Hollywood Villifies Muslims?

[bishopnl]

Critic accuses Hollywood of vilifying Arabs
Thu May 1, 2008 10:11am EDT  

BEIRUT (Reuters) - American films and TV dramas shot since the September 11 attacks have reinforced screen images of Arabs and Muslims as fanatics and villains, ingraining harmful stereotypes, argues an author on the subject.

In his book "Guilty -- Hollywood's Verdict on Arabs after 9/11", Jack Shaheen praises some post-September 11 films for offering a more sympathetic image of Arabs and Muslims, who he argues have been castigated for decades by Hollywood.

But he says that too many have portrayed them in ever darker shades, criticizing films including "The Kingdom" (2007) and "The Four Feathers" (2002) and condemning the creation of a new "Arab-American bogeyman" in TV dramas such as "24".

"In the United States, you can say anything you want about Islam and Arabs and get away with it. In other words, as someone said, 'You can hit an Arab free'," said Shaheen -- also author of "Reel Bad Arabs -- How Hollywood Vilifies a People".

Shaheen, an American of Lebanese descent, has examined the treatment of Arabs and Muslims in some 1,000 films, including more than 100 shot since September 11.

From action movies such as "True Lies" (1994) to comedies including "Father of the Bride Part II" (1995) and Disney's animated "Aladdin" (1992), Shaheen identifies films that have perpetuated damaging stereotypes of Arabs and Muslims.

"The images have remained primarily fixed and have only been changed in the sense that they have become more vindictive and damaging," he told Reuters in an interview in Beirut.

"What enables these images to persist and prevail? One of the primary reasons is silence," said Shaheen, a retired professor of mass communications who worked as a consultant on "Syriana" (2005) and "Three Kings" (1999).

"There's nobody in authority, no political leader, no Hollywood personality who has taken a stand and said that demonizing Arabs and Muslims is the same as demonizing Jews or blacks or Asians or any other racial or ethnic group."

"SELECTIVE FRAMING OF RADICALS"

In "Guilty", Shaheen credits films including "Babel" (2006) and "Rendition" (2007) for "more complex, even-handed Arab portraits". But "very few people are listening", he said.

"It's been very difficult, it's like being a salmon trying to swim upstream.

"What is done is selective framing of radicals: people saying 'death to America'. You cannot deny the reality -- there are people who really want to kill Americans. But those are basically the only images we see."

He describes last year's "The Kingdom" -- an action movie about FBI agents hunting terrorists in Saudi Arabia -- as one of the most damaging depictions of Arabs of recent times in which "even Arab children cannot be trusted".

Shaheen also charts a new trend of turning American Arabs and Muslims into "the new bogey person" and criticizes the TV drama "24" for its "vicious images of loathsome Muslim Americans as well as Americans with Arab roots".

Hollywood's depiction of Arabs has eased the path for U.S. administration policy, he argues. Decades of portraying Arabs and Muslims as the enemy "made it that much easier for us to go into Iraq", he said. "There were very few people protesting.

"The images help enforce policy," he said. "As the policy becomes more even-handed, perhaps films will reflect that.

"Plato said: 'Those who tell the stories rule society'. Nothing has changed, and the story tellers of today have a tremendous impact on the world as we perceive it."

(Editing by Paul Casciato)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard.  For one thing, Hollywood has bent over backward to accomodate Muslims--two thirds of all movies coming out dealing with the war on terror and American-Islamic issues are critical of the US government.

Secondly, the movies he names deal with the issue of Islamic terrorism, not all Muslims.  This idiot is basically protesting the potrayal of any movie which does not potray Islamic terrorism in a soft light (like Syriana essentially does).

His whining about "24" is especially ridiculous, since the shows creators have bent over backwards, issuing statements and introducing storylines which defend peaceful Muslims.   In the last season, one of the characters, Nadia, is a muslim working in the Los Angeles counter terrorism unit, and government "mistreatment" of Muslims is shown in a negative light.  

I did find this remark somewhat telling.  The guy is whining about Hollywood's treatment, and says:  "In the United States, you can say anything you want about Islam and Arabs and get away with it."

Yeah, that's kind of the point.  You can say anything you want about Christians, or about George Bush, or about anyone you want.  Because in America, we are free to say whatever.  It's when you go to Muslim dominated countries that certain topics of conversation are off limits.

[Melody]

People have such short memories.  Just a few decades ago, tons of movies had Russians as the bad guys.   

[bishopnl]

People have such short memories.  Just a few decades ago, tons of movies had Russians as the bad guys.   

Exactly.  In the 40's, it was always the Germans.

[Chérie]

One of the most memorable movies for me that depicts Muslim/Arab stereotype racism was Lord of the Rings.

I found it ironic that the good men were all beautiful fair skinned Euorpean people, while the evil and sinister were typecasted Arabic/African, with the occasional exception - such as the White Wizard

The same is true for the Chronicles of Narnia.

I believe it dates back far before 9/11. I think that this as always been the mindset of Literature/Hollywood.

King Kong is another typical example of the black man - represented as an ape from the jungles - stealing the beautiful white women.

[rootbeer]

"In the United States, you can say anything you want about Islam and Arabs and get away with it

.

I think that applies to Christians, too.

[bishopnl]

One of the most memorable movies for me that depicts Muslim/Arab stereotype racism was Lord of the Rings.

I found it ironic that the good men were all beautiful fair skinned Euorpean people, while the evil and sinister were typecasted Arabic/African, with the occasional exception - such as the White Wizard

The same is true for the Chronicles of Narnia.

I believe it dates back far before 9/11. I think that this as always been the mindset of Literature/Hollywood.

King Kong is another typical example of the black man - represented as an ape from the jungles - stealing the beautiful white women.

Please tell me that you are kidding....KING KONG???  I'm sorry, but that's completely the nuttiness thing I've ever heard....

[The Purple Fuzzy]

One of the most memorable movies for me that depicts Muslim/Arab stereotype racism was Lord of the Rings.

I found it ironic that the good men were all beautiful fair skinned Euorpean people, while the evil and sinister were typecasted Arabic/African, with the occasional exception - such as the White Wizard

The same is true for the Chronicles of Narnia.

I believe it dates back far before 9/11. I think that this as always been the mindset of Literature/Hollywood.

King Kong is another typical example of the black man - represented as an ape from the jungles - stealing the beautiful white women.

Please tell me that you are kidding....KING KONG???  I'm sorry, but that's completely the nuttiness thing I've ever heard....

Wonder who Godzilla represents...

[Chérie]

No, I'm not.

I think its a great analogy.

A big black ape from the jungles of Africa stealing away a white woman - its was every white mans fear in the 1930s.

There is alot of symbolism in that movie. Check out this article.

http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/onlinessays/JC06folder/KingKong.html

[bishopnl]

I skimmed through the article.  With all due respect, it's a complete line of bull, and I'm shocked that someone as intelligent as you would buy into something this asinine (if you are indeed buying into it--I still suspect you are just kidding )

I've seen both the original King Kong, and Trader Horn....neither movie has racist elements in it.  The fact that King Kong is an ape and Ann Darrow is white have nothing at all to do with race except in feverish liberal minds who are so obsessed with race that they begin to see racism everywhere they look.  Further, it seems you have never seen King Kong yourself, because if you had you would know that King Kong isn't from Africa...he's from a mythical island filled with lots of monsters besides giant apes.  In fact, at several points in King Kong, Kong fights off threats to Ann Darrow in the form of first a giant Tyrannosaurus Rex and then in a Perodactyl.  Kind of shoots a hole in the theory that King Kong is supposed to be a stereotypical representation of a black man capturing a white woman.

As for Trader Horn, it's true that the movie focuses on finding a white woman in the heart of Africa...but so what?  How is that racist?  A savage tribe chases people through the jungle to kill them....Unless one is prepared to argue that that never happened in the history of the continent of Africa, I think positing that it's racism is ridiculous.

In fact, as I read this....I've got to laugh.  That someone would take the time to write something so absurd is in a way, humorous...and in a way kind of sad...lol....

[Chérie]

Wow you are a little more ignorant than I thought. 

LOL When have you ever known me to joke about being a lefty?

Still luv ya anyway

[bishopnl]

Wow you are a little more ignorant than I thought. 

LOL When have you ever known me to joke about being a lefty?

Still luv ya anyway

LOL...well, I've known you to pose some pretty ridiculous ideas before, but they all at least had some kind of semi-sensible reasoning behind them, even if I didn't agree with it.

But this...lol....the only thing left about this is that you have to have left your brain at the door to buy into it.  It's like sitting around thinking up movies that had apes in them, and trying to attach some racial stigma to it.  In fact, the idea itself seems to me to be inherently racist....Trying to read between the lines and insert racial overtones into what is just an old monster movie is, IMO, unjustifiably racist in and of itself.

Tell me the truth now...have you seen either the original King Kong or Trader Horn?

[Chérie]

LOL I admit, I have not seen the original, but for me, given the history of our country and hollywood - its not a stretch.

It would be a stretch to say that there wasn't some sort of symbolism, if there never had been apartheid or slavery.

Come on, we all know that racism was so common you could find it in a box of Crayola crayons up until the 80s, flesh colored band aid bandages, and only recently did Strawberry Shortcake become politically correct with having a black friend, named Orange Blossom.

[Melody]

Hey are you trying to say that Florida is mostly black single women with cats?  (I think Orange blossom has a cat..lol)

j/k     

[Sis]

Hey are you trying to say that Florida is mostly black single women with cats?  (I think Orange blossom has a cat..lol)

j/k     

What did they do with all the Cubans in Miami?

[Chérie]

LOL don't you love stereotypes?

[Sis]

Yeah.  Women are stupid and bad drivers. 

[bishopnl]

LOL I admit, I have not seen the original, but for me, given the history of our country and hollywood - its not a stretch.

It would be a stretch to say that there wasn't some sort of symbolism, if there never had been apartheid or slavery.

Come on, we all know that racism was so common you could find it in a box of Crayola crayons up until the 80s, flesh colored band aid bandages, and only recently did Strawberry Shortcake become politically correct with having a black friend, named Orange Blossom.

Hmmm...so you see racism in a movie you've never seen, and the only way Strawberry Shortcake can exorcise it's racist demons is by introducing a black character on the show?

Danni, I'm sorry, but I can't help but laugh..lol...FLESH COLORED BAND AIDS?  Maybe that's the band aid companies inherent bias against white people....they are "flesh" colored because we are more clutzy than black people and forever cutting ourselves, so the theory is whites buy more band-aids than blacks.

For that matter, I drive a white car.  Is that a sign that I'm subtley racist?  My computer has a white monitor and white mouse, but a black console and black keyboard.  Is it biracial? LOL....

Seriously....Barack Obama can talk about "beginning the conversation" about race all he wants, but there is an uncrossable chasm in the way liberals see the world, and the way the rest of us see it.  Where we see a band aid, they see a sign of racial oppression.  Where we see a movie monster in the form of a giant gorilla, they see....a symbolic representation of blacks??  C'mon......you CANNOT be serious.  Plus, if you google "King Kong" and "racism" the first article that pops up is that article you posted.  

[Chérie]

The only reason I used King Kong as an example its the most obvious and has been the subject of many conversations I have had with other like minded people. And yeah - I did a quick google because I was positive something would pop up that would explain the reasoning behind my argument better than I.

But I think now you are just being inane. I'm sure millions of people drive white cars - I do - because it doesn't absorb as much light. I think black cars are much better looking though =)

And I scoff at your remarks about the evil band-aid corporations. 

Question though - why are you so hell bent on defending Hollywood?

[bishopnl]

The only reason I used King Kong as an example its the most obvious and has been the subject of many conversations I have had with other like minded people.

This explains your problem right there.   

So you've all discussed at length racial symbolism in a movie you've never seen....quite openminded of you all....lol...

It also explains a great deal about the liberal mindset...I've seen both the original and the remake of King Kong, and I've never saw Kong and thought "Oh, a symbolic representation of black males."  The fact that anyone does is a bit disturbing, and says a great deal about racial views in our society....albeit something a lot different than what most people believe to be true.

But I think now you are just being inane.

That's my point...it's just as inane to say ppl drive white cars b/c they are racist as it is to say King Kong has racial overtones b/c it deals with an ape and a white woman.  They're both ridiculous suppositions.

Question though - why are you so hell bent on defending Hollywood?

Because I can find enough negative things to gripe about concerning Hollywood that I don't think we need to dream up imaginary racial discrimination charges.  And Hollywood's bad enough about bending over backwards to accomodate or propagate leftist tripe.  The last thing I want is to see monkey's banned from movies on the offchance it might offend someone.
Plus, I do think there are some good things about Hollywood, regardless of what many Christians might say. 

[mesipie]

maybe if they would quit bombing every1 and blowin themselves up wed stop talkin abt em...lol...

[Chérie]

The only reason I used King Kong as an example its the most obvious and has been the subject of many conversations I have had with other like minded people.

This explains your problem right there.   

So you've all discussed at length racial symbolism in a movie you've never seen....quite openminded of you all....lol...

I said I  have never seen it. My friends obviously were a little more well versed. I know enough about the movie to see the imagery. I think pictures speak a thousand words. I have seen bits and pieces of the 2005 version.

It also explains a great deal about the liberal mindset...I've seen both the original and the remake of King Kong, and I've never saw Kong and thought "Oh, a symbolic representation of black males."  The fact that anyone does is a bit disturbing, and says a great deal about racial views in our society....albeit something a lot different than what most people believe to be true.

Of course you don't. Hello? You were born in what 82, 83? You're a white man (I don't mean that in a condescending way either ) who never had to live in a society that demeans you because of your skin color, you've never been sent to the back of the bus, you never had to drink from a separate water fountain. Yes, its disturbing. Its disturbing that up until the 1960's with Sydney Poiter there was never any major roles for the black man. Why was that?

Can I ask you a question about the 1930s version? Were there any black people anywhere in the movie? In the background trying to escape? Anything at all?

Because I can find enough negative things to gripe about concerning Hollywood that I don't think we need to dream up imaginary racial discrimination charges.  And Hollywood's bad enough about bending over backwards to accommodate or propagate leftist tripe.  The last thing I want is to see monkey's banned from movies on the offchance it might offend someone.
Plus, I do think there are some good things about Hollywood, regardless of what many Christians might say. 

When I saw the Vogue cover with Lebron James (Incidentally he is the first black man to ever grace the cover), King Kong immediately came to mind. I do not believe that was an accident on anyones part. I think that Lebron James probably didn't even realize the imagery behind that. But alot of other people did, which was the reason for the uproar.

I do agree with you that today Hollywood bends over backwards to accommodate people of all races. I don't believe that the movies being made about terrorism are meant to demean anyone - its like everyone said 10 - 20 years ago it was the Orientals, 30 years it was the Russians, 60 years ago it was the Germans.

That said, Hollywood hasn't always been politically correct. My only gripe is with literature, not the movies that were subsequently made. I don't believe that Peter Jackson (who by the way, made the 2005 remake of King Kong, and in a loving way as well I might add.) was stereotyping anyone racially in LoTR - he was making a movie about a book. I blame Tolkien for that one. But again the books I mentioned were written right about the time when racial segregation was at its peak in America.

[bishopnl]

Nobody's denying that racism has been a problem in this country.

That said, I think that many of the people who complain the loudest about racism in this country probably didn't have to sit at the back of the bus or drink from a different water fountain either.  These are the same people who see a racist boogeyman in every corner.

I was born in 1980.  It's true that racism was much less of a problem then than it was when King Kong was released in 1933.  However, I've seen racism in older films plenty of times--It's not as if I'm oblivious to the fact that racism existed in that era.  The problem I have with the theory that King Kong is a racist movie is that the only evidence I've seen shown is the fact that it deals with a gorilla and a white woman.  If that fact alone is enough to condemn a movie, then I suggest the problem is in the minds of liberals who have racial paranoia on the brain.  I also suggest that it should be highly insulting to the black community when people look at Kong and think "symbolic representation of a black man."  That's where the racial problems lie...when a movie gets made about a monster gorilla and all some people can think is that it must contain racial symbolism, it suggests to me that there might be a problem, not with the movie, but with people's mindsets. 

In my Google search yesterday, I saw a review of the movie on slate.com in which the reviewer suggested this racial symbolism as well.  Apparently, he then received many complaints from black people who were angry at the fact that he had mentioned this...their comments, judging by a defense he posted, essentially went something along the lines of, "Why is it when you see a giant monkey you make some sort of racial inference?"  And in my opinion, that question is completely justified.

As for whether or not black people were in the original King Kong, they were on the island, and shown in a sympathetic light as Kong smashes through their village.  I guess that part didn't make it into your discussion....but before Kong is captured, he tears through the tribal village, killing innocent black villagers who are fleeing in terror.  Is this supposed to be symbolic of black on black crime?

No, I don't remember seeing a lot of blacks in the destruction of New York City...however, I read just yesterday statistics quoted by the US Census bureau that put the black population in NY City at that time at anywhere between 4 to 15 percent.  So the notion that b/c no blacks were shown in the destruction of NY is somehow indicative of racism is ridiculous.  Especially considering the area of New York Kong was destroying.  He gets shot atop the Empire State building--a block or so away from the prestigious Waldorf-Astoria hotel. 

As for LOTR somehow being racist...again, ridiculous.  One of the main villains is Saruman the White. 

[Chérie]

I had already stated the exclusion of the White Wizard in a previous post.

Whether or not if you see the symbolism there, many others do.

[bishopnl]

I had already stated the exclusion of the White Wizard in a previous post.

Whether or not if you see the symbolism there, many others do.

Yes, I know they do.  Shame on them.

And I say that seeing racist symbolism in every stinking movie doesn't mean the movie is racist...it means that the people who see a giant gorilla and automatically think of a person of another race have their own internal problems to deal with.  "Many others" need to stop blaming JRR Tolkien or Merian Cooper because of their own mental associations. 

[Chérie]

I had already stated the exclusion of the White Wizard in a previous post.

Whether or not if you see the symbolism there, many others do.

Yes, I know they do.  Shame on them.

And I say that seeing racist symbolism in every stinking movie doesn't mean the movie is racist...it means that the people who see a giant gorilla and automatically think of a person of another race have their own internal problems to deal with.  "Many others" need to stop blaming JRR Tolkien or Merian Cooper because of their own mental associations. 

Hmmm... and I guess by "Many Others" you mean me.

:grin:

I love that you don't even know me yet jump to conclusions about my "internal problems"?