She is so talented. Just re-watched Zero Dark Thirty for the fourth time. It's a truly exceptional piece of filmmaking. The tension she manages to create whilst developing rounded performances and constructing outstanding set pieces is second to none. Look forward to seeing what she makes next.
@@Danleesixdoublefive321 Not this person, I don't agree. She makes good films. That said, I would agree Hollywood has gone to the dogs since it stopped entertaining and started preaching. Disney are the main ringmasters and boy have they paid a steep price for it.
If you pay attention to Leon Panetta’s very carefully chosen words, none of them contradict what we’re shown in the movie: “In the end, no detainee in CIA custody revealed the facilitator/courier’s full true name or specific whereabouts. This information was discovered through other intelligence means.” THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT WE SEE. The ‘enhanced interrogation’, or more specifically the good cop phase following a bad cop phase, is what reveals the courier’s nom du guerre. It’s this that puts Maya on the right trail, but needs to be followed up with plenty of other surveillance, bribery, sigint, clue-following etc. Panetta chose his words to play down the idea that torture played a role in finding Bin Laden. But it clearly did. That doesn’t mean torture is a good thing. But ZD30 is not pro-torture propaganda; it’s just telling the story of what happened.
What did you think went on at Guantanamo Bay? Yes, she embellished the scene to make it seem like more information was given than actually was, but don't kid yourself with fairytales of a world where governments don't torture terrorists for information. They keep it quiet, but they do it. Is it right are necessary? I don't know. But i do know as an artist it is her job to tell the truth.
I haven't seen Zero Dark Thirty yet. I have seen The Hurt Locker. More than once. And perhaps there are people who see that as a piece of propaganda, but they then watched it through entirely different glasses than I did. I saw nothing that glorified the war in THL. I saw an adrenalin junkie seeking his thrills at any cost, I saw an experienced soldier near the end of the line, and I saw a confused young boy looking to both of them for support. So to me it was an amazing character-study.
Very lucky to make changes during development before production. It could have been very costly for the budget and might have stop production entirely,. In general, love the script, especially the opening scene and the finale. Excellent work Director and DP. .
I was military police in Saigon on duty and was led into a basement room where they had a prisoner tied to a chair. They tortured him with electric wires, I walked out. But torture is as old as the christian inquisitions and will never stop.
Superb film, and riveting and important. And real. But the title of the film makes me crazy. NO military person says "zero dark thirty." They say "0-dark-thirty." The title alone makes any military person sneer at the film as amateurish and uninformed, which is a shame because it's an excellent film. And NO - it doesn't "glorify torture." What a stupid and ignorant remark. The film isn't about torture. It's about the people who took down Ósame Bin Laden, and how they did it, and they are heroes. Bravo Bigelow.
People fixate on condemning torture because it gives them validation of frustration they are feeling. It makes them feel morally or even intellectually superior to the "system" that they feel is responsible for their problems. It's the kind of thinking that forms "occupy movements". In the end it isn't about the torture or any other issue on it's face. There's more behind it. It's just another piece of the picture people are creating for themselves of the world that they love to blame.
10 years in the future but here goes. To counterpoint, there's also the tendency to overidentify with 'the world' (read: society) such that it causes distress when 'the world' is criticised. Society is not strictly the world. It has naturalistic elements in that it is vast and operates largely outside individual control. But we tend to conflate socio-economic structures with natural structures (using all-encompassing terms like 'the world'). There are issues that follow from that. For instance, Social Darwinism presumes an understanding of nature as a dog-eat-dog system when likely that is just Capitalism projected onto nature which is then held up as some anarcho-primitivist ideal. Real anarchist scholars like Kropotkin challenged that idea of the natural, demonstrating that cooperation can be just as prevalent in nature as the former. Social Darwinists tend to think they are speaking of nature and of 'life' when really they could be just creating _a priori_ justifications for their own societies. I'm guessing this is because, as middle or upper class citizens, they benefit from these forms of social organisation.
To say someone is for this war simply because she shows the truth of the hunt for Osama or because they show what happens behind the scenes in war is insulting. If you think a movie is going to effect interrogation techniques you are sorely mistaken. Also, focus on your own country.... They had to pay Iraq off because they tortured so many people
A snippet from and article in The Guardian about English torture methods. "The claimant, an Iraqi citizen, was arrested on 16 November 2006 by British soldiers. They beat him severely, slammed him against a wall and forced him into a stress position in which they stood on his knees and back. His 11-month-old son's arm was stamped on and broken, and his father had to urinate on himself ... They hooded and handcuffed [him] ..." More was to follow, including sexual abuse Abu Ghraib style."
Exactly what it says. Read it, give it some thought and it should seep into that thick scull of yours. ZD30 was only "controversial" in the US. That was the reason for my comment.
I'll send you the link from your top paper that details the torture techniques used on Iraqis if you would like. It won't let me post it in the comments, but I'm going to private message you.
she's actually personally against both wars. Her stories are meant to tell the truth about what happened hence showing the water boarding even though it makes America look bad.
To add to my comment below: Even the conversational flow that goes from where Bigelow decided to put her Oscar to discussing torture tends to trivialize the torture by putting it on the same conversational plane. The character, "Omar", is depicted as someone who provided money for the 9/11 atrocity. No doubt he did it for "Allah & Country", one of the Seals says for "God & Country" - it's this societal set-up that enables people to think that they're doing something for a 'higher cause' &, therefore, not personally responsible for the actual horror. Islamic extremists are no different from 'Western civilization' robopaths in that respect. I talked with a young Christian woman who was planning to join the National Guard a few years ago. I asked her whether she felt any conflict with the Christian creed of "Thou Shalt Not Kill". She told me that there are other things she can do that don't involve killing people. The thing is that it's the whole system that's killing people - not just the actual murderers. Bigelow's a privileged person who's been told how beautiful & talented & brilliant she is her whole life. That enables her to be 'detached' from the torture, to feel like she's 'just being objective'. Her 'ability' to do this is rooted in her feeling that it could never happen to her.
What a dumb thing to say. Any of those fiends that was tortured deserved exactly what he got. When you devote your life to some insane religious fanaticism that advocates and preaches the torture, beheading, murder and burning alive of others, you're likely to be injured. Or tortured. Such is life.
And you didn't answer my last question. Why would someone who is personally against both wars do a "propaganda" film for them. You are misinformed. It has been a well known fact that America uses water boarding in their interrogations. Not all of them, but the ones they KNOW have information they will use it. Don't ever say someone is doing "propaganda" for this disgusting war crime if you haven't researched their personal views.
"Enhanced interrogation techniques" is a euphemism for torture. Bigelow's very use of such a euphemism serves the purpose that similar expressions such as "terminate with extreme prejudice" do - it SOFTENS the reality. Torture is unacceptable. Featuring it in Zero Dark Thirty is one thing - making it seem like 'Well, this is nasty but it gets us the results that we need to save lives' is quite a different one. Bigelow & the character Maya are both beautiful women who are shown as caring. Their very beauty helps add a touch of 'tough love', of GLAMOR to the torture. Torture is the infliction of extreme pain & terror on someone. At least one documentary maker claims that Al Qaeda was born in Egyptian prisons among Moslem prisoners who'd been tortured. After being tortured they became willing to inflict extreme suffering on others in retaliation. It's a self-reinforcing & amplifying dynamic. Bigelow contributes to this by flattening its affect with liberal blah-blah.
Naive and ignorant remark. Easy to see it wasn't YOUR mother, father, wife, husband , daughter, SON, sister, brother or friend who was among the THREE THOUSAND PEOPLE were BURNED ALIVE in the twin towers. Murderous fiends don't deserve coddling. Any of those homicidal maniacs who might have been tortured deserved exactly what they got. What you put out you get back. Grow up.
please, water boarding is nothing compared to the many other ways our country has tortured these people, so what your saying is what they did to deserve this wasn't humane?? killing innocent people is humane in your book? you make no sense, i get it there human beings but still you have no idea what the world really is like and maybe thats not your place but dont argue or talk back unless you have the experience to back it up,you kind of people piss me off, ungrateful this is what we fight for
