Zero Dark Thirty

[PortlandCardFan]

So is it an acurate portrayal or not? If it's not then why the probe?

 

[Stout]

I saw it tonight. It was quite good. It held my attention throughout, and was riveting at times. That said, I don't mind a slow pace in movies, and this could have been much shorter.

 

[UncleChris]

Another "review"

7-ways-zero-dark-thirty-excuses-torture

 

[AsUdUdE]

I saw it yesterday, and I have to say, to me, the first hour or so seemed to drag, but the movie gained momentum as it went..

By the end, I thoroughly enjoyed my experience, but completely agree it could have been a full hour shorter and not much would be taken out...

The best part of the movie is it connects the dots of all these headline stories I have heard about in the past 10 years to make a linear storyline and make everything make sense..

That said I can see why come senators are making a big deal about what did or did not happend, I am interested to hear what if anything is completely condemned as hollywood story vs fact in the end though...

 

[Brian]

Saw it last night and it showed the same flaw that has bothered me since the time it was announced OBL was dead. TWO Blackhawks went in, one crashed and had to be destroyed.

I have ridden on many Blackhawks. The first thing I thought when I heard one crashed was "how the hell did they get everybody out?" There is NO WAY a Blackhawk can carry that many men, equipment, OBL's body etc. It just isn't possible. The most we have ever crammed into one was 8.

Not a spoiler, but in the movie they show two and only two Blackhawks making the trip. After the second bird is destroyed, all of a sudden there is a third Blackhawk that shows up. Picks up half the guys and flies out. It also shows a third landing back at the airbase.

WTF? In the movie it shows only two heavily modified Blackhawks in the hangar. Don't tell me a third one was called in after the second one crashed because that was a very long trip, and there was no time. They were only on the ground something like 45 minutes to and hour (I think).

Anyway, I don't get it.

edit: nevermind, at the time of the first reporting and not told in the movie, there were apparently two Chinooks that made the trip 2/3's of the way and waited. That makes sense since a Chinook can carry a crap-ton (that's an industry term).

 

[Shane]

Saw it last night and it showed the same flaw that has bothered me since the time it was announced OBL was dead. TWO Blackhawks went in, one crashed and had to be destroyed.

I have ridden on many Blackhawks. The first thing I thought when I heard one crashed was "how the hell did they get everybody out?" There is NO WAY a Blackhawk can carry that many men, equipment, OBL's body etc. It just isn't possible. The most we have ever crammed into one was 8.

Not a spoiler, but in the movie they show two and only two Blackhawks making the trip. After the second bird is destroyed, all of a sudden there is a third Blackhawk that shows up. Picks up half the guys and flies out. It also shows a third landing back at the airbase.

WTF? In the movie it shows only two heavily modified Blackhawks in the hangar. Don't tell me a third one was called in after the second one crashed because that was a very long trip, and there was no time. They were only on the ground something like 45 minutes to and hour (I think).

Anyway, I don't get it.

That's all well and good bro. But was it a good movie?

 

[Brian]

That's all well and good bro. But was it a good movie?

Definitely. Agree with what others wrote: dragged a little in the middle, but the raid itself I could watch over and over again. It was awesome.

BTW- See my edit.

 

[Shane]

Definitely. Agree with what others wrote: dragged a little in the middle, but the raid itself I could watch over and over again. It was awesome.

BTW- See my edit.

Gotcha. Can't wait to see it.

 

[PDXChris]

Saw it last night and it showed the same flaw that has bothered me since the time it was announced OBL was dead. TWO Blackhawks went in, one crashed and had to be destroyed.

I have ridden on many Blackhawks. The first thing I thought when I heard one crashed was "how the hell did they get everybody out?" There is NO WAY a Blackhawk can carry that many men, equipment, OBL's body etc. It just isn't possible. The most we have ever crammed into one was 8.

Not a spoiler, but in the movie they show two and only two Blackhawks making the trip. After the second bird is destroyed, all of a sudden there is a third Blackhawk that shows up. Picks up half the guys and flies out. It also shows a third landing back at the airbase.

WTF? In the movie it shows only two heavily modified Blackhawks in the hangar. Don't tell me a third one was called in after the second one crashed because that was a very long trip, and there was no time. They were only on the ground something like 45 minutes to and hour (I think).

Anyway, I don't get it.

edit: nevermind, at the time of the first reporting and not told in the movie, there were apparently two Chinooks that made the trip 2/3's of the way and waited. That makes sense since a Chinook can carry a crap-ton (that's an industry term).

I could have sworn that they said a third one was on its way out when the first one went down. I also thought the third one was a normal one, not the stealth one. It even sounded different.

 

[PDXChris]

Definitely. Agree with what others wrote: dragged a little in the middle, but the raid itself I could watch over and over again. It was awesome.

BTW- See my edit.

I agree 100% with that.

 

[Brian]

I could have sworn that they said a third one was on its way out when the first one went down. I also thought the third one was a normal one, not the stealth one. It even sounded different.

That wouldn't make sense though. The flight was too long. Nothing out of Afghanistan could make it in time. That's why I was confused.

 

[Brian]

I agree 100% with that.

My favorite part:

"Osama.......Osamaaaa."

Pure awesome!

 

[PDXChris]

That wouldn't make sense though. The flight was too long. Nothing out of Afghanistan could make it in time. That's why I was confused.

That's true.

 

[PortlandCardFan]

Solid movie... I thought the helo contingent was 53 or 46's with jarheads incase the SHtF!!! Doesn't make any difference just what I heard. Poor sniper dude got no action!!!

 

[NJCardFan]

if torture is called for, do what you have to do.

If waterboarding is the worst kind of torture this country uses then people need to get a grip. There were far worse methods used by the Japanese during WWII.

 

[Superfuzz]

Saw it, loved it.

People calling it a defense of torture just aren't watching past the first 30 minutes. The whole point is she's connecting the dots for about 6 years based on scraps of info she got, some from torture, and most from surveillance etc.,

Why most people leave that part out is beyond me. I suppose they're just concerned that people will see the torture scenes, see the end result and assume "torture=accomplishing something good ultimately" I think, if anything, that seeing gruesome depictions of torture on-screen would make many averse to us using it, irregardless of whether it led us to bin Laden or not. I don't think Bigelow was trying to make a statement at all. Just a compelling story. There was an article in WaPo about "Maya" a while back. Caught a few things from there in here, like the quote about her thinking that "I had a lot of friends die doing this, and I think that God spared me to catch UBL" (not verbatim) That was something one of her colleagues told the Post that she said at one point, highlighting the fact that (something the movie tried to do) she was EXTREMELY self-motivated and kind of abrasive and mildly arrogant.

That said, I think she might actually be Todd Haley...

 

[BigRedRage]

Saw it, loved it.

People calling it a defense of torture just aren't watching past the first 30 minutes. The whole point is she's connecting the dots for about 6 years based on scraps of info she got, some from torture, and most from surveillance etc.,

Why most people leave that part out is beyond me. I suppose they're just concerned that people will see the torture scenes, see the end result and assume "torture=accomplishing something good ultimately" I think, if anything, that seeing gruesome depictions of torture on-screen would make many averse to us using it, irregardless of whether it led us to bin Laden or not. I don't think Bigelow was trying to make a statement at all. Just a compelling story. There was an article in WaPo about "Maya" a while back. Caught a few things from there in here, like the quote about her thinking that "I had a lot of friends die doing this, and I think that God spared me to catch UBL" (not verbatim) That was something one of her colleagues told the Post that she said at one point, highlighting the fact that (something the movie tried to do) she was EXTREMELY self-motivated and kind of abrasive and mildly arrogant.

That said, I think she might actually be Todd Haley...

noone complained about the torture scenes in lethal weapon

 

[Covert Rain]

I don't get it all the outrage either. Did anybody actually watch all the torture scenes in past military movies about other wars/conflicts (WWI, WWII, Vietnam etc...)?

Come on. It's a Hollywood movie first. If I want accurate point for point detail down to the nitty gritty....I will watch a real documentary.

 

[Chaz]

Glenn Greenwald:

Zero Dark Thirty and the utility and glory of torture

I want to explain why this point matters so much. In US political culture, there is no event in the last decade that has inspired as much collective pride and pervasive consensus as the killing of Osama bin Laden.

This event has obtained sacred status in American political lore. Nobody can speak ill of it, or even question it, without immediately prompting an avalanche of anger and resentment. The news of his death triggered an outburst of patriotic street chanting and nationalistic glee that continued unabated two years later into the Democratic National Convention. As Wired's Pentagon reporter Spencer Ackerman put it in his defense of the film, the killing of bin Laden makes him (and most others) "very, very proud to be American." Very, very proud.

For that reason, to depict X as valuable in enabling the killing of bin Laden is - by definition - to glorify X. That formula will lead huge numbers of American viewers to regard X as justified and important. In this film: X = torture. That's why it glorifies torture: because it powerfully depicts it as a vital step - the first, indispensable step - in what enabled the US to hunt down and pump bullets into America's most hated public enemy.

The rest here

 

[PortlandCardFan]

Torture wasn't glorified in the movie. It was part of the process of collecting data. Maya was visibly discusted by it.

 

[Chaz]

Torture wasn't glorified in the movie. It was part of the process of collecting data. Maya was visibly discusted by it.

But apparently it was shown as being integral to the capture which wasn't true in real life.

I understand both sides because after all it is just a movie but it would seem that it paints a false (positive) view of the use of torture.

 

[PortlandCardFan]

But apparently it was shown as being integral to the capture which wasn't true in real life.

I understand both sides because after all it is just a movie but it would seem that it paints a false (positive) view of the use of torture.

In a sense yes. It was integral to the story because it happened. But was it integral to obtaining data? IDK, maybe. The writers didn't come out in the movie and say 'We got OBL thanks to waterboarding Ammar!!!'

Personnally I think Ammar realized how dire his circumstance were and gave in... He had no country to go back to...

 

[Mulli]

I loved this movie! To me, it made Argo look like a comic book movie.

I watched it at home with the subtitles. I think it made it easier to follow. Wow, such a great movie.

 

[UncleChris]

I watched it at home with the subtitles. I think it made it easier to follow.

When you get to be my age, you watch ALL movies with the subtitles...

 

[UncleChris]

Finally watched this move (with subtitles... )

Excellent movie, for the most part. Pretty much had me and the bride on the edge of our seats the whole time. Well made with a few parts being a bit choppy.

The part where they actually get OBL was strange and a bit weak. We watched it twice thinking we had missed something, but we hadn't. The moment of truth simply isn't there.

Likewise, we were wondering what happened to the 2 seals left on the ground to blow up the wrecked helicopter. Did the helicopter land later to pick them up (unshown) or what?

And finally, we both felt this had the strong implication of the CIA getting a lot of valuable intel from "detainees," which, of course is simply not true. And the CIA already had the courier's name before Ammar said it.

Anyway, 4 out of 5 stars.