that I also like movies and am well versed in them and the industry.

Aside from such things, I must say it has not been as much a barrier as expected. Sometimes, it’s actually a blessing. Unlike others in my classes or my colleagues now, I have a community who supports me and helps me to some extent. Being familiar with the trials and issues of the Muslim community, I also have a lot of things to say.

Hijabtrendz: Was your family supportive of your decision?

Lena Khan: My family at first was hesitant but then they were quite supportive.

Hijabtrendz: I believe you’re from California, is that area of the country very hard to make it as a filmmaker?

Lena Khan: It’s hard to make it anywhere as a filmmaker. It’s actually a bit easier in California because there are so many others to work with. It’s extremely difficult to make a film alone.

Hijabtrendz: What are some of the highlights of your career?

Lena Khan: My last film, “A Land Called Paradise,” is definitely one of them. The highlight was opening my email and seeing the dozens of emails from people personally affected by the film. To me, that is what the power of film is if it is used properly.

Hijabtrendz: What would your advice be to aspiring filmmakers?

Lena Khan: Make films. Find what it is that you are passionate about, and make a film. Don’t wait and think that you have to have more money, or first you must graduate from film school, or that first you must be hired. If there is anything that will get you going in the right direction, it’s just making a film. Make sure you’re doing it for the right reason, pick up a pen, and write something inspiring or meaningful. Then make it happen.

Hijabtrendz: You have produced several short political pieces for the upcoming presidential election, what inspired you to do so?

Lena Khan: At first, I didn’t actually want to do the project, because I didn’t want to throw all my support so enthusiastically behind Barack Obama (D-IL). But I keep up with the news, and it just kept becoming more and more clear how horrible of a man John McCain (R-AZ) is; how much he will do to destroy this country; and the extent that he will damage any policy, land, or issue that is important to Muslims.

Hijabtrendz:The films seem to only promote one particular candidate, as a filmmaker how do you balance bias, or is it OK to take a side?

Lena Khan: I personally don’t think a piece of art needs to be objective. A piece of art (which film is) is meant to express what’s in the heart, or it starts in the heart. I started this project because my heart hurt thinking how one candidate could hurt so many things for so many people. The commercials were an expression of that idea, in comedic form. So yes, I think it’s okay to take a side. The news is meant to be objective; art gets to do whatever the artist wants!

Hijabtrendz: Can people forward these films to others (i.e. via email or blogs?)

Lena Khan: I would absolutely love it if people forwarded these films.

Hijabtrendz: Is there anything else you’d like to add that you think people should know about you or the film industry?

Lena Khan: Hey, I’m always looking for funding and a good idea. So if you have either, feel free to drop me a line!

To see more of Lena Khan’s films go here.

(c) Hijabtrendz.com 2008 All Rights Reserved.

Source: hijabtrendz.com

Film is not just an entertainment medium. It has been used and continues to be used to view history and can create and reinforce perceptions about the ‘Other.’ In Hindi cinema, the largest film industry in the world, depictions of the partition of India have been used to not only distort but propagandise how Pakistan and Muslims are viewed. A sanitised view of oneself and a muddied view of others is dangerous and irresponsible if left unchecked.

‘Cinema is the great interpreter of the past and constantly programs the memory of its audience,’ wrote Gaston Roberge (131). The twentieth century saw the greatest exodus known to mankind. Partition resulted in a displacement of 12 million refugees, over a million killed and tens of thousands of women kidnapped. Independence and its resulting traumatic partition was a subject mainly ignored by film makers at the time. After the second war between India and Pakistan in 1971, however, the political winds changed, and so did cinema. Indian cinema (commonly known as Bollywood) has shifted from a position of ignoring this phenomenon as a taboo, to being more antagonistic towards Pakistan and its Muslim population.

Gurinder Chadha, an English filmmaker of Indian descent, has written about the earlier use of propaganda in film, to challenge British rule: ‘One of the earliest weapons they [Hindi film makers] had was the non-English language. They used common metaphors, religious stories and codified messages. Indians had a lot to play with to subvert rulers at the time.’ Although the tables have been turned and India is free, it has continued to use the lessons it learnt in using film to communicate and influence using subtext.

I was motivated to write this essay while I was researching the partition of India and Pakistan. I live in the US, but have parents who went through the trauma of partition. I found the stories in books (fiction and non-fiction) as well as in film to be at odds with their experiences. As there are not many more than a handful of feature films on this subject, I have watched these films repeatedly and wanted to analyse the narrative and the subtext under the entertainment.

A more detailed view of how Pakistan is perceived in Hindi cinema and the position that it holds as both a leader and follower of public opinion, was given by Arti Shukla on Culture Wars in 2005.

..in none of the films, perhaps except Mission Kashmir, is there any reference to follies that might have been committed by the Indian army or state. (In this film the police kill some innocents, but justify it as a mistake, because it was impossible to distinguish between the innocents and the terrorists.) The Indians are good, humane, patriotic, peace loving etc, although there are a few rotten apples (the traitors), whom the film protagonists always, of course, uproot. Thus, almost always the Indians have an embellished image compared to that of the Pakistanis.

I would like to carry on where Arti Shukla left. The films discussed below all play a key role in reinterpreting history. Train to Pakistan (1998), Gadar (2001), and Pinjar(2003) portray in many ways the political pulse and tensions between India and Pakistan at the times they were made. Although Hindi films have been known to be merely melodramatic, the portrayal of Indian Sikhs and Hindus as protagonists and Pakistani Muslims as antagonists is a theme that is reinforced throughout most but not all of these films. In the last few years political relations between the countries have improved and there is an effort to promote peace, love and commonality with some film makers. This is reflected in one of the top grossing films Veer Zara (2004).

While watching these films what has piqued my curiosity are the following questions.

• Why in these films is it always a Muslim girl falls in love with a Sikh or Hindu man? Why not the other way, which in the real world is a little more common, a Hindu or Sikh girl falling in love with a Muslim man. Conversions to Islam are a lot more common than people leaving Islam.

• Although some of the earlier films are a little ambivalent, why is the protagonist always a Hindu or Sikh in Hindi film? At best Muslim characters are weak or at worst, wicked. Why are Indians the benevolent, peace-loving, tolerant type and the Pakistanis the war-mongers who are the hard-line villains, devoid of human compassion?

• Where are the Muslims? Why aren’t they doing all they can to balance or correct these vile images of themselves?

Below are specific themes and examples that are found in the films.

History, and ‘who started it?’

Cause and effect are very important in establishing how we view a historical narrative. This genre of films always shows Muslims are the cause of trouble; the effect being that Hindus and Sikhs have to defend themselves.

In Train to Pakistan, once the Sikhs hear news about the ‘ghost trains’ from Pakistan (whose passengers have been attacked while fleeing to India after partition) they argue about how to respond. ‘Our daughters and sisters are being raped. If they kill one of ours we will kill two of theirs. If they kidnap one, we will kidnap two,’ says one. One of the more level-headed says, ‘What is bravery in killing the innocent?’ To this the crowd replies, ‘Who is innocent? This is war. Children of Hindus and Sikhs who were killed in front of their mothers?’

Pinjar starts with a serene view of the Golden Temple and a peaceful Sikh procession. This is all interrupted when rampaging mobs of Muslims attack the Sikhs and slaughter them. As it is the Muslims who incite the violence, then the Sikhs defend and take revenge, so to the audience it’s a natural consequence and comforting to see the ‘bad’ Muslims getting speared and killed.

Gadar starts with scenes of mayhem before partition. This segues into a scene where a Sikh family is shown terrified, and the parents give their daughters poison, telling them it is better to take the poison than have their dignity taken by Muslims. Next we see the well-to-do Muslim Ashraf Ali about to depart India, shouting orders to his servants and demanding guarantees of safety from his Hindu peers. As his train leaves the station, the bloodshed starts. The train just arrived from Pakistan is full of massacred bodies of Hindus and Sikhs. It has a message on it which reads ‘Indians, learn from us how to slay.’ This not only incites the Hindus and Sikhs to taking vengeance, but justifies their actions.

Forbidden love: Muslim girl and Hindu/Sikh man

Although the reality of partition was very violent, most films still find room for some love interest. ‘Forbidden love’ has of course been a major feature of motion pictures since they began. What is unique about Hindi film is that the story always involves a Muslim girl falling in love with a Hindu or Sikh man, but never the other way around.

In Train to Pakistan the Sikh Juggut Singh, a local dacoit or hoodlum, is shown sneaking into his Muslim lover’s house and trying to get intimate with her. Her father, the village imam, hears the commotion. He is blind, and shown to be so clueless and gullible that his daughter is easily able to distract him. Later Juggut and his love are shown frolicking in the fields, and at some point she becomes pregnant, but this only subtly implied. (In conservative villages this phenomenon of a Muslim girl and Sikh boy would be hard to imagine.)

In Gadar and Veer Zara, once again under different circumstances a Muslim girl falls in love with a Sikh and Hindu protagonist. The implication is that Muslim men are not good enough for their women, and that the best qualities a man can have come from Hindus and Sikhs. It also says it’s OK for a Muslim girl to break her family and religious bonds even though this is forbidden in Islam. By making love the key theme, these films take a tragedy and turn it into romance. The underlying message being the oft repeated cliché that ‘love conquers all’.

Portrayals of Muslim men: weak and cowardly

India is a population dominated by a Hindu population with a minority 12-15% Muslim population. It is natural to show Hindus in stronger roles. However it is the total absence of strong moral Muslim characters that is surprising.

In Train to Pakistan an outsider arrives in town with no place to stay. He is mainly referred to by his first name, Iqbal, which suggests he is a Muslim, though his surname is the Sikh Singh. When he asks for a place he is told to go and stay at the local Gurdwara (Sikh temple) which he readily does. As the story develops Iqbal is sent to prison. There the police ask him if he is a Muslim. He tries to deny it, but they ask him to pull his pants down as they want to see if he is circumcised. When they see that he is, he still does not have the courage to say he is a Muslim, and instead blames circumcision on an infection he had.

Benevolent, chivalrous Hindu men

In Gadar, Sakina (a Muslim woman) is separated from her family and a hoard of Sikhs start chasing her. The protagonist Tara Singh (a Sikh) sees this rampage and tries to prevent it. Even though he has lost family he stops the hoard with a noble speech. And in Veer Zara, as the story unfolds we learn why Veer (the jailed Skih) has taken the ‘high road’ and not disclosed evidence which could exonerate him. Veer cares more about the dignity of Zaara (a Muslim woman from Pakistan whom he loves). He won’t say or do anything which could hurt her, even if it means staying in jail forever.

Even in Train to Pakistan, Hukum Chand is a just but conflicted Hindu village headman. Muslim courtesans come to his party, and a young teenage girl stays to keep him company when the others leave. Both the girl and her family are shown as very naive. The mother is shown as someone who is willing to sell her daughter without any consideration to her and their dignity. When the girls family leaves Hukum asks her what she can do. She innocently replies ‘I only know how to sing and dance.’ Hukum Chand is shown as someone who tries to control his passions and does not make any advances to her. After some song and dance, he tells her to go back, but she doesn’t want to. Although nothing explicit is shown, the scenes imply that she is promiscuous and wants to be seduced by Hukum, so rather than taking advantage, it seems instead that Hukum gives in to the girl.

Tolerant Accepting Hindus and Hardline Fundamentalist Muslims

We all like to root for the hero and despise the villain in a film. In this genre the Hindu family is shown as tolerant and sympathetic. Conversely the Muslim family is portrayed as fundamentalist and insensitive.

In Pinjar the protagonist is a Hindu woman called Puro, who on the eve of her wedding is kidnapped by a Muslim, Rashid. When her parents learn of her fate they go to the suspect’s parents’ house. The father and the panchiat (his advisors/uncles) give them the cold treatment. The father, the panchiat and later the imam who marries Rashid and Puro are shown as villains. Not only bereft of any decency but also any humanity. Later when more of her relatives are kidnapped they are shown in a household where the kidnapper is a Muslim drunkard and the pimpish mother-in-law has no sympathy for the young Sikh girl who has been kidnapped and enslaved.

In Gadar, Tara Singh and Sakina fall in love. There are no conflicts on the Indian side with his family even though he is a Sikh and she a Muslim. She is fully accepted and does not have to convert. This is not the case for Tara when he later goes to the not so tolerant Muslim Pakistanis, when Sakina goes to Pakistan to meet her family, and Tara has to follow her to get her back from the clutches of her fanatical father.

In order to keep his wife, Tara has to convert to Islam. Although to become a Muslim only requires one to give a one sentence declaration of the belief in Oneness of God and in the last Prophet, being Bollywood it appears Tara has to go through more of an ordeal. Not only must he give the declaration but he has to do it in front of a gathering of the whole town. The wicked imam asks him to make the declaration, and then the most inciting and creative dialogue takes place between the eye-popping father-in-law Ashraf and Tara Singh. Tara is asked now to say Pakistan is the best, and bless it, to which he reluctantly agrees. Then to up the ante Ashraf asks Tara to curse India, leading to the following dialogue:

Tara Singh: Why are you playing these political games? Pakistan may live long. We do not have an objection to that. But India shall always live long.

Ashraf Ali: Till you say ,‘Death to India’, how will our people believe that you are a true Muslim?

Tara Singh: There are more Muslims in India than this country. Their hearts always say, ‘Long Live India’, so are they not true Muslims?

Conclusion

If you take the same images and you repeat them over and over again, and the images teach us to hate a people and to hate their religion, what happens is that we, in spite of our intelligence, our innate goodness, actually turn around and let these images despise and vilify an entire people.’ (2001)

Film is more than an entertainment medium. Following a survey conducted among Muslims in Britain, it was reported that those interviewed ‘found a direct correlation between media portrayal and their social experiences of exclusion, hatred, discrimination and violence’. What we can say conclusively is that film is an influential medium. How it portrays history and people of opposing beliefs or nationalities should be taken with great care. I hope this will give cause for someone else to take the baton and run with it. I will close with an old Indian tale which maybe has some insights. A father used to read his child bedtime stories. One day the child asked the father, ‘Dad, how come in all the stories you read, the hunter always bags the tiger.’ The father thought for a moment and replied, ‘When the tiger learns to write you will hear that story.’

Javed Mohammed

Source: culturewars.org.uk

A couple of days ago, a new TV show about Muslim women in Sweden, Halal-TV, aired its first episode on Sveriges Television (SVT), a Swedish television channel.

As expected, the show, which features three young Muslim women as hosts, was stirring up debate before it even began. A Kurdish-Swedish author, Dilsa Demirbag-Sten, pointed out that 23-year-old host Cherin Awad had said, at age 18, that stoning a woman to death was an appropriate punishment for adultery. Awad, a lawyer, has since retracted her previous comments.

The show also features 22-year-old doctor-to-be Dalia Azzam Kassem and 25-year-old dental hygienist Khadiga El-Khabiry. All were born in Sweden.

But that’s not what the hullabaloo is now about. On the very first episode, Awad and El-Khabiry refused to shake the hand of Carl Hamiltion (all pictured below), a columnist from the left-wing newspaper, Aftonbladet. According to a transcript published in the Expressen newspaper, this exchange occurred:

“I’m sorry, you ought to shake my hand,” said Hamilton.

“That’s something I decide,” replied El Khabiry.

“No, I don’t think so!” Hamilton shot back.

[He was then asked what he thought a Swede who had converted to Islam ought to do].

“He should shake hands when in Sweden. If he can’t manage that then he can go live in a cave and be a hermit. It’s about how we live as Swedes. That’s how we socialize, we shake hands. It’s not we who are the problem. The problem is that you come here and don’t want to shake hands, so it’s actually you who are the problem.”

“We didn’t come here. I was born here,” El Khabiry reminded Hamilton.

id=”attachment_1640″ class=”wp-caption aligncenter” style=”width: 462px;”>

From left to right: Cherin Awad, Dalia Azzam Kassem, Carl Hamilton, and Khadiga El Khabiry. Image via SVT.

If you understand Swedish, go to the program’s website then click on the side bar where it says “Se programmet” to watch the clip. You need to know Swedish because the incident happened off-camera though it was audio-recorded.

According to Shaista, a Swedish-born Muslim:

“In the clip [the incident is] when they’re sitting down and the picture is a bit blurry. They sort of had a row. They asked him why he reacted the way he did and he was saying he was the one being normal, that’s how everyone would react in Sweden, etc.

At the end of the show he is given an opportunity to state his side of the story, he’s basically saying he lost his temper a little, he doesn’t usually but he felt he was being accused of being a racist and they were rude towards him and tried to undermine him by not shaking hands, that’s what made him question them and lose his temper.”

In a column he published in his newspaper Hamilton asked “Is it racist to want to shake hands with a Muslim?” and said the non-handshaking minority should adapt themselves to the handshaking majority.

(Most of the above information I got from the well-researched article in The Local, Sweden’s English newspaper).

Where to start?

Let’s take how the media tackled the no-handshaking issue. In the article I quoted above, the article was actually passably fair, though, as Shaista points out, the transcript is slightly edited, not mentioning that Hamilton forcibly grabbed one of the women’s hands to shake, and that he said that if she doesn’t shake hands in Sweden she might as well return to Iran (Note: Not her country).

Some blog posts (where the issue was first raised) were sarcastic of the whole issue, with the author of this post titled “On Swedish TV, a Muslim Woman Supports Stoning Adulteresses,” saying:

“My only question here is, how long will it take before the closed minded columnist of the Left-wing rag Aftonbladet is labeled as a racist? If Hamilton refuses to see the light and the error of his ways, it’ll only a matter of time before he’s cast into the outer darkness by his peers. All that wailing and moaning and gnashing of the teeth awaits him, especially the gnashing of teeth.”

And that’s not the only sensationalist title. A post on corrupt.com is titled “Muslim TV Show Shocks Swedish Public,” and has some very interesting insights on the show:

“What’s striking about the response to the show is how both journalists and the Swedish public react negatively against watching radical Muslims appearing live on television. What are we, I ask as a Swede, afraid of? Did we think all Muslims would convert to law abiding Social Democrats the minute they crossed our borders?

I may be one of the few Swedes who appreciated watching these three Muslims express their opinions on TV. Aside from the tedious socialist propaganda and the poor journalism, it reflects the feelings, behavior and attitude of a great portion of the people who’ve come to stay in this country since the late ’70s. These people are no longer portrayed as hard working wannabe-Westerners without cultural roots. They represent their cultural and religious identity, and do so with pride. Even more, they refuse to accept our culture.

Such a silly social act as shaking hands, which in Sweden is a very important formal signal that you welcome a person in question (not shaking hands is the same as expressing resentment towards that same person), sparked a lively debate among people. “Why can’t they accept our social traditions?” The answer is: they already have social traditions of their own, and we’re morons if we thought they’d abandon these on the whim. Opposed to us, they are proud of their culture, while we spend hours on television condemning ours.”

I don’t want to go off on a tangent here, but I have some reservations about his whole post. In the above comments, he not only labels the three women hosts as “radicals,” he assumes that just because Muslims are proud of their culture they must reject Swedish culture and laws. He paints a picture of “us” and “them” that are in binary opposition, forgetting that the three Swedish women are part of that “us!” By simplifying the situation, he has effectively reduced the difficulties any person with dual identities faces to something trivial. He also refuses to consider the idea that shaking hands may mean a very different thing to those women—one has to take into account different beliefs and cultures. If it wasn’t a religious issue (for example, let’s say giving the okay sign in Brazil, which is equivalent to giving someone your middle finger), I’m assuming it wouldn’t have been so hard to avoid doing it.

I do believe, though, that the women should have made it clear before the show began taping that they did not want to shake hands, because I understand it is embarrassing to put out your hand and not have it shaken.

On the issue of shaking hands, Shaista is frustrated:

“The debate in Swedish newspapers continues and much focus is on why some people in the Muslim community chose not to shake hands with the opposite sex. TV-shows and journalists are once again calling to get in touch with the Muslim community to have us “explain this” to them. They think we should be happy and grateful that they are getting in touch with us to let us have chance to clarify things. But I’m not too happy or grateful. The only time they contact us is when we have to explain ourselves as the problematic part of society. We are once again given on-air time in defensive positions. A lot of us are getting tired of it. It’s not our job to run to the studios and explain and answer the questions they pose when they feel like it.”

(For more stories, go here, where the blog author has posted links to dozens of English and Swedish stories on the program).

A couple of last comments on the show itself, which is supposed to be the Muslim women explaining Sweden through their ‘Muslim’ eyes. I don’t speak Swedish, so I can’t judge the content, but from what I’ve read, the first episode talked about class and wasn’t very ‘meaty.’ I watched the clip on the site, and even though I don’t understand Swedish, I still have something to say.

The three women, although they come from different backgrounds, are hijabis. And although way harsh, this is what Demirbag-Sten, the Swedish author, wrote in a column published last week in the Svenska Dagbladet (SvD) newspaper:

“There are many ways for public broadcasting to use high standards of journalism to address the diversity issues which affect the Muslim part of the population without reducing the group to deeply faithful, headscarf bearing, homophobic teetotalers who believe that women should be virgins until they are married and support stoning for adultery.”

Immediately, you see that the connection has been made that wearing hijab = the stereotypes he just spewed. Awad’s previous statement and the women’s refusal to shake hands just reinforced those stereotypes.

I have to question why it is the three women are hijabis. It’s an unfortunate truth, but the reality is that the hijab, especially with the target audience of the show, might make all three women seem homogenous. Criticism of them being veiled actually came from unveiled Swedish Muslim women.

In an interesting eight minute (English) radio interview with the TV show producer Gunnar Hofverberg and the three hosts right before the show began, Hofverberg says:

“They don’t represent anyone but themselves. We have 150,000 religious Muslims in Sweden and we don’t make a program that represents this group.”

The radio interviewer (who’s actually very articulate though he does ask the [Swedish born] women “have you learned anything about Sweden?”) asked the three women why they think people look at them and say “Ah, three women in hijab. They must all think the same.” One of them answered (sorry, can’t tell their voices apart!):

“It seems so illogical when you say it so I can’t even say why. If I see three white men next to each other, I won’t say they must all have the same political views. We would never think that way.”

The radio interviewer then told them that because so few veiled women are on Swedish TV, people will see them as role models or forebearers. Another one answered:

“We’re all very aware that people consider us to be representatives for the Muslim community and we understand that but that’s not what we want. We want to show we are all individuals. We have two factors in common: we live in Sweden and we are Muslim. But other than that we are very different.”

Last comment: why is the show named ‘Halal TV?’

Source: muslimahmediawatch.com

I met producer Moustapha Akkad at his Century City office March 26, 2002. Among many subjects, we talked about Jewish control of the media.

Moustapha: “The media runs the world. Absolutely. No tanks or planes. The media and the public companies. This is what The Protocols of [the Learned Elders of] Zion [is all about].

“The Zionists, last century, were persecuted in Europe. So they immigrated to the United States. They had a target. They were united. And they did not permit [statements] critical of Zion. They went all the way to control the world and to control the minds of the people through the media. There’s a lesson to learn from them.

“They have control of the media here. We know it. They did not do it through tanks or machine guns. They planned of course. They united. Did you see Pat Buchanan’s book [The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization]? He makes sense.”

Luke: “Yes, he’s a sharp guy. He doesn’t mind telling it like it is, no matter how controversial.”

Moustapha: “There is a red line if I get into the issue of Israel but the Jews, like everyone else, wants to make money. Hollywood is not ethnic. There’s English, Irish, Spanish, French, Roman…”

Luke: “But movie and TV producers are 70% Jewish.”

Moustapha: “Yes. The studios are. That control is financial but not the creative aspect. You can’t be more Jewish than Miramax [owned by Disney and operated by Bob and Harvey Weinstein, distributed last two Halloween films]. They financed me and I did it. But probably if I did something about Israel, they would not. So I get financing from overseas, such as when I did The Message.”

Read this Anti-Defamation League link on Jews in Hollywood, and the Protocols of Zion.

Moustapha is best known for producing the eight movies of the Halloween franchise. He also directed two movies about the Arab-Islamic world, which have made him a hero in that part of the world – 1976′s The Prophet and 1980′s The Lion of the Desert.

I found these interesting links about Akkad on the net:

From Kult Movie Maximus: “Moustapha Akkad?”, you might wonder. “Wasn’t he the guy that produced John Carpenter’s Halloween series and never done anything else?” Well yes and no. Akkad is a Syrian-born filmmaker who has two ambitious epic films to his name. His first, the relatively forgotten film The Message, detailing the coming of Mohammed and the Koran, was understandably a huge success worldwide. Over the next four years, Akkad somehow persuaded Libyan dictator Molomar Qaddafi (sp?) to invest $35 million dollars into the sweeping war epic Lion of the Desert… which upon its release grossed about $1 million dollars worldwide. One of the largest financial disasters in history, though one of the greatest films I’ve seen… how does this make sense? Beats me…”

From Laurie Goodstein’s article in the November 1, 1998 New York Times: After years of virtual invisibility, Arab-Americans are finally finding prominence in Hollywood movies — as terrorists and villains. They are only the latest in a long line of ethnic groups and nationalities cast in stereotypical bad-guy roles, from American Indians to Germans to Japanese to African Americans to Russians.

“We cannot say there are no Arab and no Muslim terrorists,” said Moustapha Akkad, an Arab-American producer and director who was born in Syria and who has worked in Hollywood for 45 years. “Of course there are.

“But at the same time, balance it with the image of the normal human being, the Arab-American, the family man,” Akkad said. “The lack of anyone showing the other side makes it stand out that in Hollywood, Muslims are only terrorists.”

Earlier in his career, Akkad produced and directed two films portraying Muslims as heroes. “The Message” (1977) told the story of the beginning of Islam, and “Lion of the Desert” (1981) starred Anthony Quinn as the real-life Bedouin leader Omar Mukhtar, who fought Mussolini’s invading troops in the deserts of Libya. But Akkad said that raising money for such films was difficult, and that to achieve financial success and creative freedom, he had had to turn to another genre. He is now better known as the executive producer of all seven movies in the “Halloween” horror series, the most recent, “Halloween H2O,” released in August.

…………….

Moustapha carries himself in a regal way and he speaks slowly and confidently.

Moustapha: “I was born and raised in Aleppo, Syria. I wanted to be a film director in Hollywood. That was the joke of the town. We were an average family. My father worked as a government employee in customs. My father said, ‘If you want to go, I can not really help you.’ I had an American theater arts teacher Douglas Hill and he got me into UCLA. In 1954, when I was 18, I came to the airport to leave. My father said goodbye and put $200 in one pocket and a copy of the Koran in the second pocket. ‘That’s all I can give you.’

“I attended UCLA for four years and graduated in 1958. At the time, UCLA had the best film program. They had three productions per semester. USC at the time was not as rich as UCLA and the cinema department was smaller. If you wanted to do a film, you loaded up your station wagon and went to shoot. The New Wave [of filmmaking] developed at the time. The more realistic documentary approach to filmmaking. I wanted to expose myself to that and I went to USC for three years for my Masters.

“Then I started the starvation period. I applied to the seven giant studios for work and all TV studios and all advertising agencies for a job… Then [Director] Sam Peckinpah wanted to do a movie about the Algerian revolution. So he approached UCLA to help him find a consultant, somebody from that area who speaks the language. They gave him my name and we got started. Then Algeria got its independence and the project was canceled.

“He took a liking to me. He was developing a movie for MGM called Ride the High Country. He asked me to work with him. I was not paid. He always used to tell me to start from the top. ‘You went to school for seven years. You can’t go to work as a messenger boy. Sit down and write something.’

“I used to sit down and write every day and I’d bring it to him. He’d take it, read it and tear it up. I had applied everywhere for work and I always got the same question, ‘What have you done?’

“I remember from my days at UCLA, I used to be invited into American homes. And they always ask you, ‘What do you think of the American food?’ ‘What do you think of the American woman?’ ‘What do you think about American education?’ Everything you think about America, they like to know. I thought that would be a good subject to do a program on – how others see us.

“I made a small presentation to three TV stations to bring an African, European, Asian, and Latin American foreign student, with an American moderator and a different topic every week… The CBS and NBC both wanted it as a public affairs program on Sunday afternoons. NBC offered me $400 a week but no credit. CBS offered me $100 a week and the producer credit.

“So I went to Sam Peckinpah and I told him about my two offers. He asked which one I was going to take. I said, ‘NBC.’ He replied, and I’ve never forgotten, ‘You sonofabitch. What do you want the money for? Take the credit.’ I took the CBS offer.

“Now that I was a producer at CBS, I could call anybody and they’d return my call. I called United Artists and sold them a syndicated travel show, Caesar’s World, hosted by Caesar Romero. Every week we traveled to a different country.

“I always advise anyone who aspires to be in this business Sam Peckinpah’s advice. When you have something that somebody likes, play dumb on the money aspect. Tell them to talk to your lawyer or agent. But never compromise on the credit.”

Luke: “How did you come to make your 1976 book The Message [about the founder of Islam, the prophet Mohammed]?”

Moustapha: “I was making documentaries all over the world. I thought I needed to do something about Islam, which is not understood. At first I thought I’d make a documentary. Then I met Irish scriptwriter Harry Craig. He convinced me we should do it as a feature. I was able to raise the money from the Arab world.”

Luke: “How was it received?”

Moustapha: “It was received fantastic but it was not American commercial [fare] for two reasons. You can not see the prophet. I get upset when I see Jesus or Moses portrayed by an actor. To me, you don’t touch these things. The film is about Mohammed but he’s not portrayed. Therefore, the camera takes subjective angles. It’s good for those who know the religion. The movie was a big hit on video.

“Then two years later, I got into another one.”

Luke: “How did you raise the money from Moahmar Khaddafy for Lion of the Desert?”

Moustapha: “It was easy. I had the credentials now. And the subject pertained to the Italian occupation of Libya. I had the freedom to work with the material. It was not religious, where you can’t show this, you can’t say this…”

Luke: “Why do you think it didn’t do better at the box office?”

Moustapha: “Publicity about Khaddafy hurt. They politicized it. The critiques [of the film] were good. I believe in the audience. If the audience do not come, I can not [boost the film].”

Luke: “Who distributed the film?”

Moustapha: “This is another thing. We had a hard time finding a distributor because of Khaddafy, prejudice, whatever… United Artists distributed it [around the time of the Heavens Gate debacle].”

Luke: “How did you connect with Director John Carpenter in 1977 to make the first Halloween movie?”

Moustapha: “I was busy doing Lion of the Desert. He said he wanted to make a movie for $300,000. I laughed. You get worried when the budget is high or low. I asked him about the story. He told it to me in four words and I grabbed it. He said, ‘Baby sitter to be killed by the boogie man.’ The baby sitter part grabbed me because every kid in America knows what a baby sitter is. I told him, ‘Let’s do it.’ I was spending $300,000 a day on Lion of the Desert. I gave John points [percentage of the gross receipts] so he made lots of money afterwards.

“The movie came in on budget. It was John Carpenter’s movie. I saw the commercial aspect to it. We distributed it theater by theater, state by state. We made so much money we couldn’t believe it.”

Luke: “You must’ve funded it with pocket change from Lion of the Desert.”

Moustapha: “Yes. Then two years later, 1980, Dino DeLaurentiis came to me wanting to do a sequel. I said, ‘Sequel? This is not television. It’s not going to make any money.’ They said, ‘We’ll give you the profit in advance.’ So they did and we made Halloween II. It did good. I couldn’t believe it.

“They came again. They said, ‘Let’s do Halloween III.’ I said, ‘No way.’ They said, ‘This time we will change it a bit. We will do one without Michael Myers.’ I wasn’t for it, but I was outvoted. I said ok. That was the big mistake. It was a big flop.

“Then I brought back Michael Myers and the basics, and Halloween IV was a big hit, perhaps the biggest hit [of the franchise]. We made the most money on Halloween I, the biggest box office on Halloween H2O [VII] but we had the most paying customers for Halloween IV.

“Drunk with our success, we did Halloween V a year later. And that was a mistake. A few years later, Miramax came with an attractive offer to do Halloween VI. Due to recent events, we’re coming out with Halloween VIII in July.

“This Halloween [series] is a blessing. I feel like a father. Everybody wants to come chop the head of Michael Myers but I love this guy. I always try to keep to realistic stories. Somebody falling from the sky with ten ears and ten eyes isn’t scary. But if you’re locked inside a house and there’s somebody there who wants to kill you, that could happen to anybody. You can relate.

“Why do people pay money to get scared? I asked my 17-year old son. He said, ‘Dad, I take a girl with me to the cinema. After five minutes, I’m either grabbing her or she’s grabbing me.’

“[Actor] Donald Pleasance was asked by the press if we he was going to keep doing Halloween movies. He answered, ‘No way. I’m going to stop at 22.’ And that’s my answer too.

“With H2O, we chopped off his [Michael Myers] head. But was it really his head?

“This is something where you cater to the kids. Eighty percent of the audience now is kids. Home entertainment has become so sophisticated with the large screen, stereo, satellite, DVD, you can watch any movie a few months later. You can stretch your legs, smoke, drink. So why should adults bother to drive to see a movie? Kids have to go for dating and meeting. At my age [66 yo], you start losing touch.

“When my teenagers talk, I have a hard time understanding sometimes. We were casting Halloween 8. The director [Rick Rosenthal] suggested Busta. Do you know who Busta is?”

Luke: “No.”

Moustapha: “I went home and asked my son about Busta. He lit up. ‘Busta Rhymes?’ He went crazy. I called the office and said, OK, get Busta Rhymes.’ He’s one of those rap singers with the hair…” And Moustapha fingers curl around the air above his head.

“We got him. Every time we shoot, kids gather around the studio. Another actor suggested was Tyra Banks. Do you know Tyra Banks?”

Luke: “I think I’ve heard the name.”

Moustapha: “See? You’re getting grey hair already. Again I went home and asked my kids. [Their voices filled with excitement.] ‘Tyra Banks? I’d marry her.’ Tyra Banks is a black model who appears in underwear ads.

“When we test the movie, we bring kids. I’ve lost touch… All I do is preserve the storyline and the atmosphere of horror. But as for casting…”

Luke: “How come you are the one person on all eight Halloween movies? Do you own the franchise?”

Moustapha: “Yeah. I paid for the first one. I guess it’s a blessing. I didn’t intend to sequels. But I had my lawyer read the contract and they put everything in… At the time, I didn’t think of it.

“I spend 90% of my time on the Halloween franchise. If I am to direct, I only want to direct epic historic films. My favorite director when I was a child was Alfred Hitchcock. And then David Lean. I met him while I was student and he gave me advice. I’m now preparing an epic on Saladin and the Crusades, starring Sean Connery. We have a script. Financing is the issue.

“I love history. The best movies are comedies but I’m not good at that. I cannot direct a Western. You have to be able to live it to be able to direct it. Produce it, you can.”

Luke: “The current atmosphere post September 11, is that good or bad for your Saladin film?”

Moustapha: “It is very good because Saladin exactly portrays Islam. Right now, Islam is portrayed as a terrorist religion. Because a few terrorists are Muslims, the whole religion has that image. If there ever was a religious war full of terror, it was the crusades. But you can’t blame Christianity because a few adventurers did this. That’s my message. Always there are fanatics but Saladin protected freedom of religion and different holy places. My sources on Saladin are all from the West. They all admit the chivalry of Saladin. The BBC did a beautiful four hours on the Crusades.”

Luke: “Are there other Islamic filmmakers?”

Moustapha: “No. There are Arabic Christians like Mario Kassar.”

Luke: “What is it like being a Muslim in Hollywood?”

Moustapha: “No. American citizenship is not an ethnic nationality. I practice my religion more freely here than I could anywhere in the Arab and Muslim world. Here it is not the rule of the majority but the rule of the constitution. Atheist lady Madelyn O’Hair sued the government and the next day, when she won, government schools were not allowed to mention the name of God. You get waves of hatred. You don’t blame people after September 11 from having certain feelings against a certain group. That’s normal. I was upset about it. Sometimes I am afraid to ride on a plane with someone [who looks like a young fundamentalist Muslim].

“We’re living in a free society ruled by a constitution. The United States is like a corporation. The US is the true United Nations. The whole world is represented here. We all have shares. How influential you are depends on how hard you work. But at the end, the media runs the world. Absolutely. No tanks or planes. The media and the public companies. This is what The Protocols of [the Learned Elders of] Zion [is all about].

“The Zionists, last century, were persecuted in Europe. So they immigrated to the United States. They had a target. They were united. And they did not permit [statements] critical of Zion. They went all the way to control the world and to control the minds of the people through the media. There’s a lesson to learn from them.

“They have control of the media here. We know it. They did not do it through tanks or machine guns. They planned of course. They united. Did you see Pat Buchanan’s book [The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization]? He makes sense.”

Luke: “Yes, he’s a sharp guy. He doesn’t mind telling it like it is, no matter how controversial.”

Moustapha: “There is a red line if I get into the issue of Israel but the Jews, like everyone else, wants to make money. Hollywood is not ethnic. There’s English, Irish, Spanish, French, Roman…”

Luke: “But movie and TV producers are 70% Jewish.”

Moustapha: “Yes. The studios are. That control is financial but not the creative aspect. You can’t be more Jewish than Miramax [owned by Disney and operated by Bob and Harvey Weinstein, distributed last two Halloween films]. They financed me and I did it. But probably if I did something about Israel, they would not. So I get financing from overseas, such as when I did The Message.

“My base, really, is England. I have a studio there, Twickenham. It’s not under my name. I did all of my work [on the two films he directed]. My crew was mostly English. The best crews are English.”

Akkad’s produced such other films as Sky Bandits, Appointment With Fear and Free Ride [1986].

Luke: “How do you feel about being best known for the Halloween films?”

Moustapha: “Only with kids. The adults haven’t seen it. But when I’m around kids, I feel good. How I feel depends where I am. When I am with kids, I feel like a king because of Halloween. With adults, they might know me for Lion of the Desert. Within the Arab-Muslim world, I am really big because they see me [as one of them] who’s made it in Hollywood.”

Luke: “Have you encountered much discrimination as a Muslim in Hollywood?”

Moustapha: “No. I make it very clear. I am proud of it. I don’t try to hide it. Many suggested that I change my name. I would not. I respect other religions – Jewish, Christian, atheist… When I see somebody who, because he got married, changes his religion, I lose respect for him. One who’s proud of his roots and his heritage, I respect.

“This is something that I practice in my home. When I lock the door in the morning and I leave the house, I am 100% American in my thinking, working… This is where I earned my education, my living, and my faith. Who’s going to touch this country? Forget carrying the flags. Look at it from a practical point of view. I live here. My kids live here. My grandchildren live here. So I want security for this country America. It’s a matter of practicality, not religion. I am open about it but I have never faced any [discrimination] that I know of. You might find something but I didn’t feel it.”

Luke: “Did you put a flag on your car after September 11th?”

Moustapha: “No. I hate this flag waving. People who fly a flag are trying to hide something. Why should I fly a flag? America is not a flag. It’s a country with a constitution. And anything that affects this country, automatically affects me. I think these terrorists, the Taliban, are a bunch of animals. I thought of them as animals when they blew up those [ancient Buddhist] statutes. I wanted at the time to go hit them.”

Luke: “Did you feel any moral qualms about taking funding from Moahmar Khaddafy?”

Moustapha: “No. It all depends on what I do with it. If he put conditions… If I served his regime… At the end, he wanted to make a film about him and his revolution. I turned it down. I don’t care where the financing comes from. It’s what you make out of it. I can get it from anywhere.”

Luke: “Even Osama Bin Laden?”

Moustapha: “I’d take the money from him. But what I do with it, that’s what counts. I would correct his outlook and his animalistic approach to the whole religion.”

Luke: “And where is your family?”

Moustapha: “I have one sister and one brother in Syria. I have three brothers here. I have four kids, three boys. My son Malek is my big help. He just finished his own film, Psychic Murders. He shot it on digital video. He’s accomplished more at his age than I accomplished at that age. I had to earn a living. I told him that he’s deprived of the pleasure I have [from struggling]. When I own a car, it’s [the fulfillment of] a big dream. When he wants a car, he gets a car.”

Interview by Luke Ford. Source: lukeford.net

Mustafa Akkad died on 11 November 2005.
He produced great Hollywood features
besides two Islamic masterpieces; The Message and Lion of the Desert.
He was trying to find sponsors for his upcoming project Saladin.

Source

What was your inspiration for your video “A Discussion”?

This piece was based on an article that I wrote on Muslim Writers Society’s website a few years ago. The dialog is based on true discussions between different women and also based on discussions with some Muslim women who explained their struggle about wearing Hijab. What “inspired” me was the strength of Muslim women who wear the Hijab. Hijabi women have always been on the defensive, and due to their kind nature (generally speaking), they tend to be patient with all the crap that they get. This video was meant to show that a woman who wears the Hijab does so by her own will and it’s not an easy choice, and it explained the socio-religious reasons for wearing it and for not wearing it.

How is studying and being a practicing Muslim in the film and video industry?

Being a “practicing Muslim” or a Muslim who cares about Islamic laws is really challenging in this field, at least in America. Studying it had its own challenges. For example, I don’t shoot kissing scenes or nudity, and I am careful with profanity and sexual contents. But at the same time, I received a lot of respect and support from non-Muslims and less from Muslims. This was really surprising to me. But I have to clarify something: even if I were not a Muslim, I would still stay away from sexual scenes because they are not creative at all, and I see them as a cheap shot to get artificial audience…audience who are interested in the nudity but not interested in the core message of the film. 

What do you see for the future of Muslims in film, both in front of and behind the camera?

More Muslims are joining this field in America. At our time, whatever and whoever Muslim that makes it in this field would be considered a “pioneer” in my opinion. Because other than Moustapha Akkad, God bless his soul, we had no serious Muslim filmmaker with good intentions of making a good change. There is also a Muslim dichotomy in this field. On one hand you have Muslims who stick to the traditions and want to use this field as a Da’wah (propagation) tool, while another group of Muslims want to use this field to modify the understanding of Islam through “reform”. What these folks don’t understand is that Islam needs no reformation, but Muslim do need reform.

Despite the fact that American Muslims have joined this field too little and a little late, I still see the future good and bright for Muslim filmmakers.

How do you think film will change the way Muslims do Da’wah? Do you think this area is the next major area for Da’wah and Tabligh?

This area should have been for Da’wah and Tabligh more than a hundred years ago. But we have been very slow and not so smart about using film for a good cause. Film is the most powerful form of art, no doubt, but I yet have to see a good Da’wah film other than Akkad’s The Message. There are many independent films and videos for Da’wah purposes, but are mostly low-quality or have poor marketing. “Muhammad: the Last Prophet” directed by Richard Rich is an example.

What future projects do you have in the works?

I have mostly done documentaries and educational videos. Currently I am working on my last documentary that is about the role of propaganda in persecution. I have two other shorts in the works as well, but I am focusing on children’s shows insha’Allah.

What do you thinks lies in store for Muslim directors and producers?

Muslim directors and producers and Muslim media artists in general have no community support in America. At a typical mosque you will hear the elders speaking and complaining about how the media is out there to get Muslims, but then they will chastise their own kids if they choose to go into this field. Millions of dollars are spent on fancy mosques, but little is spent on any Muslim media outlet. We don’t even have a serious cable channel. Yes, there is Bridges TV, but that goes to back to what I said previously: we only have low-quality stuff. So Muslim media artists have a huge challenge ahead of them. Perhaps it’s the will of God the Almighty to filter the sincere from those who just want to get rich quickly and really fast? I don’t know. But whatever it is, it is a huge challenge to be a Muslim and to be in this field. Mainly because any serious production will cost money, and Muslim communities rarely support any production effort with money.

How do you suggest young Muslims get started in media?

Start in high school if you can. Grab a camera and start shooting. Or if you like print media, grab a pencil and start taking notes on events, publish your own print newsletter (don’t just do blogs, but do print to get the experience of reaching masses in the physical world).You can then major in communications or journalism, depending on the university that you are going to. Best way to start also is theater and photography. The more experience with theater and photography, the better you will be off when handling film projects.

Is it a wise career choice? What opportunities are available for students?

It really depends on the individual and the circumstances. In the Muslim communities, there is little to no support for youngsters to seek careers in this field. We push our kids to become doctors or engineers, and if we are very tolerant, then maybe lawyers. But liberal arts is beyond the imagination of many parents, especially immigrant parents.

Opportunities in this field has no limits. One can do so many things in a film production, just look at the credits at the end of any film. Those are all the opportunities out there. Now for Muslims, sky is the limit, because this is an untapped field by Muslims, especially Shia Muslims. One major suggestion that I can give is this: if majoring in media, make sure to take some business classes, because this is the type of a field that you need a lot self-management skills.

What do you suggest to those who would like to be involved in film and production but do not have access to the high-tech and often costly equipment?

Rent or lease equipment. But most important of all, it’s not the equipment that matters, it’s the talent. You can have a golden pen with golden ink, but will you be able to write like Shakespeare? However, give charcoal to Shakespeare, and see how he writes with it!

I have seen many communities and mosques who spend tons of money on great sound systems, fantastic cameras, and cutting edge computers, but then there is no one who knows how to use any of those. If you have the passion, you have the talent, then the equipment will eventually come or that  you can raise money or get grants for your film project to fund the equipment.

What do you think is the most rewarding aspect of having a career in film?

Film is among the most powerful forms of art. Getting the message across via film and seeing the crowd understanding a message in 90 minutes that hundreds of book could not achieve in 90 years is very rewarding.

Zaynab Herrera is community activist and student at the University of Toronto. When she’s not busy chasing after her two-year-old daughter, she’s busy blogging at SoCrunchy.wordpress.com.

Source: islaminsights.com

Abu Dhabi - The organizers of the second Middle East International Film Festival, to be held from October 10-19, announced the special presentations line-up today at a press conference held at the Abu Dhabi Authority for Culture and Heritage (ADACH).

Unveiling the special presentation screenings were Vice Chairman of MEIFF and Director General of ADACH, Mohamed Khalaf Al Mazrouei, Project Coordinator Eissa Al Mazrouei, Executive Director Nashwa Al Ruwaini and Abdalla Bastaki, Director of the Emirates Film Competition.

“Abu Dhabi’s cultural project, with its future horizons and openness to the other, would not be completed without a strong presence of cinema which constitutes one of the major themes of contemporary culture. The Middle East International Film Festival, since its launch in October last year, constitutes the first crucial step on that long road,” said Mohamed Khalaf Al Mazrouei.

“The inaugural Middle East International Film Festival was a huge challenge as to start a new festival that strives to have a predominant role in the international festival world is not easy with over 3000 other festivals taking place every year around the world. We believe that universality does not happen except through regionalism the Festival serves Arab cinema, especially in the Emirates and the Gulf, and we are honored to have great Arabic titles both in and out of competition as well as a massive selection of international films. We aspire to serve the art of film from all over the world. This year we promise an experience not to be missed for cinema lovers and interesting industry initiatives that would cater for the Industry professionals. Our extended ten days of the festival along with the new and returning sections of the festival will add on to the quality of achieving status as a must attend festival” quoted Nashwa Al Ruwaini.

In its second year, MEIFF strives to become a centre for filmmakers in the region and internationally to meet and present their films in a city fast becoming the leading cultural centre in the Middle East. The international element of the Festival this year is truly reflected in the line up of films that we will be screening this year. Jon Fitzgerald, MEIFF’s Director of Programming stated “It was a real challenge trying to achieve a true balance between East and West in our programming due to the sheer excellence in submissions from both this part of the world and beyond. Our viewing committee and programmers have viewed over a thousand films in order to get to the stage we are at currently in finalizing the final slate.” The festival has films from over 35 countries and all the five continents scheduled to screen this year, with the competition films and the other programming sections due to be released over the coming weeks leading up to the festival.

This year’s MEIFF has expanded to ten days and the prize money for the prestigious Black Pearl Awards has been increased to more than one million US Dollars, giving MEIFF its own unique personality within the film festivals of the world.

Cinema Verite:
In addition to the special presentation films, organizers also announced a special event in partnership with Cinema Verite to pay tribute to the Oscar winning actress Jane Fonda. Cinema Verite is in an exhibition/screening space located in Paris, dedicated to social and humanitarian issues, associated with it is a fund that finances socially conscious films on a yearly basis and the international rendezvous yearly event that aims to bring together prominent directors, actors, politicians and leaders to address social issues. Jane Fonda has been an incredible success since her early screen performances in the 1960s and has been a dedicated political and social activist throughout her entire career. Joining Fonda for the event with Cinema Verite will be the icons of cinema including Susan Sarandon, and Carole Bouquet.

MEIFF Tribute:
A tribute honouring the great Tunisian director Nacer Khemir will also be held during MEIFF on his 60^th birthday with a special screening of his film “Touaq al Hammama al Mafqoud,” based on the book by Ibn Hazem. Nasser is a theatre and film director as well as a poet, writer and painter. His films have won many awards worldwide and his famous theatrical show, “Al Hakawati” has appeared on stages in Africa, Europe and America. There have also been several exhibitions of his artwork in Tunis, Paris and other European cities as well as many illustrated books, joining together images and words.

Industry Initiatives:
Nashwa Al Ruwaini also announced that MEIFF will be launching the ‘MOST’ initiative during the Festival this year in conjunction with The Saban Center for Middle Eastern Policy at The Brookings Institute in Washington. ‘MOST’ stands for ‘Muslims on Screen and Television’ and will become a cultural resource center providing valuable resources and information on Islam and Muslims for the US entertainment community. Its aim is to meet the critical need for increased understanding and accurate representation on both sides during this time of great tension and mutual suspicion between the US and Muslim World.

MEIFF will also be launching the Arab Film Industry Research Circle that covers the current situation of Arab cinema in the Levant, Egypt, The Gulf and North Africa. This research circle aspires to shed light on the points of strengths and weaknesses in Arab cinema along with ways in which co-production initiatives can be achieved

MEIFF will also offer a symposium about the power of women in the entertainment industry. Which we will release more details on in the coming days.

The MEIFF 2008 Special Presentations to be screened are:
Opening Night Gala: The Brothers Bloom (USA), directed by Rian Johnson. Starring, Mark Ruffalo, Adrien Brody, Rachel Weisz, Maximilian Schell and Rinko Kikuchi.

Brothers Stephen and Bloom are orphans who bonded in childhood and were mentored into becoming the best con men in the world, swindling millionaires with complex scenarios of lust and intrigue. They’ve decided to take one last job before dissolving their partnership-showing a beautiful and eccentric heiress the time of her life with a thrilling adventure that takes them around the world.

Vicky Cristina Barcelona (USA/Spain), directed by Woody Allen. Starring, Rebecca Hall, Scarlett Johansson, Patricia Clarkson, Javier Bardem and Penélope Cruz.

Vicky and Cristina visits Barcelona for the summer and becomes enamored with the artist Juan Antonio who they meet at an art exhibition and gets entwined with him and his beautiful but insane ex-wife. When they all became amorously entangled, the results can only be described as chaotic.

Miracle at St. Anna (USA/Italy), directed by Spike Lee. Starring Derek Luke, Michael Ealy, Laz Alonso, John Turturro and Kerry Washington.

The film chronicles the story of four black American soldiers who are members of the US Army as part of the all-black 92^nd Buffalo Soldier Division stationed in Tuscany, Italy during World War II. They experience the tragedy and triumph of war as they find themselves trapped behind enemy lines and separated from their unit after one of them risks his life to save an Italian boy.

The Lucky Ones (USA), directed by Neil Burger. Starring, Rachel McAdams, Tim Robbins and Michael Pe?a.

After suffering an injury during a routine patrol, hardened sergeant TK Poole is granted a one-month leave to visit his fiancé. But when an unexpected blackout cancels all flights out of New York, TK agrees to share a ride to Pittsburgh with two other stranded servicemen: Cheever and Colee and what begins as a short trip unexpectedly evolves into a longer journey.

Easy Virtue (UK), directed by Stephan Elliott. Starring, Jessica Biel, Kristen Scott Thomas, Colin Firth and Ben Barnes.

Larita, a Jazz Age race-car driver impulsively marries young Englishman John Whittaker in Monte Carlo and travels to England to meet his privileged and batty family who naturally, hate her. John’s mother and sisters try their best to sabotage the newlyweds while his father, develops a deep bond with the bride founded on their mutual appreciation for motorbikes and flouting social etiquette.

Igor (USA/France), directed by Anthony Leondis. Animated film with the voices of John Cusack, John Cleese, Steve Buscemi, Sean Hayes and Eddie Izzard.

In a world filled with mad scientists and evil inventions, one talented evil scientist’s hunch-backed lab assistant, Igor, has big dreams of becoming a mad scientist himself and winning the annual Evil Science Fair.

Closing Night Film: Body of Lies (USA), directed by Ridley Scott. Starring, Leonardo DiCaprio, Russell Crowe, Mark Strong and Golshifteh Farahani.

A CIA operative, Roger Ferris, is sent to Jordan to track a high-ranking terrorist. The spy is aided by the head of Jordan’s covert operations in an uneasy alliance that leads to cultural and moral clashes between the men.

MEIFF, held in Abu Dhabi, is an annual event and a project of the Abu Dhabi Authority for Culture and Heritage (ADACH). The Festival is a cultural event dedicated to bringing a diverse slate of international films and programs to the community and introducing filmmakers from around the world to the resources of the region.

This year’s MEIFF will see several new additions to an already exciting schedule. For the first time, there will be a section of the Festival concentrating on Environmental Films as well as a showcase of documentaries highlighting the 60 years since the division of Palestine. The prestigious Black Pearl Awards will also return in the second edition with the total prize money now exceeding $1 million in cash in the categories of fiction, documentary, animation, shorts, student films and animation.

For more information, please contact
Tel: +971 2621 2040
Email:
<!–
var prefix = ‘ma’ + ‘il’ + ‘to’;
var path = ‘hr’ + ‘ef’ + ‘=’;
var addy65609 = ‘press’ + ‘@’;
addy65609 = addy65609 + ‘meiff’ + ‘.’ + ‘com’;
document.write( ‘<a ‘ + path + ‘\” + prefix + ‘:’ + addy65609 + ‘\’>’ );
document.write( addy65609 );
document.write( ‘<\/a>’ );
//–>\n press@meiff.com
<!–
document.write( ‘<span style=\’display: none;\’>’ );
//–>
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
<!–
document.write( ‘</’ );
document.write( ‘span>’ );
//–>

© Press Release 2008

from MEIFF

Source: zawya.com