Introduction
Hollywood movies have the power to shape our perceptions of the world around us. While they can entertain and provide us with glimpses into other cultures, they can also misrepresent these cultures by marginalizing and denigrating them as is the case with some of the released movies after 9/11 which contained harmful Arab and Muslim characters. Many Hollywood movies have portrayed Muslims and Islam in a negative light, showing them as extremists, terrorists, and killers of innocent people. This has been harmful and ideologically damaging. Islam has been highly politicized by propaganda theories based on stereotypes and Othering (Said, 1978, 1981 ; Shaheen, 2001 ; Kumar, 2012).
These stereotypical images are rooted in Orientalist literature aiming at accepting the Orientalist ideology that idealizes the West and disgraces the East. The former have always been structured according to binary oppositions that establish a picture of a civilized West dominating the uncivilized East (the Other/the Rest). These, these have led to discrimination and mistreatment against everything Muslim in real life. As a result, Hollywood has been criticized for perpetuating negative images of these communities based on fears (Semmerling, 2006) that contributed on a large scale to escalating Islamophobia (McAlister 2005 ; Arti 2009 ; Alsultany 2012 ; Kumar 2012). Many studies have shown that hatred of Arabs, Islam and Muslims has been economically and politically bent and that there has always been an American agenda to fulfil, such as finding a good pretext for military intervention in the Middle East as the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the subsequent War on Terrorism to fight terrorist Arabs/Muslims. David Leich (2007) published The Middle East and the United States : A Historical and Political Reassessment which provides a detailed analysis of American interests in the Middle East, with a particular focus on the importance of oil. The post-9/11 era saw a significant increase in the production of films on terrorism, some of which were directly or indirectly supported by the U.S. government and the Pentagon. The U.S. government has provided support for this category of movies to project negative and hostile images of the formers to fulfil its interests in the Middle East (ibid). Chomsky in, Hegemony or Survival : America’s Quest for Global Dominance (2003), examines the U.S. government’s decision to pursue War on Terror and the use of military force and economic sanctions to maintain its dominance as a global power.
As mentioned before, the 9/11 event helped Western ill sentiments to come to the fore again and that was helped by media propaganda against Islam and Muslims. One such media propaganda is Hollywood movies that centered around and popularized Islamophobia in films such as The Kingdom (2007), The Dictator (2012), and American Sniper (2014). The 9/11 films have been used to spread stereotypical demeaning images of Arabs and Muslims and perpetuated a constant distortion of Muslim communities. Moreover, this ill sentiment manifested in Islamophobia against all that is related to Islam, considering Muslims as murderers and criminals who express hatred towards Western civilization. On this fact, Kumar argues that :
The 9/11 event allowed the term Islamophobia to be used by and large to declare War on Terror and to find an excuse to fight “Muslim terrorists” who are perpetuating terror and fear and threaten the stability, peace, and security of the West’s interests all over the world. Islam has become highly politicized due to the propaganda theories which are based on Othering, stereotypes, and Orientalism ; hence, the Islamophobia factor has been spread throughout Western (2012 :163-164).
One of the most Islamophobic movies produced in the aftermath of 9/11 is TheDictator ; a witty comedy released in 2012 and directed by Larry Charles. It satirizes a fictional Arab country “Wadiya” and its leader “Aladeen”. The movie mocks Arabs and Muslims through political and social representations. The Dictator portrays a fictional North African dictator named General Aladeen, a despotic tyrant and an ardent supporter of Bin Laden. Aladeen rules the fictitious country of Wadiya with an iron fist and is manufacturing nuclear weapons to attack Israel, which leads the United Nations Security Council to decide military interference in Wadiya. Aladeen travels to the U.S.A. in an attempt to solve the problem, but he is kidnapped, with the help of his uncle, who sends a substitute to replace him at the conference. However, after Aladeen manages to escape from his kidnapper, he meets Zoey, a human rights activist, and later they fall in love with each other. When he confesses his true identity to her, she is shocked and decides to leave him as she cannot fall in love with a cruel dictator. Aladeen manages to reach the conference and tears the document of democratizing Wadiya before the eyes of the world. At the end of the film, Aladeen goes back to Wadiya with Zoey and marries her. He holds the first democratic elections in Wadiya, which are rigged in his favor. Throughout the movie, General Aladeen is represented as a sexier, childish, anti-Western, and a cruel dictator who promotes and sponsors terrorism through having ties with al-Qaeda. Aladeen’s character was inspired by the real-life of Arab/Muslim dictators such as Muammar Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein. Hence, the movie is laden with signifiers that are stereotypes about Islam and Muslims.
There are several good reasons for the choice of this movie. The film provides an opportunity to decipher how these Arabs and Muslims are stereotyped and perpetuated negatively and by doing so these stereotypes contribute to damaging attitudes towards these people. Among the reasons one can say that the film is stuffed with signifiers that are stereotypic of Islam and Muslims : the name “Aladeen”, his long beard, misogyny, anti-Semitism, and anti-Americanism. Another reason for the choice is that the movie adopts the same Orientalist approach of earlier films indicating that the tyranny of Muslims, Arab, and Eastern rulers serves as a pretext for the West to interfere in the affairs of these countries, which is the ultimate aim of Orientalist discourse and Islamophobia. For instance, the reasons for interfering in Wadiya are no different from the given justifications for the invasion of Afghanistan (fighting Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda), and Iraq (fighting Saddam and eradicating mass destruction weapons). Though fictitious and comic, the film presents an identical situation to the real political one involving the U.S. and the East. Hence, it is crucial to address these issues because the perpetuation of harmful caricatures leads to prejudice and discrimination that have dreadful consequences for individuals and communities. To reach the objective mentioned above, film deconstruction through Brunette’s theory will be used.
1. Deconstructing the Movie, The Dictator
Peter Brunette in his “Toward a Deconstructive Theory of Film,” (1986) wrote about how Derrida’s deconstruction theory can be applied to debunk a film. According to Brunette,
Films are based on written scripts which thus can be subjected to deconstruction in addition to the language of the camera that is constructed through signs and symbols, light, camera angles, visual and sound effects, music, and various other complex techniques that carry or transmit certain meanings to the viewers through visual images. Cinematography, after all, is also a form of writing (Brunette, 1986 : 61).
Messages are found in the dialogue, background music, clothing, and other materials used in films that bear certain discourses. The deconstruction of this movie will be done to uncover its underlying meanings and messages to gain a deeper understanding of its misrepresentation of Arabs and Muslims through the identification of the theme, the characters, the setting of the movie as well as the use of language and cinematography.
To start with, the main themes explored in The Dictator include political satire, and social and cultural critique to comment on the state of politics in Arab/Muslim countries, particularly in the Middle East. The central theme in the movie revolves around the struggle for power between General Aladeen and his advisors, as well as his quest to prevent democracy from being established in “Wadiya”. The plot then develops when Aladeen travels to New York to speak at the United Nations, but is kidnapped and replaced by a lookalike, leading to a series of comic misfortunes. The resolution of the conflict is achieved through Aladeen’s embracing democracy and becoming a better leader. Here lies one of the aims of the West to democratize Arab/Muslim countries and to teach them how to govern themselves since they are always seen as unable to do so by themselves.1In the movie, this is Zoey’s task ; an American woman whom Aladeen falls in love with and who later in the film confesses she is of Jewish origin. She is the one who helps him after being betrayed by his uncle Tamir, and she is the one to help him change his mind and accept that his country “Wadiya” embraces democracy. Again, the movie shows that the Orient and Arab countries require the West to civilize them and thus justify imperial involvement in the region.
The portrayal of the characters reinforces harmful stereotypes and caricatures of Arab and Muslim cultures. First of all, the name Aladeen is not new ; it is famous in Western film productions such as Disney’s Aladdin. In The Dictator Aladeen is a villain (killer, sex-crazed, and terrorist), a bad guy in opposition to the good American character. As is seen, post-9/11 movies still foster the images of good versus evil and “us” versus “them”. Aladeen, though a powerful and threatening leader, is portrayed as ridiculous having a long beard, thick hair and black glasses (figure 1), and speaking some gibberish2 language3. Aladeen with his iconic beard is one of the early stereotypical images that appear in the movie and which trigger in the minds of the viewer’s images of terrorists. When the so-called “War On Terror” began, one of the most prominent stereotypes of Arabs and Muslims that combined all the negative characteristics was “the beard or ‘Bearded Terrorists’ and it became an embodiment of evil Arabs and Muslims” (Schmidt : 2014 :137).
Most important is that the movie depicts Aladeen as immature, an immaturity that ironically stands for the political silliness of the Orient as a whole. For instance, Aladeen is introduced to the audience as an immature dictator who enjoys playing games in very critical and untimely situations. Hollywood makes him appear as if he were an irresponsible kid who takes everything for fun. For instance, scene 00.23.42 represents the fake Admiral General Aladeen addressing the U. N. in a humiliating fashion. He delivers a speech on democracy while drinking his urine which is utterly disgusting. As such, the ideology of the film maintains that immaturity is intrinsic to the Arab culture and the Orient. Being immature can lead to irresponsible actions against the West.
Figure1 : General Aladeen, a typical Arab/ Muslim stereotype with his iconic beard
Source1 : https://colibris.link/quxtu Source 2 : https://colibris.link/0D6Aq
Aladeen’s sexuality is also used as a tool to reinforce negative images. He is hyper- masculine and sexually obsessed which propagate the idea that Arab and Muslim men are dangerous sexual predators. He is shown living with concubines and female body guards who are there to obey his orders and satisfy his erotic desires. This is another famous stereotypical image which associates Arab men with sex. When the film begins, General Aladeen’s peculiar and favorite leisure of making love with famous people is introduced to the audience.4 He proudly stands in front of a golden wall in his bedroom and looks at the hundred photos of those people (both men and women) he had sexual intercourse with (scene 00 :13 :57). He seems fascinated with his fulfillment which connotes his worshipping of sexuality.5 An image is worth a thousand words as is expressed in figure 2.
Figure2 : The wall is full of the photos of the women and men Aladeen had sexual intercourse with
Source : https://colibris.link/h47rI
Aladeen stands for all Arabs who are misrepresented as people who are pathetically and pathologically driven by sexual desires. In his “Ideology in Images : We Are Being Framed”, Mikolaj Sobocinski (2001) gives a detailed account of how images present ideologies. He says that images are as much filled with meaning as words since both of them can be perceived just like language and work as a sign for communicating (22). Sobocinski explains that a sign is divided into signifier and signified which leads to multiple levels of interpretations. A single sign may contain several varying meanings that are culture specific. It depends on the choice of the reader of the signified meaning they want to extract from. A picture can be talked of as presenting meaning in a more precise manner because of the multiple elements (signs) involved in its construction. Every culture has its code of values based on which the individuals develop their perception of the world. This is the reason that the interpretation of a message differs from one culture to another (ibid : 22). Moreover, members of the same society might interpret similar information through different sets of codes. This theory of codes forms the basis for interpreting content with implicit ideology at its basis (ibid : 23-24).
In discussing Stuart Hall’s ideas, Sobocinski introduces the concept of a reflective or mimetic approach to understanding meaning. He suggests that meaning is inherent within objects, people, ideas, events, and so on. According to this view, pictures are seen as mere reflections of the world. Hall emphasizes that things themselves do not inherently possess meaning. Rather, it is individuals who use representational systems to ascribe meaning to things. This process occurs gradually and becomes integrated into our cognitive system. Eventually, these constructed meanings take the form of myths, which then become ingrained thought patterns, serving as obstacles in our understanding as by then we have been “framed”. Consequently, ideology and mythology subtly influence our minds in invisible ways, shaping our perceptions and beliefs (Sobocinski, 2001 :27).
Similarly, The Dictator reinforces negative stereotypes about Muslim women. Aladeen’s female bodyguards are portrayed as hyper-sexualized objects that are there to please and entertain Aladeen. This is an old image that goes back to the nineteen twenties’ depiction of the harem girls. E. Said in Orientalism stated that oriental women in Western literature (Flaubert’s) are slaves for pleasure and sex (1978). This image perpetuates the idea of oppressed Arab/Muslim women who need to be “rescued” by Western men.
Some images are related to the setting of the movie and contribute to the construction/representation of the Muslim identity in an Orientalist light. This is very significant as the movie takes place in “Wadiya” as opposed to New York City. Wadiya is portrayed as a stereotypical Middle Eastern country (thought to be situated in North Africa) with palaces, deserts, and camels further exoticizing and Othering Arab and Muslim cultures, and considering all Arab countries as one and same. Figure 3 below displays Aladeen’s palace in the middle of the stretching desert. It creates a stereotypical image that stands for all Muslim countries and their populations living in the desert. It also contributes to Othering the Eastern/Muslim world as backward in opposition to the Western world. New York, on the other hand, is portrayed as a beacon of democracy and progress, reinforcing the movie’s simplistic portrayal of the two political systems. Aladeen lives in a palace of Islamic architecture looking like a mosque (figure 3). The latter is a place for Muslim religious prayer and worshipping. This is a reference to the relationship between the Middle East and Islam as threatening (Islamophobia).
Figure : Wadiya
Source. https://colibris.link/KH7H3
Ironically, when Aladeen travels to America to persuade the international community to remove the imposed sanctions on Wadiya, following the production of nuclear weapons, he and his men arrive in New York on camels (figure 4). The striking opposition between the camels and the cars in the streets of New York City seems to widen the gap between the backward East and the advanced West.
Figure 4. New York City
Source1. https://colibris.link/2Ss58 Source2. https://colibris.link/bP9qY
The movie also portrays Wadiya as a threat to America and the world as it develops nuclear weapons. It represents the anxiety from which America and the West suffer following the terrorist attacks that happened on September the 11th, 2001. This is set at the very beginning of the movie through the news footage
“Tensions are rising as the stand-off between the world community and the rogue North African nation of Wadiya intensified today as U.N. weapons inspectors were once again refused access to the country by Wadiyan leader, Admiral General Aladeen.”
This quote in the narration with real footage6 of the U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq before the American invasion of Iraq in the so-called “War On Terrorism”, creates a link between General Aladeen and the Iraqi president Saddam Hussein who was accused of supporting international terrorism as there were U.S government official accusations that claimed that there was an enigmatic relationship between the Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda.
This representation of Arabs being linked to terrorism or being a threat to the West is one of the classical stereotypes of Arabs in Hollywood that was intensified after the 9/11 attacks. Another symbol that strengthens the country as a threat and enemy is the flag of Wadiya which resembles that of Iraq.
As far as the use of language and dialogue are concerned, we see that the movie reinforces harmful stereotypes and misrepresentations of Arab and Muslim cultures through Aladeen’s fake language, and the use of frequent sexual expressions that render more and more the Middle Eastern culture in exotic, alien terms. Aladeen’s language is harsh and his voice is guttural evoking the image of the violent, angry Arab/Muslim. It is often used as a tool to reinforce the association of Muslims with terrorism as his frequent use of Arabic phrases, such as “Allah Akbar”.
The cinematography and sound in the movie are used to create a humorous and absurd tone. Camera angles, lighting and the music are exaggerated for comic effects. As techniques, they contribute to the reinforcing of destructive caricatures. The movie heavily relies on high-key lighting, which means that there are minimal shadows in the frame, and everything is well-lit. This technique is often used in comedies to create a playful mode and fun. However, it contributes much more to the movie’s misrepresentation of Arab and Muslim cultures by rendering them overly simplistic, one-dimensional, and lacking in-depth analysis. The camera uses low-angle shots to depict the Arab and Muslim characters as powerful and dominant, reinforcing the biased ideas of the latter being violent and dangerous. Low low-angle shot is used in the introduction of Admiral General Aladeen as the supreme leader of the fictional country Wadiya, depicted as a powerful and imposing figure. It is also used in his speeches and public appearances to emphasize his larger-than-life presence. Additionally, the movie uses close-up shots to exaggerate the characters’ facial expressions, emotions and reactions features, such as Aladeen’s beard and clothing which contribute to the orientalist portrayal of Arabs and Muslims as inferior, backward, exotic, and fanatic others. Many other camera angles reinforce Arab/Muslim stereotypes as when the camera focuses on the opulence of Aladeen’s palace and luxurious lifestyle to reinforce the notion of corrupt and materialistic Arab and Muslim societies.
2. Islamophobia in The Dictator : Vilifying Arabs and Muslims
Islamophobia as a word is a neologism constituted of two words; Islam and phobia which means irrational fear; it is not a new phenomenon, too. It dates back to the advent of Islam and the Muslim crusades wherein the West was frightened by Islam to take over Christianity and push the former to conversion. Michael Curtis in his Orientalism and Islam wrote that criticism by Christians of its rival religion was voiced soon after the advent of Islam starting with St. John of Damascus in the late seventh century, who wrote of “the false prophet” Muhammad (PBUH). Rivalry, and often, enmity, continued between the European Christian world and the Islamic world. For Christian theologians, the ‘Other” was the infidel, the Muslim. Islam was generally regarded as false and as the basis of a hostile, different, and dangerous civilization (2009 :31). The intense reappearance of the term in the twenty-first century underscores a new element in the Western relationship with the Muslim world and its new construction of Islam as a whole. As such, Islamophobia can be defined as a new word for an old fear7. It is based on exaggerated fear, hatred, and hostility toward Islam and Muslims that is perpetuated by negative stereotypes resulting in bias, discrimination, and the exclusion of Muslims.
What is noticeable is that the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, had a profound impact on American society, culture, and politics, as well as they have urged this phenomenon to come to the fore, and to become highly politicized and used by and large to declare War on Terror to fight ‘Muslim terrorists’ who are perpetuating terror and threaten the West stability, peace, and national security, but mainly interests.
American citizens developed a heightened fear (Semmerling : 2006) and suspicion of Islam and Muslims which was helped by the media including movies. The Dictator is full of depictions of Arab and Muslim cultures as inherently violent, backward, and brutal as the movie scene starts with news footage about ‘the rogue North African nation of Wadiya’ (Semmerling :25). Throughout the film, the characters are shown engaging in terrorist activities, including bombings and assassinations, which perpetuate the stereotype of Muslims as terrorists. The film also features scenes of public executions for stupid reasons. Overall, the movie disseminates Islamophobic content which adds to the revilement of Islam.
For instance, Aladeen is a threat to the West because he is a dictator who executes everyone who disagrees with him. His character is depicted as megalomaniacal, childish, anti-Western, and a cruel dictator who promotes and sponsors terrorism and the terrorist organization Al-Qaeda, who always surrounds himself with feminine security and bodyguards (a hint to Qaddafi). ‘Aladeen’ is also shown as working to develop nuclear weapons to attack Israel (a hint to Saddam) and so he presents a threat to America. Moreover, He is also barbaric and a terrorist. Aladeen is barbaric ; his dictatorship manner is seen in the way he orders his troop to execute everyone who disagrees with him even for a stupid reason. Aladeen’s representation as a murderous and barbaric killer was introduced from the beginning through a flashback showing him he forgot that he had executed Nadal the former head of the Wadiyan nuclear program after a disagreement about the shape of the nuclear weapon. The following dialogue shows this fact :
“Where is the Head of my Nuclear Program and Procurer of Women ?
Where is Nuclear Nadal’ ?
You had Nadal executed, Supreme Leader.
Why did I do that ?
Supreme Leader !
Nadal. We are just months away from refining weapons-grade uranium,
and we are set to test the missile next week.
It is too round on the top
It needs to be pointy.
Round is not scary.
Pointy is scary. This will put a smile on the faces of the enemy…”8
Moreover, Aladeen also ordered the execution of one of his officers because he was going down the stairs in the opposite direction in front of him. The execution scenes are exaggerated and funny, but the trouble is with the sign of moving his hand on his neck as if he was chopping his head9. Aladeen thus is the epitome of the “Arab murderer” who stands for all Arabs/Muslims as murderers and cold-hearted killers.
The movie goes far in its misrepresentation of Aladeen out of xenophobia and Islamophobia. He is a bomber in the helicopter scene with Nadal taking a tour with two American pilots. Their comic way of speaking renders the situation awkward as the former are suspected to be hijackers. Aladeen and Nadal were speaking about “the 911 new car series”, but the pilots thought it was about 9/11 and so the scene reminds the audience of the 9/11tragedy, Bin Laden, and the terrorist attacks :
“So, how are things back at the Palace ?
Fine, but guess who’s still living in my guest house ?
Ooh, Bin Laden ?
Yes, Osama.
Bin Laden flooding the bathroom, every time he showers...
And how hard is it to put a bath matdown, Bin Laden ?
Hey, do you remember my favorite sports car ?
You mean your Porsche ?
Yes... the 911,
So I was driving my 911 near the palace one day...and I totally crashed !
It’s ok, I’ve already ordered a new one. A brand new 911 2012.”10
The message behind the comic scene is clear : that Arabs are terrorists. The audience is made to believe that Aladeen is a bomber and terrorist and that he stands for the whole Arab/Muslim nation. As such the stereotype of “Arab bombers” is constructed. The 9/11 trauma on the American’s mind and the Islamophobia issue are thus present in the movie as Aladeen is shown developing a nuclear bomb that threatens the USA. Although America possesses nuclear weapons, yet it is not labeled a terrorist country. This again shows Edward Said’s notion of the Western style of domination and having authority over the Orient.
Conclusion
The deconstruction of the movie The Dictator provides a clear vision of the use of Arab and Muslim misrepresentations and Islamophobia. Though the movie is comic and uses humor to satirize dictatorships, it relies on stereotypes and generalizations that disseminate harmful narratives about Islam and the Middle East. By bestowing a dictator as a caricature, the film reinforces worldwide negative perceptions of Arabs and Muslims and perpetuates Islamophobia and anti-Muslim sentiments among the audience. These stereotypes not only misrepresent an entire nation and its religion but also contribute to the discrimination faced by Arab/ Muslim communities in the world. It is high time to critically examine the media content that is being consumed with its potential impact on the audience’s perceptions in an attempt to challenge these stereotypes and biases to give a more authentic representation of Arab and Muslim cultures in Hollywood and media, in general.