Starring Shohreh Aghdashloo, Mozhan Marnò, and James Caviezel The Stoning of Soraya M. portrays the political and social repression of post-revolution Iran through the eyes of a woman unjustly accused and fatally punished for the crime of adultery. The graphic violence depicted is a brutal reminder of what ordinary Iranians face on a daily basis, most recently during the post-election uprising in Tehran and throughout the country. Yesterday I got a chance to interview Cyrus Nowrasteh, director of this brand new and very timely film:

Jonathan: Where did you get the inspiration to write and direct a movie about something so far away and esoteric to the American mind as a public stoning?

Cyrus: I’m a filmmaker and I am looking to tell great stories, but I’m also an American of Iranian heritage. I read this book it’s based on a true story. It was published in ‘94 in this country. It was originally published in Europe. The account is from the journalist who brought the story out of Iran about a stoning. It is a riveting, emotional, heartbreaking, and inspiring story. I felt it would make a powerful movie about a subject too few people know about.

My wife who is also a screenwriter who wrote the screenplay with me is American born and she connected on a very fundamental level with the story and the characters. And I felt that other people would respond in the same way. Audiences are desperate for good stories about something meaningful. I don’t care where they are, whether they’re connected, find it disconnected, we are all human beings.

Jonathan: Did you ever expect the release of The Stoning to coincide with something as huge as the recent election uproar in Iran?

Cyrus: No, we planned the release 2 weeks after the election, but we did not expect the turmoil in Iran that erupted as a result. It turned out to be very timely.

Jonathan: The film takes place in a post-revolutionary and very rural Iran, circa the mid 1980’s. The new clerical guard had already established rule. The movie depicts corrupt politicians who take advantage of the new power structure and impose draconian law on the rest of the community.

We also see a defiant woman, Zahra, the aunt of Soraya, played by Shoreh Aghdashloo, as the central and defiant voice of the film. In such a repressive society, how do we come to hear such a strong female voice and how does such a character come to be adapted to film?

Cyrus: The story got out by a French-Iranian journalist who interviewed Zahra.

There are strong women everywhere. Including in repressive countries. We’ve seen such strong women out on the streets of Tehran demonstrating against the Iranian government including some being killed in camera view like this young woman Neda. Sometimes the strongest ones are in repressive countries and they are trying to be heard. That’s what Zahra in her story was doing and that’s what Neda was doing.

Jonathan: How crucial is their voice within this movement?

Cyrus: I think it's very crucial. From what we have seen on the streets, Neda has become the voice of the revolution, the images; what happened to her, and what has happened since has been picked up and talked about all over the media, newspapers, everywhere. Women I think were the essential voice of this movement in recent weeks.

Jonathan: Similar to Zahra’s communication with the French-Iranian journalist and the symbolism of Neda, we have seen on Twitter, Facebook and Youtube, the Iranian people's desire to be global citizens, reporting news to Americans of the protests and crackdowns from Tehran. Has there been a long held desire not to be insulated from the West?

Cyrus: Very much so. In Iran, generally the population is better educated than most other Middle Eastern countries. They also have wider access to the internet.

I think there is more fascination with the outside world, democracy and the West. That’s why I think there is more opportunity for change inside Iran, more than in any other country in the region.

Jonathan: There is also this issue of Islamic virtue. We see Zahra invoke the phrase “allah akbar” (“god is great”) we also see this among the protesters crying from the rooftops at night. Is there an incompatibility with the progress and freedom that comes with adapting to the modern world while staying true to Islamic traditions?

Cyrus: It just depends on the individual’s interpretation. I think you have a struggle inside Islam. Some people perceive Islam as needing reform, and needing to connect with the modern world. Others say that any such desire is anti-Islam. I think Zahra is invoking god into the terms in which she understands which is as a merciful god and not as an instrument of any personal agenda like so many other characters in the movie.

Jonathan: Complimented by your film, with the wide media exposure of this regime’s brutal tactics, do you believe that there are irreparable rifts within the leadership and more negative public perceptions, which might possibly open the gates for a free Iran?

Cyrus: I certainly hope so. We will have to wait and see. What I fear is that they managed to put the uprising down for the moment and we’re not going to hear from these students for a while. The media here is (reporting) Michael Jackson, Mark Sanford, or whatever ridiculous story they’re on to. I think the media needs to stay on point with Iran and really put the regime’s feet to the fire because now the regime is trying to claim that this is all a media conspiracy and all these demonstrators were stirred up. I just hope this is not a story forgotten.

Jonathan: By helping to bring this issue to forefront — I assume the audience is widely Western and American — do you think there is a moral obligation for intervention?

Cyrus: Intervention at what level?

Jonathan: As far as speaking up or stepping up pressure.

Cyrus: I think the Iranian people and the demonstrators are very conscious of foreign perception of what’s going on inside the country and the need for foreign support. I think that although he started off kind of tepid, the President’s message has gotten a little bit more forceful in the past week. I hope he stays that way, but the real proof will be in the pudding. Let’s say indeed this revolt is put down and the Iranian government tries to go back to normal. Will the American government or administration sit down as if nothing has changed with the Iranian regime? If they do that then what does that say? What is the message that is sent? I think the real test will be to see how the administration deals with the Iranian government down the line.

Jonathan: Thank you so much Cyrus for your time

Cyrus: I appreciate it.