Talk:Not Without My Daughter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Film Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start
This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
???
This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.

IAM AN IRANIAN ,AND THIS FILM WAS TRUE REPERSENTATION OF ISLAMIC LAWS, IRAN IS BEING DESTROYED BY ISLAM AND AYATOLAH FOR 1400 YEARS, WOMEN IN IRAN ARE BASICLY TREATED AS SLAVES EVEN LOWER, THERE IS NO RESPECT IN ISLAM FOR WOMEN,IRAN WASNT LIKE THIS BEFRE ISLAM or befopre this islamic revelution, im sorry to see my country fallen to lagoon of hate and disrespect in the eyes of the world, Land of the free when cyrus build iran he gave identity to humans ,when we were forced to convert to islam by swords of mohammmad(islamic prophet) respect and iranain culture and humanity were destroyed right then, but we will get our country back ,and we WILL CLEAR IRAN FROM ISLAM AND ARABS RUNNING IT.



I just don't understand where the controversy with this movie/book is coming from. Father makes mother choose "this life" or "life without your child". Seems pretty clear cut to me. Other views? 162.39.180.2 13:49, 25 September 2005 (UTC)Jp

Since the establishment of Islamic regime, Divorced women in Iran have had custody of girls until they are seven, and of boys until they are two. When the child is older than this, the custody right goes to father. The reverse happens in United States. At the moment (after 2003) Divorced women in Iran have custody right of boys up to 7. Yes, in Iran when a couple get divorce, their child will go to father if the child is more than seven years old. -- Sina Kardar 20:12, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd agree, and there are plenty of people who think this film is a fairly accurate representation of what women have to put up with in Iran and other Middle Eastern theocracies. However, there was one user who kept adding partisan commentary to the article, so I added the NPOV tag. ProhibitOnions 15:29, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, I did my best to make the article more objective, say, like taking out some words like "horrific" or something like that. That Betty girl whose last name escapes my mind became one of my heroes when I saw the movie. However, we must also consider that when the tag line says "based on..' it means that some scenes depicted may or may not have happened in real life. That said, I have %200 respect to the woman and the child involved in the case and my hearts are with them for their bravery.

One last word: A scene that deeply shocked me and opened my eyes to what may be going on in some families of the Arab world is when a husband came in and punched his wife just because she was talking to Betty. That really shook me to the core. Its been 14 years since I last saw the movie and I still cant forget that!

Antonio End the violence against Muslim women! Martin 09:07, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

If there exist any propaganda movie in the world, this is the one. The best evidence (for a non Iranian) is that the Islamic regime screened the movie repeatedly in Iran. If the movie had any thing to do with reality or it could somehow induce a feeling against the regime, they would not screen the movie. I myself have seen it inside and outside of Iran a few times. It just induces anti-western feeling in Iranians. You see streets full of mullahs! Teachers who violently separate children from their parents on the first day of school!! A man who is beating his wife in public !!! and violently!! All women look ugly and dressed in black. Everybody is shouting and doing stupid things. The movie was supposed to show one of the most beautiful cities of the country. However it looked like palestine ! You see in the capital of the country, Tehran, that a group of sheep are passing !! Ask people who lived in Tehran for last 50 years!! Nobody have seen such things. In this movie you see very few "good" Iranians. Those "good" are all against regime and anti revolution!! Good peoples have relation with mafia and can help Betty escape the country illegally! Are good and civilized people in Germany and France able to help a person escape their country illegally ??!! Do they have relation with mafias ? There many many more things about the movie. Not without my daughteris not a movie about Iran with some exaggerations or mistakes. It is an awful piece of trash. There are lots of books and movies made by Iranians in exile about Iran or situation of women in Iran. I recommend those. 22:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


I recommend the movie to those who do not know any thing about Iran and do not want to know any thing about it.

So many people in the world have been brain washed by the movie. I am not surprised as the whole knowledge of most of them about iran is that "Iran is Iraq in which q is replaced by n". -- Sina Kardar 19:29, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Not without my daughter was a propaganda movie. Not that I agree with what Dr. Mahmoodi did, even if only 10% of the movie was true. No one should be allowed to treat his wife or child the way he did and he had no right to decide for them where to go and how to live their lives, but the movie was not based on truth and made solely for propaganda against Iranians over all and not against action of one person. I did see both interviews with Betty and Dr. Mahmoodi and it did seem like they both were not truthful. Betty did this because she wanted to sell the book and Dr. Mahmoodi was not truthful either, he did make many mistakes on not being up front and straight forward with his wife and specially his child. I do think Sally Field should be ashamed of herself for having the leading role in this movie and being the puppet of some political agenda. Please see discussions here Movie Discussion -- Sina Kardar 19:44, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Criticism of the book

It would be nice to see some sourced criticism from the Islamic world about this book here. I know it exists; in Alison Wearing's Honeymoon in Purdah, the author recounts several conversations she had in Iran about this book.

The general trend from Wearing's conversations seemed to be anger at Mahmoody's alleged stubborn ignorance of Iranian/Muslim customs and culture. For example, one woman recounted a bit about how Mahmoody was apparently appalled when her in-laws slaughtered a goat upon her arrival, though they intended this as a gesture of warm welcome to her. --Saforrest 07:04, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This article is currently POV

In Iran, there are people who are very conservative (as portrayed in the movie) and others who are much more liberal and westernised. However, all Iranians agree this movie is basically a hatchde job and very much biased. You won't find too many Iranians agreeing with this. The article should be changed to reflect this viewpoint - that the movie is not an accurate reflection of Iranian life or culture. --Commking 03:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Propaganda Tag

The propaganda tag is not justified and is somebody trying to express their opinion about the film. The movie is simply based on the book written by Betty Mahmoody about her own story real life story. Perhaps some folks might feel that the film reflects poorly on the Islamic culture but it is not a propaganda film.--CltFn 04:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

But it has been accused of such: http://www.filmtracks.com/titles/not_without.html. We can't use our own opinions about the movie to determine whether or not the movie is actually propaganda. BhaiSaab talk 04:09, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Then create a category Films accused of propaganda. "Accused of propaganda" and " is propaganda" is not the same thing.--CltFn 04:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
How do you establish that a film is without a doubt propaganda? You'll get people on both sides of the argument all the time. I think that, for the purposes of Wikipedia, they are the same thing. BhaiSaab talk 05:18, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
A film is propaganda only if it meets certain criteria . You would have to establish , that a film was made with the purposeful intent to futher a political view, such as for example a film made by a political or ideologicial party. Farenheit 911 is such a movie or movies made by the German government in world war 2. In wikipedia we cannot sloppily tag articles with a category tag unless they meet the criteria of the category. You yourself have demonstrated an understanding of this concept , when you changed the category of certain books from criticism about Islam to Criticism of Islamism.--CltFn 11:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
The movie is a propaganda film. It is very much different from a criticism. I suggest you see some films from Iranian film directors. They extensively address women rights and oppression of women. But "Not without my daughter" is a collection of lies and the writer tries to take revenge from Iranians. A Lie is a Lie. And propaganda is nothing but distributing lies. Do you expect does who made the propaganda come and say that???!!! The movie was shot in Israel and funded by US and it is against Iran, their common enemy. I have to admit that the propaganda was very successful. From Japan to south america, people have seen it, while they have not seen even one film from highly celebrated Iranian cinema Sina Kardar 18:41, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
US have been very productive in making propaganda films: Category:American propaganda films. US continuously made films against its enemies during the last decades. many of those propaganda films become bestsellers and awarded!! If "NOt without my daughter" was not a propaganda film, there was no need to make a documentary as a responce. Sina Kardar 18:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
The film director of "Without my daughtor" said that the aim of the 90-minute documentary was to "show the lies in the American film and present the real story behind" what turned into an acrimonious custody battle for Mahtab Mahmoody.[1]

Propaganda is nothing but distributing lies. Sina Kardar 19:09, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Not without my daughter" or "Can I leave Iran, please?"

I just saw the movie for the first time and something is becoming clear to me: the filmmaker should have put more emphasis on the wife's legal situation. You see, it happens that I have a foreign wife and a foreign daugther, and they both live with me in my home country, in South America. When we lived in their country, anytime I wanted to travel to my country with my daughter I had to show a permit, signed by the mother, at the border. Conversely, now that we live in my country, anytime my wife wants to travel with my daughter she has to show a permit at the border, signed by me. This means that anytime one parent tries to take the child across the border, he or she is asked by the authorities: "Do the other parent agree with this?" regardless of who is leaving which country. Now, of course my wife can leave my country in the middle of the night is she pleases, after all, she is not an underage woman. But my daughter is underage, and she needs the permit of both parents to cross an international border, at least here at South America. As I understand, the situation in Iran is that both the child and the mother are considered "legally underage". But I was left with a taste that the real situation, in this case, was that Moody was willing to let Betty go, but alone. That situation is exactly the same that we can have here in Latin America should one parent oppose to a family travel, althougth in this part of the world Betty's right to leave would have been guaranteed by law, something that in Iran was up to Moody to decide. Aldo L (talk) 06:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)