‘In the colour of Judas tree’ (به رنگ ارغوان) is in cinemas right now. It was banned for five years and now the intelligence service recognised the film as not dangerous. But it came to my mind why they’ve waited for so long and released the film after the disputed election which activities and protests very resembles the protests and acts in the film. After coming out of the cinema with the deadly headache I had, trying to think. I didn’t know to be happy or sad, angry or smoothed.
Hamid Farokh nezhad is one of agents of intelligent service in the country. He disguises as a university student in a forested northern town. His mission is to follow Khazar Masoomi, his classmate, whose father was one of the activisits before the Islamic Revolution in Iran. Now the Islamic dictatorship wants to capture him. In the mean time, the aware and active students are protesting against deforestation of government to build a highway. So the anti-government protests are the background of the main story. Hamid Farokh Nezhad by his updated equipments is getting nearer to Khazar Masoomi and trying to get more information. But love plays its game in the mean time. Hamid Farokh Nejad falls in love with his victim. And I won’t tell you the rest. Go and watch the film. How was my trailer?
The similarity is not definitely intended. But it gives you a very bad feeling, that maybe the government is showing the film not because it’s a film but because it’s an anti-government film. Seeing the censor of truth in the governmental media is driving us crazy and showing reverse news make us want to hang ourselves. But showing a copy of the same story in the cinema makes us feel we are FOOLED. We don’t know to be happy to see a story quite like what has happened to us in the name of religion and consider it as one of the dissident acts that are publicised or to be sad to see what has happened by the regime is so well known and recognised that becomes something routine and usual. But I think we should be angry because this is a fake dissidence. The film is showing a dissident action but what comes at the end: failure. And this dissidence is in the system. So, it’s not weakening the regime but strengthening it.
The Idea of Veil: Another resemblance that I’ve found in the film is between the disguise of Hamid Farokh Nejad and the veil that women must put on in the Islamic dictatorship. The agent has two sides in the film. One is a very timid and stupid student who doesn’t care about politics or anything and doesn’t understand anything. The other is the agent itself who is very clever, very quick and very foxy. These sides completely contradict each other and shows how much being dishonest and two-sided is disgraceful. Veil of women has the same theory behind it. The bloody clergies say that women should be protected in veils in the society and at home they’re free to do whatever they like. They cover themselves in the streets and show another personality, another voice, another face(with hair on it) which contradicts their inner reallity. The women are really pushed to be immasculated because in veils they are meant to act like men.