Innocence of Muslims Review and Analysis

Innocence of Muslims reviewed and analysed in as balanced a way as the film possibly allows. Overall, the film is very bad and it is actually quite amazing that it managed to cause so many issues given its lack of quality. Herein, the positives and negatives of the film will be discussed.

Innocence of Muslims

Innocence of Muslims Review

As part of my standard review process I tend to list positives and negatives, but it is a challenge to find many positives with this film. As such, the following section where I list positives must be understood to be an example of me truly reaching.

Positives

Innocence of Muslims Muhammed

The camera work is adequate. The camera’s used in filming seem to have a certain level of quality and the shots are not too bad. They are not particularly creative or inventive, but the camera work is not so bad overall.

Its existence verifies that free speech continues to exist. The film is offensive, tedious and annoying but the very fact it exists suggests that free speech lives. Granted, this may be the very worst possible use of free speech imaginable, but if this can pass basically every valuable use of free speech is also safe.

Negatives

Innocence of Muslims Screen Shot

One of the immediate negatives is that much of the dialogue in the film has been dubbed. The reason for this seems to have been that the actors involved would not have consented to the dialogue. Interestingly, their entire voices are not dubbed over so there are strange pitch and accent changes in the middle of dialogue that gives it a ‘patchy’ feel.

Much of the action takes place on a set with a green screen. Basically, the desert locations are actually super-imposed over the video, giving it a generally low quality feel. This is not just low quality, but the angle of the backgrounds and the actors are wrong, with actors appearing to float.

However, the biggest problem with the film is that it feels aimless. It is very difficult to follow the plot, which seems to occur over multiple time periods that somehow weave together. The problem is that it does not adequately contextualize these changes so that in any given scene it can be uncertain when and where the action is taking place, or who the characters involved even are. It took me a while to grasp which one was Muhammed, and even then I am not sure I have gotten it right.

Conclusion

The film is very, very bad. It simply is not worth getting offended at a depiction of Muhammed in a film that simply fails to reach a level capable of legitimate depiction of anything. The truth is that it is hard to follow the films ‘plot’ and as such I found myself struggling to understand which one was Muhammed for a fair portion of it.

Related posts: