I've been meaning to post something very serious and academic about this subject for a while but instead I'll just throw it out there to see if anyone has any comments on it.
We're screening two films in our Visualizing the Sacred: Islam on Film series (and, yes, that link is a bit of shameless self-promotion) which tell the story of the birth of Islam and the life Muhammad, Moustapha Akkad's The Message (1976) and, as a children's matinee, Richard Rich's animated Muhammad: The Last Prophet (2004). In respecting Islamic custom, neither film actually represents Muhammad's physical presence on screen or by voice. He is present in his absence in both films either through off screen space, voiceover narration which relates his words, stand-in objects, such as the camel he's riding on, and POV shots.
I think The Message, in particular, would make an excellent, if long at 177 minutes, addition to any Intro to Film Style/Technique class as a sprawling Koranic take on Hollywood Biblical spectacle that also never once displays its central character on screen or in voice.
As I understand it, the Islamic restriction on images of Muhammad is not something that's found in the Koran itself. Rather it came into acceptance over time as generations of Islamic scholars established the codes and laws of Muslim society, after the fact of Muhammad's revelations. A title card at the outset of The Message explains that the decision not to show Muhammad on screen or in voice was intended to keep the focus on the spirituality of his message, rather than his actual, physical existence. The script actually underscores repeatedly that Muhammad was not divine, as Christian's believe Jesus was, but only a man delivering the message of God.
Muhammad's presence/absence in either film would be a fascinating thing for cinema scholars to explore in class as leaping off points for discussions about cinematic technique. I'm most interested, however, in the use of POV shots in The Message and Muhammad: The Last Prophet. The visual strategies of both films were signed off on by various Islamic councils and scholars. Without wanting to spark some kind of controversy on a subject way outside my wheelhouse, I wonder, if any of these scholars had ever taken a film class -- especially one taught by Vivian Sobchack -- would they have still given their consent. After all, if it's not okay to represent Muhammad on screen, why is it okay to represent his visual perspective? Even if you don't hold to the idea that POV shots necessary identify the audience as the character -- essentially meaning the viewer is or becomes Muhammad -- there are camera moves in both films that suggest an off screen Muhammad standing, running, turning his head etc. essentially embodying his presence on screen.
Even if you haven't seen the films (both are available on DVD) I'd love to hear what your thoughts are on the whole POV thing. And for those of you out there prepping film style and technique classes, I think The Message would be a great addition to any syllabus, as maybe it's time to give Lady in the Lake a rest.
UDPATE: Here's a clip from The Message that shows a few good examples of Muhammad's off-screen presence.
No comments:
Post a Comment