Rodrigo Amaro The documentary "Général Idi Amin Dada: Autoportrait" directed by Barbet Schroeder ("Murder by Numbers" and "The Reversal of Fortune") presents us the self-portrait of one of the most mindless dictators ever existed, the megalomaniac Idi Amin Dada, Uganda leader from 1971 to 1979. Self-portraits are dangerous in the measure that the audience will only get what the portrayed wants to reveal about himself, which is his good side, after all who wants to show his own bad temper and mean deeds to the world?It would be a funny picture, since most of the time Dada appears to camera always smiling, joking around about anything (the 'Save the British' fund with Uganda donations destined to England's poor economy at the time was hilarious), if we weren't forced to remember who the man on the screen is and why he's not funny. He might not appear as the cannibal some say he was, or the man who commanded the murder of thousands of people (the film only mentions the Minister of Foreign Affairs, who was alive during the making of the film, a voice over explain he was killed two weeks later, presumably because he wasn't effective in his duty), he might not appear as a bad man at all but we can sense his craziness, the absurd in the things he exposes or even in his fight against Israel. The guy is nuts and it was unbelievable someone like him had the chance to be the leader of a nation. But that's what power makes with people, it makes them greedy, blind to other peoples problems, it makes them unreasonable. And he was all that!The film doesn't add anything interesting but it's not Schroeder's fault, it's Dada's own fault this being something almost irrelevant. He controlled everything, he wanted to present his tender moments with his 18 sons, or his Discovery Channel moments where the crocodiles and a elephant pay tribute to the man (so he thinks that's what the animals are doing). And politically speaking this man and the film have nothing good to say except a enormous contradiction when Idi says he likes Nixon but hates Kissinger, both part of U.S. government. The guy didn't had a clue of what he was saying, making his presence here something laughable rather than a dignifying portrait of his legacy, and he could have made so much more for his country.It's good for historical references, it has its importance, quite good to watch but that's it. The man illustrated here was so light, so funny and so friendly that Forest Whitaker's Oscar winning performance in "The Last King of Scotland" was more terrifying and more realistic than Dada himself. 6/10

bandw This documentary is unique in my experience, offering as it does in-depth interviews and real-time personal footage of a notorious dictator, with his full cooperation.Idi Amin ruled Uganda from 1971-1979 during which time it is reputed that some 300,000 Ugandans were put to death. Given Amin's reputation I was expecting him to have the personality of a Stalin, but not so. In many ways he seemed to be a fun-loving, likable guy. For example, at a dance he would play an accordion-like instrument, dance and joke around. He seemed to have a genuine appreciation for wildlife and the countryside. But as the movie went on you began to feel that behind the bonhomie was a personality disorder. For one thing he was delusional - he had, or said he had, a hatred of the Jews and in one scene he was seen staging a mock invasion and capture of the Golan Heights. This was a pretty pathetic performance - a few dozen soldiers with a helicopter backup. The thing that makes the movie interesting is that you can never quite figure Amin out. Did he actually believe that he could take the Golan Heights, or were the maneuvers just a game?He would do crazy things like establish a fund for England and offer food for the starving English. He made the comment that United Kingdom Prime Minister Edward Heath would not come to visit him because Heath would only visit weak leaders. Did Amin believe these things, or was he grandstanding? I think Amin's agreeing to participate in this endeavor indicates a certain innocence, or was it arrogance?The filming of a cabinet meeting caused a little chill to go up my spine. Amin instructed his cabinet members to make decisions on their own saying that he wanted strong, independent men to occupy those posts. But then he contradicted himself saying that they could call him any time for advice - even at 2 AM. And, in a voice-over, the director pointed out that one of the ministers who had made a poor decision was mysteriously found dead in a river a couple of weeks later. This cabinet meeting offers perhaps the deepest insight into Amin's rule: contradictory, unfocused, emotional, threatening, and avuncular. Given the fact of Amin's participation and that many of the scenes were staged, the horrors perpetrated by his regime are not treated here, but those horrors are the biggest part of his legacy.Giving absolute power to anybody is a bit problematic, but giving it to someone as quirky as Amin produced some pretty bizarre results.

bendunlap This documentary film is extraordinary in its own right. However, it is the interviews with director Babet Schroder (found on the DVD release of the film), specifically his retelling of the events around the time of the premiere of the movie in Paris, that propel this film to the level of incredible.Idi Amin's Autoportrait is most relevant today for its capacity to show an instance before more secretive, media-savvy dictators became the norm. Leaders today are of course still perfectly willing to say absurd things on film but, unlike that of Idi Amin's Autoportrait, today's spin is formidable. Key to this film's relevance is that one's imagination need not go far to consider what similarly candid documentaries of certain infamous dictators might look like if footage of them also escaped editing by political pressure. Following the premiere, this film was temporarily edited due to pressure from Idi Amin but thankfully was later restored to become an incisive portrait of the man. Such a portrait of any world leader would probably be quite difficult if not impossible today, making it a very relevant benchmark for those interested in how today's dictators interact (or don't) with media they don't fully control. Among other things, this film is especially of use for those interested in the extremes of state-society relations.

Michael Kenmore I saw the film on rental DVD which is out of print and very difficult to get ahold of if no out of print VHS copy is available. This is a compelling and fascinating documentary on the former and ousted Uganda dictator Idi Amin Dada who thought it would be ideal as a positive public relations tool to use a documentary film to voice his views. It proved the opposite as you watch the film that maintains truth and objectivity while letting Idi expound his opinions to inform the viewers of his views and justify his decisions as the despotic ruler of Uganda between 1971 and 1979. It's an amazingly candid documentary about a candid dictator who at first seems like a nice, jollying person to hang out in the beginning of the film but turns out to be a perverted-beyond-humanity, murderous, blood-thirsty schizophrenic psychopath as an illiterate military commander-turned-dictator thirsting and gnawing on bestial cruelty and bloodshed as a stronghold on ultimate power that is a toxin of the mind, heart and soul. The documentary barely shows any atrocity except at the beginning, but the way Idi engages the documentary crew with his inane, egotistical, delusional and bizarre ramblings on-camera should ice-chill the spine of every conscientious viewer who paid attention to watch this historically important film since Idi Amin Dada recently died from multiple organ failure in a Saudi Arabia hospital in August 2003.For a brief but detailed account of Idi Amin Dada's sheer scope of violence and brutality under the Dada regime, I recommend "The Most Evil Men and Women in History" by Miranda Twiss available only at Barnes & Nobles. It astounds me that one of the worst and most barbaric dictators of the 20th century lived to be an old man without prosecution for crimes against humanity. Without Barbet Schroeder's brutally honest documentary, we would not be aware of what was inside the warped mind of Idi Amin to justify the horror bestowed upon the victims in the wrong place at the wrong time from all directions in Uganda under his coup d'etat rule.Truly, we have the real Hannibal Lecter on film and that is General Amin. A rare film that's so bone-chilling it's scary just listening to Amin's speeches with his strange, barely contorted facial expression - and it's in real-life. The embodiment of evil personified by Amin on film.