For a long time the worst film I'd ever seen was Vampire Assassin. It's a movie about a cop that hunts vampires, and in the end gets turned into a vampire. Or something. I only saw it once before my friend set it on fire for being so bad. Now, however, I can proudly (proudly? shame-ed-ly? I don't know how this goes) say that I have seen a worse film than Vampire Assassin. Several times worse. In about a sixth the runtime.
Innocence of Muslims is thirteen vile minutes of unadulterated what-the-hellery. I went in with impossibly low expectations; by the time I was done, I had forgotten what my expectations had been. It's like a reverse Inception. I've seen middle-school productions with more coherence, better acting, and less greenscreen. Was that greenscreen? I don't know, but if it was real sets, it was the fakest looking set I've ever seen ever. I'm going to spoil the movie because it's less than fifteen minutes long. Also I don't want you to see it.
And that's the truth of the matter. I know you know this film is bad, and I'm not going to pretend it isn't, but I don't think you know just how bad this film is. It's not just bad. It's not just horrible It's...it's...I...I'm not sure I can put it into words, but I'll try.
We start off with what appears to be a military person bragging about how his prophet had, "61 wives; 11 at the same time!" and how he even had a girlfriend. He appears to be talking to...someone in a white lab coat. I thought it was a dentist, but apparently he's a general doctor. The military person then goes on to talk about how he wishes his wife would die so he can marry a younger woman. Charming. Or maybe he's just thinking it, because his lips don't move when he says it. And that's the first fifteen seconds of the film! Your first impression! What do you think of the hilarious constable?
Something I have to mention, just because of the sheer oh-god-why-ery is the editing. It's not that the editing is terrible; terrible is understating it. Saying that terrible understates the quality of the editing is giving the film an unearned compliment. It's like the film reel was accidentally dropped into a blender, and whoever put the film back together was stone drunk. Then the drunkard dropped it in the blender again and everybody got pissed off and left. There is no transition that isn't awkward or misplaced, and it would make the film unwatchable even if the cast was made up of a hundred clones of Sir Patrick Stewart filmed on location in Egypt. The editing of the film is by far the worst part of the film, even worse than the ultimate message. Though the message is stupid, it's easy to miss, because the whole film is an incoherent mess. The editing is right front and center, driving thumb-tacs into your eyeballs for giggles for the entire fifteen minute runtime. Unforgivable.
Anyway, a bunch of men with large beards and white robes (who I thought might be the Ku Kux Klan when I first saw them) come over and antagonize the doctor by brandishing weapons, knocking over papers, killing a bystander and threatening to burn stuff down. Oh, there are apparently 1400 arrests, but we don't see that. We learn that the white-robe guys are the Islamic Egyptian Police, and that they persecute Christians and force them to confess to killings they didn't commit. His daughter asks why they'd do this, and doctor says something about taxes. He goes on to say "Man + x = Islamic Terrorist". His voice cracks when he says "Islamic Terrorist" though, and he spells it BT. That sounds to me like a voice insert, but hey, maybe Egyptians go through a second puberty at middle age. He then tells his daughter she has to find out what the X is on her own. The doctor's wife gets no lines. Thought I'd mention that. This is two minutes in, by the way.
We then cut, without any kind of warning, to a pair of burly-looking men talking about a six-year-old fathering a two-year old child. I think the implication is that one of the two men actually fathered the child, but it's just as possible that the people who made this film have no idea where babies come from. They decide to call the child, "Muhammad: The Father Unknown". We then jump to this Muhammad as a young slave. We see him flash his mistress before another cut where he has a beard and is playing what appears to be sexy twister with the same lady. The two of them step outside, Muhammad names a donkey a prophet, I think, and the woman begs a much older gentleman (her cousin) to take pity on the poor soul. He says he'll do this by making up the Islamic holy text. I think, it's not entirely clear on that.
We then cut (again) to Muhammad saying "The inspiration has disappeared" I...have no idea what's going on in this scene, I think there was a war, maybe? Muhammad says he's going to kill himself, and that he's already done it two times before. I've watched that scene six times and I still don't understand what's going on.
We cut again to Muhammad carrying a sword and talking about sacking a city, condoning child prostitution in the process. He goes on to sleep with several married women, justifying it rather feebly, justify genocide (which he's called out on) marries a child (offscreen), kills an old lady, dismembers a guy in front of his wife, and says that all non-Muslims are infidels. Oh, and someone mentions that he's probably a homosexual. And that's the film.
I think this may be one of the worst films ever made by a man. No, I take that back. I'm not sure this is a film. I think this can only be considered a film in the same way that the card that tells you how to play Texas hold-em is considered a playing card. This is a film in the same way Pepsi is an alcoholic beverage. The acting is wooden at best, the most realistic set is a tent, the ice-crusher editing may cause spontaneous human combustion, there's zero pace, and the central message is, "Muhammad is everything you should hate!"
That's another problem with this movie, they portray Muhammad as this horrible human being who happens to be a combination of every terrible thing any human being could possibly be, but they've already shown him to be stupid enough to name a donkey a prophet. Are we supposed to take this seriously? How? Why? Isn't that what they did in Battlefield Earth? How did Muhammad go from can't count the fingers on his hands to military leader of unspeakable prowess without the learning machine?
An importiant question, brought up in another thread is whether or not the film should be considered hate speech [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.389441-Poll-Is-the-Anti-islam-film-hate-speech]. My first impression was that considering the film itself to be intelligent enough to be called hate speech was giving it too much credit. The wikipedia entry for the film [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_of_Muslims], however, has informed me that the Southern Poverty Law Center has all but condemned the film as hate speech, and those guys tend to know what they're talking about, so there's that. Me, I don't know anything about the Quran or the Muslim religion, but I do feel as though the film hates me with a violent passion. It certainly treats me like most of the people who've hated me in my life; punishing me for thinking, punishing me for not meeting it's bewildering expectations, punishing me for questioning it, and never giving me an opportunity to perform well in it's eyes. I wouldn't say people are justified murdering people over the film, but I don't think any human being could watch it without being offended, is what I'm saying.
All in all, I'd give the film a two out of ten. Nah, I'm joking, this film doesn't deserve a scale. Maybe a bad scale. Maybe, like, a bad movie scale. Like, one is Kony 2012 and ten is Schizophreniac The Whore Mangler. But I haven't seen Schizophreniac The Whore Mangler, so I can't rate it. What I'm saying is this is the worst film I've ever seen, or heard of, ever. DO NOT WATCH!
So...nothing you didn't already know. Sorry for wasting your time.
Innocence of Muslims is thirteen vile minutes of unadulterated what-the-hellery. I went in with impossibly low expectations; by the time I was done, I had forgotten what my expectations had been. It's like a reverse Inception. I've seen middle-school productions with more coherence, better acting, and less greenscreen. Was that greenscreen? I don't know, but if it was real sets, it was the fakest looking set I've ever seen ever. I'm going to spoil the movie because it's less than fifteen minutes long. Also I don't want you to see it.
And that's the truth of the matter. I know you know this film is bad, and I'm not going to pretend it isn't, but I don't think you know just how bad this film is. It's not just bad. It's not just horrible It's...it's...I...I'm not sure I can put it into words, but I'll try.
We start off with what appears to be a military person bragging about how his prophet had, "61 wives; 11 at the same time!" and how he even had a girlfriend. He appears to be talking to...someone in a white lab coat. I thought it was a dentist, but apparently he's a general doctor. The military person then goes on to talk about how he wishes his wife would die so he can marry a younger woman. Charming. Or maybe he's just thinking it, because his lips don't move when he says it. And that's the first fifteen seconds of the film! Your first impression! What do you think of the hilarious constable?
Something I have to mention, just because of the sheer oh-god-why-ery is the editing. It's not that the editing is terrible; terrible is understating it. Saying that terrible understates the quality of the editing is giving the film an unearned compliment. It's like the film reel was accidentally dropped into a blender, and whoever put the film back together was stone drunk. Then the drunkard dropped it in the blender again and everybody got pissed off and left. There is no transition that isn't awkward or misplaced, and it would make the film unwatchable even if the cast was made up of a hundred clones of Sir Patrick Stewart filmed on location in Egypt. The editing of the film is by far the worst part of the film, even worse than the ultimate message. Though the message is stupid, it's easy to miss, because the whole film is an incoherent mess. The editing is right front and center, driving thumb-tacs into your eyeballs for giggles for the entire fifteen minute runtime. Unforgivable.
Anyway, a bunch of men with large beards and white robes (who I thought might be the Ku Kux Klan when I first saw them) come over and antagonize the doctor by brandishing weapons, knocking over papers, killing a bystander and threatening to burn stuff down. Oh, there are apparently 1400 arrests, but we don't see that. We learn that the white-robe guys are the Islamic Egyptian Police, and that they persecute Christians and force them to confess to killings they didn't commit. His daughter asks why they'd do this, and doctor says something about taxes. He goes on to say "Man + x = Islamic Terrorist". His voice cracks when he says "Islamic Terrorist" though, and he spells it BT. That sounds to me like a voice insert, but hey, maybe Egyptians go through a second puberty at middle age. He then tells his daughter she has to find out what the X is on her own. The doctor's wife gets no lines. Thought I'd mention that. This is two minutes in, by the way.
We then cut, without any kind of warning, to a pair of burly-looking men talking about a six-year-old fathering a two-year old child. I think the implication is that one of the two men actually fathered the child, but it's just as possible that the people who made this film have no idea where babies come from. They decide to call the child, "Muhammad: The Father Unknown". We then jump to this Muhammad as a young slave. We see him flash his mistress before another cut where he has a beard and is playing what appears to be sexy twister with the same lady. The two of them step outside, Muhammad names a donkey a prophet, I think, and the woman begs a much older gentleman (her cousin) to take pity on the poor soul. He says he'll do this by making up the Islamic holy text. I think, it's not entirely clear on that.
We then cut (again) to Muhammad saying "The inspiration has disappeared" I...have no idea what's going on in this scene, I think there was a war, maybe? Muhammad says he's going to kill himself, and that he's already done it two times before. I've watched that scene six times and I still don't understand what's going on.
We cut again to Muhammad carrying a sword and talking about sacking a city, condoning child prostitution in the process. He goes on to sleep with several married women, justifying it rather feebly, justify genocide (which he's called out on) marries a child (offscreen), kills an old lady, dismembers a guy in front of his wife, and says that all non-Muslims are infidels. Oh, and someone mentions that he's probably a homosexual. And that's the film.
I think this may be one of the worst films ever made by a man. No, I take that back. I'm not sure this is a film. I think this can only be considered a film in the same way that the card that tells you how to play Texas hold-em is considered a playing card. This is a film in the same way Pepsi is an alcoholic beverage. The acting is wooden at best, the most realistic set is a tent, the ice-crusher editing may cause spontaneous human combustion, there's zero pace, and the central message is, "Muhammad is everything you should hate!"
That's another problem with this movie, they portray Muhammad as this horrible human being who happens to be a combination of every terrible thing any human being could possibly be, but they've already shown him to be stupid enough to name a donkey a prophet. Are we supposed to take this seriously? How? Why? Isn't that what they did in Battlefield Earth? How did Muhammad go from can't count the fingers on his hands to military leader of unspeakable prowess without the learning machine?
An importiant question, brought up in another thread is whether or not the film should be considered hate speech [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.389441-Poll-Is-the-Anti-islam-film-hate-speech]. My first impression was that considering the film itself to be intelligent enough to be called hate speech was giving it too much credit. The wikipedia entry for the film [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_of_Muslims], however, has informed me that the Southern Poverty Law Center has all but condemned the film as hate speech, and those guys tend to know what they're talking about, so there's that. Me, I don't know anything about the Quran or the Muslim religion, but I do feel as though the film hates me with a violent passion. It certainly treats me like most of the people who've hated me in my life; punishing me for thinking, punishing me for not meeting it's bewildering expectations, punishing me for questioning it, and never giving me an opportunity to perform well in it's eyes. I wouldn't say people are justified murdering people over the film, but I don't think any human being could watch it without being offended, is what I'm saying.
All in all, I'd give the film a two out of ten. Nah, I'm joking, this film doesn't deserve a scale. Maybe a bad scale. Maybe, like, a bad movie scale. Like, one is Kony 2012 and ten is Schizophreniac The Whore Mangler. But I haven't seen Schizophreniac The Whore Mangler, so I can't rate it. What I'm saying is this is the worst film I've ever seen, or heard of, ever. DO NOT WATCH!
So...nothing you didn't already know. Sorry for wasting your time.
