« More Noodles Than You Can Shake a Chopstick At | Home | Fine Dining, Hold the Snob »
Nothing Good from a Bad Man
By bukkhead | August 7, 2007
FILM REVIEW: ‘THE LAST KING OF SCOTLAND’
Written by Peter Morgan and Jeremy Brock. Based on the novel by Giles Foden
Directed by Kevin Macdonald
Rated R
121 mins.
Against my will, I watched The Last King of Scotland last night. Why was it against my will? What have I got against Forrest Whittaker, one of the most important actor-directors of our time?
My theory is that any subject portrayed in a fictional film will be glorified, or at the very least, somewhat justified. I could be the victim of a politicized, even racist press, but I don’t want there to be movies that show the human side if Idi Amin. Not after what I’ve heard of the man. A man who engaged in ethnic cleansing, political genocide, and mass murder. And man who, but for limited resources, would have committed the atrocities of a Hitler.
And the Last King does show Idi Amin to be a likable fellow. The movie, which is a fictional account of Amin’s later years, seen through the eyes of his personal physician, is itself loosely based on a fictional novel. Idi comes across as charming, brave, and a man who genuinely wants to make Uganda a strong country for her people. Nicholas Garrigan is a young Scottish doctor, looking for adventure in Africa, who ends up befriended by Amin and becomes one of his closest advisors.
There’s probably a name for these fictional biographies as told through the eyes of some lesser subordinate, like Amadeus, for example. It’s a compelling story-telling technique, and I can’t begrudge the writer’s ability to weave a tale. Nicholas is a man in conflict, between the proper, civilized, boring doctor and the young, carefree, immature gadabout. In this way he mirrors Idi Amin, who wants to be both a powerful leader, but is himself inexperienced, unwise, and probably just a pawn in some larger game.
Afterall, Amin’s rise to power was by the grace of the British government. This is only implied in the movie, but it’s an element I feel is sorely missed. By the time we reach the end of the film, a few shots, some placards explaining details of Amin’s fall, are all we are given to show that the man was not so good for Uganda. This is not enough, in my opinion. Those who don’t know their history will walk away from the movie thinking that he was just a paranoid, delusional despot who let power corrupt him.
But this is not the case. The atrocities that Idi Amin committed in Uganda will be a permanent scar in Africa’s history. The only extended horror that the audience is given to indicate this are a few scenes where Amin turns on Garrigan, and even that is justified by Garrigan’s own act of betrayal. And there should be no justification for the things Amin has done. He and his memory have not right to them.
So this is a well made film, and Forrest Whitaker rightly deserves all of the praise he has received. My only contention is that he should use such talents to portray subjects accurately, or at least subjects worthy of glorification.
Topics: Movies | No Comments »