November 01, 2007

BRITZ

Part 1 of Britz was great. And bollocks. Great in that as a drama it had me glued, and I always like Riz Mc as an actor. Bollocks because it doesn't help doing things so overblown.

The MI-5 headquarters with the huge big screens was like something from Doctor Who as were the MI-5 characters. They were crap, dramatically up their ass parts with dramatic, crap actors and actresses playing them. Whoever is responsible for this should watch Michael Winterbottoms films more closely.

I don't really reckon this over-dramatisation is healthy for the nation to see in the context of fundamentalism. Having said that I am a bit annoyed that I haven't had a go yet myself. The "cliff hanger" where he is left, solo on the tail of the female suicide bombers whilst the others are congratulating themselves on thinking they have their enemy is stolen from fucking Silence of the Lambs. Bollocks.

UPDATE: I wasn't expecting that. Part 2 more or less completely redeemed the whole thing, I didn't realise it till the last five minutes but yup, that was very well done. Except for the cross eyed French chain smoking Al-Qaeda woman of course who was crap. Its obviously written by a luvie but its a genuine attempt to translate this Jihadi phenomena for a British sofa audience.

Khurshid Ahmed, the chairman of the forum, called on Channel 4 not to air the film, Britz,
Peter Korminsky
Guardian

I know that there were many exaggerations to make points but it did make me think about the way many young Muslims may feel.


last night’s programme was riddled with so many flaws that it made it difficult to believe that any reasonable-minded person with so much as a percent of understanding about Muslim British women would take the story of Nasima at face value. Some scenes depicted were so unrealistic and absurd that I couldn’t restrain myself from shaking my head in utter disappointment, and I doubt I was alone...

...one message that I do hear loud and clear... is that Muslims like me and you...have to speak up...I honestly believe that if one voice can change two minds, and two minds can change four, then eventually the world will change - slowly but surely.



...I don't mind telling you that, under no circumstance, can I hope to understand what makes someone want to take other human life. Being mentally ill and committing murder is one thing... making a reasoned decision to take the lives of innocent bystanders is another. However... the word 'innocent' was the key word for this magnificent show... but more on that later...

...Nasima angrily telling us, direct and into our living rooms that we may well scoff and wonder why these brutal actions need to be carried out... but we shouldn't wonder why innocent people need to die as none of us are innocent. "As long as you vote this government in" and as long as the war goes on and we "do nothing", we are fair game. This, like nothing else in the show, provided the biggest chill. Firstly, it showed how unrepentant the terrorists are and secondly, how it makes some kind of twisted sense. What else can people do when they've explored all the legal channels?



...I think it was a pretty fair portrayal of both sides up to a point. The brother’s indoctrination into MI5 seemed plausible due to his natural ambition and sense that his country of heritage, Pakistan was still a bit backwards. The sister Nasima's story I found a little harder to mix household products and detonate it in the ‘good plot devices’ section of my brain...


I will bet that to many people that would be a documentary and not a fiction.

It was almost a BNP recruiting film because it confirmed all of BNP propaganda.

I was astounded that it had the racist theme of rejecting the black boyfriend Jude and his treatment at being told he wasn't welcome at the radical's meeting because he was a "Christian" and then the father's reaction because he was a 'negro'.

If I was a Muslim I would have been incensed at the portrayal (betrayal) - but how far away from the reality is it?


Mozzam Begg

Peter Kosminsky came to the front of the theatre, after the
stretch of silence, to answer questions from an audience
which consisted of, surprisingly to me, only four Muslims.
I asked him about why he chose to make this film. He
replied that it was to make people ask more questions about
internal and foreign policy; about spooks as well as
suicide bombers. Indeed, it was to boldly ask the question
whether the effects of personal trauma - in this case
Nasima's best friend who is detained without trial and then
subjected to a control order - , coupled with societal
hostility and a sense of political impotence can lead
someone to the path of violent extremism. And if it can,
are we able to understand? He also commented that this film
was not at all aimed at the Muslim community - quite the
opposite.

1 comment:

FreeWriters said...

Yup sure, you can link to our page, go for it Dave!