Saddam Hussein's Hollywood Dream: The Extraordinary Story Behind Iraq's Wartime Epic
As fighter jets roared overhead and artillery thundered across the horizon, hundreds of filmmakers continued shooting scenes in the Iraqi desert. Around them, a brutal war was unfolding. Soldiers disappeared from the set after receiving military orders, explosions echoed in the distance, and military convoys shared the same roads as film trucks carrying costumes, cameras and antique weapons.
Yet the greatest threat to one of the most ambitious films ever produced in the Arab world did not come from the Iran-Iraq War.
Instead, it came from British actor Oliver Reed, whose infamous off-screen behaviour nearly brought the entire production to a halt after an incident in a hotel restaurant enraged Iraqi officials. According to producer Lateif Jorephani, government ministers demanded that Reed be removed from the production after he filled a wine bottle with urine and instructed a waiter to deliver it to another table "with my compliments." Jorephani later recalled that senior officials were "absolutely flabbergasted" and pressured him to dismiss the film's leading star.
The bizarre episode has become one of the defining stories behind Clash of Loyalties, a lavish historical epic financed by Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein during one of the bloodiest conflicts in the Middle East. More than four decades later, the film remains an extraordinary example of how cinema, politics and war became deeply intertwined.
Background
When Saddam Hussein consolidated power after becoming Iraq's president in 1979, he sought not only military strength but also cultural influence. Alongside major infrastructure projects and state-controlled media campaigns, the Iraqi government invested heavily in filmmaking, believing cinema could project Iraq's history and national identity to audiences at home and abroad.
The result was Clash of Loyalties, known in Arabic as Al-Mas'ala Al-Kubra ("The Great Question"). The historical drama tells the story of Iraq's 1920 revolt against British rule following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after the First World War. Produced with a reported budget of roughly $24 million, the film was among the most expensive productions ever undertaken in the Middle East at the time.
Rather than relying solely on Iraqi talent, the production recruited internationally recognised filmmakers and actors. British star Oliver Reed portrayed British officer Gerard Leachman, while James Bolam and Helen Ryan joined an international cast. Veteran cinematographer Jack Hildyard, known for his work on major Hollywood productions, also contributed to the project.
The film was intended to rival classic historical epics such as Lawrence of Arabia, presenting Iraq's struggle against colonial rule through spectacular battle scenes, sweeping desert landscapes and large-scale cavalry charges. Yet unlike those productions, this film would be created while a modern war raged just beyond the cameras.
War Interrupts the Cameras
Principal photography began in 1980 just weeks before Iraq invaded neighbouring Iran, triggering a conflict that would last nearly eight years and claim hundreds of thousands of lives.
Almost overnight, the atmosphere surrounding the production changed dramatically.
According to those involved, civilian aircraft carrying British actors landed in Baghdad under military escort and often arrived without runway lights because of fears of missile attacks. Cast members recalled hearing explosions during filming while military personnel moved through nearby areas.
Producer Lateif Jorephani later described the surreal experience of making a feature film in an active war zone.
"We had real missiles and bombs going off," he recalled during an interview for the BBC's Witness History. Crew members and actors were frequently called away for military service without warning, forcing production schedules to change repeatedly.
Despite these enormous challenges, filming continued.
The production travelled across several iconic Iraqi locations, including Baghdad, Babylon, Kut and the marshlands surrounding the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Some scenes were filmed in desert temperatures exceeding 50°C (122°F), creating physically demanding conditions even before the dangers of war were considered.
Transporting equipment posed another major obstacle.
Large quantities of replica First World War rifles, artillery pieces and military props had to be transported across international borders. According to Jorephani, Turkish customs officials temporarily halted trucks carrying the weapons, fearing they were genuine military supplies intended for Iraq's armed forces during the conflict. Only after extensive explanations were the vehicles allowed to continue.
Oliver Reed: Brilliant Performer, Constant Headache
If the war tested the production's logistics, Oliver Reed tested everyone's patience.
Already famous for his commanding screen presence and equally notorious reputation for heavy drinking, Reed developed a reputation among colleagues for outrageous behaviour away from the cameras.
Despite his off-screen antics, cast members consistently noted that he remained highly professional during filming itself, arriving prepared and delivering convincing performances when the cameras rolled. However, once shooting ended, his behaviour often became unpredictable.
Stories from the production have since become legendary.
According to fellow actor Marc Sinden, Reed challenged strangers to arm-wrestling contests, drank heavily, and frequently shocked colleagues with outrageous jokes and public stunts. Actress Virginia Denham later remarked that the only thing she truly feared during filming was Oliver Reed himself, describing him memorably as "a weapon of mass destruction."
The incident that nearly ended his involvement occurred during a hotel dinner attended by guests and officials.
After filling an empty wine bottle with urine, Reed reportedly instructed a waiter to present it to another table as a complimentary gift. The stunt deeply offended Iraqi authorities, who viewed it as unacceptable behaviour from the foreign star of a government-backed production. Producer Lateif Jorephani found himself under intense pressure from senior officials who demanded Reed's immediate dismissal.
Removing him, however, would have jeopardised one of Iraq's largest cinematic investments.
Key Developments (Continued)
Faced with mounting pressure from Iraqi ministers, producer Lateif Jorephani found himself navigating a delicate balance between politics and practicality. Replacing Oliver Reed halfway through production would have been enormously expensive and could have delayed or even doomed the project. Much of the film had already been shot, and Reed's character played a central role in the story. According to Jorephani's later recollections, convincing Iraqi officials to allow the actor to remain was one of the greatest challenges he faced throughout the production.
Against the odds, filming continued. The crew adapted to wartime conditions, reshuffled shooting schedules as personnel were drafted into military service, and worked around logistical disruptions caused by an active conflict. The determination to complete the film reflected not only the dedication of its cast and crew but also the Iraqi government's desire to see the project finished.
When Clash of Loyalties was eventually completed, it stood as one of the most ambitious productions ever undertaken in the Middle East. Featuring large-scale battle sequences, elaborate period costumes, and sweeping desert cinematography, the film sought to rival Western historical epics while presenting Iraq's own interpretation of its struggle against British colonial rule.
Although the production achieved its immediate objective of completing the film, its international impact proved far more limited than Iraqi leaders had envisioned. Released during a period of regional instability and political isolation, Clash of Loyalties struggled to gain widespread distribution outside Iraq. Instead of becoming a global cinematic landmark, it gradually became better known for the extraordinary circumstances surrounding its production than for its box-office performance.
Today, historians and film scholars often regard the movie as a rare historical artifact—one that offers insight into the intersection of cinema, nationalism, and state power during the late twentieth century.
Expert Analysis
Film historians argue that Clash of Loyalties represents more than an ambitious historical drama. It illustrates how governments have long recognised cinema as a powerful instrument for shaping national identity and influencing public opinion.
Throughout the twentieth century, numerous governments invested heavily in film to project political narratives, celebrate military achievements, or reinforce national unity. Iraq under Saddam Hussein was no exception. Cultural institutions received state funding, while films highlighting Iraqi history and resistance to foreign domination aligned closely with the government's broader messaging.
The choice to depict the 1920 Iraqi Revolt was particularly significant. The uprising remains one of Iraq's defining moments of resistance against British rule and has continued to influence national memory. By bringing the story to the screen with international actors and high production values, the Iraqi government sought to elevate that chapter of history onto the world stage.
Yet scholars also caution against viewing the film solely through the lens of propaganda. Many of the actors, technicians, and production staff involved were professional filmmakers motivated by artistic ambition rather than political ideology. Their experiences reveal the complex realities of working within state-funded cultural projects, where creative expression often coexisted with political expectations.
The film also highlights the unpredictable nature of international collaboration. British actors and technicians worked alongside Iraqi crews during one of the most volatile periods in modern Middle Eastern history. Despite differences in language, culture, and politics, many participants later recalled strong professional relationships formed under extraordinary circumstances.
Impact and Implications
More than four decades later, the story behind Clash of Loyalties continues to resonate because it raises enduring questions about the relationship between politics, art, and history.
First, it demonstrates the enormous symbolic value governments attach to cultural productions. Films can preserve history, inspire patriotism, shape public perception, and influence international audiences. For leaders seeking legitimacy, cinema often serves purposes extending far beyond entertainment.
Second, the production illustrates the resilience and vulnerability of artistic projects during periods of conflict. While many industries grind to a halt during war, filmmaking has frequently continued under difficult conditions, whether to sustain morale, document history, or reinforce political narratives. The cast and crew of Clash of Loyalties worked amid air-raid warnings, military mobilisations, and constant uncertainty, making their achievement remarkable regardless of the film's later commercial fortunes.
Third, Oliver Reed's notorious behaviour underscores the challenges of cross-cultural productions. Actions tolerated or dismissed as eccentric in one setting may carry far greater consequences in another, particularly when governments are directly involved. His near-dismissal became an unexpected reminder that diplomacy sometimes extends beyond politicians to artists, entertainers, and cultural ambassadors.
The renewed interest generated by the BBC's Witness History programme also reflects a broader trend. Audiences increasingly seek stories that reveal the human experiences behind historical events. Rather than focusing solely on political leaders or military campaigns, these accounts examine the people who found themselves working, creating, and surviving amid extraordinary circumstances.
What's Next?
Although Clash of Loyalties remains relatively unknown to mainstream audiences, interest in the film has grown among historians, documentary producers, and cinema enthusiasts exploring Iraq's cultural history.
Digitisation projects and archival preservation efforts are helping rescue lesser-known films from deterioration, ensuring that future generations can examine them as historical documents as well as artistic works. Researchers continue to study how state-sponsored cinema reflected political priorities across the Middle East during the Cold War era.
For many viewers, however, the enduring fascination lies not only in the completed film but also in the remarkable journey behind its creation. The combination of international actors, wartime production challenges, government oversight, and Oliver Reed's infamous off-screen exploits has transformed Clash of Loyalties into one of cinema's most extraordinary behind-the-scenes stories.
As historians continue to uncover personal recollections from those involved, the production offers valuable insight into how culture persisted even during one of the region's darkest conflicts.
Conclusion
The making of Clash of Loyalties stands as one of the most improbable chapters in modern film history. Conceived as Saddam Hussein's grand cinematic vision, the project survived logistical chaos, an international war, political pressure, and the unpredictable behaviour of one of Britain's most controversial actors.
Its legacy extends far beyond the screen. The film serves as a reminder that cinema is never created in isolation from the world around it. Political ambition, historical memory, artistic aspiration, and human unpredictability all shaped a production unlike any other.
For Iraq, the project symbolised an attempt to tell its own story through the language of epic filmmaking. For historians, it offers a rare window into the intersection of culture and power during a defining era of Middle Eastern history. And for audiences today, the tale behind the cameras where real bombs fell, soldiers vanished from the set, and one actor nearly brought the entire enterprise crashing down with an ill-judged prank may ultimately prove even more compelling than the film itself.
In the end, Clash of Loyalties endures not simply as a movie, but as a remarkable testament to the strange, often surreal, ways in which history and cinema can collide.
Comments
Post a Comment