The Last King of Scotland (2006)

Sorry, this movie sucks

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

I watched this movie many years after it was released - having heard about it from so many people. I also thought that there was a fair bit of media buzz created when this movie was released. Although Forest Whitaker's performance was good, it was kind of overdone at times and wasn't too much to write home about. Having read so much about Uganda and Idi Amin, it is laughable how historically inaccurate this movie is. Most people would brush this off by saying "hey its just a movie". But its more than that, its a piece of history that was conveniently altered by Hollywood to create sensationalism. This movie will in no way help the millions of people around the world who have no clue about the history of Idi Amin. There is a lot of unnecessary drama in the movie that takes the focus away from the main historical events. Idi Amin was a psychotic monster in real life, but in the movie he appeared remarkably sane. Whitaker failed to communicate the fear and bone-chilling aura of one of the most brutal African dictators in modern times. The performances of the other actors were mediocre at best. The character of Nicholas Garrigan is totally fictional. There was no white doctor who Amin was ever so close to, and no white man ever had an affair with his wife and got her pregnant. In fact, in real life Amin divorced his wife on national radio and later had her killed and her body dismembered. However, in this movie there is a made-up Hollywood romanticism that is all to familiar now - white guy leaves his cozy life to go to a third world country, has crazy adventures, gets laid all the time, penetrates into power circles with ease, several locals die, but the white man comes back home and lives to tell the tale! Towards the end of the movie, when the Air France plane is hijacked, the movie drags slowly to the point where Garrigan escapes on a plane full of refugees. They could have instead shown how the hostages were actually rescued by the Israeli Armed Forces in what was one of the finest rescue missions in history. I think the script sort of ruined this movie. You can watch it for entertainment, but please do not confuse this for being actual history.

Try to imagine what it might be like if you were a Western European and witnessed—from the inside--the beginning and development of one of the most notoriously brutal African dictators of the 20th Century. What might it have looked like to you? This is exactly what Giles Foden did when he wrote his fictionalized historical novel, The Last King of Scotland. In writing his novel, Foden gives us a chance to try to get into the regime of Ugandan dictator Idi Amin and get an up close and personal look at this brutal clownish figure from the 1970s. Like Hitler or Jim Jones, there is a curiosity to know more about where such people come from and what makes them tick. Call it morbid, but nevertheless, it is still there. In the movie version of the novel, Scottish director Kevin Macdonald--principally known for his documentary, Touching the Void (2003)--shapes Foden's novel and brings it to life.As the movie opens c.1970, a young Scottish doctor, Nicholas Garrigan (James McAvoy), is fresh out of medical school but feels that he will always live in his father's shadow unless he breaks from the family and practices medicine far away. Seeking to make a difference, he chooses to practice in the underdeveloped African country of Uganda. Nicholas starts to work in a free clinic with another white doctor and his wife, Sarah Merrit (Gillian Anderson). When he hears about a local coup, he thinks it would be interesting to go to town and see a rally with the new leader. Nicholas and Sarah go to the planned demonstration where they see Idi Amin (Forest Whitaker) addressing a large crowd. On their way back to the clinic, he is stopped on the road by the local authorities because Amin is in need of medical help. While he is treating Amin's injured hand, the two make a connection. Amin becomes interested in the way Nicholas handles himself and admires Nicholas' tee-shirt with the word, "Scotland" on it. He wants to trade his uniform for Nicholas' tee-shirt. The fact that both identify with the Scots and dislike the English is something they have in common.Shortly thereafter, Amin sends his limo to pick up Nicholas, gives him a tour of his palace, and meets his wives and children. Then, in a jovial way, he asks him to become his personal doctor, and offers to let him run Uganda's top clinic in Kampala. Nicholas accepts and abruptly leaves the clinic. As he enters into Amin's social functions and is taken into Amin's confidence, Amin starts to call him 'his personal adviser.' Nicholas' naivete is no match for Amin's charm, and he is soon ensnared into Amin's inner circle. Soon, British agents are asking Nichols to 'keep in touch' if there in anything that they should know; Nichols scoffs at the idea of informing on Amin.As Amin's personal doctor, Nicholas notices his growing paranoia. But, living in a somewhat cloistered life, Nicholas doesn't realize the brutality of what is going on in the country. It's only when he is personally degraded that he discovers some of Amin's atrocities. And, it is only when he becomes the object of that brutality—as a result of an affair with one of Amin's many wives--that he personally experiences it.What's amazing to me about this movie is that—until the very end—there is little violence to portend what is really happening in the country. We know—though Nicholas' eyes---that Amin is concerned about his world image. We know that he is negotiating about Palestinian and Israeli hostages from a hijacked airplane. But, the movie only skims the surface of these important historical issues, because that is not really what the movie is about. It's about the relationship between a naive personal adviser (later called a 'personal monkey') and the web of deceit spun by the brutal sociopath that controls him.'The death toll during Amin's regime will never be accurately known. An estimate from the International Commission of Jurists is that it was not less than 80,000, and more likely around 300,000. Another estimate, compiled by exile organizations with the help of Amnesty International, put the number killed at 500,000.'--Quoted from WikipediaIt's important to note that the time frame of this fictionalized story is from 1971 to the incident at Entebbe in 1976, and Amin's regime was to last until he was deposed in 1979. What we really don't know--and can't know from the above quote--is the time pattern of Amin's ordered tortures and killings: What would a time chart would look like, with TIME as the X-Axis and KILLINGS AND TORTURES as the Y-Axis? From this chart you could see: 1) Did these killings and tortures start gradually and grow over time? 2) Did they occur at a constant rate throughout his regime? 3) Were they concentrated more in the later years of his rule? 4) Were there any external events that triggered when they occurred?Since we can only estimate the raw numbers, we are even FURTHER afield as to the pattern of their occurrence. When you factor in that we are seeing a fictional account of Amin though the eyes of a cloistered and naive white Western European, what you are left with is a story of what might have happened. Again, I say that the movie and novel are more about the relationship between Garrigan and Amin than what I suggested at the beginning of the review: the witness and experience—from the inside--of Amin's entire regime.Does this movie give us more insight into the mind or motives of Amin? Probably not. But, Forest Whitaker gives us a powerful portrayal of this historic figure. Whitaker could have overplayed Amin, but he didn't. His portrayal seems right on the mark!!

I said it years ago. Forrest Whittaker was bound to get an Oscar somewhere along the line. I never thought it would be for lead actor, because "the part" wasn't coming his way.It came - and the rest was history. From Platoon, to the unbearable Fouth Angel and beyond, every part, every role was polished and precise. A true pro who got the big one. I love it.Macalvoy is also cast perfectly and plays out well as his character, and shows us it is much more multifaceted than we thought. Very nice work.The film itself has that low-budget feel, but as is the case it makes everyone work harder to make it shine. Six million dollars ain't what it used to be.Amazing acting and a great story from a great book. A must see for true Forrest fans and everyone.

This is a story about a man who has been graduated from a medical school in Scotland, whose name is Nicholas. Nicholas is a made-up character. He randomly chooses Uganda to go to look for what he signing to be. At that time, Uganda is controlled by Idi Amin, who is a real character, as a monarchy. By a chance, Nicholas helps Amin by medical treating and becomes a primary doctor and live a wealthy life. Amin even asks about the government decision to Nicholas. Nicholas gradually realizes the problem of The Government by Amin. In my opinion, the characteristic of Nicholas is very normal as a young guy these days. Young people tend to look for easy ways to be rich. The movie tells that being calm and see what is really a good and proper way. I don't really like the scenes with violence with a grotesque visuals. Over all, this is an very interesting movie.