Kathryn Bigelow - Torture Apologist?

[ShaunN]

Here is a link to a commentary by Andrew Sullivan:

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast....apologist.html

Zero Dark Thirty has not been widely released yet, but it has already started cleaning up with awards. But it also seems to be based on a terrible lie - the idea that torturing people provided vital information that led to the discovery of Osama Bin Laden. If the movie makes this case, then it is doing something truly terrible and Kathryn Bigelow and everyone associated with this film have a lot for which to answer. I hope that Bigelow did not do this in her film to add an element of drama and "moral complexity" at the expense of facts. If it could be credibly argued that torture actually does serve a useful purpose, I would be the first to admit the complicated issues involved here. But there is no such evidence and, in the case of Bin Laden, he was found without the use of torture.

The whole culture of torture that was glorified and justified in "24" really did have a powerful impact in the real world. Kieffer Sutherland and other members of the "24" production team once spoke at West Point to specifically tell the graduating class that they were using torture as a dramatic device. It did not stop the continuing perception among serving servicemen that torture was an acceptable activity. These entertainment vehicles have real-life impacts.

[KirbyKrackle]

"I haven't seen the movie, and I'm not calling bigelow anything, but what I am saying is that she is a torture apologist".

I'll see the movie first before If I decide if it's pro torture or not. Personally, I doubt it.

[zemo]

Zero Dark Thirty has not been widely released yet, but it has already started cleaning up with awards. But it also seems to be based on a terrible lie - the idea that torturing people provided vital information that led to the discovery of Osama Bin Laden. If the movie makes this case, then it is doing something truly terrible and Kathryn Bigelow and everyone associated with this film have a lot for which to answer. I hope that Bigelow did not do this in her film to add an element of drama and "moral complexity" at the expense of facts. If it could be credibly argued that torture actually does serve a useful purpose, I would be the first to admit the complicated issues involved here. But there is no such evidence and, in the case of Bin Laden, he was found without the use of torture.

Going to make myself unpopular: Osama bin Laden was found through a big helping of information from a Pakistani doctor, setting up a fake polio drive to collect intel (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...pakistan-polio). This lead to a ban on polio vaccination by the Taliban. While this is obviously unreasonable and the Taliban are the main culprits, I can not help but feel that the revenge for 9/11 has been carried out on the backs of Afghan children.

As for the topic at hand: If the depiction of torture is indeed as it was described, and it seems too straightforward to leave room for interpretation, then fuck her and everybody who helped her create this. Torture is vile and evil, and useless to boot. It's people that are not in control of their destiny being willing to make others suffer in order to regain it. It is ultimate bullying, and no country that condones it will ever be on the side of the "good guys", no matter how many terrorist their soldiers kill.

[Cam63]

I can't imagine she'd condone torture for information.

[Morrison_Lad]

From what I understand about the film, it's a lot more complicated than either Sullivan or Frank Bruni (who wrote a column in the NYT about this very subject today) are making it out to be.

As the writer Mark Boal points out, this is a feature film, not a documentary. But beyond that, I think that a drama needs to create ... well, drama. And it more importantly needs to create a flow-line for its main character, in this case the primary CIA analyst portrayed by Jessica Chastain. From what I understand (and again, I've obviously not seen it yet) what Boal and Bigelow do is create a drama built around both the assassination of bin-Laden, but also around Chastain's CIA character and her emotional and moral and ethical progress throughout the film.

The film will certainly be controversial in many ways. It already has been, in fact. Frank Bruni writes in the Times that it will be a sort of Rorschach test for viewers. I think that's probably correct. I know that the sequences of "intense torture" (as it was described in one review) definitely have me uneasy about seeing it. On the other hand, it supposed to be a masterfully constructed film, with a central performance that is stunning (and having seen many of Chastain's performances, that doesn't surprise me). So, I will go see it in January when it becomes available here. How I feel about what it depicts, I won't know until I leave the theatre or, more likely, until much later.

Kathryn Bigelow is an impressively talented director. Whether she and Mark Boal made a monumental misstep here, I just don't know. But I do trust Bigelow, and so I will view the final work and make a determination then.

Interestingly, I was going to start a thread on this very subject, but while I was trying to determine how to approach it, you posted this one. Anyhow, I think it's an important subject to discuss, and it certainly will be analyzed and deconstructed to death over the next few months as more and more people see it, and as it is lifted up to a very high Oscar perch (which at this point is inevitable).

Actually, if Bigelow wins for Best Director, which seems a real possibility, it would be interesting to see her address the subject in her acceptance speech.

[bert]

she was married to James Cameron.

she knows ALL about Torture.

[Morrison_Lad]

she was married to James Cameron.

she knows ALL about Torture.

And he cheated on her.

[Infra-Man]

Torture leading to actionable intelligence is about as realistic as some of the dumb bullshit in The Hurt Locker.

[Matt_Y]

This is how one review I review I read put it:

The movie features four terror attacks/attempts, none of which were foiled by information extracted under duress. Even the name of bin Laden’s courier comes not from rough treatment but from basic, simple lying to the detainee (lying, to be fair, that is possible due to the detainee’s weakened state).

[The Mandarin]

Bigelow created "Near Dark", one of my favorite films. It would take more than one screw-up from her to destroy my fanship.