Encounter Point Film and Positive Messages to the Society - Movie Review Example

Encounter Point Encounter point is an award winning film written by Julia Bacha and directed by Ronit Avni and Julia Bacha. The majortheme of this 2006 film is the ongoing clashes between Israel and Palestine. Even though started in thousands of years before, this clash still remains unsettled, causing major threats to the global peace and harmony. In fact Arab-Israel clash is believed to be a clash happening more of cultural reasons rather than political reasons. Christians and Jews are fighting against the Muslim dominated Palestine or Arabs in Middle East. The film End Point explores the possibilities of settling this bloody conflict with the help of the ideology of non-violence. This paper reviews the film End Point and various themes presented in this film for settling Arab-Israel clashes. Directors Ronit Avni and Julia Bacha were not much interested in labeling this clash as a clash between two equal forces. They accepted the fact that Israel has superior military forces and weapons than Palestine and throughout this film they try to portray this clash as a conflict between two unsymmetrical parties. It should be noted that Israel is a nuclear power and in terms of destructive weapons, Palestine will never come closer to Israel. At the same time, Palestine uses suicide bombers quite extensively to create bomb blasts in Israel’s territories. It is difficult for Israel to prevent such suicide bombers from attacking their people and properties because of the problems in identifying the suicide bombers. Even then, Israel is causing more damages in Palestine’s territories and the directors of this film have no hesitance in accepting the superior abilities of Israel over Palestine. It is difficult to identify the intentions of the directors after watching this film. Many of the viewers are of the view that it is an anti-Israel film whereas many others view it as an anti-Palestine film. In my opinion, the film is far away from keeping any neutrality in it and it is definitely an anti-Israel film. It should be noted that in many scenes in this film, wounded Palestinians appear whereas not a single Israeli has been portrayed as injured in this film. It is a fact that Palestinians are causing some damages to Israel even though the volume of such damages is smaller than that caused by the Israelis. “In one scene, a Palestinian meeting Israeli peace activists says we are waiting to see Israelis who are interested in peace. No mention is made of Israel’s attempts at peace at Oslo, Taba, and just recently leaving Gaza” (Gates). In other words, Palestinians were portrayed as peace lovers in this film and no such labeling was done to the Israelis. The directors tried to create a sense that they are adopting a neutral approach in this film. Casting of “Robi Damelin, an Israeli mother who has lost her son, Ali Abu Awwad, a Palestinian who has lost his brother as well as numerous other bereaved family members and socially conscious Palestinians and Israelis, is as inspiring as it is impressive”(Zachfree). However, there are many instances in this film in which the directors taking sides with the Palestinians. It should be noted that incidents of Israel’s brutalities are plenty in this film whereas same thing cannot be said about the Palestinians. In short, this film is definitely biased more towards the Palestinians. Under any circumstances, it is impossible to say that this film is a balanced one. Even though there are plenty of individual stories in this film, the directors failed miserably to tie those stories together to provide a general theme. At some points, the viewers may struggle to identify the intentions of the directors. A balanced film should have given equal weightage to the brutalities of both Israel and Palestine. Moreover, strong points of both the parties should have been filmed with equal weightages in order make this film more balanced. It is a fact that a neutral observer may definitely label Israel as the major culprit in the Middle East clashes. However, approaching Middle East conflict with such a preconceived mindset may not help the peace efforts through non-violence as described in this film. In order to make both the parties aware of their mistakes and also to force them to adopt the theory of nonviolence for bringing peace, more balanced handling of the Middle East incidents would have helped the directors. As a starting point for the settlement of Middle East conflicts through nonviolent means, I would definitely recommend this video to others. It should be noted that no other recent films handled the Middle East as beautifully as handled by Ronit Avni and Julia Bacha. I am a strong advocate of the theory of nonviolence and therefore I will definitely encourage others to watch this film. Even though Robi Damelin and Israli mother and Ali Abu Awwad, a Palestinian were the lead characters in this film, I do believe that Ali Abu Awwad holds slightly upper hand in this film. Robi Damelin was an indirect victim of this war since she lost her son in this war. On the other hand, Ali Abu Awwad was a direct victim in this war since he suffered many injuries apart from losing his brother. Still Ali Abu Awwad did not stop his efforts to bring peace and harmony to Middle East through nonviolence. It should be noted that Ali Abu Awwad did not stop his attempts to bring peace and harmony in Middle East even though he suffered a lot. In other words, the strength of the theory of nonviolence is upheld by the directors through Ali Abu Awwad. Nonviolent action is not simply any method of action which is not violent. Broadly speaking, it means taking action that goes beyond normal institutionalized political methods (voting, lobbying, letter writing, verbal expression) without injuring opponents. Nonviolent action, like war, is a means of waging conflict. It requires a willingness to take risks and bear suffering without retaliation. On the most fundamental level, it is a means by which people discover their social power (Irwin and Faison, p.2). Nonviolence is a weapon which can be used effectively in any struggles. Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela implemented this theory successfully in their struggles in India and Africa respectively. Many people have the opinion that it is possible to liberate a country from colonial rules only with the help of weapons or bloody wars. They can cite the examples from Libya and Sri Lanka in order to substantiate their arguments. At the same time, it should be noted that a person called Anna Hazare recently forced Indian government to pass a bill in the parliament against corruption through a fasting agitation. In other words, fasting like nonviolent means of agitation is powerful as the gun battle. It should be noted that nonviolence is a weapon available to all irrespective of their financial capabilities. Moreover, this weapon would never cause any damages to the lives and properties of innocent people. It gathers more media attention than a gun battle may achieve and therefore the offenders will be forced to settle the issues. In other words, theory of nonviolence believes in constructive ideals rather than destructive ideals. So, I do believe that nonviolence can be practiced better in solving international disputes. To conclude, Encounter Point is a film which definitely gives some positive messages to the society. In a world which settles disputes with the help of guns, this film asks the public to settle their issues with the help of theory of nonviolence. Works cited Gates, Anita. “Encounter Point (2006) On Opposite Sides, United by Grief”. 2006. The New York Times. November 17, 2006. Web. 10 November 2011. Irwin, Bob and Faison, Gordon. “Why Nonviolence?”. Web. 10 November 2011. Zachfree. “Encounter Point: Film Review”. Web. 10 November 2011. Read More