Zero Dark Thirty

Was pretty good! Nothing gimmicky, over stylized or unrealistic. The narrative stayed true to the actual events leading up to the death of UBL. Everything, especially the final assault on the compound felt very real, almost as if it were a documentary crew coming along for the ride. Can't wait to see Kathryn Bigelow's next film.
 
This film was fantastic. A really great slow burn. Crafted impeccably. Just insane how difficult a puzzle like this is.

IMO it was worth it for that moment alone. The raid was also wonderfully done. I was almost expecting more of a typical movie triumph ending, but then when I didn't get it I realized why. It was about the silence of the moment. It would've been wrong to have the rush of music and the cheesy fist pump at a moment like that. It was so sweet but almost bittersweet.

I loved ending it on the "now what" moment for the main character. So much given over such a long time. What does she do now? The pilot asks (almost jokingly) "where do you want to go?" and she has no answer, only tears.
 
"The narrative stayed true to the actual events leading up to the death of UBL"

Nonsense. The film created fake torture scenes that never happened. The Senate Intelligence committee called them on it, as the film is a propaganda exercise and makes a case for torture. It's a pretty massive controversy, in the news every day now.

There's even a campaign to stop the film from receiving any academy awards.

The uninformed perception that it "stayed true to actual events" is exactly why these lies are so dangerous and harmful to the rule of law. Torture us a felony crime, a war crime, a violation of the Geneva Conventions. This is the most heinous type of propaganda, that can turn a once free people into the fourth reich.

Learning to Love Torture, Zero Dark Thirty-Style

Zero Dark Thirty: Torturing the Facts

Arrest All Torturers
 
If you wish to discuss the film, please continue.

However, if this moves into politics, the thread is closed.

It's close to that right now.

Absolutely no political discussions are permitted here.

There are plenty of other internet sites that can be accessed to discuss politics.

This is not one of those sites.

This is the first and last warning.

Thanks for your cooperation.
 
L1N3ARX said:
The narrative stayed true to the actual events leading up to the death of UBL.
Click to expand...

Oh, thanks for giving away the ending! Should have a spolier alert there man. *joke*

But I find it interesting how movies that deal with recent history, where the viewer already knows the ending, can still be so tense and interesting. I mean we know what happens in the compound, yet its still so tense to watch. Another example was Untied 93; again we all know exactly where this is going to end, but still the viewer is gripped until it actually happens.

I read somewhere that sometimes its more enjoyable to watch a movie when you already know spoilers about it, than watching a movie that you know nothing about. Not sure that I agree with that, but it seems to work very well for examples like these.
 
David Saraceno said:
If you wish to discuss the film, please continue.

However, if this moves into politics, the thread is closed.

It's close to that right now.

Absolutely no political discussions are permitted here.
Click to expand...
That makes it all but impossible to discuss this film on its theme as the whole chat about this film is arguably political.
 
P13 said:
That makes it all but impossible to discuss this film on its theme as the whole chat about this film is arguably political.
Click to expand...

It should be relatively easy to divorce the discussion of the real world and the actual merits of the movie; does the movie work? If so how and why? If the subject of torture works to drive the story forward then thats fine too. No need to talks about politics.

Looks like they are already working on the sequel:


Harhar. NSFW folks!
 
simonpwood said:
It should be relatively easy to divorce the discussion of the real world and the actual merits of the movie
Click to expand...
Not really, on a film that is sold as being factual (or at least being set amongst facts) then how it accurately lives up to this is a key part of discussion about it.

I think it's harmful of Hollywood to deliberately rewrite history, I know there were descendants of the crew on the Titanic that were genuinely very upset by some "facts" being made up to create a story. Admittedly with history of that age, where's the speculation on some events, where there's a fictional story being told amongst it, some artistic licence is understandable.

By contrast it was offensive to British veterans to see history rewritten for U-571 on the basis that some Hollywood execs thought it'd be better if the crew was made American rather than British. On that kind of treatment of history I have nothing but contempt, as it adds nothing to the story and causes upset to people currently alive.

With the case of Zero Dark Thirty, it seems unclear how factual or otherwise it is, I would discuss my thoughts on that more but can't see how I can do so without having some political analysis.
 
Last edited:
This film was fantastic, and for those saying it wasn't factually true. Just google CIA destroyed interrogation tapes. Don't mean to turn this topic political, you can use google to get informed, but I just wanted to point out that the film took less liberties than you think. This was the best film I've seen in the past year.
 
I know I'm in the minority here but I didn't like Zero Dark Thirty. I felt the main character's story arc was lacking or entirely non-existent, and because I couldn't identify with the character or her motives beyond the obvious (get Osama Bin Laden because he's a bad guy) I found her struggle to achieve her goal uninteresting. I was only interested a couple times during the film, and it was in scenes were Bigelow had the opportunity to humanize characters but chose not to -- like in the Marriot hotel scene.

I realize that this is probably by design, as the film's supposed to be gritty and real and based on a true story, but that approach simply doesn't engage me. When I watch films, I want impact. That impact can be visual, emotional, tonal, or stylistic -- it can be anything really as long as it's something. I felt the film was devoid of any of that.
 
Last edited:
Finnegan said:
I know I'm in the minority here but I didn't like Zero Dark Thirty. I felt the main character's story arc was lacking or entirely non-existant, and because I couldn't identify with the character or her motives beyond the obvious (get Osama Bin Laden because he's a bad guy)
Click to expand...


This is a fair criticism. The film is a no nonsense procedural only concerned with the mission at hand and nothing else. The difference between this and many other great movie procedurals like All The President's Men or The French Connection is that, even though those films don't delve into the personal motives of the characters much, there is a rapport between the two lead characters that forms a human arc to the story. Seeing their relationships build during the course of the story engages you, and their rapport becomes fun to watch. With this film, the lead character feels on her own most of the time, and none of her relationships are lasting. That coupled with the grim nature of the story which leaves little room for humor makes the film kind of a dry experience. I found the details of the hunt and the procedural aspect fascinating enough, and the technical execution so skilled that I did enjoy the film. And the climactic raid is unbelievably tense, seeming to unfold almost in real time. It's the antithesis of every artificially inflated, absurdly stylized, jazzed up Hollywood action sequence of the past 20 years, and is all the more suspenseful for it. Also, in terms of performances, the surprise for me was Jason Clarke. It's always exciting to see someone you aren't familiar with command the screen and really own a role. Look forward to seeing more from him. All in all I think it's a pretty good movie but not a great one. You don't get much insight other than what happened.
 
Last edited:
"This film was fantastic, and for those saying it wasn't factually true. Just google CIA destroyed interrogation tapes. Don't mean to turn this topic political, you can use google to get informed, but I just wanted to point out that the film took less liberties than you think."

I think it's you who's uninformed. Senate letter to Sony Pictures.

"Instead the CIA learned of the existence of the courier, his true name and location through means unrelated to the CIA detention and interrogation program."

The film is based on the wishful thinking of CIA torturers, the "sources" who would like the public to believe torture is a) acceptable, b) productive. In fact torture is a) immoral, b) outlawed everywhere at all times in all circumstances. Those perpetrating it are guilty of felony crimes and international war crimes.

The Zero Dark Thirty Scandal Files
http://wp.me/pwAWe-YR
 
mail4joeg said:
"This film was fantastic, and for those saying it wasn't factually true. Just google CIA destroyed interrogation tapes. Don't mean to turn this topic political, you can use google to get informed, but I just wanted to point out that the film took less liberties than you think."

I think it's you who's uninformed. Senate letter to Sony Pictures.

"Instead the CIA learned of the existence of the courier, his true name and location through means unrelated to the CIA detention and interrogation program."

The film is based on the wishful thinking of CIA torturers, the "sources" who would like the public to believe torture is a) acceptable, b) productive. In fact torture is a) immoral, b) outlawed everywhere at all times in all circumstances. Those perpetrating it are guilty of felony crimes and international war crimes.

The Zero Dark Thirty Scandal Files
http://wp.me/pwAWe-YR
Click to expand...

What part of no politics do you not understand?
 
This film was in development a good 6 months or so before Bin Laden's capture took place. It's not "wishful thinking" or any other grand conspiratard concept.. it's nothing more than a work of dramatic fiction based on real events. Let us leave it at that, thanks.
 
Batutta said:
What part of no politics do you not understand?
Click to expand...

He has a whole blog about political films; seems he should know more than any of us of what counts as political. Guess he's trying to close this thread down or something?

Mail4jpeg; chill out dude; film is meant to be entertaining, right?
 
Finnegan said:
I know I'm in the minority here but I didn't like Zero Dark Thirty. I felt the main character's story arc was lacking or entirely non-existant, and because I couldn't identify with the character or her motives beyond the obvious (get Osama Bin Laden because he's a bad guy) I found her struggle to achieve her goal uninteresting. I was only interested a couple times during the film, and it was in scenes were Bigelow had the opportunity to humanize characters but chose not to -- like in the Marriot hotel scene.

I realize that this is probably by design, as the film's supposed to be gritty and real and based on a true story, but that approach simply doesn't engage me. When I watch films, I want impact. That impact can be visual, emotional, tonal, or stylistic -- it can be anything really as long as it's something. I felt the film was devoid of any of that.
Click to expand...
I agree. I found the film to be almost completely emotionless, which is odd considering the extremely emotional subject matter. There were definitely some deep emotions driving the main character, but we were never really allowed a glimpse inside. She was just another cog in the military machine.
 
agcohn said:
I agree. I found the film to be almost completely emotionless, which is odd considering the extremely emotional subject matter.
Click to expand...

Hmm...well I can agree in a sense but in another sense the second half of the movie to me felt justified in that sense (which is where IMO it gets the most emotionless save the ending shot...) because it's about the main character almost becoming relentlessly numb to herself, the world, etc. She gives everything and it numbs her. That's why the ending was so great for me, because after seeing her so clammed up and so focused on this ONE THING...it's over...there's almost no way to know what to do at that point. The pilot asks "you must be important, where do you want to go?" She has no response, only tears.

Worked for me...ah well. Can't please everybody :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top