After the Cannes Film Festival and Carthage cinematographic days (JCC)the Egyptian film Eshtebak (Clash) by Mohamed Diab was screened at Cairo Film International Film Festival (CIFF) in the section New Egyptian Cinema (New Egyptian cinema), in the most total indifference on the part of the Egyptians.
What can we say aboutEshtebak?
We can already say that it is a very very beautiful film on all fronts. The scenario is original, the staging is excellent, the actors’ game is very fair, the characters are well studied and well described, the rhythm of the film is very good, no relaxation at any time…. Everything was perfect, except perhaps the conclusion or the message of the film, on which I have a few reservations after the forced cohabitation with the Islamists that Nidaa Tounes imposed on us.
Tom Hanks Facebook status recommending that you see the film.
Last May, Eshtebak had opened the “Un Certain Regard” section at the Cannes Film Festival. During the ten days of the festival, everyone was unanimous to say that the film is excellent. The “Hollywood Reporter” had described it as “jewels” and the American star Tom Hanks had started by publishing a status on his Facebook page to recommend to the spectators to find a way to see this film which “must be seen” and then sent a personal letter of congratulations to the director, letter in which he had said that rare are the Americans who see in Egypt something other than the pyramids or the terrorists That spectators will finally see that all of humanity is a fragile community but that we are all “inside” together. He also congratulated the director, the whole technical team and all the actors for this beautiful work.
Congratulations letter from Tom Hanks to Mohamed Diab
Then it was the consecration to the JCC where Eshtebak won four prizes:
– One in the parallel section : Prize of the African Federation of Cinematographic Critique (FACC), Nejiba Hamrouni Prize for the best feature film.
– The other three prizes in official competition ::
- Silver
- Best editing for Ahmed Hafez
- Best image for Ahmed Jabr
These prices are widely deserved.
Technically, Eshtebak is a feat. It was indeed completely turned in a limited space. A van has been reconstructed in real dimensions, and the whole film is shot inside this van. Eight months of rehearsals were needed before you start filming. It was necessary at the time of filming that everyone was in a very precise place. Then the camera never got out of the van space. Even when you see the outside, it is always filmed from inside the van, so that the camera only shows what the prisoners themselves can see.
Inspired by a real fact, this closed -door, all the events of which take place inside a van is quite unusual. He recounts the confinement of various arbitrarily arrested people during the 2013 demonstrations and who will be forced to cohabit together. These people come from various backgrounds and each have its own history, its past, its ideals, its hopes …
At the very beginning of the film, when they will find themselves in this same space, these people will all be wary of each other, then, little by little, will form two different groups of people: Islamists and others (civilists). These two groups will start to tear each other apart, to accuse each other, to insult … But gradually, they will discover themselves. They will understand that violence is useless, will become united with each other and will realize that in order to be able to survive in this space that they are forced to share, they must find common ground.
I think that is the message that the two Diab brothers, co-scriptwriters of the film wanted to pass: we are different, we have different projects and dreams, but we are forced to share the same space and must therefore try to find a way to live there together, our destiny being the same. The problem is that these two co-prescribers were not very objective.
They have indeed a little too embellished the Islamists. There is certainly true when we see the latter more organized and more disciplined than civilists, but the film insisted too much on their misfortunes, on their qualities and on their human side until they make them a little too nice compared to others. The film is a bit unbalanced in this plan. This was also the main reproach made to this feature film by the Egyptians who rather received the film. And I would say they are not quite wrong. A large controversy took place during the cinema release in Egypt. The Egyptians are also divided between their pride of having such a beautiful film which is so successful abroad and which represents them in the race for the Oscars and the fact that they reject its too honeyed side with regard to the Islamists.
It is true that Eshtebak has insisted too much on the human side of the Islamists. In order to promote the Entente for better cohabitation, the writers have actually a little too much and were also accused of subtly supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and even being camouflaged “Ekhwen”. The co-scriptwriters refuted these accusations and even specified that at one point in the film, a member of the fraternity had led the van and entered a wall. By this image, they would have wanted to say that when the Islamists had taken the reindeer from the country, they had been unable to carry him out safely and had found themselves trapped.
As said above, the humanitarian message of the film is in itself noble. We are indeed condemned to live all together, with our differences, in an enclosed space (here the van, but we can also understand within the same country), we are all humans, let us try to understand ourselves, to forget our differences and to help us to be able to live.
This is the message. Is it achievable?
Personally I don’t think so. The Tunisian experience proves it perfectly. In appearance, we can speak of understanding and cohabitation, but it is only an appearance. An Islamist, and any extremist besides, cannot accept to leave everyone the freedom to live as he sees fit, it is contrary to the very essence of his societal project. For an Islamist, all humans must comply with the law of God as he himself interpreter.
And if in Tunisia, apparently there is a peaceful cohabitation and even a political alliance to govern the country, in reality, Nahdha is insidiously changing our society. For example, she puts many subjects on the carpet that we thought, like that of polygamy or customary marriage. It is changing the decency criteria, to make a separation of the sexes in public places…. Nahdha is changing our society almost without our knowledge and one day it will be too late!
What is the solution?
Obviously the repression is to be completely excluded.
But how can we make Islamists and civilists cohabit who have completely opposite social models and aspirations?
Neïla Driss
Read on the same subject:
