Four Lions

I'm a big fan of the work of Chris Morris. As far as I am concerned he is one of the few people who actually gets what satire should be - topical, biting, true to life and, if need be, cruel. So it was with some anticipation that I sat down to watch his film on suicide terrorism - Four Lions.

The basic idea behind is both striking and spot-on. The reality is that jihadists are not the sort of robotic, fundamentalist warriors depicted in many TV shows and films. They are often inept, shallow and very human. More often that not terrorism - and not just Islamic terrorism - succeeds more through luck than judgment. This is what Four Lions showed in detail - the contradictions of the bombers, their inability to agree on just about anything, and the fact that their bombings were a farce from beginning to end. In a country where many see an ruthless army of Islamic militants waiting to be awakened, this film depicts a scenario far closer to reality - a bunch of incompetents, largely ignorant of the religion they are meant to be fighting for, succeeding in creating death and confusion only after their hastily conceived plan goes wrong.

The odd thing about the film, though, is just how tame it is. The first half of the film - right up until the suicide bombing of a sheep - feels a lot like an episode of Last of the Summer Wine with added cussing and nail bombs. Yes, I get that it is meant to be exploring the mundanity of those involved in the plot, but the end result is that the film seems very sedate and, at times, almost meandering and unengaging. The fact that these people are incompetents doesn't mean that their attempts to produce bombs should be devoid of tension. See Zero Day for a film that deals far more effectively with people both living normal life and simultaneously gearing up for a killing spree.

The film only really comes to life in the final third, as the "plan" (such as it is) goes into action, and then almost immediately falls apart. The heavy handed, lethal policing, the general incompetence of the bombers and the fact that their attack ultimately ends up being confused and unable to hit their actual targets makes for a very watchable piece of cinema - simultaneously tense, funny, uncomfortable and an accurate representation of the idea that neither terrorists nor police are ever truly in control of these sort of events. Its a shame that the rest of the film couldn't have been like the final third.

It is also a shame that the biting edge to much of Morris's work is missing here. It is almost as if he has decided that making a film about suicide bombing is enough - the controversy is a given, and therefore he doesn't have to raise his game. Which makes this, overall, a bit of a missed opportunity. This film didn't - and couldn't, really, given its structure - provoke the sort of reaction and debate as his paedophile Brasseye special did. What would have been far more effective is to do the whole thing as a Brasseye or The Day Today news flash about an ongoing terrorist incident occurring on the day of the London Marathon, complete with inappropriate media observations, ghoulish reporting, nonsense emerging from the police and garbled videos emerging from the bombers - amateurishly shot and utterly confused as to the actual motivations behind the bombings. That would have been edgy, clever and controversial satire. That would have been vintage Morris. Which, sadly, Four Lions - as good as it was in places - was not.

For those of you who like your comedy to be scathing, vicious, topical and often uncomfortable, Chris Morris' output is always worth watching. He's been working on a jihadist comedy called Four Lions for a while, and The Guardian has a clip up from it. Go watch it. It looks like vintage Morris, and is almost certain to piss off just about everyone who lacks a sense of humour about the controversial.

Paedo-geddon!

The Devil's Kitchen rightly points out this absurd and frustrating story - a vicar banned from a school for kissing a girl on the cheek. Frankly this is worthy of Chris Morris - it is beyond belief. I am surprised that they did not drag him from the school and burn him in a giant wicker phallus. It almost looks like a wind-up. Sadly it isn't.

There is a massive difference between someone kissing a child on the cheek and someone abusing a child. I cannot, cannot, understand how people do understand this very simple fact. How can showing affection to a child who has done well be interpreted as abuse?

And there is more to it than just the absurdity that someone links a kiss on the cheek with statutory rape. Is this really what it has come to? Are we so paranoid about paedophiles that we see them everywhere? This is like America at the height of McCarthy's power - rather than reds under the bed, we have paedos under the bed.

And how does this help children? They will grow up afraid of adults, and afraid of affection. Yes we have to teach kids to be careful and to avoid strangers. Monsters do exist, and kids need to be protected from them. But the fact remains that the chances of a child being abused by a stranger is far far far less likely that the chances of a child being abused by someone they know.