The Devil's Double

Caligula meets Scarface in Lee Tamahori's The Devil's Double, a sickeningly volatile portrait of Saddam Hussein's lunatic son Uday and the unfortunate subject coerced into functioning as his double(Latif Yahia). Dominic Cooper plays both roles and displays a remarkable tenacity in their execution.

It's a shame they're so difficult to watch.

I have no idea what Uday Hussein was like while living but if the acts he's depicted unleashing in The Devil's Double are even seriously exaggerated he must have been a first rate fucker. The spoiled capricious tyrannical salacious vindictive murderous son of a despot, he never holds back when it comes to satisfying whatever whim crosses his mind, and operates within a mad ethical spectrum wherein he is the insane judge, jury, and executioner. If you should displease him, his forces will destroy you and everyone you love, brutally. Unfettered, energetic, unconditioned jouissance, with unlimited resources at its disposal.

As it pursues its desire.

He needs a double to represent him in public and the humble Latif tries to successfully yield to his will. The two form a tempestuous public/private yin and yang as they carve a place for themselves in their culture's destiny. Love interest Sarrab (Ludivine Sagnier) melodramatically complicates things as she craves them both. Munem (Raad Rawi) tries to maintain a hemorrhaged degree of order as his upright constitution continuously confronts Uday's.

Oddly, Saddam (Philip Quast) isn't presented as a monster and he occasionally attempts to keep Uday in check. Uday's brother is shown in a dimly flattering light as well as he responsibly handles his political affairs.

The film staggeringly balances the two sides of Uday's identity as it attempts to reasonably analyze a maniac while working within his irrational frame. According to Tamahori's portrait, there's little room for ambiguity in the construction of Uday's constitution.

Adolescence meets power and refuses to accept responsibility. Pleasure endures without consequence. A populace rages and weeps. Madness ruins a civilization.

The argument can be made that if reprobates like Uday were given free reign in Iraq to do as they pleased, their elimination represents a victory for liberty. But externally inflicting such liberation on an oppressed people robs them of the catharsis obtained from settling the matter for themselves. It also sets up a dangerous set of circumstances wherein the 'liberators' eventually become the 'oppressors' thereby opening up critical domains which attempt to justify the excesses of the usurped as their authoritarian rule becomes more appealing in the aftermath.

Helping the people's revolutionary goals after they've been set in motion and then departing after the misery has been removed is a different matter.