fictional character. I liked the story though. I felt really disappointed when I discovered that he didn't actually exist. After that the whole point of the movie feels a bit meaningless now. One of the main characters is based on a historic figure and the other one is imaginary. When the two come together it makes the whole story kind of fictitious, while they are presenting it as based on facts.
shareFiction can illustrate truth sometimes.I learned that after reading The Gulag Archipelago. The Last King of Scotland got the essence of what happens when clueless meets ruthless.
Just think of this film as another entry in the "The Dictator " genre. Sorry you were disappointed-if you didn't know that the film was adapted from a novel I can understand. Peace out.
Nicholas was loosely based on a real character, Bob Astles. Although he was a businessman rather than a doctor, he had the similar role of Idi Amin's hanger-on/token white flunky. And, like Nicholas, he suffered badly for it when he was no longer in Amin's good books. So there is some truth to the story.
When darkness overcomes the heart, Lil' Slugger appears...
I'm glad that no real Nicholas got his nipples ripped off though. :/ How was he not scared by Amin from the start? I would've been, he was too in your face and wanted to be best friends for no particular reason.
shareHe probably thought he'd take advantage of the good life Amin gave him, as long as he could. Plus, he must have felt powerful, being at a dictator's side in that way.
shareTruth. Nothing seduces like power, or the illusion of sharing it. Also dictators combine charm,persuasion, and menace. Nicholas was the type to react before thinking long-term. (Good trait for an ER or military doctor on active duty,though.) Once he started "living large" he didn't analyze the situation until events forced him to.
share[deleted]