I’ve been reading Clive Cussler’s sahara. The movie was amazingly and entertainingly awful – I had to rent it so I could watch it with Pepper Mill and MST3K-ize it. But I heard there was more in the book, and couldn’t believe it could be as over-the-top as the flick.
Reading the book, I am struck by its description of corruption in the African countries of Benin and Mali – especially Mali.
Did Mali protest this at all? I can see them ignoring the book, but movies have a bigger audience and bigger impact. Right now in the news we have Rwanda complaining somewhat belatedly about the events in Hotel Rwanda, and the Vatican complaining about The Da Vinci Code. Laos complained about Air America. But did Mali ever protest about this? How do filmmmakers feel about making a real country the bad guy (North Korea protested the last James Bond flick Die Another Day – although I never heard a complaint from them about Goldfinger).
Or is it just that Mali’s too poor and too far away? I did a web search on this and found nothing.
Rwandan President Paul Kagame’s criticism seems directed primarily at Paul Rusesabagina’s depiction as a “hero” of the genocide.
Other unnamed survivors are indirectly quoted as being critical of aspects of the genocide as depicted in the film – not mentioning precisely what was wrong with it.
Without specifics, it’s kind of a dismissable criticism. It’s like criticizing Ann Frank’s view of WWII simply because she wasn’t more principal to the conflict.
I lived in Mali for two years and can tell you that it is one of the most stable governments in West Africa. Although there was some unrest some years ago from the Touareg tribes up north, that was pretty much settled. The country’s president is educated and benign. We never saw anything more than a students’ protest while there.
