Review Tales

The 2004 movie Hotel Rwanda is one of the more unfortunate cases of taking Steven Spielberg’s Schindler’s List approach to recount a genocide. This is not an issue limited to this movie alone. Hollywood typically falls on a “one man braving all odds to save the day” angle whenever there is a real-world tragedy. I imagine such simplistic “lone wolf” narratives feed into that individualistic, exceptionalism value many Americans cherish. In actuality, tragic events like the Holocaust and the Rwandan genocide were about a breakdown of civilization; these were moments in history where mankind’s ugliness went unchecked and his worst impulses were fed.

By making it about one “heroic” man or men who did the right thing, the insurmountable weight of what happened feels flattened and a little too comforting. This is not to say Schindler’s List or Hotel Rwanda are comforting movies, but that the hero’s journey and arc takes center stage, while the atrocity itself becomes background dressing. The largely Western audience these movies are aimed for, are rarely shown the full scope of what happened and why, partly due to an educational gap in the filmmakers, or more cynically, a marketing decision to not make the consumer-audience feel too complicit.

The Individual vs. The Collective in Western Disaster Narratives

One need not look further than the countless disaster blockbusters Hollywood churns out. The main characters in such movies like Independence Day, Godzilla and King Kong to name a few. These fictional spectacles are usually about a divorced scientist or a war veteran with personal issues disjointed from the bigger calamity taking place. Western media has conditioned its audience, and by extension the rest of the world, to invest in a romance or a family in peril to feel any connection with the events taking place.

Even a maritime disaster like the Titanic has entered the public consciousness as one of the greatest love stories told. Whether it’s disaster movies or giant monster (Kaiju) movies or retellings of real-world atrocities, I will forever be an advocate for having the collective be the focus, rather than the individual. This approach generates a level of scale to the conflict, giving the calamity in question a strongly felt presence that demands audience engagement. 

The Watered-Down Retelling of the Rwandan Genocide

The plot of Hotel Rwanda revolves around Paul Rusesabagina (Don Cheadle), a Hutu manager who wheels and deals to hide hundreds of Tutsis at the luxurious Hôtel des Mille Collines during the 1994 Rwandan conflict. Paul lives a happy life with his Tutsi wife Tatiana Rusesabagina (Sophie Okonedo) and their three children. But when Hutu military forces initiate a campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Tutsi minority, Paul is compelled to allow refugees to take shelter in his hotel. As the United Nations forces pull out, Paul must struggle alone to protect the Tutsi refugees in the face of the escalating violence later known as the Rwandan genocide.

The Academy-Award nominated screenplay was co-written by Americans Keir Pearson and director Terry George, who wrote in consultation with the actual Paul Rusesabagina. And therein lies my issue with the movie. I have no doubt in my mind that George and Pearson had the best of intentions, but the script about this African tragedy was watered down and rinsed for a Western audience accustomed to a certain way these types of stories go.

Is Paul Rusesabagina a Heroic Figure or a Profiteer?

Unsurprisingly, there’s recent evidence to suggest the character Don Cheadle plays wasn’t so noble as this film would have us believe. Interviews with over 70 people who had stayed in the titular Hotel during the Genocide provide an alternate take to the portrayal of Paul Rusesabagina as depicted. This is still contested, but there are accounts of Rusesabagina forced refugees to pay for their rooms and all of the food which was given to them; he was said to have cut off communication lines to the hotel which were located outside his own office.

Indeed, Paul was a prominent member of Hutu Power politics, alleged to have handed a list of refugees over to the Interahamwe forces and broadcasters. Indeed the UN soldiers were believed to have played a larger part in helping the refugees. These allegations haven’t been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but when refugees and even UN Peacekeepers don’t have much positive to say about the man, it kinda brings into question his character when you watch this Hollywood production!

The Role of Radio in the Rwandan Genocide

A fact about Rwanda’s genocide that has always stuck with me is that the ruling party caused much of the deaths using radio. A lot of the killings were done by ordinary people who were urged by their media to get out there and exterminate those who were defined as a threat. RTLM (Radio-Television Libre Milles Collines) became the genocidal radio, dedicated entirely to entertainment and genocidal propaganda. It even had pop music, and was very much in keeping with the youthful spirit of the militia movement at the time. 

Each broadcast was increasingly xenophobic, egging ethnic Hutus to massacre ethnic Tutsis (along with any Hutus who disapproved). The speed of the genocide was remarkable: neighbours who had shared dinner the night before killing each other; children killing their playmates. No one has killed that many people that fast, not since Hiroshima and Nagasaki! A tribal call to arms can get really ugly really fast! 

The Unspoken Truth of the Rwandan Genocide

This is the unsanitized truth of what happened in 1994 Rwanda! Tutsis were labelled with dehumanizing language (cockroaches) and much worse on late night local radio programs. It started out clandestinely until it gradually came out in the open. Imagine being up in the morning, listening to local weather & sports and suddenly advice on how to report or butcher your neighbour! This is what the banality of evil looks like.

But you wouldn’t quite get that with this film! It’s the unspoken alligator under the bed when you take a real-world event and make it about one moral man’s struggle. History is rarely ever that clear-cut. That’s why unflinching, unsentimental biopics by the likes of Martin Scorsese or Steve McQueen continue to endure; because it is always important to depict a thing for what exactly it is.

A Flawed but Necessary Movie

Nevertheless, Don Cheadle gives a moving performance as Paul – seriously the man can do almost anything! He is the anchor that grounds everything! Hotel Rwanda is by no means a bad movie, on the contrary it brought public attention to one of the most monstrous events of the 20^th Century. But in so doing, the movie falsely promotes a man, who for all intents and purposes was a genocide profiteer, as a “hero”.

There has been a resurgence of interest in Hotel Rwanda, which means this will be the entry point for many unfamiliar with the Rwandan genocide. I still recommend this movie as a primer into this awful moment in time – but I implore folks to watch with an open mind and read more about the history from other credible sources.