The Ambassador (2011) User Reviews

Fascinating, funny and frustrating

[signemarie · 8/10 · 24 January 2012]

Be advised that curiosity seem to be the major drive behind this movie. Not righteousness. Mads Brügger doesn't judge or morally question the conduct of the people in his movie, and to be honest, I found it incredibly refreshing! The movie asks a bunch of questions: How are diamonds smuggled out of Africa? How does one become a part of this corrupt diplomacy in the first place? And lots more! Yes, some of them remain unanswered – I didn't mind terribly.

Seeking answers, Mads Brügger turns himself into a neocolonialist cliché: The Ambassador. Name a stereotypical trait of a white, corrupt diplomat in Africa and you can be sure this Ambassador does it, says it, smokes it or wears it. His tailor made khaki suits, super glossy burgundy riding boots, silver cuff-links and constant smoking of (expensive) cigars... it's all a part of telling the story of how one man made his way into the business of diamonds and fake diplomacy. That's what you should watch it for.

Overall I found the Ambassador immensely fascinating and in some places funny, but informative at the same time. I learned something and I was entertained. Well done!

Real Africa!

[petarmatic · 7/10 · 29 March 2014]

This documentary is a real insight into dealing and wheeling in Central African Republic. I heard all the bad things about that country. It seems that it is bad as they say. It looks that they are not only corrupt but cannibals as well. It gives me shivers down my spine.

I am sorry to say that more and more countries in the world look as failed states as they CAR. It really shows us in what sorry state Africa is in.

Just few days they showed footage of people trying to get into Mellia, so desperate to get to Europe.

More and more people like that are coming all the time from the failed states of Africa.

Nothing can be done to stop that.

A worthwhile documentary with interesting content and a bit of humor.

[moonlightrain · 10/10 · 21 July 2012]

Mads Brugger plays his character well as an under cover shady diplomat. It is humorous simply because you know he is faking it and everyone around him is taking him seriously.

The fact of the matter is that Mads Brugger was really risking his life to get this footage. There was no abort button, if things went horribly wrong we wouldn't even have this documentary. I would have liked him to go deeper into the shadow-world of Africa, but the fact of the matter is that he could have ended up dead in a ditch. He is lucky that he did not.

This is not a documentary about morals, it is simply a documentary about how easy it is for the wealthy to become involved in corrupt government. It shows how far money can go in a corrupt society. The fact of the matter is that as stated in the movie, 2,500 of people were registered as Ambassadors to that single country in one year. That is just to give you an idea of how many wealthy people are living this lifestyle.

A must-see mocumentary about blood diamond trading

[Benno_Hansen · 9/10 · 22 September 2011]

Mads Brügger - whose last documentary consisted entirely of ultra rare recordings from deep inside North Korea - is releasing a new documentary; this time about corruption in the Central African Republic (CAR). Not posing as a diplomat, but having bribed his way to actual diplomatic immunity, Mads travels to the capital Bangui to set up a consulate and mingle with shady businessmen and poor, clueless locals.

A lot of the footage has been captured with hidden cameras, hence of less than perfect quality, the rest with a Canon 5D which no-one in the entire country recognized as a film camera. Real life crooks exposing themselves include European dealers of diplomatic passports, local criminals / businessmen, the now dead chief of the CAR secret service and some international diplomats.

It appears corruption is more widespread than most would assume. Illegal trading in diamonds is much more widespread than most could imagine. And that France, the former colonial master, is still meddling in affairs there - in a completely amoral fashion.

A must-see for anyone interested in foreign aid, blood diamonds, international diplomacy, the exploitation of Africa or just how to do a documentary. Genre-wise it is related to the works of Michael Moore and Sacha Baron Cohen, I'd say. Don't miss it.

The Absurd Reality We Live in

[johne8-600-911582 · 9/10 · 5 February 2013]

It seems that all the less than positive reviews of this film have failed to realize the genre of the film--that is absurdism. Attempting to create an argument through logical and deductive reasoning--in the sense that everything be perfectly scripted and organized--utterly fails to consider the wider spectroscope of human nature. Absurdism tends to lends itself a generous victim to narrow and short-sighted attacks and criticism-- searching for meaning in an otherwise meaningless reality. Welcome to the wold of contradiction and compromise--in other words--reality. Watching or reading such genres never fails to stoke up some amount of internal conflict--yet somehow feel an awkward (e.g. absurd) connection.

Superb!

[mefisto222 · 10/10 · 16 January 2014]

I cought this documentary by searching my TV channels. In fact, friend of mine was involved in gold mine business in Mali. His experience is very close to that of Mads. Very bizarre way of living, full of betrayals, corruption, promises and dissappoitments. Mads' experience was rather a happy end, one of a few in this business. Anyway, the story-telling, camera and selected characters are perfect. You can get very fast into the story and enjoy absurdity of the neo-colonial style of living. You become part of this crazy business. You wonder that you are in 21st century. In addition, his acting performance is great. Therefore thumb up Mads!

Redundant

[billcr12 · 5/10 · 15 June 2012]

The Ambassador looks like a ninety minute version of the television news program 60 Minutes, with only Mike Wallsce jumping out for a confrontation missing. A Danish man finds a couple of different companies who sell diplomatic credentials for cash. Using a series of videos from hidden cameras, he shows the widespread corruption which crosses all national and racial boundaries. A major problem is, although most of the meetings are in English, many are in French, without translation.

He buys an official diplomacy for $130,000 and sets up a match factory with an Indian guy as cover for diamond mining. Thousands of such "diplomacies" are uncovered by the filmmaker, which isn't a big surprise to anyone who watches the news. Everyone has a price, as the saying goes, and even here in America, we have over 30,000 lobbyists, who bribe government officials every day to pass laws favorable to their clients.

As far as the documentary goes, it is extremely redundant, with endless meetings with officials being paid off for helping the "diplomat" do business in Africa. The Ambassador is done with a satirical bent, but is never very funny, given the subject matter in the end, which is blood diamonds. Overall, it is a sad commentary on the human race; we are all doomed.

A very well made documentary

[hokrollo · 9/10 · 19 January 2012]

This documentary is both very funny, and very serious at the same time. Digging into a widely known topic, which on the other hand never gets exploited.

While the evidence may be rather thin, you're not in doubt what is happening the most of the time. And when the evidence are not there at all, there's usually the humerus way of exploiting the corrupt people in the process.

So overall a very good original humerus foreign political documentary, which still contains some good inside on the topic. The 9 is for the really creative way this is made, and thereby it's originality compared to similar documentaries.

Enjoy.

very disappointing

[laura_13-898-503657 · 3/10 · 20 November 2011]

I watched this movie as it was selected as the opening film of the Dutch documentary film festival IDFA in 2011. It was a big disappointment. It's completely unclear to me what point the film maker wants to make here. There is not a single proof of 'real' diamond smuggling. The film only contains a lot of suggestive references to illegal behaviour by others without any confirmation. It rather seems like the film maker was not able to collect enough evidence for what he set out to do. However, the film maker himself obviously did engage in ethical questionable behaviour.

Even without watching the film, it's obvious that in a country such as the Central African Republic in its current state with e.g. a poor human rights situation and a history of civil war, one cannot expect the same standards of legal and ethical behaviour that we expect in the developed world. However, a statement such as 'there is a ruling political class in the capital which spends most of its time on illegal activities' without any further references adds no value whatsoever.

I also have no understanding for the approach of portraying himself as the parody of a 'neo-colonial' businessman. It's occasionally mildly funny, but beyond that rather feels embarrassing for the film maker himself than for the Africans who go along with his behaviour.

Thus, overall this film is neither worth watching nor worth the attention it got.

Muddled message

[p-stepien · 3/10 · 25 January 2013]

Crack reporter Mads Brugger invokes his inner Sascha Baron Cohen to turn into a Liberian diplomat searching for blood diamonds and the corruption surrounding it. Through his journey he comes into contact with brokers, who deal in diplomatic papers, thus offering despicable white guys opportunities to practise shady business matters in Africa. Laden with cash and an ultimate pre-ordained goal (of uncovering the blood diamonds trade), he dons a white suit, immerses himself into an eccentric European persona with racial stereotypes and ludicrous point of views, soon raining down on the Central African Republic, one of the most corrupt failed states in the world.

Despite touching some extremely fascinating issues, such as the brokerage in diplomatic passports, post-colonial back-room dealings and the mechanisms of power and money, "The Ambassador" poses several very problematic issues in terms of artistic honesty, limited contemplation and matter sensitivity by the director as well as some starkly distracting manipulative tactics. When Brugger is in character generally anything goes, much like the famed Borat, but unlike his British predecessor the Dutch director fails to capture the same controversial feedback, instead our quirky diplomat talks absurd nonsense to liven up proceedings with his unknowing counterparts just letting the powerful white dude churn out drivel, at best nodding in belated agreement. However the problem area lies in the overriding outlook by Mads Brugger, who often narrates his close-minded point of view, unfortunately one quagmired in generalisations, ignorance and a permeating lack of sensitivity. The basic message and ultimate downfall of Brugger being: "This is Africa", as if a documentary about Belarus could be summarised as "This is Europe". The Heart of Darkness is obviously invoked (despite the fact that the 'heart of darkness' by Conrad actually wasn't placed in Africa, but inside white colonialists), while Brugger dishes out overly generalised comments hidden within 'jokey punts' for the effect factor, making him almost as derogatory a character as his 'false diplomat' persona.

"The Ambassador" also feels overly fabricated as Mad Brugger has his mind set on reaching the pre-conceived conclusions, and if the facts say otherwise then f%^& the facts - such as the unapologethically misinformed attack on Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, which concludes the documentary. Another stark example: when shown a picture of what in my eyes looked like an amiable and friendly looking Asian, Brugger surprisingly narrates about how this person looks 'shady' (why? because he's Chinese?). The director's quest for so-called 'blood diamonds' ends up looking like a wild goose chase, but when he finally comes across a partner in business, it turns out that Brugger has a self-proclaimed definition of what 'blood diamonds' are (apparently government licensed diamonds mines using crude artisinal extraction methods qualifies as 'blood mining'). The stronger questions regarding corruption, the whole audacity of trading in diplomatics credentials and power mechanisms seems overshadowed by Brugger's incessant focus on getting a big story, instead of focusing on the small issues exposed to form the big picture.

The most divisive and contemptuous matters occur when Mads Bruger decides to have some mock fun at the expense of Pygmies, a side of the narrative, which should have been cut out for the director's sake, as he comes out as extremely exploitative and tasteless. A issue very well summarised by Docutopia reviewer Anthony Kaufman: "Thus, like the political stunts of Michael Moore, sometimes they work brilliantly when the target is right, as in Bowling for Columbine, when he goes after K-mart for selling bullets; but not when that target is misplaced, as when he goes after ailing NRA president Charlton Heston in the same film, trying to make him feel responsible for the shooting death of a young girl." Thus the inherent problem of Mads Bruger himself often feeling like the most embarrassing thing in the movie, something that "Borat" managed to avoid despite the titular hero running around with buttocks exposed in a five star hotel.