The finger is on the trigger. This will launch a missile from a Drone which will kill the occupants of a house in Kenya. But before the trigger is squeezed there are innumerable drama of permission taking, politics, ethics and morals. Together they show human fallacies. Every character has his fears and vested interests which manifests itself in their actions and decisions.
The movie is about covering oneself legally first and later, ethically and morally, before one takes a decision which will kill many. There are lots of rationalizations and attempts to explain the decisions. The movie shows quite convincingly the back-end game of passing-the-buck. Also the operational side of surveillance and drone attacks.
It’s an immensely watchable movie but I can’t spare the feeling that it’s a propaganda movie too.
There are three parties in this complication. The British, the Americans and the Kenyens. They are all located in their respective countries. The British interest is to kill individuals which they have identified as terrorists, the Americans own the drone and the missile and the controllers who fly the drone and pull the trigger, and finally the Kenyans, who do the “dirty” and “riskiest” work on ground in Kenya.
Except one Kenyan Character, all the three parties are in there respective cubicles or conference rooms. They are in front of multiple computer monitors, Laptops and large screen displays, in faraway sanitized environments. The armed drone which hunts terrorists in Kenya is controlled from a portacabin somewhere in the United States.
All the three parties arrive as if doing a Nine-to-Five job. And after the job is done, the parties pack their bags and leave for home as if duty is over. The dead and the dying are left to fend for themselves in faraway Kenya.
The actions are maintained tight as the scenes move from one country and character to another. The back and forths are sewn well into the story. Characters who settled for one decision a while ago, change or renege their position a while later. Characters take a stand on a rationale then call their higher ups “cowards” when the superior takes similar stand. There are multiple “Go-Aheads” and “Holdbacks” as stray issues deflect decisions.
And finally when there is all clear, go-ahead to kill, something else happens.
neerajshrivastav 