Zero Dark Thirty

[The Futurist]

Torture is still used.

 

Don't be naive.

[dashrendar44]

And it's totally acceptable according to many reactions out there. Terrorize the potential terrorists!

[rahvinn87]

Torture is still used.

 

Don't be naive.

 

Not sure if this was addressed at me? If so I think you misinterpreted what I said (or my wording was poor). In no way was I suggesting that torture is no longer used, as you say that would be naive. I was pointing out that one of the central messages of the movie (as I saw it) was that focusing your efforts on torture could blind you to other, far more useful, effective and more easily accessible avenues of inquiry.

Edited February 4, 2013 by rahvinn87

[The Futurist]

I heard that if you want to make terrorists talk, you give them M&M's.

 

Works every time.

[dashrendar44]

I heard that if you want to make terrorists talk, you give them M&M's.

 

Especially if they're stuffed with pork meat.

[Lordmandeep]

I think torture is wrong but I would not classify people who conducted torture in the case of capturing Bin Laden as bad or vile people...Lol I heard that they used Enter Sandman from Metallica to torture Terrorists...What if he was a Metalica fan? Also, you are correct about the many different way people see the film.It is based on your political viewpoints...If you think the Death of Bin Laden was a great moment, you find the end of the film quite satisfying.If you think the war on terror was useless, you think at the end the film asks "was it worth it ?"

[Noctis]

Oh, wow, talk about a huge surprise. Utterly gripping. As someone who doesn't like The Hurt Locker, this is leagues above it in every category possible. This is sensational filmmaking. I'm stunned.

 

A

[Noctis]

When the movie clearly shows that torture played a major role in finding and killing Bin Laden even if CIA debunked that claim in reality, that's giving torture more power that it really has. That's endorsing War On Terror program and credited its success on killing Bin Laden. Even if "Enhanced interrogation program" constitutes a war crime. In the end, that piece of "Art" delivers in an insidious way that war crime and violating Geneva conventions is ok in the name of Democracy and Liberty since it helps gaining reliable intel.

   

Yeah, no.

[Claire of Themyscira]

Oh, wow, talk about a huge surprise. Utterly gripping. As someone who doesn't like The Hurt Locker, this is leagues above it in every category possible. This is sensational filmmaking. I'm stunned.

 

A

 

[Noctis]

I am truly baffled at how ANYONE in their right mind could think this film advocates torture. Are you guys not paying attention to the characters? Look at what happened to Maya gradually throughout the twelve years of trying to capture and kill Bin Laden. She could barely stomach watching  the first few tortures, but a few years later, she's unflinching and can watch it without any hesitation. There's a beautiful shot in the film where it illustrates her evolution. She's watching a man get tortured and the camera focuses on her expressionless face. She's staring. The tortures she has been a part of have dehumanized her somewhat. And they also did it to Dan, who left the fucking place because he couldn't take it anymore. For instance, at the end of the film, while many people feel like she's expressing silent joy, I see it as someone who is now completely lost and has no idea what to do with her life. 

 

Pro-torture my ass.

[Lordmandeep]

The film is not pro torture at all.

 

Its that people expected the main character to go on some idealistic soliloquy  about how terrible Torture is in the middle of the film.

 

The film does have a slight stance saying Bin Laden deserverd to die and that was a good thing and that is a viewpoint most people here in North America have.

Edited March 28, 2013 by Lordmandeep

[Noctis]

The film is not pro torture at all.

 

Its that people expected the main character to go on some idealistic soliloquy  about how terrible Torture is in the middle of the film.

 

Exactly. And yay for no 'lol' in your post. You really need to stop saying them so much. =)

[Noctis]

 

Fucking. Scrumptious. 

[DAR]

Very effective thriller, Chastain was great. A-I try to keep out of political discussions for the most part so as far as the torture goes it sort of mirrors my own feelings. It doesn't condemn it but at the same time it doesn't condone it either. It's a war and it's never clean, neat or pretty.

[dashrendar44]

Yeah, no.

 

If it's presented as facts when it has been debunked, yes.

Edited March 31, 2013 by dashrendar44

[Jake Gittes]

Because CIA is so honest and truthful 100% of the time. Especially when it comes to torture.

[dashrendar44]

Because CIA is so honest and truthful 100% of the time. Especially when it comes to torture.

 

Jessica Chastain's character endorses torture to track Bin Laden (only guilty muslims of course because they never tortured innocent people in the process, right?). They gained some intel from torture but CIA pundits are not convinced.

 

Then Obama officially shut down the program (nobody seems to really give a fuck and annoyed Mark Strong's CIA supervisor throws a hissy fit because they can't torture anymore 100% approved by federal government) but the intel gained is still lying around there, nobody but Chastain's SuperWoman believed in because she's the tough motherfucker of the story.

 

Finally, they keep tracing back from the intel trying to get around without torture anymore (as they want us to believe) to the compound. Navy Seals kill Bin Laden. Superwoman was right all along till the beginning and CIA pundits that keep on doubting her (and giving her a hard time on her path) were morons. How do you interpret that whether torture works or not even if it's ugly?

Edited March 31, 2013 by dashrendar44

[Lordmandeep]

the film shows torture gets you either small level information or made up information.

 

Real information is found through normal investigative methods.

[Jake Gittes]

Good job taking what I said and never directly replying to it. I'm not even a conspiracy theorist or anything, but I think it would be mighty naive and silly to believe an organisation like CIA would not lie about using torture if it was in its best interests. CIA might say it didn't get anything from torture, but words are all they've got. At least Bigelow and Boal had access to some documents, you and I know absolutely nothing. 

 

As for what the movie depicts, the whole point of Chastain's character is what price she pays for coming to terms with torturing people and committing herself to searching for UBL like that. The price is, she is slowly but surely destroyed inside. She might keep a tough motherfucker facade to be focused and get things done, but she gradually dehumanizes herself until there's nothing left. In the end, when left alone, she's neither a superwoman or a hero, she's a broken woman who has no idea what to do with herself. There's no sense of triumph or victory. Chastain isn't the only one, either, as we see Dan pretty much stating that he cannot take it anymore, even though he tries to hide it behind a cheap joke.

 

The depiction of torture itself also never made me think Bigelow had any positive feelings about it. I've seen the film's detractors try to accuse it of actually endorsing torture by being neutral about it, but personally, I only have more appreciation for a film that trusts the audience to have its own moral viewpoint already established instead of imposing one on it. That way, Bigelow can do without having a character look into the camera and say "torture is bad", but she can depict torture in a way that leaves no doubt in its ugliness and destructive effect on the characters. She shows us what happened, how it happened, and what were the psychological and emotional consequences, and guess what, there's absolutely nothing positive about any of it.

[dashrendar44]

A movie that takes an ambiguous stance on whether torture is good or not to achieve anything as a subject matter then conclude that somehow it helped is not an anti-torture movie. That's all.

 

But I didn't buy the little cheesy tear at the end as a whole "character development". So that explains why I don't buy the whole "That's Bigelow's way of saying torture is wrong" argument.

Edited March 31, 2013 by dashrendar44