![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Catch a Fire
Nov. 5th, 2006 12:21 amAs I was watching, I thought it was historical fiction that someone had created to make a point about the war on terror. The setting is 1980 in South Africa and follows the transformation of one man into a terrorist/freedom fighter on the one hand, but also goes into the psychology of the man in charge of preventing attacks against South Africa on the other. The themes of terrorism, torture and how far someone should go to protect his country just seemed too in the news right now for them to have been able to find a story that fit so perfectly.
At the end, though, the movie includes a note of sorts that explains that the events were based on a true story. It makes the movie all the more disturbing and left me feeling unsettled. The movie makers are clearly trying to draw parallells between then and now.
I've heard people say things like, "Well, I don't like torture, but we have to protect the country." As if torture is an abstract concept, as if it isn't happening to real people and screwing up their lives, as if it won't have very real consequences for our country. As if its all very fine and well to use agressive measures, as long as its to other people and not our people.
This movie is aimed squarely at those people. Its a true story about what happens when a country makes excuses, about what happens if we think in terms of the ends justifying the means - innocent people get tortured, held indefinately or even "disappear," and the very thing that we are trying to stop only grows in power.
No good ever comes of spreading injustice. Evil begets evil. And other ominous, vaguely preachy things one might expect from a religion teacher.
Sadly, the theater was almost empty, so I'm not sure that the point is getting across to the people who could really use it.
Tim Robbins, as always, was awesome. Derek Luke, who played the terrorist/freedom fighter (he kept getting called both), also gave a great performance. Precious was beautiful. Just beautiful. (Main character's wife, don't know her name.)
As a side point, all of the women in this movie wore their hair naturally, something you don't often see and which made me very happy.
At the end, though, the movie includes a note of sorts that explains that the events were based on a true story. It makes the movie all the more disturbing and left me feeling unsettled. The movie makers are clearly trying to draw parallells between then and now.
I've heard people say things like, "Well, I don't like torture, but we have to protect the country." As if torture is an abstract concept, as if it isn't happening to real people and screwing up their lives, as if it won't have very real consequences for our country. As if its all very fine and well to use agressive measures, as long as its to other people and not our people.
This movie is aimed squarely at those people. Its a true story about what happens when a country makes excuses, about what happens if we think in terms of the ends justifying the means - innocent people get tortured, held indefinately or even "disappear," and the very thing that we are trying to stop only grows in power.
No good ever comes of spreading injustice. Evil begets evil. And other ominous, vaguely preachy things one might expect from a religion teacher.
Sadly, the theater was almost empty, so I'm not sure that the point is getting across to the people who could really use it.
Tim Robbins, as always, was awesome. Derek Luke, who played the terrorist/freedom fighter (he kept getting called both), also gave a great performance. Precious was beautiful. Just beautiful. (Main character's wife, don't know her name.)
As a side point, all of the women in this movie wore their hair naturally, something you don't often see and which made me very happy.
