The Last King Of Scotland

Review By Phil Gray

Pack up your bags, lads and lasses, we’re off to Africa. More specifically, Uganda in Africa, it’s the 1970’s and it’s coup time! The Last King of Scotland focuses on the adventures of Nicholas Garrigan, a doctor who enjoys having mishaps in Africa. Written by Giles Foden, the book is split into two parts. The first half is all about Nicholas Garrigan and his first taste of African medicine. The second half deals with the fun and games he has with Idi Amin (if you can call being in fear of your life every day fun). It’s a charming book with a great deal of character, like a warm whiskey on a winter’s day, followed by your favourite stew with a dumpling on the side. The first half of the book would be the warm whiskey while the second is your favourite stew, with the dumpling you’re not sure you want to swallow whole.

The first half is better than the second, now that isn’t so hard to warm up to with that glass of whiskey in your hand. I’ll explain why the first half is the better functioning half; a man living in a pillar box, smoking a pipe. It’s as easy as that, all the interesting characters are in the first part of the book. While the ones you don’t really want to swallow are in the second half. The first half has the awkward romance between Sara (an Israeli doctor) and Nicholas Garrigan while the second half has Nicholas Garrigan wanting to change his pants within the first chapter (fear does that, even to doctors). The pants changing occurs all the way through the second half, even at the end with the phone call out of the blue, ‘who is it darling, oh it’s just the ex-dictator of Uganda, I won’t be long’.

Welcome to the playboys mansion in Africa! I think they should have renamed the film of The Last King of Scotland to ‘The First Swinger in Africa’. Garrigan (played by James McAvoy) gets his groove on even before all the credits have gone up. Yep, he meets a woman on the bus in Africa, cracks joke about monkeys being deep fried in Scotland and then he’s got her riding his bicycle with both wands in the air. Smoother than 007, Garrigan in the film gets the girls, gadgets and a swift getaway (albeit after a slight kicking and being hung from meat hooks). If Sean Connery was thirty years younger he could have easily played Garrigan, I was half expecting James McAvoy to come out with the famous line, shaken but not stirred, whilst jiggling ladies coconuts.


Not only does Garrigan get it on with a random African lady, he tries it on with the X-files lady (Gillian Anderson playing Sarah) when that fails he sets his sights higher and bags one of Idi Amin’s wives. That does not end up well, as he successfully gets Amin’s wife pregnant which ends with some of her body parts being swopped around. Yes, the film does have some unpleasant scenes amongst the naked bosoms and cool tunes. It gets darker as the film progresses, more people die and Garragan is caught up in the ugly world of African politics. Policies such as ridding Uganda of all the Indian Asians, meaning that Garragan has to make his own suits and can’t buy earl grey tea anywhere.

The differences between the book and film of The Last King of Scotland are vast. At no point in the book does Nicholas Garrigan go gun crazy, shooting all the cattle within a hundred miles just so he can concentrate on his bandaging dictator’s scout’s badge. The film concentrates on action, sex and death while the book is slower paced, concentrating more on bumbling, inadequacy and fear. The film is streamlined, like an Olympic diver, it does an impressive pirouette, double twist and triple tuck before hitting the water with a minimum amount of splash. The book is more like an old fashioned bomber, someone who jumps off the high diving board, rolls into a ball and causes all the water in the pool to exit whilst they land.

I wonder if I can fit some more analogies in. If Mike Tyson was the film, it’d bite both of the ears off the book. If George Lucas was the book, it’d wear a wookie suit so it could rip the arms off the film (in slow motion). Okay, end of analogies, the film is better than the book. Don’t gasp so loudly! The film is a very succinct piece of work while the book is flabby and suffers from Nicholas Garragan being too much of a fool. If you like interesting characters, read the first half of the book with a warm whiskey. If you like James Bond shenanigans, watch the film while squinting with one eye (Forest Whitaker impressions make the film better). I’m off to squint at a cow and practice medicine with my baseball bat.