Reuters:

American films and TV dramas shot since the September 11 attacks have reinforced screen images of Arabs and Muslims as fanatics and villains, ingraining harmful stereotypes, argues an author on the subject.

In his book “Guilty — Hollywood’s Verdict on Arabs after 9/11″, Jack Shaheen praises some post-September 11 films for offering a more sympathetic image of Arabs and Muslims, who he argues have been castigated for decades by Hollywood…

Odd choice of title, given that, as uncomfortable as the reality may be, Arabs were guilty of perpetrating 9/11:

To observe that is not by default also to assert that every Arab Muslim is a “fanatic and villain”. Yet as 9/11 and a myriad of other “events” demonstrate, some Arab Muslims certainly are. Even Mr Shaheen admits that much:

…Shaheen, an American of Lebanese descent, has examined the treatment of Arabs and Muslims in some 1,000 films, including more than 100 shot since September 11…

…”What is done is selective framing of radicals: people saying ‘death to America’. You cannot deny the reality – there are people who really want to kill Americans. But those are basically the only images we see.”…

Those are “basically the only images” we see. Meaning we “basically” see no positives — a no that presumably stretches to include the non-portrayal of Afghan Muslim positives, non-portrayed by Egyptian born actors.

Of course Mr Shaheen is pushing his latest rather predictable book. So it is unsurprising he may be trying to oversell (no pun intended) matters. Yet it is worth asking in more detail: is the charge substantively, rather than perhaps merely emotionally, accurate?

In fact, given the level of overt nastiness directed at Americans and the West by many Arab Muslims (in particular, because not all Arabs are Muslims, remember) in the last 40 years, and especially since September 11, 2001, it would seem Hollywood has actually let that group off rather lightly. Mr Shaheen has his list. So does Irish writer Mark Humphrys, who has also been keeping close tabs:

Since 9/11, and the declaration by Islamic terrorists of a war on the world, Hollywood is desperate never to show us a single film in which the bad guys are Islamic terrorists…

Mark then supports that assertion with a list of 52 of them, many of which are major box office, or “critically acclaimed” productions. (And, sometimes, both.) Here’s a quick snapshot of part of his list (so far):

31. Death of a President (2006) - The bad guy is .. President Bush of course! And he gets shot!

32. Casino Royale (2006) - The bad guys are … some kind of international “terrorists”. Not Islamists. You know, um, the other kind.

33. Déjà Vu (2006) - The terrorist bomber is … American. Of course.

34. The Good Shepherd (2006) - The CIA are morally dubious - yet again. Couldn’t Hollywood have made just one pro-CIA film after 9/11, before getting back to business as usual? Just one? If Hollywood has made a single pro-CIA film since 9/11, tell me about it here.

35. A Few Days in September (2006) - The bad guys are … the CIA! They knew 9/11 was coming, man!

36. Shooter (2007) - The bad guys are .. corrupt American politicians, corrupt American law enforcement, corrupt American businessmen, etc.

37. The Trial of Tony Blair (2007) - The bad guy is .. Tony Blair! And he goes on trial!

38. The Mark of Cain (2007) - The bad guys are .. the British soldiers in Iraq! Like The Road to Guantanamo, this is the kind of film an enemy propaganda department would make. Has anyone made a single film that is positive about the British troops in Iraq? One? Ever? Tell me here.

39. Die Hard 4.0 (2007) - The bad guys are .. “Internet terrorists”!

40. The Bourne Ultimatum (2007) - The bad guys are … the CIA again!

In his research of 100 films since 9/11, Mr Shaheen has apparently missed all of those. And there are, also, relatedly, all of the anti-war films. In contrast, the list the other way ’round is decidedly shorter.

Picky, picky, undoubtedly. However, Mark’s “baddies” list also includes one film which that Reuters piece quotes Mr Shaheen as stating helpfully provides a “more balanced” — …Shaheen credits films including…Rendition” (2007) for “more complex, even-handed Arab portraits“… — portrayal. Meaning film portrayals of, as Mark writes, “All jihadis [as] innocent family men targeted by the evil CIA,” would seem to be Mr Shaheen’s notion of a film providing “more complicated, even-handed Arab portraits.”

Also, consider how Hollywood stereotypically portrays nearly everyone. Germans and Japanese of 65 years ago (one hardly has to ask)? And then there are Italians (Mafia), Irish (drunks and/ or IRA-fanatics), Russians (commies and now corrupt oligarchs), blacks (impoverished criminals and undereducated morons), Hispanics (drug-dealers and/or illegal immigrants)? And the list could go on.

But Arab Muslims have been singled out unfairly, imagines Mr Shaheen. Undoubtedly, another award will shortly be coming his way.