海角大神

In November 2001, Mohamedou Ould Slahi was approached by the local police in听his native Mauritania and told that the 鈥淎mericans want to talk to you.鈥� Suspected of high-level involvement with the 9/11 hijackers, he was detained and eventually imprisoned without charges in Guant谩namo Bay by the U.S. government. The intermittently compelling 鈥淭he Mauritanian,鈥� which draws on Slahi鈥檚 bestselling 2015 memoir 鈥淕uant谩namo听Diary,鈥� and stars Tahar Rahim听as Slahi and Jodie Foster as his chief defense attorney, Nancy Hollander, dramatizes the 14-year ordeal leading to his release.

Director Kevin Macdonald and his screenwriters, Rory Haines, Sohrab Noshirvani, and M.B. Traven, offer up this volatile material, including torture scenes, in the straightforward manner of a legal procedural. Presumably the filmmakers decided that the injustices could speak for themselves without any pumped up filmic pyrotechnics.

What pulls the movie out of its stylistic complacency is Rahim鈥檚 performance as Slahi. Best known for his role as the Muslim mobster in the prison drama 鈥淎 Prophet,鈥� Rahim holds the screen even when he is seemingly doing nothing at all. His presence is like a force field. Rahim鈥檚 cagey underplaying clashes with Foster鈥檚 hypertense emoting in many of their scenes together. And yet these scenes mostly work anyway because the dynamic between them is so clear-cut. Hollander is furiously driven to restore Slahi鈥檚 civil liberties. Professing his innocence, Slahi nevertheless believes he is already condemned. 鈥淲hatever I say,鈥� he tells her, 鈥渋t doesn鈥檛 matter.鈥�

Hollander sues the U.S. government on Slahi鈥檚 behalf. Under the Freedom of Information Act, she requests a warehouse full of files pertaining to his case (most of which turn out to be redacted). But, to the film鈥檚 credit, she is not highlighted as the great liberator. Hollander and her assistant Teri Duncan (Shailene Woodley), who initially doubts Slahi鈥檚 innocence, are ultimately subordinate to his saga.

听

In some ways, the most compelling legal figure in 鈥淭he Mauritanian鈥� is Hollander鈥檚 adversary, Lt. Col. Stuart Couch, the Southern military prosecutor assigned to the case and who is powerfully played by Benedict Cumberbatch. (And yes, his Southern accent is just fine.) Couch鈥檚 good friend died in the 9/11 attacks and he relishes the prospect of trying Slahi. But as the evidence mounts that Slahi鈥檚 鈥渃onfession鈥� was obtained by torture, Couch, who has a deeply held 海角大神 faith, refuses to participate in the proceedings in 2004, ending the prosecution and making him a pariah among his colleagues. Even so, it would take until 2016听for Slahi to be released from Guant谩namo, which remains open.

In the film鈥檚 end credits we see footage of the real Slahi seemingly enjoying his freedom, listening happily to a Bob Dylan recording. We are also shown clips of the other main protagonists. For me, this common docudrama practice unfairly undercuts the authenticity that preceded it 鈥� reminding us we鈥檝e been watching a bunch of impersonators.

In the case of 鈥淭he Mauritanian,鈥� this choice also brought up a larger question for me: Should Hollywood dramatize incendiary political subjects of recent memory at all? It鈥檚 the same question I had when 9/11 movies like 鈥淯nited 93鈥� (2006) came out. It鈥檚 how I felt about 鈥淶ero Dark Thirty鈥� (2012), which, unlike 鈥淭he Mauritanian,鈥� didn鈥檛 even take much of a moral position on the torture we were witnessing. (Tellingly, I had no such qualms while watching Errol Morris鈥� 2008 Abu Ghraib documentary, 鈥淪tandard Operating Procedure,鈥� perhaps because what we were witnessing wasn鈥檛 鈥渞eal,鈥� it was real.)

It鈥檚 not simply that it鈥檚 鈥渢oo soon鈥� for such movies. That鈥檚 highly debatable. More to the point is that the stark reality of these explosive events as we live through them 鈥� in the news, in real time, on TV and through investigative documentaries 鈥� potentially outflanks any attempt to dramatize them using embellished scenarios听and famous actors.

I raise this issue also because it鈥檚 only a matter of time before Hollywood inundates us with pandemic-themed dramas.听I鈥檓 not saying such headline-grabbing movies should not exist. But in these times especially, we need to ask more of Hollywood. An efficient procedural like 鈥淭he Mauritanian鈥� has its place, but what we need now 鈥� what we require 鈥� is the singular power that only art can provide.

Peter Rainer is the Monitor鈥檚 film critic. 鈥淭he Mauritanian鈥� opens in theaters on Feb. 12 and is expected on streaming platforms in early March.