Afghanistan, documentaries, film festivals, Hollywoodgate, Ibrahim Nash'at, M. Javid Mukhtar, Mawlawi Mansour, movies, Mullah Akhund, reviews, Taliban, Telluride Film Festival, Venice International Film Festival, Yaqoob Mohammad
August 10, 2024
by Carla Hay
Directed by Ibrahim Nash’at
Pashto and Dari with subtitles
Culture Representation: Filmed from 2021 to 2022 in Kabul, Afghanistan, the documentary film “Hollywoodgate” features a predominantly Arab group of people (with a few white people) who are involved in some way with the Taliban.
Culture Clash: After the United States withdrew military forces from Afghanistan in 2021, the Taliban took possession of weapons, aircraft and other resources that were left behind by the CIA and the U.S. military.
Culture Audience: “Hollywoodgate” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in seeing an inside (but admittedly restricted) account of what the Taliban did and plans to do with discarded war items in Afghanistan.
Is the documentary “Hollywoodgate” propaganda for the Taliban in Afghanistan, or is it a warning to people who oppose the Taliban? “Hollywoodgate” has elements of both because it’s a raw chronicle that came with filming restrictions. “Hollywoodgate” is compelling to watch, even though it states from the beginning that “Hollywoodgate” director Ibrahim Nash’at was allowed filming access under certain limiting conditions.
Egyptian filmmaker Nash’at (who makes his feature-film directorial debut with “Hollywoodgate”) filmed “Hollywoodgate” from August 2021 to most of 2022, after the United States had withdrawn U.S. military forces from Afghanistan. Nash’at was given permission by the Taliban to film Taliban activities in Afghanistan, on the conditions that (1) he only focus on two Afghan military officials and (2) Nash’at had to be under constant surveillance by the Taliban. “Hollywoodgate” had its world premiere at the 2023 Venice International Film Festival and its U.S. premiere at the 2023 Telluride Film Festival.
“Hollywoodgate” was filmed cinéma vérité-style. The documentary begins with a brief captioned introduction that states: “In 1996, after a generation of war and more than 1 million casualties, the Taliban seized control of Afghanistan. After 9/11, the U.S. and NATO forces invaded Afghanistan, hoping to overthrow the Taliban for their role in harboring Al Qaeda. On August 3, 2021, the Taliban reclaimed Kabul.”
Nash’at is an intermittent narrator for the documentary, mostly in the beginning of the film and at the end. He occasionally appears on camera. In the beginning of the film, Nash’at says in voiceover narration: “Just days after the last American soldier left Afghanistan, I arrive in Kabul with only an Afghan translator and my camera. I came to see whose hands this country was left.”
Using his connections as an investigative journalist, Nash’at says he made arrangements to document the Taliban’s transition from being an insurgent militia to a military regime. The two Taliban officials whom Nash’at was required to focus on for this documentary are Air Force commander Mawlawi Mansour and Air Force lieutenant M. Javid Mukhtar, also known as M.J. Mukhtar.
“Hollywoodgate” gets its title from the numerous warehouse-styled bases with doors marked Hollywood Gate 1, Hollywood Gate 2, Hollywood Gate 3, etc. that are shown in the documentary. It’s repeatedly mentioned in the documentary that the CIA used these bases during the U.S. war in Afghanistan. There are several scenes of Taliban soldiers, usually led by Mansour, who are on these bases to take possession of the many weapons, aircraft, technology equipment and other resources used in war.
These abandoned bases are usually in extreme disarray, with broken doors, damaged and overturned furniture, garbage-strewn rooms and graffiti with pro-U.S. messages. It gives the distinct impression that the Americans who used to work in these bases had to leave in a hurry but made sure that they left their mark behind, by destroying as much as they could before they could leave. Despite the messy conditions, the Taliban soldiers scavenge through the remains with a certain amount of glee. One unidentified soldier says, “The Americans left us an enormous treasure.”
Even though Nash’at was given permission to film Mansour and Mukhtar, the higher-ranking Mansour is the one who gets most of the documentary’s screen time. And it’s easy to see why. Mukhtar isn’t very talkative and seems to be have a very guarded personality. He reveals very little about himself. The documentary footage of Mukhtar is essentially just “ride along” footage.
By contrast, Mansour has a “larger than life” personality, for better or worse. Mansour, who has an authoritarian swagger, strides confidently through the throngs of military soldiers who are at his beck and call. Mansour gives the impression that he expects to be the center of attention wherever he goes. He’s treated like a military rock star and has a demeanor that suggests he can be a loyal ally and a ruthless enemy. He also tries to project an image of being a very patriotic family man.
Even though Mansour at times appears friendly and smiling with certain people, he has a leadership style that is about instilling fear. One minute, he could be laughing and casually joking with some people. The next minute, he could be assaulting someone or ordering an assault of anyone whom he thinks is being disobedient or disloyal. You get the feeling that the worst punishments were never filmed by Nash’at because he was never allowed to have that type of access.
Mansour is the type of leader who can be both inspiring and demeaning to his subordinates. There’s a scene where he gives a rousing speech to a group of dozens of cheering soldiers and proudly tells them: “You are the heroes of a generation because you defeated the U.S. and Taliban.” But there’s also a separate scene where Mansour tosses aside an empty plastic water bottle while he’s walking somewhere, only to immediately order a minion soldier to pick up the bottle.
When people in the documentary are surprised to see Nash’at filming them, Mansour tells them firmly that Nash’at was given permission to film. In one such scene, Mansour adds in a cold tone when he speaks about Nash’at, who can be seen filming the scene in a nearby mirror: “If his intentions are bad, he will die soon.” It’s a chilling warning to Nash’at that he should not feel safe when filming this documentary.
The chameleon-like sides of Mansour’s personality can be seen throughout the documentary. He plays the role of charismatic host to political officials in a scene where he enthusiastically greets ambassadors from Russia, Iran and Pakistan on a recently repaired aircraft that had been abandoned. Only the Russian official’s first name (Nikoli) is mentioned.
But there are also scenes where Mansour icily asserts his authority and reminds Nash’at that Nash’at can be prevented from filming certain things. Later, Mansour is a deferential subordinate when Afghanistan minister of defense General Yaqoob Mohammad and Afghanistan prime minister Mullah Akhund speak at a rally attended by Taliban officials and soldiers.
Because “Hollywoodgate” was filmed cinéma vérité-style, there are no interviews that were filmed for the documentary. Nash’at seems to have an unassuming presence when filming (he doesn’t talk much and is clearly not doing this documentary to be the star of the movie), but there are scenes where there’s obvious and continuing mistrust of Nash’at. For example, when some unidentified Taliban officials look over a ledge and describe seeing a barrel of weapons, one of the officials can be heard saying about this cache of weapons: “Don’t show it to the filmmaker.”
“Hollywoodgate” viewers might also notice that in this very patriarchal military society, women are barely seen and are certainly never in any leadership positions. Women and children in the documentary are only briefly seen as bystanders in places where the Taliban soldiers are passing through. And if it isn’t clear enough how oppressively sexist the culture is, Mansour says matter-of-factly in a conversation that his wife is a medical doctor but he refused to marry her until she gave up her medical practice.
The access that Nash’at was given for this documentary can certainly be commended for its uniqueness. However, to its detriment, “Hollywoodgate” can never shake the tone that Nash’at and the other “Hollywoodgate” filmmakers are just being used by the Taliban for Taliban image-making public relations instead of being a truly independent documentary. Scene after repetitive scene in the documentary is about showing Taliban soldiers amassing the abandoned weapons, equipment and other items.
“Hollywoodgate” has multiple of scenes of Mansour consulting with technicians on the abandoned bases, as the technicians give him briefings on how they can repair the aircraft or equipment that was found damaged. The intention is obvious: The Taliban plans to use whatever was abandoned by the U.S. and add it to the Taliban’s military arsenal. The Taliban’s message is very clear: “We’re now more armed than ever. Enemies beware.”
Some viewers of “Hollywoodgate” might be shocked by the statistic mentioned at the end of the documentary and in the movie’s trailer: According to the U.S. Pentagon, the U.S. left behind an estimate $7.12 billion worth of military equipment in Afghanistan. “Hollywoodgate” might not be able to change the Talban’s intended uses of this military equipment, but the documentary offers a glimpse into how and why this military equipment was accumulated in the first place.
Rolling Narratives released “Hollywoodgate” in select U.S. cinemas on July 19, 2024.