Stoning of Soroya M. | 06/24/2009 3:00 pm
'The Stoning of Soraya M.': A Heartbreaking Film Based on a True Story (Video)
As women speak out against the tyrannical government in Iran today, an
upcoming drama about the stoning of a young woman speaks volumes about
the fundamental injustices. The film debuts in theaters June 26.
Soraya (Mozhan Marnò)
Images courtesy of MPower Pictures
Images courtesy of MPower Pictures
As the video of Neda, the young Iranian woman fatally shot on a Tehran street during a peaceful protest, haunts the world’s consciousness, an upcoming film, "The Stoning of Soraya M.", about the tragic death of a young woman, is equally telling of the struggles of humanity in Iran.
After Soraya (Mozhan Marnò) refuses to divorce her husband, who has fallen in love with a 14-year-old girl, he conspires with the local mullah (a former criminal) to accuse Soraya of infidelity. Despite a lack of proof, Soraya is found guilty of cheating on her husband and sentenced to death by stoning. Her family, fellow villagers and former friends witness her horrid death.
Throughout the film, a naive Soraya acts very complacent with her life for the sake of her family, even though she endures verbal and physical abuse from her husband and from her own sons. When asked if she has any last words, she finally speaks out against the corruption, and asks her villagers one very relevant but simple question: "How can you do this to me?"
"It is God’s law," one person says, while the local mullah says, "With each stone you throw, your honor will return."
Soraya is buried up to her chest with her arms bound. Dozens of the villagers stand around her — some with heavy pellets in their hands. Her father throws the first rock, followed by her tyrant husband. Her own children witness their mother’s slow and painful death. 
The jarring film, directed by Cyrus Nowrasteh, is based on the international bestseller The Stoning of Soraya M.: A True Story, written by Freidoune Sahebjam. Similar to the book, the movie is told through the voice of Zahra, Soraya’s aunt. Zahra (Shohreh Aghdashloo) is the only person to fight for Soraya – and even offers to take Soraya’s place. When she spots a journalist whose car has broken down, she convinces him to listen and record her words as she tells of the events that occurred in her village.
The drama is set in 1986, in a newly fundamentalist, post-revolutionary Iran, but Zahara is much like the women protesters in Iran today, who are refusing to remain silent about the unjustice unfolding. And without Zahra’s voice, "The Stoning of Soraya M." would have never existed. Only time will tell what will become of these new voices.
Real, powerful and haunting, "The Stoning of Soraya M." — though not easy to watch — is a significant film that forever resonates.
Watch a preview of the film below:
Read more about: Culture, Iran, Middle East, Movies, Neda Soltani, News, Politics, Society, Stoning of Soraya M., Video, Women's Rights
- Dear Margo: When You Think You've Heard Everything ... You Haven't
- Dear Margo: When Dad/Gramps Just Ain't Interested
- What's your viewpoint on a one-term presidency for Obama, no matter the reason?
- Could Mammograms Fall Victim to Obamacare? by Liz Peek
- Liz Smith: In a Concert Hall Far, Far Away
- Liz Smith: Sharon Stone, Steve Tyrell, Sarah (You Know Who), Glamour, Lesley Gore – and More!
- Queen Martha, by Cynthia McFadden
- Did You Ever See a Book Cry? by Sheila Nevins
- LIZ SMITH FLASH! The Kennedy Conspiracy and the Mafia
- Remember shopping pre-Internet? What era/memory in the evolution of shopping do you think of most fondly?
- Did You Ever See a Book Cry? by Sheila Nevins
- LIZ SMITH FLASH! The Kennedy Conspiracy and the Mafia
- Dear Margo: When Dad/Gramps Just Ain't Interested
- Liz Smith: Sharon Stone, Steve Tyrell, Sarah (You Know Who), Glamour, Lesley Gore – and More!
- Liz Smith: In a Concert Hall Far, Far Away
- Dear Margo: When You Think You've Heard Everything ... You Haven't
- Joan Ganz Cooney Still Shops the Way She Always Has
- Joan Ganz Cooney Looks at Unemployment, Not War
- Let Down and Felt Up? by E.D. Hill
- The World in Vogue (Photos)
- What's your viewpoint on a one-term presidency for Obama, no matter the reason?
- Could Mammograms Fall Victim to Obamacare? by Liz Peek
- Dear Margo: When You Think You've Heard Everything ... You Haven't
- Dear Margo: When Dad/Gramps Just Ain't Interested
- Did You Ever See a Book Cry? by Sheila Nevins
- Remember shopping pre-Internet? What era/memory in the evolution of shopping do you think of most fondly?
- LIZ SMITH FLASH! The Kennedy Conspiracy and the Mafia
- The Love Goddess: In Sickness and in Health ... But Hold the Sickness
- Queen Martha, by Cynthia McFadden
- Joan Ganz Cooney Looks at Unemployment, Not War
wOw Features
Reader Voices
The Palin Book, as Dear Margo Sees It
Caption This!
30 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment
" Despite a lack of proof, Soraya is found guilty of cheating on her husband and sentenced to death by stoning."
I understand that you’re attempting to highlight the illegitimacy of the trial…but, even if there was a plethora of real evidence, who cares?! The fact that a woman can be stoned to death for cheating on her husband — whether she did it or not — by those primitive, misogynist laws is the greater crime; not whether the trial was legit or not. Bad trials can happen anywhere because even the greatest laws in the world are only as good as the people who execute them (or don’t); absurd, disgusting "punishments" like that only happen in certain cultures and because of certain oppressive religious laws.
They’re the worst ones, often enough. Honor killings (murders) are often perpetrated by the possessing male (forgive the word, but that’s what it is in those cultures — possession, pure and simple). Depending on her situation, it’s either the father, brothers or husband. It often doesn’t matter what she’s done, or if she’s even done anything at all; the mere suspicion that she’s smirched the possessing male’s honor is "crime" enough. Whether it be a 12 year old riding home on a bike with a boy, or a girl talking to a soldier, or the suspicion that a girl has lost her virginity, etc., etc. — it doesn’t matter. The male who "owns" her considers that the mere suspicion is an affront, and the only redemption is her (often horrifically brutal) death.
If possible, it becomes even more disgusting and unimaginable when the mothers support and even facilitate these barbarous crimes — and sometimes they do, too.
Exactly, MK P. The "first stone" honor belonged to him. As for the 14 year old girl who the husband took as his lover, we already know what fate lies before her as well.
I think of my own precious ,deceased father, who would lie sleepless, worrying, fretting and walking the floor, until I called him, safe and sound, after a 5 hour drive back to my dorm room after a home visit.
There are so many things about our culture and mindset that gives me pause. But whenever I hear of the treatment of women and children in the middle east….it breaks my heart.
The only thing that gives me hope for them is that they are now living through what we as a nation lived through in the 60’s. An era of real and tangible change, and those that are discriminated against are rising up and demanding to be treated as equals. Slowly but surely things will change in the middle east for women and one day how they are treated today, will be a faint but sad memory.
Belinda Joy,
"….. they are now living through what we as a nation lived through in the 60’s." Other than the horrible treatment slaves edured, our nation never went through what goes on in Iran. But I get your point: it’s a revolution.
As the old people age out and the young idealistic Iranians become more potent, things will change.
Our country changed dramatically in the 60’s. You may view slavery as the only pivotal and dark chapter of our country, but that pales in comparison to the pervasive discrimination and violence our country has seen and allowed to happened since those days. I need not reach back in my memory to slavery to substantiate my comments and opinions.
Well I guess you and I view our history quite differently. Up until the 60’s women had a hard time being seen as equals and were routinely discriminated against. Women had few rights and for decades accepted their second class status. We were slapped on the butt by males in the work place, objectified and demeaned.
Minorities were not allowed to live, work, socialize, learn in the areas they wanted. Blacks up to (and in some instances beyond) were lynched on a regular basis and murdered at a steady clip. Iran has its militias and we had the KKK terrorizing and bombing buildings throughout the U.S. The 40’s were a time when Asians and Italians were placed in interment camps, and everyone was suspected of being a communists. So Andrea in my eyes we (Americans) lived through decades of horror, pain, death and destruction, until the time was just right for massive and sweeping change. And when it happened many people gave their lives for the changes we experienced, just as Iran is going through today.
Hi, Belinda,
As someone who was in both high school and college in the 60’s and saw the changes in America, and having spent a fair amount of time in the Middle East, I find the degree of change decidedly different between US and Iran.
US:
During the 60’s we could voice our opinions and have protests without the government having overwhelming control. I’m not saying that KKK bombings or placement in interment camps wasn’t damned frightful, but the reality is that the whole US had a government that represented the people. American women in the 60’s were treated as second class citizens, but they were also key manipulators - they knew how to get what they wanted from their spouses or fathers. They could cut their hair and dress as they pleased. Slap on the butt in the American workplace? No comparison to being stoned to death in Iran. Americans for the most part have never had to walk on eggshells; it’s a 24/7 occurrence in Iran.
Iran:
Women have not been able to radically reverse and fight back these strict laws because it can lead to serious reactions. And yet four decades earlier they had more rights. They have basically fallen from the near-top of the totem pole.
1925-1979 Pahlavi Dynasty1979 and > : the Khoumeni Years
Almost immediately upon assumption of power by Khomeini, women protested the policies of the Islamic government.
- In courts a woman’s testimony is worth half of what a man’s is. This applies to many basic rights - just half of what he is entitled.
- Women had to go back to wearing the hijab.
- Separation of the genders in every venue was the rule once again.
- Females who didn’t cover all parts of their body, except hands and face, were subject to punishment of up to seventy lashes or sixty days imprisonment.
- Men could again abandon wives by simple declaration, while wives had no judicial recourse for divorce.
- Children of divorce went to the father and widowed mothers could lose their children to the nearest male relative.
- Many women rights activists who challenged the reversal of these laws were arrested, jailed or banned from working.
In summary women lost most of the rights they gained few decades earlier under Pahlavi dynasty. With the 2005 election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, women’s rights advocates have been beaten, jailed and persecuted. While I’ve focused on women’s rights and restrictions in Iran, I think a comparison between those of American women in the 60’s compared to Iranian women today are a far cry from similar. Imagine going backwards.SG,
I agree that one death is one too many. But the issue at hand was comparing change in the US in the 60’s versus what’s happening in Iran today.
Yes, Katydid, I agree. I remember being out of college and working for a few years when FINALLY the mega-corp I worked for allowed women to wear nicely tailored pant-suits. Until then it was no pants of any kind. Kind of makes me angry know that women didn’t have the wherewithal to just do it. What’s that old saying?
Better to ask forgiveness than to ask permission.
They’re still protesting in Iran. Of course you wouldn’t know it with Michael Jackson being in the headlines all this time. I think some people in broadcasting and other websites have a screwed up sense of priorities.
Oh Andrea, you don’t want to get me started on that topic… Iran, N. Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan all have hot button situations going on currently and yet Michael Jackson is all you see or hear. Ok, he died and it’s a sad thing, but the rest of the world doesn’t stop while we wring our hands and review every thing the man ever did or said (and what his family says, what his doctor says, what his past friends say, what his fans say, what everyone who ever worked with him says, what his neighbor from 20 years ago says…)
I agree with you 100%, but in my opinion, the priorities in broadcasting have been screwed up for some time now - this is just the latest manifestation and a prime example of why I gave up watching TV - my priorities differ greatly from the powers that be.