79°Mostly Cloudy

Going to the Movies by Catherine Taegel – “Zero Dark Thirty”

by Prince Of Petworth January 11, 2013 at 4:00 pm 14 Comments

Photo by PoPville flickr user ep_jhu

Going to the Movies is a new PoPville feature by Mount Vernon Triangle resident Catherine Taegel.

I’m Catherine Taegel, a MVT resident, and member of the wonderful DC Film Society(which anyone can join!). I have had no formal training in reviewing movies, but as a lover of all movies – old, new, big, and small – I look to provide thoughtful reviews that will intrigue and guide locals as they attempt to sort through the various cinema offerings in our area.

The other night I attended the screening of “Zero Dark Thirty” at the Regal Gallery Place cinema. Telling a story that is so engrained into the very fabric of our society is a tall order, even for Kathryn Bigelow, whose movie “The Hurt Locker”, portraying the war in Iraq, won a slew of awards, including the Oscar for Best Picture, in 2010. She’s no stranger to controversy – often criticized for glamourizing and sensationalizing war and the personal stories occurring within them. Her direction of “Zero Dark Thirty” is no different.

 Continues after the jump.

The months leading up to the release of the movie has only built more momentum for the film. Questions of the extensive access the director and screenwriter had to Langley, whether or not sensitive and classified information were released, and the level of importance torture played in the capture of Osama bin Laden has even led to a Senate inquiry.

It’s true. Enhanced interrogation is in your face within the first ten minutes. You are introduced to the main characters in the same motion and while it is uncomfortable and disarming, it sets the stage for the movie. However, it is important to note that this scene, and general issue, becomes woven into the story, and is not the story itself. The scene and acts themselves provide a necessary dichotomy as we follow these CIA agents on their quest to find Osama bin Laden and what it appears to take to track a terrorist.

There is a lot of time, events, and character development to cover in “Zero Dark Thirty” and Kathryn Bigelow wastes no time. The film opens with the sounds of September 11th and goes through the next decade like chapters in a book – using major violent global attacks purported by al-Qaeda as its anchor. The timeline is familiar and fresh in our minds. Real images and reports are interwoven to keep the audience connected to the actual events it is attempting to portray. The film deals with heavy subjects, but you are never in one scene long enough to linger on any emotion.

As the real life CIA Agent Maya, whose real name is unknown as she is still in the Agency, Jessica Chastain is the star of this film. Convinced that Osama bin Laden’s courier network will lead the CIA to the mastermind, Chastain is the center and the pillar of this film. Her portrayal shows Maya as stoic and vulnerable, barely keeping it together, but clearly driven by a higher purpose. (She even says at one point that she believes she was spared from a terrorist attack to see the mission through.) The film keeps pace around her and you are caught up in her determination in nearly every scene. She adeptly manages this film.

The rest of the actors are no slouch, but there sure are a lot of them. Jessica Chastain’s male counterpart throughout the movie is played by Jason Clarke, an Australian actor, who may not be a name but his face is familiar and his performance kicks off the movie, presenting himself as a clear mentor for Maya. (Jason Clarke had roles in “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps”, “Lawless”, and will be in the upcoming “Great Gatsby” directed by Baz Luhrmann.) The only character portrayal I had an issue with was Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, played by James Gandolfini. Luckily, the obscure casting is not a momentum killer.

Bigelow does an amazing job of providing insight into tracking a terrorist – working with our allies, being duped by our supposed allies, blending into the scene, seeing through the crowds, navigating political waters, and setting up the raid. The climax of the movie – Navy SEALS entering the compound – gets your adrenaline pumping. The scene is patient, methodical, and engrossing.

There are parts of this story that can never be verified, but it does not mean that the story cannot be told. It is a compelling, character-driven story that captures the climax of an American story that defines a generation.

“Zero Dark Thirty” can be seen in wide release on January 11, 2013.

  • ctk

    Is this satire?

    • petwurf

      must be. :-|

    • Anonymous

      What’s the goal of being unnecessarily mean to someone who’s clearly just offering us her view on a film and promoting her organization?

  • aomare

    I urge you all to boycott ‘Zero Dark Thirty’, a new movie glorifying human torture and promoting false propaganda. Instead, donate the value of a ticket to a worthy cause or treat a loved one to lunch. Use your dollars wisely, because as consumers we have the power to make a difference. Thank you for your time and consideration.

    Learn more here: http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/12/dont-trust-zero-dark-thirty/266253/

    • Anonymous

      Portraying torture in a morally ambiguous way isn’t the same thing as “promoting” it. I’m guessing by your strident tone you haven’t seen the film yet. Go figure.

      • anon

        You’re missing the point completely. Misrepresenting torture as an effective interrogation technique is 1. insanely inaccurate and 2. morally reprehensible. The movie is flat shameful, and yes, I’ve seen two different screenings of the film.

        • Eric

          If you want to have an argument about the efficacy of torture, a fictionalized movie based on real facts is probably not the best place to get your information. I’ve seen the movie now and I don’t believe it promotes torture. It cannot be a mistake that Bigelow frames the torture scenes immediately after the aural montage of 9-11 phone calls: as if it to draw the viewer’s attention to the barbarism on both sides. If anything, the movie to me seemed to be asking the viewer if it was all worth it–the torture, the lives lost, et cet.–in the pursuit of capturing Bin Ladin. I’m not the only one: here’s one random article from the Daily Beast to counterpoint your one random article from the Atlantic Wire: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/12/11/zero-dark-thirty-doesn-t-promote-torture.html. However, I’d wager that you don’t want to have that argument, much less that discussion. You, in fact, want to stop that discussion before it’s even begun by admonishing not to see the film because it “glorifies” torture. Portrays torture? Certainly. Glorifies it? Um. You cast the film and filmmakers in a derisive light and implicitly question the motives of anyone who’d like to see the film. You assume that people aren’t fit to make their minds up for themselves about any of it. Basically, you have the aesthetic sense of either a censor, Chicken Little, or both. Enough of this hysteria. Let people see it with clear heads and make up their minds for themselves. It’s a great movie–not the best I’ve seen all year, but still great. And I’m resolutely anti-torture, anti-War on Terror, anti-Bin Ladin.

          • ChiJimmy

            Whats the best movie you’ve seen all year?

          • aomare

            Trust me, I’ve done my research. I’ve read several articles and reviews to form my opinion. I’m also taking into account the fact that Congress is investigating the making of this movie because there may have been some inappropriate communication from the CIA. Not to mention that Senator McCain has come out condemning the torture scenes in this movie, so I feel quite confident in my statement. I’m not sure I understand where you’re coming from if you’re anti-torture, anti-war, etc. I am also anti all the above, and therefore I choose not to support a movie depicting that torture led to the capture, when the govt has clearly stated it did not. Additionally, due to the same reasoning I’m not going to support a movie produced by someone, as the article states, known for “glamourizing and sensationalizing war”. That would be going against my views, and yours as well. Ultimately people will do as they wish, I was just trying to do my part in hoping to shift some of the attention and profit from this movie to a more worthwhile cause.

    • Anonymous

      “I urge you all to boycott ‘Zero Dark Thirty’, a new movie glorifying human torture and promoting false propaganda.”

      If it glorifies torture, then why did my wife cry during the torture scenes because she found them so harrowing (Which I also found revolting)? If this movie has a pro-torture agenda it seems to have failed completely.

  • Eric

    I haven’t really thought about it, but this was not it. Not a huge “war” films fan. That being said, the thoughtfulness and craftsmanship in this film was fully evident even to me.

  • Eric

    Aomare, if you don’t think the government doesn’t have a vested interest in stating that the events in this movie aren’t at all like those that transpired, I don’t know what to tell you. Maybe go see ‘Lincoln’? That’s not at all a challenging and/or provocative movie, and I think you might enjoy it.

    • Los

      I thought Lincoln was a mediocre film at best, but I figured it would sweep the nominations. Hollywood loves anything by Spielberg, specially if it is an epic, where the good guys win and does some moralizing on the way. I thought Django did a far better job at showing how despicable slavery was and why it a war was necessary to eradicate it. I know that there are no instances of Mandingo fights to the death, but I’m pretty sure worse things did occur.

      • Eric

        I agree with you Los. Lincoln had stellar craftsmanship yet still managed to be mediocre at best. It was a utilitarian movie, a story that didn’t need to be told, and a flimsy piece of entertainment.


Subscribe to our mailing list