Hollywood’s Upcoming Movie “Beirut” Checks Off Every American Stereotype About Lebanon

The trailer for Jon Hamm’s latest movie, titled Beirut, and produced by Bleeker Street, was released yesterday. The movie, set in 1982, tells the story of an American officer who finds himself back in Beirut 10 years after his family was killed there to save a friend of his who works in the CIA after he was kidnapped by some Islamic terrorist organization.

In theory, and the fact that the movie is written by the same people behind The Bourne trilogy, this sounds like something that could be fun. Except, once again, an American Hollywood studio decides to whitewash the civil war of a city, and turn its entire struggles about the past and hardships of a white man, who is out of place among the savages he’s forced to exist with.

Here is the trailer:

A Qandahar-esque city ravaged by war: check.

Oriental music with no clear of origin: check.

English spoken like only Americans think terrorists speak English: check.

Mosques on the silhouette of every city shot: check.

Brown kids running around with guns: check.

A terrorist Islamic organization that doesn’t actually exist: check.

The movie not only omits any Lebanese presence in it, but bends the history of the country and of the era that it portrays to make it conform with exactly what Americans think of the city and of the political factors at play. Suddenly, the Israelis are the knights in shining armor trying to save Beirut from its own people, while white Americans roll in to save the day once more.

Those Arabs in the movie? Barbaric savages. Their cities and where they live? Hellholes. Their entire lives? Reduced to kids running around cars with plastic guns.

A movie filmed in Morocco, with no Lebanese cast, with no Lebanese input, with no Lebanese insight – and named after the capital city of a country, while it makes sure to perpetuate the exact notion believed by the people in the country where this movie will most advertise itself.

Representation matters. And this is most important at a time when some creature like Trump is president, a creature that believes any country that is not European is a shithole, and every immigrant from a country that isn’t Norway and friends is a disgrace to his country. In the movie, Beirut, the notion that Arabs are people that exist in an endless circle of violence is perpetuated once more, whilst ticking off every white American’s notion of orientalist Middle Eastern realities. Even the tag line of the movie is “2000 years of revenge, vendetta, murder. Welcome to Beirut.”

Did anyone tell these people that revenge and vendetta are the same thing? Or that the 2000+ year history of Beirut is not about revenge, vendetta and murder, but that a city older than the oldest entity in their country is not summarized by what they think is true of it.

What’s worse is that you’d never find a Hollywood movie, say, that is set in New York portray nothing relevant to the city and be named after it. You’d never find a movie set in any “white” European city negatively portray that city as a terrorist infected haven. Instead, all portrayal tries to stay as respectful as possible to the history of the place they’re showing on screen.

We do not get that courtesy.

I don’t know how Beirut looked in 1982. I was not born back then. But my parents were alive and well back then, and this is not the city they knew. Even in its war-torn buildings, and its own struggles. Even our airport back in the 80’s didn’t look the way it was portrayed in that movie’s trailer. They can’t even afford us historical accuracy – but what do you expect from producers who think all Middle Eastern countries are the same, and that filming a movie in Morocco to portray a city thousands of miles away is fair enough and accurate.

The worst part about the movie is that this is an American take on the Lebanese Civil War – to a certain extent at least – while the war itself had nothing to do with them. And then the release date of the movie is set to coincide with the 43rd anniversary of the Lebanese Civil War, on April 13th.

Dear Hollywood, I understand you have a growing need to be “woke” these days, but being “woke” also involves being aware that other people’s countries and cities are not free reign for you to appropriate into movies whose only purpose is to further perpetuate what you believe is true about those places and those people, as well as fill your pockets with money at their expense.

I, for one, will be boycotting this movie when it’s released, and I invite every Lebanese to do the same. Using our capital but filming somewhere else, using our people but using other nationalities, using our heritage but using other languages, accents and music, and white-washing our entire struggles to fit into the cute boxes that would never oppose the notions of the typical American movie goer, while reinforcing what they think of us, is not okay.

Advertisements

46 thoughts on “Hollywood’s Upcoming Movie “Beirut” Checks Off Every American Stereotype About Lebanon

  1. Seems to be a typical product of today’s Trump style America. I’ll be boycotting this movie too.

    Like

    Reply
  2. This is not the first time Morocco has allowed Hollywood to use its country to produce anti-Arab films negatively stereotyping Arabs and Muslims. This is condemnable and shameful of the King and his government for allowing this racism against his own people.
    I think Lebanon should raise this important issue in the Arab League to pass a resolution obliging all Arab countries to refuse Hollywood to shoot films which stereotype Arabs and boycott films and companies which do so. Enough is enough.

    Like

    Reply
  3. It would be great if you can add a Criticism and controversies section in Wikipedia about this and put a link to your blog.

    On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 1:18 AM, A Separate State of Mind | A Blog by Elie Fares wrote:

    > eliefares posted: “The trailer for Jon Hamm’s latest movie, titled Beirut, > and produced by Bleeker Street, was released yesterday. The movie, set in > 1982, tells the story of an American officer who finds himself back in > Beirut 10 years after his family was killed there to s” >

    Like

    Reply
  4. For sure this film will be a big failure since the film name is Beirut and it was filmed in Morocco, no Lebanese Actors, the story is not realistic as shown in the trailer and as well the Lebanese have already succeeded in having movies about this period “War Period” and their success was international.

    Like

    Reply
  5. Why are we ashamed of our past? I’ve lived that era and what I saw in the trailer is exactly what I lived and passed through.

    Unfortunately, at that time some Lebanese did consider Israel as the knight in shinning Armor that was here to liberate part of the Lebanese from others whom they considered as not Lebanese.

    I will not go into the story plot; I’ll just confirm the settings and atmosphere which we passed through in that time.

    From the damaged buildings, the chaos, to kidnappings of westerners, to Israeli invasion , to gunmen in the streets. I saw nothing in the trailer that I didn’t live in particular in 1982.

    For sure the movie might be biased, but from what I saw it’s not biased against the Lebanese; but against a certan part of our history that included militants who might have or might have not been Lebanese.

    Here is my input

    A Qandahar-esque city ravaged by war:
    Correct. Examples: Down town, mount lebanon, parts of achrafie, e c.. several areas in Lebanon during civil war. Buildings were damaged like that either due to internal wars, or due to Israeli aerial bombardment which both demolished whole neighborhoods that looked exactly like what you saw in the movie . We’ve lived them and seen them.
    A building is now left out standing (war museum) to act as a reminder of how Beirut was.

    The airport night have not looked like physically what was shown in the trailer, but for sure it wasn’t controlled by the Lebanese authorities

    Oriental music with no clear of origin: check
    No comment. And not important.

    English spoken like only Americans think terrorists speak English: correct .
    Unfortunately many of the fighters were actually university or students in schools. Lebanese have always been known to be literate and some many languages.

    Mosques on the silhouette of every city shot: check.
    No comment

    Brown kids running around with guns: correct .
    Many kids were running the streets with guns, in reality to this date you see them in Palestinian refugee camps.

    A terrorist Islamic organization that doesn’t actually exist: correct.
    Irrespective of the word terrorist and it’s definition (based on whose side a person is with) We had many Islamic and non Islamic organizations (many of still exist in Lebanon today) .

    In conclusion, we should actually use this as a reference and show how dirty the war was to avoid th mistakes of th past.

    Like

    Reply
  6. Why are we ashamed of our past?

    I’ve lived that era and what I saw in the trailer is exactly what I lived and passed through.

    Unfortunately, at that time some Lebanese did consider Israel as the knight in shinning Armor that was here to liberate part of the Lebanese from others whom they considered as not Lebanese.

    I will not go into the story plot; I’ll just confirm the settings and atmosphere which we passed through in that time.

    From the damaged buildings, the chaos, to kidnappings of westerners, to Israeli invasion , to gunmen in the streets. I saw nothing in the trailer that I didn’t live in particular in 1982.

    For sure the movie might be biased, but from what I saw it’s not biased against the Lebanese; but against a certain part of our history that included militants who might have or might have not been Lebanese.

    Here is my input

    A Qandahar-esque city ravaged by war:
    Correct. Examples: Down town, mount lebanon, parts of Achrafieh, etc..

    In several areas in Lebanon during civil war Buildings were damaged like that either due to internal wars, or due to Israeli aerial bombardment which both demolished whole neighborhoods that looked exactly like what you saw in the movie. In fact the part where he was walking down a street full of torn down buildings is exactly like downtown then.

    I’ve lived through them and saw them.

    A building is now left out standing at Sodeco (acting as a (war museum) as a reminder of how Beirut was.

    The airport might have not looked physically like what was shown in the trailer, but for sure it wasn’t controlled by the Lebanese authorities and militia tanks roamed around it.

    Oriental music with no clear of origin: check
    No comment. And not important.

    English spoken like only Americans think terrorists speak English: correct .
    Unfortunately many of the fighters were actually university or students in schools. Lebanese have always been known to be literate and know many languages.

    Mosques on the silhouette of every city shot: check.
    No comment

    Brown kids running around with guns: correct .
    Many kids were running the streets with real and toy guns, in reality to this date you see them in Palestinian refugee camps.

    A terrorist Islamic organization that doesn’t actually exist: correct.
    Irrespective of the word terrorist and it’s definition (based on whose side a person is with) We had many Islamic and non Islamic organizations (many of still exist in Lebanon today) .

    In conclusion, we should actually use this as a reference and show how dirty the war was to avoid the mistakes of the past.

    Like

    Reply
  7. Well said, and we shouldn’t just boycott the movie, the government needs to object on it or send an official disclaimer to the producers at least to make a statement. Media should do something as well, we can’t stay passive as always.

    Like

    Reply
  8. Excellent cast in a stupid story.
    Where are the Lebanese and who are these black kids with AK47?
    Are we watching Somalian kids in Qandhar Afghanistan? 😁😁😁
    How many mosques did we have in the southern suburbs? The shooting platform looks like Kabul as it reminds me with Chuck Norris’ Delta Force who sneaked through the underground in 1982 which was built in the southern suburbs in 1988 😁😁😁

    Like

    Reply
  9. ”I don’t know how Beirut looked in 1982” *writes whole article about how Beirut was so pretty in the middle of war*. Lebanese are the most salty people ever when it comes to saying bad things about their country. Get over yourself.

    Like

    Reply
    • I don’t know who you are to talk about this but i don’t care either, nobody said it looked ‘pretty’ it was war, the people suffered from it. But lebanese people are people not terrorists out to get usa and israel who destroyed our arab countries and took over because americans just can’t mind their own business. This is our country, beirut is our capital, this is our history. So not only is it our right to defend it but also our patriotic duty.

      Like

      Reply
  10. It needs to be understood that hollywood is the entertainment branch of the military – industrial complex and that the judeo-christian empire has been in a state of perpetual warfare with the islaminc caliphate since they first made contact about 1500 years ago. From the “sheik of araby” on down, hollywood has consistently painted a negative image of arabs.

    http://www.mapsofwar.com

    Like

    Reply
  11. It is totally inappropriate nor acceptable to portray a city in a damning manner, with totally in accurate information and with borrowed characters that bare no resemblance to the people of the country!
    Such movies should be banned internationally in support, leading the ones behind the movie to pay a price for their actions.

    Like

    Reply
  12. I believe the lebanese must – not only boycott this movie- but even sue the director and the producer for distorting the heritage , history and image of this country .

    Like

    Reply
  13. I was a civilian in Beirut in ’82 and ’83, during periods known as “cease fires.” Haven’t seen the film, so don’t know how the city itself is portrayed. But, for the benefit of readers who don’t have an uninformed political bias, but who do understand the not-so-subtle distinction between the “wild, wild leftist Hollywood” and the contrasting relatively conservative opinions of most Americans outside of Southern California, stick to the critique of the film. Either that, or educate yourself politically.

    As the advice goes, better to remain silent and have some think you’re stupid, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

    Like

    Reply
  14. America’s motion picture industry had sunk into decadence and depravity a decade ago. Unfortunately Western viewers,particularly, the America’s are predominantly peanut brains that are insidiously subjected to programmed brainwashing strategy that is intended to promote militarism and a Rambo syndrome. Now with Trump at the oval office militarism has taken a leap to the forefront of his political thinking. His infatuation with military, bordering on obsession, constitutes the gravest danger to mankind and is tantamount to a ticking Time bomb. The motion picture industry over the past two decades has been actively involved in promoting US militarism and US omnipotence. One word describes this best: SICK.

    Like

    Reply
  15. That’s unfortunate. I am no so offended though, because when we stop caring what Hollywood and white Americans think of our country and us, then our actual identity might start coming out. This obsession with what the West thinks to be true of us is just another sad call for attention from us to be liked by the very people who really don’t even like themselves.
    Who cares what a Suburban mom or dad in the midwest thinks of Beirut?

    Like

    Reply
  16. It should be stopped and they should ban it’s release. If someone made a movie about tel Aviv or about any other US ally and changed the facts, the culture, the history etc..it would be banned. This is a cultural and historical crime, and we have had enough of hollywood and their attemots at brainwashing every generation with their lies and fabrications. Enough is enough. We should make movies about them, their savage criminal white men that masacred, pillaged and committed genocide against the native americans…white mans burden! We should make movies about how the zionists stole land, killed hundreds of innocent people and continue to seize land, kill unarmed civilians and try to claim their history and culture as their own. Why cant we have our own hollywood that debunks all their lies and attempts at making the rest of the world seem like a terrorist nest when in reality israel is a terrorist state and the US has more american terrorists than the rest of the world! Look up the definition of terrorism, then tell me where you feel more terrified.
    Enough hollywood, enough zionist lobby, boycott them all

    Like

    Reply
  17. I’ll just pay 1.5 dollars for this when it’s leaked online. I’ll watch and laugh about this with friends over a nice fat join of sweet blonde Lebanese hash.

    Like

    Reply
  18. Pingback: Jon Hamm, negociador contrarreloj | Las Horas Perdidas

  19. I respectfully disagree on many points.
    Obviously American producers don’t do enough research to give countries the courtesy of showing their peculiarities that differentiate between them. And it is more related to bad production than to seeing Middle Eastern as inferior that they show a wrong airport, bad Arabic, etc. Case in point, the actors are not the best ever.
    But on the point that Beirut in 1982 was not a mess and our parents never saw it this way, it’s wrong. The city’s population decreased by half in 2 years.
    Not looking at the why and when, only facts: American diplomats, heads of intelligence services, journalists, 500 marines were killed, and finally the dean of AUB in 1983.
    So on the point that Americans were not concerned, of course they were, whether it was their business or not to be there.
    We like and want to see our city as great and open, and it is in many ways, but our history is what it is.
    And the most ironic thing is that the article uses “Qandahar” to describe how the Americans turned our city into a stereotype, while using “Qandahar” as one. Wouldn’t Afghanis like to show the beautiful and open aspect of their city as we do?

    Like

    Reply
  20. Notwithstanding the appalling English syntax, a well written and on the whole, correct commentary. I too will be giving this one a miss, albeit that the movie looks well made – of course the terrorist organization is fictional, it’s called fiction. Actually, parts of west Beirut look neater than the real thing!
    OliverA, NYT, Achrafiyeh, Beirut

    Like

    Reply
  21. Gosh, the man who wrote this story is still trapped in his past..And have not dealt with his own demons; Mister scriptwriter I feel so sorry for you…may your soul be enlighten with Love and forgiveness
    Enough war, enough terrorism, enough Drama… time to move forward and write a true story about Lebanon…

    Like

    Reply
  22. I am stunned by the level of stupidity of my fellow Lebanese. Not all of them of course. Mainly the falsely emotional and irrational ones. Those are outraged and show their obfuscation at the movie: Beirut, judging that it portrays Beirut and the Lebanese unfairly.
    Those Lebanese are totally delusional and in serious denial. In the 80′ (period of the fictional story inspired by true events) this is what Lebanon was about!? Suicide bombings, kidnapping of foreigners and hijacking of civilian planes. Irrespective of the level of your outrage, history cannot be counterfeited.
    It is like Germans being outraged by a movie showing the horrors of the Nazis in the 30′ and 40′.
    Some over zealous are pointing to a plot masterminded by Hollywood elites to discredit Lebanon. Those should seek firstly knowledge and secondly professional psychiatric help.

    Like

    Reply
  23. You calk to boycott ! Clearly creates nore marketing for these people! They should be sued ! Petition to demand the government to take action is what I beleive should be done

    Like

    Reply
  24. Boycotting it in Lebanon won’t make a difference, as it has worldwide reach. On the contrary, it should be released to allow Lebanese to criticize it and defend the real values of Lebanon.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s