« Still alive, not dead (bis) | Headaches »


December 12, 2005

On Syriana

Having just seen this film, I thought I might make a comment or two.

Overall, a very interesting film, I rather liked it. Somewhat on the dramatic side, as relatively large budget film has to be, but very nicely done overall. I shall not pretend to review the film as a film reviewer, but some thoughts on its MENA subject matter and small details that pleased me (as well as displeased), from someone who operates in this kind of world.

What follows will have direct reference to the film’s events, “spoilers” to use that silly precious little phrase. Don’t want to read them, don’t read on. For those who may want to see the film, my summary is I found the film to be a very nice rendition of affaires here in my region, although to be sure dramatised.

First, the name is quite stupid, and I have no idea why they chose it.

Second, some thoughts then on the details, which overall pleased me immensely.

As a general matter, as this is the world I travel in, I found the details were quite accurate. Dramatised to be sure (above all the oil business side), but spot on in general style. For a dramatisation, I would say there are few movies that I have seen that touch on my world that have been as ‘right’ as this in a general sense.

Among the small details I particularly enjoyed, the fact that in large part they got the Arabic right, right down to dialects (Other than the Gulfies often spoke with a Shami accent, but then lots of the elite Gulfies really do, due to education – although on the other hand I am not strong in Gulf dialect so I may misjudge this) pleased me immensely. George Clooney’s several Arabic lines were really quite well done (I presume his Farsi was equally well delivered, at the very least it did not sound grossly wrong), on the other hand Alexander Siddig gargled several of his lines; his Arabic sometimes left something to be desired. I also presume the Urdu among the Paki workers was well done, but I am no judge of that. I note that in wandering around online that the subtlety of getting the nationality of Gulf menial workers right (non-Arab) was lost on most, for I saw numerous comments taking them for Arabs.

These are tiny details of no real consequence, other than underlining a remarkable and laudable attention to detail. While probably lost on 99 percent of the audience, it speaks well to the background work put into the film. Indeed the film captured the dynamic of the guest worker culture in the Gulf quite well, another subtlety that I think was lost on almost all viewers, although in many ways quite important to the socio-economic challenges there.

I also note that Dubai was a nice stand in for a generic “Gulf Emirate” although I rather thought some of the scenes must have been shot towards Sharjah, although given my highway and hotel knowledge of Dubai I am not the best judge of that.

Casablanca was its usual decent self as a Beirut stand in, although I recognised the neighbourhoods they were shot in (if I am not mistaken, Derb as-Sultane and certainly downtown. I note I have an apartment not far from the hotel depicted. It amused me immensely, the hotel in question is well known as a Gulfie whoring hotel).

As to the plot, there were some fairly stereotypical items such as the evil oil company story line, although this was not terribly overplayed. I could have done without the evil corporation sub-text, but on the other hand it is childish to deny influence peddling and the like existence, and for better or worse the kind of world that energy firms have to operate in region is a corrupt one. Perhaps I misread this, my pragmatism and amorality leading me to accept that that in fact one can not be Snow White and do business around here. Nor should one be dirty up to the elbows to be sure. As longer term readers know, I am not a huge fan of the US foreign corrupt practices act prissiness, as it criminalises things that would be best left out in the open and perhaps forced to declare as a matter of business. I note in passing I liked the portrayal of the due diligence process. Anyone who has sat in such rooms should have enjoyed that.

I also found the implication of CIA involvement in assassination of heads of State also was a bit overdone, above all in direct connexion with oil company interests. On the other hand, films do have to be dramatic, so I was inclined to forgive this little hook. It was just ambiguous enough to give it a pass for dramatic license.

Among the items I most disliked was the idealisation of the elder Emir (although this was conveyed as the interpretation of the Energy Analyst, a good character, so one can take it in many ways including his gullibility and wanting to make his son’s death meaningful – again the film was subtle), but less so on his wanting to do good, but the economics of his proposals and the pretension that new export lines and state driven developments would somehow of necessity revolutionise the ability of the Emirate or whatever to capture more of the value or diversify. The overall implication that somehow it was the US or foreigners that have held back the Gulf from developing better, more diversified economies struck me as the worst, most anti-Globo-ish left nonsense to be found in the film, followed by the implication that somehow an oil firm was directly controlling US policy for the MENA region.

However, they did make good story lines and they have enough of a grain of truth that overall the story had a rather more plausible ring to it that virtually any other film on the region I have seen in a rather long time.

Indeed, for the thoughtful viewer coming to the film without particular ideological axes to grind, with the exception perhaps of the CIA hit on a sovereign and the possible idealisation of the same figure, there is much to reflect on here from a pragmatic stand point, most specifically with respect to the necessity of dealing with

The reality of the region is rather less-than-pleasant, and the film does bring that home. If one leaves aside the under current of conspiracy – although not entirely, for conspiracy is indeed how many things get done in the region – it poses proper questions. The US, GB, Europe, etc. have to do business with the Gulf and will have to do more so in the future. Yet there are many overlapping agendas, and I would say few understand them well. Further to that, one’s short term interests for getting certain things done run counter to one’s long term interests for change. Where should the balance be struck?

There are important questions, as is the degree to which dependency on hydrocarbon based energy obliges one to be involved with a terrible tar baby. While I am sure many of my colleagues with Right views will be somewhat annoyed by the stereotypical oil-company-CIA-USG axis undercurrent (although I might add the economist/analyst quasi hero is rather unusual and unleftish), I would advise letting this slide in favour of the occasion to reflect on the real questions and challenges.

Regardless, an interesting film.

Posted by The Lounsbury at December 12, 2005 08:49 PM
Filed Under: Biz - Private in MENA , Business , Economics , MENA Region General , Politics - EU FP , Politics - Foreign Policy , Politics - US FP

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.aqoul.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/2194


Comments

Comment Subscription

Email Address: