The FBI and CIA aren't exactly working with each other and, even when they
do, the situation rapidly deteriorates.In desperation the Army are brought onto the streets, military law is imposed,
curfews ensue and the local Muslim population are rounded up, dumped in
makeshift prison camps whilst suspected terrorists are tortured and killed.
To the American people this has been a shocking and frightening film, both
because of the danger that terrorism could pose to America and the threats to
civil liberties which a military presence can cause.
The Muslim community has been outraged; the choice of Islamic terrorists as the
enemy has not been welcomed, especially as the USA and Britain were,
quite happily, bombing the s--t out of Iraq and Baghdad as the film was
released.
I personally wasn't offended by their choice of bad guy. Almost every
country exists under a threat of extremist activity, the IRA, ETA, KPP, Algerian
activists, the Tamil Tigers and so on, and many in the Islamic World have
threatened action against the Western World.
With the sad rhetoric issued almost daily from the White House and Iraq it
would be fair to say that The Siege was seen as propaganda within the
States by a great many people.
The film itself tries to distance itself from such accusations, pointing out
that the Muslim community as a whole isn't considered terrorist by nature and
showing that an out of control army can be brought to heel. Indeed, the
dangers of letting the army lose in New York is superficially covered, but the
real moral issues aren't explored to any great extent.
I have great sympathy for those Muslims who are already having a difficult time
being further alienated by the film from those who have seen this, almost, as a
call to arms against Islamic terrorism.
Others have been shocked and stunned by the imagery of how life under military
law and during terrorist activity is affected; I wasn't particularly moved.
Perhaps a political understanding of such scenarios, and having been caught up
in a number of civil disturbances in the UK, where I have seen how the police
really behave, has left me desensitised.
Although realistic, and conceptually frightening, the film left me with a
feeling of, "Yeah, so what ?". Ignoring the facts of terrorist attack and
military control; there was very little that the film actually said to me
that I didn't know already.
Despite that; the film hung together very well. The exploding bus scene was
the highlight of the movie although the film felt a little longer than it
actually was.
Pre-release hype had led me to believe that great swathes of New York had
been been closed off during the making of the film. I may be mistaken but
a lot of the scenes looked like they were shot at the same location with
a lot of re-dressing of the set; note the slab like building at the rear
of the exploding bus scene, is it the same one which appears in the exploding
theatre set ?
The, also hyped, bridge check-point was almost pathetic, it looked like an
unused slip-road, and the lack of scale throughout the film was a little
disappointing.
But, as I have said, the film did hang together well.
Treating the film as a rally cry against terrorism may be a little unfair; it
does criticise the extreme responses that can, and indeed do, occur in the
aftermath of terrorist attacks.
Unfortunately, especially in America, I believe there are many who, whilst
waving their Star Spangled Banners every time a Cruise missile is fired at
Baghdad, will see this film as justification for continued attacks upon Iraq,
elsewhere and the Islamic people as a whole.
As the film, in passing, tried to point out; there are two sides to every
story.
