[Marxism] Muhammad film: Israeli director goes into hiding after protests

dan d.koechlin at wanadoo.fr
Wed Sep 12 14:00:30 MDT 2012

I watched the trailer for the "Innocence of Muslims" movie on YouTube.

The acting is abysmally bad, so bad that one wanders on what exactly the 
supposedly $5 million production costs  went.

That the film is meant to cause offence to Muslims is obvious. IT is 
it's only goal.

But the depiction of Muhammad as a petty warlord, intent on pillaging 
settlements, raping women and children before selling them as slaves is, 
despite all the idiotic slapstick "life-of-Brian-like humour", basically 
correct. As far as I can see, the narrative does not deviate 
substantially from what is recorded in the hadiths.

The mores of the 7th century Arabian Peninsula were brutal and cruel, 
and that is unfortunately a fact that present-day Muslim apologetics 
must come to terms with. "Innocence of Muslims" is an "ignorant film" 
because it is meant to infuriate Muslims, not because it displays 
blatant ignorance of accounts of Muhammad's life and times. Muhammad was 
indeed beset by "Djinns" and prone to periods of profound 
despondency/depression, he did indeed order his men to rape captured 
women, he occasionally enjoyed the companionship of young boys 
(pederasty was normal at that time, as is recorded in the hadiths) 
although the term "gay" is really anachronistic, he did complain of not 
being able to keep his numerous wives from bickering, etc.

Of course, similar portrayals of the main protagonists of the Old 
Testament would make for equally gruelling viewing for a modern audience 
: murder, rape, humiliation, extortion, torture, enslavement, ...   The 
LORD telling the children of Israel to put to the sword every last 
inhabitant of Canaan would be just as unpleasant to watch, if an 
Anti-Zionist small budget director were to take on the project.

But again "Innocence of Muslims" is so crude, so badly written, the 
actors so amateurish, the cutting and editing so haphazard, the sound so 
grotesquely unmixed, the costumes so hideously anachronistic, that it is 
not a movie at all. IT is a youtube video, first and foremost, and 
cannot have cost more than $100,000 if that.  I have seen better films 
shot by my high-school students. IT is just a kick in a hornet's nest 
which was designed to go viral over the internet.

More information about the Marxism mailing list