The republic, the regime and you: Eagles of the Republic Review
Propaganda is everywhere. Whether it’s promoting social values, or uplifting (or disparaging) political figures, there are oceans of propaganda curated to shape how we see and interact with the world around us.
Dangerous as it is, no one is immune to propaganda — and a world of trouble exists for those who might be forced to create it.
In the third film of his Cairo-set film series, Swedish-Egyptian director Tarek Saleh takes on the world of Egyptian propaganda films, with a daring peek into the life of actors under the current el-Sisi regime in Egypt.
The film, which premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival, follows George Fahmy, a famous but self-absorbed Egyptian actor, played by Lebanese-Swedish actor Fares Fares, who is tasked with starring in a propaganda film as Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi.
While initially opposed to the role, the regime gets George to reconsider. They attempt to blacklist him from future roles by forcing a popular actress, one of George’s friends, to speak poorly of him, and when this doesn’t work, they outright threaten to kill George’s teenage son.
Upon accepting, George is upset to learn the propaganda film isn’t all that concerned with accurately portraying el-Sisi’s rise to power in Egypt. The actor is opposed to the falsehoods the film’s producers introduce to his portrayal of el-Sisi — taking issue with the portrayals of him as confident and ambitious. George doesn’t shy away from pausing scenes to tell his co-stars they should be acting with authenticity to the history of el-Sisi — treating him plainly in their delivery rather than cowering at the might he has yet to achieve — hoping to bring the film as close as possible to the truth.
Keeping the propagandistic production within the realm of el-Sisi fanfiction is the ever-menacing and increasingly threatening Dr. Mansour, a senior presidential aide. Cold and blunt, Mansour shuts down most of George’s protests, reminding him just how much is at stake professionally and otherwise should George try to control the narrative too much.
Imbued amongst the social commentary of the film is how pervasive propaganda is in our lives, and how delicately (or violently) that web of lies is maintained.
Interestingly enough, the person who has the most controlled image of his public persona in the film is George Fahmy himself. To the public, he is an easygoing, virtuous family man; in reality, the actor struggles to have an authentic relationship with his son, is separated from his wife and is dating a woman much younger than him who has (frankly, far-fetched) dreams of becoming an actor.
The film also gives a glimpse into the benefits of serving the regime as a propaganda star. George uses his newfound connections to aid his actor friends in being un-blacklisted by the film industry, as well as to indiscreetly have an affair with the defense minister’s wife.
Fares plays George with a softly impatient cadence, not quick to anger but clearly emotionally driven by his love of acting, which turns into a love of lying to everyone in his life, whether it be his colleagues or his family. Fares honours the fatigue of the Egyptian star in a sympathetic way, such that there is an obvious tiredness to needing to lie so much, which truly boils over when George is on set.
One could argue that the plethora of scenes off the film set helps draw parallels between George’s need to curate his personal image and the broader legacy of el-Sisi’s propagandic persona, but not enough of the Egyptian president is shown to highlight this parallel in the film. The truth of this parallel and how deep it runs is likely better known to Egyptian filmmakers, actors and citizens living under the regime today.
Despite this, the pacing of the film leaves some elements of George’s life feeling a bit unimportant to the much larger motifs of the film. We get plenty of glimpses into his struggle as an actor with a high social presence, but the film’s more interesting scenes focusing on the dynamics between George and Dr. Mansour feel more rushed, or at least don’t hold as much space outside of the very high tension they take up. As interesting as these scenes are, with Mansour bugging the actor’s house and forging his suicide note, the film does not focus enough on the dynamic after the threats, which leaves Mansour feeling all-powerful but George feeling more uneasy rather than rightfully scared for his well-being. As a result, most of George’s struggle on set is stuck in his arrogance to dare towards authenticity, rather than his struggle to perform at the risk of his life.
Another pacing shock occurs at the end of the third act, where a plot twist involving the main players of the regime unfolds. Although the mess that comes with the twist helps showcase the regime’s media-control, the suddenness and immediate hush of what follows makes for a very confusing plot twist.
Ultimately, the film offers a lot of insight on the power of the el-Sisi regime, but loses the active struggle of actors who might refuse to play their part, limiting some of the tension behind the film’s ambitious premise.
