No.. I will not comment on the lack of accuracy in the use of dialects, especially Bedouin ones, but there is no need to get ahead of myself, so let us start from the beginning. I also note that the article contains spoilers of the events of the series, as it targets the group that has completed watching it.
A New Era
I would like to begin by commenting on the first part of the work, which is the opening credits or opening music. This may be the first time that we see the opening credit for a Saudi work that is similar to what we see in drama series on streaming media platforms such as “Netflix.” This similarity is not just a process of imitation, rather, it is a sign of entering a new phase, as we can say that we have entered this era of drama making in this art form that we will discuss. This stage comes after different eras of drama, including the era of “The Good Old Times,” such as “Darb al-Zalak,” and the character arcs based on spontaneity, improvisation, and comedy. We see the opening credits are very simple, a still image and simple music, then it was followed by Tariq Othman’s series in the eighties, such as “Khalti Qomasha,” “Kharag W lam Ya’ud” and “Ala El-Donia El-Salam,” which relies on daily drama with a critical and comedic nature. Some of these opening credits are performed by the actors themselves. And then after that, passing through the nineties era with all the traditional series it had, such as “Al-Bayt Al-Oud,” “Malfa Al-Ajaweed,” and “Hazawi Al-Dar,” which begins with long credits in the style of an operetta, or other Bahraini drama such as “Saadoun and Niran” or the works of the late Abdul Hussein Abdul Redha in “Souq Al-Maqasis” and others, before we enter the era of Fajr Al-Saeed and the over the top and vulgar drama whose opening credits are also full of drama, whether at the level of the music and its rise up the musical scale or at the level of the selected shots. We can say that we have announced the entry of this new era, reducing the 30-episode Ramadan series, and embarking on a new experience, and the opening credits is only the first clear indication of that. The opening credits of Rashash in the first two seconds sounds like it was adapted from the HBO series Westworld, and the images of documents and newspaper news remind us of series such as “Narcos” and “The Americans,” and then the cello introduces itself in the same warm tone that is not devoid of an epic tone reminiscent of the epic Game of Thrones, but with a slower tempo. It may seem at first glance that the cello is not the instrument we want for a series whose main theme is the desert. Perhaps we see the rebab or the oud as more compatible instruments, but the warmth suggested by the piece suits the heat and isolation of the desert, especially when mixed with the whistling of the flute to provide the perfect combination for the main theme of the work. It is easy to agree that the introduction lacks originality, and that it imitates the opening credits of other series, but we can say with satisfaction that the musician Amine Bouhafa presented us with a piece that we can enjoy before each episode.
Having gotten the opening credits out of the way, we can now delve into the heart of the work and its various technical details.
Melodrama and Moral Polarization
The main title of the work is “Rashash,” and there is a secondary title, “Evil Has a Name.” Perhaps the makers of the work wanted, consciously or unconsciously, to make it clear without leaving room for doubt that Rashash is a purely evil character, and this may be a step to exonerate him from the charge of promoting vices, which is a charge that should not be raised in critical and artistic discussions. But what interests me here is the reference to the melodrama of the work, and I specifically mean the moral polarization of the characters, that is, there is a longitudinal and sharp division that separates the nice and good characters from the bad and evil characters. I am not categorizing here only for the purpose of categorizing, but I believe that this revelation leads to many controversial points and in different directions.
Perhaps the first point that this moral polarity leads us to is the possibility of the existence of the antihero. Someone is likely to suggest that the character of Rashash is an example of an antihero in television drama, and I would like to register an objection. There is a difference between an antihero and a Villain, and I remind you again that I am not categorizing without basis. The hero cannot be a character who leans entirely toward the evil moral polarity, unlike the enemy character, especially in melodramatic works. The antihero must be an attractive character, as the work cannot be based and centered around a boring character that the viewer cannot relate to emotionally. From here comes the trick on which the idea of the antihero is based, which is that it is an incomplete character, a character that is very similar to us with its mistakes and its evasiveness between what it wants and desires and what it fears and is unable to do, and therefore it is an intelligent character who can justify its immorality in a coherent manner and perhaps within a solid philosophy as well, and what connects us to this character is our understanding in addition to our sympathy with its circumstances, as trying to understand a person and his circumstances is a form of empathy, and examples of this are too numerous to count, such as Walter White in “Breaking Bad” and Tony Soprano in “The Sopranos.” Indeed, it is sometimes difficult to know whether the character represents the antihero or not, such as Don Draper in “Mad Men,” or it may require an intellectual-political stance to determine this, as is the case with the Jennings in the series “The Americans.” Anyway, the bottom line here is that it is difficult to create an antihero in a melodramatic work with a split moral standard for the characters, because that breaks the close bond between the viewer and the main character and prevents the creation of a state of sympathy and then the viewer’s identification with the character.
When we come to the character of Rashash, we see that he is an evil character who practices many immoral acts, such as killing and robbery, without trying even once to justify this act or to highlight any of the philosophy – even a simple one – on which the character of Rashash is based, although it is possible to do so by linking it to some Bedouin values with a backstory related to Rashash’s childhood. It would have been possible to create a character that was deeper, more convincing, and more enjoyable even for the viewer, a narcissistic, arrogant character with his own philosophy and justifications. I do not ignore the presence of simple hints of such a philosophy, such as his conversation in the first episode with the seller of Captagon pills about ambition, and Rashash’s repeated talk about not being afraid to ask for more and coveting “success,” but this idea does not seem to lead to anything, or I should say that there was not enough dramatic investment in it.
I liked to start with the melodrama of the work and moral polarization because, in my view, it may be an umbrella that brings together the rest of the artistic problems of the series or is linked to them at the very least. However, this problem refers to a larger intellectual system that we live in in our societies, which is moral normativity. It is very important for the creator of a dramatic work to be sufficiently familiar with other philosophical systems, the most important of which is amorality, which does not mean the absence of moral values, but rather understanding and interpreting things in their circumstantial contexts instead of making moral judgments about them. Understanding this philosophy is very important in writing antihero characters in dramatic works, as it transfers our paradigm of thinking from making judgments to trying to understand and analyze individuals’ behavior and decisions.
As long as the conversation is still about the characters, moral polarization is not their only flaw, although I think it is the main flaw. The creators chose to focus on the huge events in Rashash’s journey, including plundering, looting, and extorting people’s money, robbing stores, and assaulting security personnel. I do not want to delve into whether that was the right decision or not, but this choice came at the expense of building the backstory for all the characters, including Rashash. In fact, the pace itself began very quickly in the first episode, as if it was rushing to get to the main events. In the first episode, we saw Rashash as a sniper in the border guards, then he had an attempt to be a drug dealer, then a trader, then he was caught red-handed and got fired, all within the first half hour! As for the rest of the characters with Rashash, I think that the majority of the audience were unable to differentiate between them or know their names because they are very similar, with the exception of – perhaps – Qahs (Ibrahim Al-Hajjaj), with reference to the excellent performance of the actors, but it is a script problem and not a performance problem.
In addition to what was mentioned, it is difficult to write what is known as the character arc, which expresses the character’s internal journey, its transition from one side to another, and its adoption of qualities and values contrary to what it started with, as the characters in the work are static and morally stable (this does not mean that it is impossible for them to change and adopt other qualities, such as changing the father’s strictness to kindness and tenderness, for example, without swinging on the scale of morality), but the brevity of the work does not allow for this slow and convincing transition of the characters. From here we can turn to the plot and direction, as they are the last thing left for the work to stand on its feet dramatically.
But before that, we can summarize the above as: a melodramatic work based on moral polarization, in which the characters play roles on opposite sides, consistently throughout the episodes of the short series. In addition, the events of the series are not unknown, but rather real and known. All of this begs the question: What is the fantasy that the series draws upon in its transition from a true and realistic documentary to a fictional drama?
Two Parallel Lines
Since the characters in the work will remain still, there is only one thing to connect the plot and events of the work to these characters, which is their goals and what they want to achieve, and this will determine the two main plot paths. The main plot runs in two parallel lines between the character of Officer Fahd and the character of Rashash, where the first seemed full of secondary plots while the second was reduced to one dimension, which is robbery, looting, murder, and intimidation. It should be noted here that these two lines express and are in line with the melodrama of the work itself, as we find that Fahd’s path represents absolute good and Rashash’s path represents evil. Fahd lives in the middle of a whirlpool of conflicts. He is at odds with his father, who wants him to inherit his company and manage his money when he succeeds him, he is also expecting a newborn. There is also the Colonel, who sees in Fahd nothing but a useless pedant (at least in the beginning), and on top of these pressures is Rashash, whom Fahd is trying to arrest. It is not convincing to say that these plots were merely to stretch the series, or merely obstacles to make Fahd’s task of arresting Rashash difficult. These plots, I believe, should highlight who Fahd is to the viewer. The first plot is one of the justifications for Fahd’s big enthusiasm in arresting Rashash. The bad relationship with the father represents a stain for the son who always tries to erase it, whether consciously or unconsciously, and this appears in his attempts to gain acceptance from the father, or to impress him to get praised, and this is what Fahd does with his domineering father. It is one of the reasons for Fahd’s insistence on chasing Rashash, in addition to his passion for this profession. As for the second plot, related to his pregnant wife, it constitutes one of the weaknesses that Rashash may exploit to his advantage. Expected fatherhood is an emotional moment that comes with a great responsibility, including the father’s concern for himself, so that his son does not lose him at an early age, and the scene of Fahd’s dream with Rashash shooting his wife in the stomach clearly expresses this. As for the final plot, it is for the purpose of raising the level of drama within the police department, as it is not fun for the detective to decipher the crime codes directly without harassment or obstacles. From here we conclude that for Fahd, arresting Rashash is what will solve all his problems. Arresting Rashash means his father’s approval of him, the protection of his wife, proving himself in his job, and gaining the approval of his superiors. Did these plots play their artistic role in the work? In my opinion, some of them were not convincing, such as his clash with his boss at the police station, or they were not invested in as prominently as the first and the second plots.
In parallel, we see Rashash, after the first half hour, proceeding with his own plot in a single and similar line: intercepting vehicles, terrorizing their passengers, robbing them and sometimes killing them, and then returning to hide in the desert. It may be correct to say that the difference between the paths of the two plots is due to the fact that Fahd’s plot is completely fictional, compared to Rashash’s plot, which is based on realistic events, and this plot becomes less realistic in his meetings with Fahd, whether in that village or in front of the bank after the exchange of fire. This became clear after the events of killing and robbery ended and the death of all Rashash’s companions, as the events took a fictional and dramatic turn far from reality, for example, when Rashash paid for the dinner for Fahd’s family and gave him the picture with the bullet, and then stormed his house, slaughtered the sheep, and wrote his name in blood, as well as the scene of Fahd’s interview with the Yemeni sheikh and the ensuing fight between Rashash and Fahd.
The Picture…The Highlight
Finally, we come to directing, which is, in my opinion, the strongest link in the work (and this should always be the case). To be clearer, what I mean by directing is the process of transferring written text onto the screen, including the use of all image techniques, from angle of view, type of capture, and focus. As we know, the combination of these elements is what the director uses to convey the feelings or even ideas in the scene, which in turn must be consistent with the plot of the work, the characters, and other artistic elements. That is, the image and its supplements, including the soundtrack and other details, must also tell the same story (Or perhaps another story) that parallels or clashes with the events the viewer sees, and this is what gives the artwork depth, different layers of meaning, and a rich experience for the recipient. It is very urgent that I address some examples to clarify the picture on the one hand and to give justice to the efforts made on the other hand.
The first example: a spiritual experience
Rashash is still a sniper in the Border Guard, and before he ends his long day, he notices the presence of two officers completing a deal. Rashash confiscates Captagon pills, which he recognizes for the first time, and orders them to leave. Here is the scene of the effect of the pills on Rashash. The director wanted to convey to the viewer the feeling of floating resulting from the use of narcotic pills and the spiritual experience that the user experiences, which is related to the life of the user himself. What the director of the series, Teague, did was to use an “overhead shot” or what is also known as “God’s eye,” where Rashash is lying on his bed, looking up at the camera. The camera gets close to Rashash’s face to take a close-up photo of it, and this technique is supposed to highlight facial expressions and feelings, but Rashash’s face remains completely still without any emotions, then it moves away again to give the illusion of flight, and because Rashash’s face is cold and featureless, as we saw in the close-up, what is flying now is something else, his soul, his thoughts, and what confirms this is the continuous interruption between the image of Rashash and the horse galloping in the desert, and this is related to Rashash’s love for this scene, as he mentioned to his friends how he used to “drag” them behind him in the deserts in search of horses. This scene was repeated many times in the series as the only motif that links us to Rashash’s previous life. This scene is not the only one that shows us Teague’s great capabilities in the blocking process and mixing different types of shots to convey a specific feeling. This short scene has a very satisfying and enjoyable experience for the viewer!
The second example: a verbal duel in the style of a cowboy
In the fifth episode, there is a scene that I don’t think anyone paid attention to, which is the scene in which Officer Fahd meets Rashash and his group for the first time, in reality, not in a dream. Before the meeting, the director prepares us for a scene similar to what we see in American cowboy films, as we see repeated cowboy shot type shots before the two meet and there is a distance between them, just as two cowboys meet in a duel. Teague alternates between two symmetrical shots. In it, Rashash appears to be huge due to his proximity to the camera, and Fahd appears to be small in the depth of the picture and vice versa. However, what we see is not a duel with weapons, but rather a psychological rhetorical duel. The scene combines the Cowboy and the Close-up shots to show the impact of each sentence from one of them on the feelings and psychology of the other. Rashash uses provocation to get into Fahd’s head and control him, once by using private information about Fahd, such as indirectly telling him that his wife is pregnant and another time by reminding him how he killed his friend Ghaleb. In return, Fahd uses his visit to his mother to tell him how embarrassed she is by his actions once, and another time he tries to remind him of his God and the victims who may die because of them, the victory in this “fight” appears to Rashash in a logical manner that is consistent with his victory at that moment over Fahd and the government agencies, but what I would like to point out is the complete mastery of this scene, which depicted two opposing and contradictory sides in a way that is consistent with the melodrama of the work, between good (Fahd) and evil (Rashash). And not only that, but it highlighted the value backgrounds of each of them. Fahd and his preaching style, Rashash, and the values of nomadism and strength. Among the most beautiful things that Rashash said, whose values and principles were proven when Fahd told him that Ghalib, who was killed by Rashash, “is manlier than him,” Rashash replied, “He’s manlier than me in his grave!” and burst out laughing. In the world of the strong and the world of fighting and dueling, the strong and the one who survives is the fittest, the best, and most lasting, in other words, he is the one who is right.
Aesthetic captures were often repeated to highlight the identity of the place, such as desert captures and drone captures that highlighted the smallness of humanity in front of this vast area and the difficulty of the police reaching them, as well as the complete knowledge of Rashash about this area. Sometimes wide shots contributed to capturing the identity of the place by showing the shape of the buildings and the style of cars to convey the environment in which the events of the series take place.
A final comment regarding the directing. Some scenes, specifically the fight scene in the first episode between Rashash and the officer selling the Captagon pills, were not convincing at all and were not compatible with the work environment, rather, the influence of the Western director appeared in them, as the way they quarreled was distinctly Hollywood and did not resemble the quarrels of people born in this environment at all. The quarrel was like two prisoners in an American prison, and the way he encouraged the other officers was funny. The whole scene was a cacophony that did not fit in with the rest of the action scenes. The same thing happened when Rashash fought with Fahd in the guest tent of the Yemeni tribe.
It may be the first time we see a Saudi work in which the image has a narrative structure. We do not move from event to event to event in a stressful way for the viewer. There is a plot and events that proceed sequentially, and there is another narration of the image that intersperses the narration of the plot and is like a mental break for him and an opportunity to use his other senses. While the plot is running its course, there is another graphic narrative represented by horses as a recurring and narrative motif that parallels the plot. Its repeated appearance with the soundtrack serves as a break for the eyes and ears, but at the same time they tell the same story in a different way. The horse is running in the desert, representing the theme of freedom as long as Rashash is still at large, and mixing it with close-up shots of his face shows us his tension and anxiety, until we see the horse’s death in the end coinciding with his execution.
The Script Problem
I am never one of those who repeat this saying, and I always express my clear position on it on every occasion. I do not think that we are suffering from a script problem, but rather a problem in the entire film and drama industry, and that is for a very natural reason, which is our delay in entering this industry. There are problems in production, directing, acting, marketing, criticism, and everything else. Scripts are not among these problems. High-quality novels, let alone short stories, are readily available, and they are suitable for adaptation into screenplays. However, here I stand alongside those who say this statement regarding “Rashash,” the work was excellent in terms of the performance of the actors, the direction, and the smallest technical details, and that is what made the script and dialogue appear very weak. Many of the dialogues were completely dull, dialogues do not belong in drama, with the exception of very few of them. Also, the writing of the plot relied heavily on the image and the director’s skills to dazzle rather than being perfect in itself, whether at the level of the dramatic plot and the escalation of the pace of events – for example – or at the level of the psychological aspect to enrich the presence of the characters in the work.
Also, the events at the end of the work were not convincing unless we kept the idea of the work’s melodrama in our minds, as this reduces its unreasonableness. The accumulation of coincidences is annoying to the recipient, and betting on the element of surprise and suspense in the last episode is not appropriate, what I mean by that is when Officer Fahd received a bullet in the stomach. We know how such actions cannot end with an unhappy ending, on the one hand, but we know the true story and how it will end with Rashash. As for Rashash seeing the death of the horse in his dream in the first scene in the last episode, it was successful in creating a circular narrative structure. It links the end of the episode to its beginning, especially since we know that Rashash will be executed, and there are no spoilers of this event in the series.
I think that Saudi works in general, including drama, have left the stage of “very good work, perhaps even excellent work, due to limited capabilities.” We are now living in the stage of “succeeding in not completely failing,” which is not a bad stage at all. Many of the Saudi works produced recently have highlighted the clear seriousness in the work industry, including the Rashash series, and as I mentioned, the work was of a very good degree of mastery. It may seem what I mentioned in this article is a bit harsh, but in fact, all of the series’ problems lie mainly in the script only. There is seriousness and mastery on the part of the actors, the director, and the rest of the team, and therefore the problem can be solved in the upcoming works. Therefore, I think it is very important that we go beyond criticism based on making judgments about value and try to delve deeply into these works. This work and other recently produced works have a lot that can be talked about and discussed instead of making brief judgments. However, analyzing such works constitutes an incentive for the makers of the work to present more developed and profound works, works that carry dimensions that go beyond the apparent script and are hidden behind what is known as subtext.
Regarding the actors, I especially mention the artist Yaqoub Al-Farhan, and here I would like to record my apprehension that this talent will be reduced to such roles. We have seen him before in “Al-Asouf” in the role of Juhayman, but I had previously seen him in a short film entitled “I Can’t Kiss My Face (لا أستطيع تقبيل وجهي).” “His role was completely different, but with the same degree of mastery and creativity. I hope his talent will be used in other roles.
I can say with ease that the series “Rashash” currently raises the ceiling very high in the level of Saudi drama, especially its directing, as it showed us how Saudi work appears when an experienced directorial eye captures details and diversifies between different shots and focus, unlike Gulf dramas in pervious eras, some of which I mentioned at the beginning of the article, were based entirely on the written script, dialogues, and actors’ performances, and a complete absence of supplements to the work, such as blocking, soundtracks…etc. that fall under cinematography. Thus, the work appears without a graphic or cinematic narration, rather, its shots are full of arbitrary elements, which do not play a role in narrating anything, neither at the level of the plot nor at the image level. As for “Rashash,” it highlighted that the director is the number one person in making the work successful, and that the success of drama and cinema depends on the image, not just the script. This work deserves attention, criticism, and conversation about it to learn from it in future works.
T1669
