Review of "Shake Hands with the Devil"

[snowywolfowl]

 The second movie review of the night takes us from the blood soaked fields of Belgium in WWI to the blood soaked fields of Rwanda in 1993. In “Shake Hands with the Devil” Quebecois actor Roy Dupuis plays General Romeo Dallaire, the commander of the ill-fated UN peacekeeping mission to Rwanda. Over the course of 100 days Dallaire and his men bare witness not only to the horrors of organized genocide but also the indifference such events were met with by the world at large. Throughout the massacre Dallaire pleads time and time again for reinforcements to stop the atrocities unfolding around him, only to be met with refusals and troop withdrawals.

The acting here is very good. Dupuis is very convincing as Dallaire, showing the man's transformation from optimism that the ceasefire between Tutsis and Hutus can hold, to frustration with the indifference of the world to the massacres, to finally emotional collapse into PTSD, despair, and a failed suicide attempt. The supporting actors are also quite good and well utilized by the screen writer and director, especially in the scenes where Dallaire is speaking to the therapist treating him after his diagnosis with PTSD. Their presence in the room, while at first a little confusing, becomes a very effective Greek chorus to reflect and explain the events unfolding before us, and oh, what events they are.

As “Shake Hands with the Devil” sits squarely within the genocide film genre it is full of disturbing imagery. Civilians slip on blood before being taken away to be killed, children's bodies lie in the path of UN vehicles and so must be pulled to the side for the convoy's to pass, and perhaps most horribly the sound of machetes hacking into people is never too far away. Through all of this the impotence of the UN to do anything is showcased again and again, with Dallaire's telling one high ranking Hutu officer that “the world will not approve” being met with complete contempt and disdain. In another scene an injured Tutsi woman, her family dead, when being told that the UN cannot use its guns to stop the killings demands of him “well what good are you then?”. While it would be easy for the writer to have slipped an answer in the decision to have no answer at all most accurately shows the value of the mission to the victims of the genocide.

It's this last point that is probably the most painful about this movie, and the one that should provoke some soul searching among those of us watching dramatizations of such events from the safety of our own living rooms. If this movie raises any questions its not “is UN peacekeeping a bad idea?” but rather “why do we spend resources (money and lives) for peacekeeping in countries we don't care about?” As is pointed out in the movie Rwanda, for all its death toll, is a forgotten and ignored operation. Instead it is Bosnia that commands the lion's share of the military, political, and humanitarian resources. When one considers that several peacekeepers lost their lives in Rwanda to accomplish practically nothing it would seem that answering that question is the least we, as citizenry, can do.

As for the victims of this and future genocides, we already have the answer.

 

 

Comments

[telemeister.livejournal.com]

You are made of sterner stuff than I, old lad. I would be v. upset by such a film. My sweetie got the first season of Little House on the Prairie for Christmas and I am turning into a delicate thing, fluffy at the edges.

[snowywolfowl.livejournal.com]

Ah, Little House on the Prairie! I remember reading all the novels as a kid, and watching that on the tv. Not a bad series, if just a little too sweet and syrupy for my taste.

I don't think I'm made of any sterner stuff than the next person, and to be honest, I hate watching genocide films. My sitting through two hours of atrocity is usually more an act of respect for the victims than anything else, and its a rare film that gets a second viewing. It's just too horrible.

In this case though I was really interested in how this important piece of Canadian history came to pass for a few different reasons. The first is that the whole idea of UN peacekeeping missions was started by Canada and for many years we were among its most vocal supporters. With this in mind I was interested in seeing the dramatization of Gen. Dallaire's experience because its potential for Canadians to reevaluate the "hows" of peacekeeping. If Canadians take anything away from this I would hope that it wouldn't be for a blanket end to humanitarian efforts but rather an honest reevaluation of what can and cannot be done. Simply put the United Nations cannot stop a genocide in a non-strategic location because it will never get troops with the material and political backup to fight. It will never happen. It didn't happen in Rwanda, and it won't happen in Darfur or anywhere else. Heck, Canada can't even convince NATO allies in Afghanistan to allow their troops to fight the Taliban. This means that if we as Canadians want a genocide to stop we would have to be prepared to foot all the bills, in blood and material, and frankly, after a decade of non-stop operations in Afghanistan our army can't do that. It's just not that big.

So, really, it wasn't the whole genocide thing that I wanted to see. It was more about seeing a movie portrayal of what pretty much is the end of UN peacekeeping as we know it.