I reject any narrative that says this film maker is at fault for the American deaths. Seems to me that the Muslim fanatics are at fault.
The film just dramatized the same questionably unproven background stories about the life of Mohammed that several people on this forum always repeat as fact. I have no idea what history says, but he just tried to tell that story, and I’m sure never thought it would be used to rile up so many people like that. Still was pretty crummy to have the actors not know what they were working on, but CNN is committing the far more obvious deed of endangering lives just to tell a story.
"I have no idea what history says..."
My challenge to you is to research the history, using orthodox Muslim sources (Koran, Haddiths, etc) to see if any of the scenes in the movie portray generally accepted events in the life & deeds of Mohammed.
A quick search on the scene of the old woman pulled apart by camels found this:
"http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-elderly.htm"
"She was a very old woman, wife of Malik. Her daughter [and another] were also taken. Zayd ordered Qays to kill Umm Qirfa and he killed her cruelly by putting a rope between her legs and to two camels and driving them until they rent her in two). (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 980)"
"Ibn Ishaq/Hisham" 980 appears to refer to Ibn Ishaq, an early Muslim historian.
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Ishaq"
"Ibn Ishaq collected oral traditions that formed the basis of the most important biography of the Islamic prophet Muhammad."
Parts of his book, "Sīrat Rasūl Allāh" were copied by Ibn Hisham.
"The original text of the Sīrat Rasūl Allāh by Ibn Ishaq (Medina 85 A.H.; Bagdad 151 ) did not survive. Yet it was one of the earliest substantial biographies of Muhammad. Fortunately, as noted above, much of the original text was copied over into a work of his own by Ibn Hisham (Basra; Fustat c. 218 A.H.).[14]"
"In hadith studies, ibn Isḥaq's hadith is generally thought to be "good" (ḥasan) (assuming an accurate and trustworthy isnad, or chain of transmission)[23] and himself having a reputation of being "sincere" or "trustworthy" (ṣadūq)."
Thus, it appears that the most shocking scene in the movie YouTube trailer has a basis in historical references generally accepted by Muslims.
Now we are left with the question, "Is Truth a sufficient defense against charges of Defamation?"