REVIEW - The Kingdom (2007)

Directed by Peter Berg (whose directorial career has yet to yield anything particularly interesting) and written by Matthew Michael Carnahan (whose writing career thus far amounts to this film), The Kingdom is a living testament to the way in which the American Right has purloined the narratives and language of the Internationalist Left and, as such, it is a deeply chilling watch.

The film begins with a briskly animated if light-weight look at the history of Saudi Arabia from the conquest of the peninsula by the House of Saud right up until the revelation that the majority of the 9/11 bombers were Saudi.  From this we move to a Saudi compound full of American oil workers, defended by what looks like an army and excuses from the oppressive Islamist laws that hold sway over the rest of the country.  From the outset it’s easy to see why the Saudi people might have a problem with these compounds... any Saudi who sets foot in them has a gun stuck in his face and once you’re inside you find people grilling pork products and playing baseball while their American wives look on in swimming costumes.  Essentially, these places are so American that if a European went there they’d probably feel a bit uncomfortable... imagine such a place dumped on your doorstep and defended by a legion of aggressive and paranoid soldiers.  However, this point is seemingly lost on Berg who plays up the “innocent victim” angle when a group of terrorists turn up and start shooting up the place before blowing themselves up, waiting for the emergency services to arrive and detonating a second bomb so huge it doesn’t so much beggar belief as bugger it.  Needless to say, there was an FBI agent at the scene... though why the FBI have a man in Saudi Arabia in the first place is never explained and it makes what comes next seem a little strange.

Back in the good ole US of A, an FBI agent is holding court as the news comes in detailing casualties and whatnot.  The mood is aggressive and vengeful and the agents are horrified that the Saudis and the State Department won’t allow the FBI to send in a load of FBI agents to clean up the mess.  This prompts studly FBI agent Ronald Fleury (Jamie Foxx) to threaten to arrest a load of Saudis living in America and miraculously and despite State Department protestations, a team is allowed into The Kingdom to investigate the bombing.

When the team arrive, the jokes about Saudi culture begin and then don’t let up until the film ends.  The film mocks the fact that Saudis aren’t used to foul language, it mocks the fact that they’re uncomfortable around women in tight T-shirts and push-up bras, it mocks their inability to speak English, their religious views and their internal politics.  This is not a film that embraces the Other, instead it points fingers and laughs at it “Hur hur... they’re not like us!”.  The team struggle with Saudi politics as the sympathetic chief of internal security has been sidelined in favour of a military man with no skill at investigation.  Scared of being shown up, the general blocks the FBI’s investigations prompting the FBI agents to steal evidence and play politics.  Incompetent brown people out of the way, the team work out that terrorist mastermind Abu Hamza is behind the crimes only for him to infiltrate the Saudi military and snatch one of the FBI men and drag him off to a housing estate where they’re going to film him having his head cut off in the style of Nick Berg.  Needless to say, the FBI turn up, blow the place to shit and save their friend, killing Abu Hamza in the process.  The film then ends with a couple of weird scenes where it is revealed that both the FBI agents and the terrorists share the desire to “kill them all”.

Let me begin with the positives.

Firstly, the film’s action sequences are rather good.  Berg has clearly taken a page out of Paul Greengrass’ Book of Bourne and the film’s action has a realistic feel to it thanks to good sound-effects and nicely put together shaky-cam filming.  Despite being really quite long, the action scene (that takes up the last 20 minutes of the film) is never dull... something I can’t say about The Bourne Ultimatum ironically, whose repeated foot-chases literally had me nodding off.

Actually... I say “firstly” but that really is where the good stuff ends.

The film’s characterisation is something between laughable and insulting.  Foxx’s character is an adroit politician, a lethal killer, an expert investigator and he is loved by his men and any passing children.  In short, he’s an absolutely empty Mary Sue of a character.  Foxx is a charismatic sort but his laid back style and cutting edge dress-sense clash with the idea of his being an FBI agent.  FBI agents tend to be incredibly white bread... Foxx looks like R. Kelly.  Jennifer Garner is the token female agent who exists solely as a foil for the wacky Saudi misogynists.  Watching this film really did bring home to me quite how silly the claims are that a) she’s a beautiful woman and b) she’s a good actress as she hardly acts at all and walks around with a face like a slapped and chronically under-nourished arse.  I think she must weigh as much as one of my legs and is only half as sexy.  Jason Bateman of Arrested Development also appears in a piece of cynical casting as he exists purely to excrete largely unfunny one-liners and to be captured (naturally... he’s Canadian).  Bateman is a really great actor but to say that he has nothing to do in this film is an understatement... it’s not even clear why he’s been taken to Saudi Arabia in the first place.  This leaves the two remaining leads, who do actually make a bit more of their limited roles.

Ashraf Barhom does well as the put-upon Saudi security officer.  His part is written in an ultimately submissive manner in that he begins hostile to the Americans but gradually comes to like them and in so doing the film reveals more about his character.  Despite this, I think he provides the film’s stand-out performance.  This is saying something as the final lead is Chris Cooper has spent much of his career as a character actor playing largely rugged southern parts such as that of the Orchid collector LaRoche in 2002’s Adaptation and The Kingdom finds him back within that comfort zone.  However, Cooper also appeared recently against type as a treasonous Catholic FBI agent in Billy Ray’s excellent Breach.  Cooper is good in this film, don’t get me wrong, it’s just that he can be so much better and so much more than a grizzled Southern stereotype.

The performances aside, what is most disturbing about this film are its downright neo-colonial politics.  The Saudis are portrayed as backward, corrupt, inefficient and almost wilfully ignorant.  One cannot win over a Saudi through reason, only through flattery and threats.  This kind of lazy racism is utterly unacceptable given that films such as 2005’s Syriana flew in the face of it and 1999’s Three Kings actively engaged with it and attacked it.  In 2007 such outright ignorance and xenophobia cannot be explained through carelessness, only through deliberate choice.

This is where The Kingdom really comes off the rails as its opening sequence suggests that this is a political film interested in the subtleties of Saudi-American relations.  It is not.  The Kingdom does a very good job of pretending to be an intelligent film; filling itself with political figures, hinting at political situations and featuring lots of supposedly sympathetic scenes featuring terrorists and their families.  However, look past the way the film is shot and you’ll find nothing but astonishingly right wing pro-American ideas.  Diplomats are portrayed as corrupt and decadent, politicians are self-serving immoral crooks and the only reason anyone might raise objections to Americans blowing the fuck out of a poor Saudi neighbourhood is because they are somehow corrupt or secretly in league with the terrorists.  Even the film’s final scene, comparing the American and Terrorist sentiments of “Kill ‘em all” does nothing but reinforce the “Clash of Civilisations” mentality and ethos that the film plays up to relentlessly.

Indeed, despite pretending to be interested in the politics of the Middle East the film is ultimately all about a willingness to exchange a short-term tactical victory in favour of lasting strategic damage in the War On Terror (or TWOT for short).  The film shows no conception of the idea that maybe, blowing the shit out of a neighbourhood full of civilians might kill a few terrorists but guarantee that dozens of non-terrorists will be injured and therefore prone to thinking that the Americans are butchers.  On this level, the film is a complete and utter fraud.

Another weird decision the film makes is referring to the chief Terrorist as Abu Hamza.  For the record, Abu Hamza is a real guy and is currently in prison not because he blew up people but because he preached violence and hatred. 

Between the hook and the one eye, it’s difficult to imagine that the makers of the film might not have heard of the real Abu Hamza.  I suspect that the name choice was deliberate and based around the fact that a lot of people will have heard the name and associated it with some kind of terrorist.  It’s a bit like if there had been a Cold War film that featured a Left Wing terrorist called Michael Foot and as such is a very strange piece of writing.

On the whole, The Kingdom is a nicely directed but ultimately fraudulent piece of film making that tries to disguise knee-jerk nationalism and xenophobia as something more thoughtful and challenging and in this respect comes dangerously close to being outright propaganda.  The film’s under-written plot is barely held together by some poorly written and thought out characters far more dependent upon the likeability of the actors than upon anything in the script.  Avoid.

Comments

[Liam]

Apart from being surrounded by armed guards why should any Saudi be offended by American compounds? I have a mosque "dumped" in my hometown. The people who go there dress very differently from me and the Mosque itself has architectural stylings that make it stick out like a sore thumb. Many of the Mosque attendees eat halal meat which I consider a unnecessarily cruel form of butchery. Furthermore many at the Mosque do not speak English or mix with the local community. However, I feel no animus toward any of these people.

Strangely enough you can build a Mosque both in the UK and the US. The same cannot be said for the building of a church in Saudi Arabia.

Why should eating pork and wearing bikinis, behind closed doors cause any offense. And why would any European feel uncomfy? Unless of course they start from an anti-American point of view.

[Jonathan McCalmont]

It's rubbing it in their faces.

You have people who are incredibly poor but who are trying to lead good lives within the teachings of their religion.

Meanwhile you have the westerners who live lives of incomparable luxury seemingly flaunting every one of God's laws AND they have the state defending them.

I don't necessarily agree with their feeling agrieved but I can certainly understand it.

[Liam]

if you want to talk about rubbing stuff in peoples' face that surely should apply firstly to the House of Al-Saud. The sheer opulence of that family is mind boggling. I lived in London for many years and one of the sights that sticks in my memory is the rear entrance to the Selfridges: the street was always jammed with Mercedes limo's picking up vast quantities of goods for Persian/Arab clients. At the time I was a penniless student. I felt no animosity at all. In fact that sight would usually prompt me to go to the Edgware road for a feast of Middle Eastern food.

After I read your review I did two things:

1. Saw the movie. Average action malarky. I did not see the clash of civilisation point as you did. I saw it as an expression of the futility of the fight between civilisations. I thought the most sympathetic character was the Saudi police colonel: a devoted family man who abhorred bad language and wanted to avenge the deaths of all who were killed, not just his own men.

2. I spoke to the landlord of my local pub. I know he worked in Saudi Arabia for many years after leaving the Air Force. Pork is impossible to get hold of in "Saudi", as he calls it, unless you know someone with black market connections. Second the compounds are usually quite small, and have few guards. Guarding has increased since the 'war on terror' started but it is usually low profile. Most foreigners keep a lowish profile, women do not drive and cover up when out in public. As for poverty, the poorest in Saudi are the immigrant workers from Pakistan and the Philippines or those Saudis from those areas or clans not favoured by the elite.

To single out Americans as an understandable source of grievance is unfair. For me it would be best if all Western Governments decided not to prop up the Al-Saud family and left immediately.

I also question what living a good life is. I cut and pasted the following from Amnesty International's 2003 Report on Saudi Arabia:

"The gravity of this discrimination was highlighted in March by the death of 15 girls and the injury of dozens of others during a fire at a school in Mecca housing 800 girls. There were concerns that the girls may have been victims of the strict application by the Mutawa’een (religious police) of the policy of segregating the sexes. Some eyewitnesses said that the Mutawa’een prevented the girls from escaping because they were not wearing headscarves and because their male relatives were not there to receive them. The Mutawa’een were also said to have prevented rescuers from entering the school because they were men. The government denied the involvement of the Mutawa’een, apparently on the basis of an investigation it had carried out. AI called for a transparent investigation into the incident and the bringing to justice of anyone responsible for the deaths. It did not receive a reply."

[Jonathan McCalmont]

The Compound in the film is clearly stylised. Ludicrously so.

I grew up knowing people who lived and worked out there and the impression I got was that even though you could do what you wanted to inside the compounds, you still behaved yourself simply because you're a guest in someone else's country.

The compound in the film has Americans doing everything that's liable to offend the local Saudis. Frying pork sausages, sitting around in bikinis, drinking beer and playing baseball.

I'm not sure what the director was trying to achieve with all of that as no real compound is anything like that. I suspect it was going for sympathy with Åmerican viewers, hence my interpretation of the film as pro clash of civilisations.

[Broom]

Abu Hamza? Weird.

Is there any possibility that the guy they are referring to is not the hook-handed preacher but rather this chap? -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Hamza_al-Muhajir

If so, it's still pretty presumptuous. The guy isn't dead yet, after all...

[Jonathan McCalmont]

Nah... the character's fictional. It's just weird that they'd choose such a high profile name as "Abu Hamza" and then not draw any attention to the similarities.