i felt exactly the same way as you. the film did not peak my interest until the last 45 minutes. the first hour and half was boring interrogation scenes. how Jessica Chastain got nominated for an academy award is insane. the nude guy who did the torture/waterboarding scene should have gotten an Oscar nod.
How come nobody stopped to think that maybe torture is in the movie not because it gave us info that got bin laden, but that it was widely used in attempts to get that sort of info and the film makers didn't want to shy away from showing how that happened?
Remember that when McCain was tortured he said that he'd give the correct answer in terms of possibly location or whatever, but gave false numbers. (If I'm wrong on this someone feel free to correct, this is just what i remember)
Im not a professional movie reviewer or anything like that but I feel like personal opinions on the topic of torture got in the way in which you reviewed this film. Yes it is wrong blah blah but when I watched it and saw the torture scenes I had already in my mind accepted that this was common practice back then, it wasn't shocking in the sense that "OMG they actually do that" but more of a representation of the process. As far as a movie review goes, you spent the whole time debating torture.
I think Argo, Zero Dark Thirty are defently the three frontrunner at the oscars. 5-7 of the majors category`s will be won from these movies best picture, best director, best lead actor , adapted and original screenplay for sure.... best lead actress and best suporting actor maybe
Let us remember that "Torture doesn't work" is not because you NEVER get any correct answers, it's that you can't trust any of the answers given because people will say anything to stop the torture. They may say the correct answer early on, perhaps "I don't know", but someone may want a different answer and continue torture. This will lead to useless answers, and this is why torture manifestly does not work.
if torture should be made illegal, then war should be made illegal. you can't have your cake and eat it. well, clearly you can, but you shouldn't. so there!
By saying that the movie doesn't take a stand on anything shows that you missed the whole point of it. The point of it wasn't to make a point, it was to document what happened as accurately as possible. None of us can really say whether it is fictional or not, but regardless this was still a brilliant film.
The filmmakers have no obligation to comment on the use of torture. They merely presented it. It is not immoral to give the audience the benefit if the don't and let them come to their own conclusions. Films are meant to ask questions, not to state the answers.
The first hour of this movie was a total waste of time. They could have edited it down to ten percent of it and it wouldn't change the movie one bit. The raid was really exciting even though you know what is going to happen.
do you not understand the the government commented on the movie by criticizing it. they attack it for the torture scenes saying they are inacurate and more cruel that reality (now whether it is isn't the point I am making) my point is why would they secretly make the movie to build support for torture and then publicly attack it because they claim the torture scenes are fictitious and shouldn't be taken as fact. that seems rather counter intuitive.
Watch Kirby Dick's THE INVISIBLE WAR, its on Netflix, nominated for an Oscar and the #1 rated film on Rotten Tomatoes for the entire year. In December 2011, a military court ruled rape an occupational hazard of military service. Do you still not believe me???
There are a lot skeletons in the pentagon's closet, but finding someone that could potentially cause the destruction of mankind is a little more important than ending rape culture. Yes it is an important issue, and the pentagon was investigating it.
Ok I will, the fact she was able to fly by herself during wartime to anyplace she wanted to go in the world was the Presidents way of saying great job. She cried because for 12 years she hunted UBL and she was part of the team that found him, and the plan she was against worked.
My comment doesn't say anything about it being fiction or non-fiction. But, for the record, it's non-fiction. Sure, they took some liberties when filming it, but all the major events in the story HAPPENED.
I must admit I was disappointed with this movie. Even though I was not expected to be wowed with the twists and expert storytelling, there still should have been some mounting tension in the first two thirds of the film. Those two thirds suck. There is just too much talking and scowling. And the main point is that Chastain is thinks she is right, and she is, as it obviously turns out. There is no good set-up for that final inevitable act. That was well-executed, but then I said, who cares?
I disgree with Ben in that if you make a film about a true event, you are obligated to tell the truth. Just because they write based on doesn't mean it isn't sold as the truth, which it is.
The movie was quite good, but I don't understand the accolades for Chastain AT ALL. She exuded absolutely no gravitas or authority, and she sounds like she's 16 years old when delivers her lines. Jennifer Ehle's character
a documentary of bin laden death gives you more info you'll actually care about and looks more interesting than the movie, i didn't really get that tense as i thought i would be, it was poory directed towards the end, while it doesn't dramatize what happened it didn't feel like something real was happening either, too slow, dragged out, kinda all over the place, the important things are really worth only 2 mins of screen time maximum but in most scenes they dragged it out just so it felt bigger
i think it is interesting at how many people say the movie is propoganda, but the movie is critisized by the government for the torture scenes cuz they are claiming the torture in the scenes are exaggerations. so if you believe the government made this movie, then it is propoganda against itself???? i can never follow consipracy theory logic.
You don't put scenes in that don't progress the plot. If those interrogation scenes were not meant to progress the plot then why were they there? If they didn't provide any intel then they didn't progress the plot. Anyway you look at it most viewers will be biases towards the idea that those torture scenes progressed the plot and therefor must have provided useful intel.
Because sometimes movies are so overtly propaganda pieces, it would be neglectful not to mention it. The politics often are the defining feature of some films.
First of all I'm in the military, attached to a command that sent Sailors into harms way to find him a lot! I understand the way women were and sometimes are still treated is upsetting but you're arguement is apples and oranges.
Are you kidding? Read the book one of the Seal's wrote. It describes everything that happened just like it did in the film. The film was extremely accurate, and it's not fiction.
I totally disagree. The film just isn't taking a stand on what you want it to take a stand on. Check out Ignatiy Vishnevetsky's film review on MUBI called The Monitor Mentality, or A Means to an End Becomes an End in Itself.
She had an opinion that differed to the massive hoards of fanboys, how exactly is that justification to have a completely capable and talented film critic to leave a show?
The raid scene was incredibly inaccurate. A helicopter never crashed. They extended the whole thing out, when it really only took about 5 minutes from the landing to UBL's death. And the way he was killed was WAY off. He was face-to-face with the SEAL team member that shot him. He surrendered, and the guy shot him in the head. The movie was so far off, it was stupid. It was still cool the way they did it, but there was really no need to embellish it that much.
The movie was propaganda, and it did imply that torture does have its merits, but it wasn't boring. Having said that, I realize that there's a very large segment of the population that only enjoy movies that are based on comic books... or movies that are actual cartoons. If you are part of that group, then yes, you will find it boring up until the last 30 minutes.
Was this a poll you took? Plenty of others have complained about Christie. Look at a ll the crap she caught after her TDKR review. Hey Christie, don't let the door hit you on the way out!
I don't think Bigelow and the writer had this agenda. I just think they are politically naive and didn't understand the implications it could have. The writer has responded by trying to blame the audience for misinterpreting the movie, but If it was well-written and well-directed (perhaps including some of the debate or discussion about how none of the information obtained from torture led to Bin Laden's death), then this controversy would not exist.
Yes, I mentioned the dark hours of the US in my first comment. You can reread it in my second reply. America has done some horrible shit, no one is fighting you on that. But frankly, it is natural. We are a young nation. May I remind you we were the first real republic that did not destroy itself since the Greeks. We have been going through internal and external hell. The depressions, the booms and busts, civil war, WW1 and WW2., and the Cold War.
Also, What country has not done horrible shit? Every inch of Land on this earth has been fought over for. Whether by humans or by animals. Every country has its dark days.
Jennifer Ehle's character was far more believable, and interesting. As far as the politics, or lack of politics, of the film...I of course found the torture scenes revolting and hated Jason Clarke's character with a passion, but I honestly didn't feel the film was making any value judgments. It was simply portraying the events dispassionately as they occurred.
@Alex Hajna Ummm, no. The raid was accurate. If you watched the Nat. Geo. version, that one was incredibly innacurate. A helicopter did crash, and the way OBL was killed is accurate. He wasn't face to face. The SEALs went into a hallway, he peeked his head out of a door, the pointman shot him. Afterwards, they cleared the room, and shot him some more.
Except, that a lot of pro-torture media personalities are using this movie as justification, as if they've been vindicated. This, and I simply, cynically, do not have a lot of confidence in the intelligence of the average American to do any "background research" and find out the information about the courier did not come from the way the movie says it does, and may, even if they don't support it still, feel as though torture played a role, which is an unfair starting point to moral arguments.
I really just want to watch a review about the quality of the film without having to hear the liberal talking heads of Ben, Christie, and Alonzo (or whatever his name is). I don't mind people talking about real issues but at least have a counter point to your show...I get so fed up with these left wing nuts talking to themselves and implying that they are supremely right and anyone who doesn't agree with them is not intelligent or enlightened...what a joke.
the only actor from this film who should have been nominated for and Oscar, was the guy who did the nude torture/waterboarding scene. the james gandolfini character was a waste of budget. any out of work actor who's struggling to pay next months rent, could have acted the part and paid far less for it.
Here's an idea ... why doesn't everyone who is calling this movie propaganda GO AND SEE IT instead of jumping on the very, very predictable bandwagon! Open up your minds and look at it with some objectivity instead of immediately dismissing it.
A better Soviet Union? People were dying of famine in the Soviet Union. They were lucky to get a few hours of electricity a day let alone a telephone. People had to wait years to get a car and you tell me America is simply a better Soviet Union? If you said We acted like a Soviet Union, I understand, but our infrastructure is a million times more stable and we have the strongest middle class in the history of the world. In 25 years America will still be in the same position it is today.
You fail to see my point. I am comparing the US to other empires from mankind's history. Never did I say that United States being better than past empires justify it. Plus, this is a republic not a democracy. I thought you said you read up on our nation's history. In a republic, the people do not have direct control over our government. If our government was based on apporval ratings, then we would've been out of the middle east by the 5th year. I dont like your strawman arguements.
I wish they talked less about the "controversy" and more about how great a thriller this was. It was incredible.
It was fascist propaganda. Guess you believed the official 9/11 story?
i felt exactly the same way as you. the film did not peak my interest until the last 45 minutes. the first hour and half was boring interrogation scenes. how Jessica Chastain got nominated for an academy award is insane. the nude guy who did the torture/waterboarding scene should have gotten an Oscar nod.
Props to Matt for holding his composure while getting talked over multiple times.
Chasdain's character's single minded obsessive pursuit of bin laden is all you need to know about her.
Watch it. You won't be disappointed. I want to go back and watch it again it was so good, and Jessica Chastain was awesome.
Propaganda isn't always a negative thing. Take it for what it is..
How come nobody stopped to think that maybe torture is in the movie not because it gave us info that got bin laden, but that it was widely used in attempts to get that sort of info and the film makers didn't want to shy away from showing how that happened?
Did this movie cover the dude that was having trouble sleeping because of the helicopters, so he kept tweeting about what was going on?
When are you coming out with your Worst Film of 2012 video?!
Christy didn't know a helicopter crashed? How does any informed adult not know this?
Remember that when McCain was tortured he said that he'd give the correct answer in terms of possibly location or whatever, but gave false numbers. (If I'm wrong on this someone feel free to correct, this is just what i remember)
Im not a professional movie reviewer or anything like that but I feel like personal opinions on the topic of torture got in the way in which you reviewed this film. Yes it is wrong blah blah but when I watched it and saw the torture scenes I had already in my mind accepted that this was common practice back then, it wasn't shocking in the sense that "OMG they actually do that" but more of a representation of the process. As far as a movie review goes, you spent the whole time debating torture.
I think Argo, Zero Dark Thirty are defently the three frontrunner at the oscars.
5-7 of the majors category`s will be won from these movies
best picture, best director, best lead actor , adapted and original screenplay for sure....
best lead actress and best suporting actor maybe
Let us remember that "Torture doesn't work" is not because you NEVER get any correct answers, it's that you can't trust any of the answers given because people will say anything to stop the torture. They may say the correct answer early on, perhaps "I don't know", but someone may want a different answer and continue torture. This will lead to useless answers, and this is why torture manifestly does not work.
Here's an idea guys. Get together and choose 5-10 best films of 2012 you'd highly recommend seeing. Just an idea.
if torture should be made illegal, then war should be made illegal. you can't have your cake and eat it. well, clearly you can, but you shouldn't. so there!
I wonder how accurate they made the raid.
I wonder if they included the women in the house, or the fact that Bin Laden was unarmed...?
By saying that the movie doesn't take a stand on anything shows that you missed the whole point of it. The point of it wasn't to make a point, it was to document what happened as accurately as possible. None of us can really say whether it is fictional or not, but regardless this was still a brilliant film.
The filmmakers have no obligation to comment on the use of torture. They merely presented it. It is not immoral to give the audience the benefit if the don't and let them come to their own conclusions. Films are meant to ask questions, not to state the answers.
The first hour of this movie was a total waste of time. They could have edited it down to ten percent of it and it wouldn't change the movie one bit. The raid was really exciting even though you know what is going to happen.
Liking this new camera angle.
It's low end torture that we exectuted Japanese officers for in WWII. It is not simulated drowning. It is actual drowning.
Seen it?
Christy didn't know that a helicopter crashed on the raid?! Did I misunderstand that?
How is it PC if its true...
do you not understand the the government commented on the movie by criticizing it. they attack it for the torture scenes saying they are inacurate and more cruel that reality (now whether it is isn't the point I am making) my point is why would they secretly make the movie to build support for torture and then publicly attack it because they claim the torture scenes are fictitious and shouldn't be taken as fact. that seems rather counter intuitive.
Watch Kirby Dick's THE INVISIBLE WAR, its on Netflix, nominated for an Oscar and the #1 rated film on Rotten Tomatoes for the entire year. In December 2011, a military court ruled rape an occupational hazard of military service. Do you still not believe me???
the only time i didn't check my watch was during the raid...a version of which i had seen previously in another documentary.
There are a lot skeletons in the pentagon's closet, but finding someone that could potentially cause the destruction of mankind is a little more important than ending rape culture. Yes it is an important issue, and the pentagon was investigating it.
Ok I will, the fact she was able to fly by herself during wartime to anyplace she wanted to go in the world was the Presidents way of saying great job. She cried because for 12 years she hunted UBL and she was part of the team that found him, and the plan she was against worked.
I'm just glad Grae Drake wasn't here as she would probably proclaim it as the best film of the year and that everyone should seen it.
Lincoln?
To whoever wrote the description: it's Joel *Edgerton*.
Just because we are the greatest country doesnt mean you can just hate us....Im proud to be american.
This is a constant. Why do you think she gets teased by the others as being "heartless" and "souless"? This is what people say about her.
My comment doesn't say anything about it being fiction or non-fiction. But, for the record, it's non-fiction. Sure, they took some liberties when filming it, but all the major events in the story HAPPENED.
I must admit I was disappointed with this movie. Even though I was not expected to be wowed with the twists and expert storytelling, there still should have been some mounting tension in the first two thirds of the film. Those two thirds suck. There is just too much talking and scowling. And the main point is that Chastain is thinks she is right, and she is, as it obviously turns out. There is no good set-up for that final inevitable act. That was well-executed, but then I said, who cares?
I disgree with Ben in that if you make a film about a true event, you are obligated to tell the truth. Just because they write based on doesn't mean it isn't sold as the truth, which it is.
With this and her Dark Knight Rises review in mind, I wonder whether Christy is prone to be contrary to whatever word of mouth has caught on.
The movie was quite good, but I don't understand the accolades for Chastain AT ALL.
She exuded absolutely no gravitas or authority, and she sounds like she's 16 years old when delivers her lines.
Jennifer Ehle's character
a documentary of bin laden death gives you more info you'll actually care about and looks more interesting than the movie, i didn't really get that tense as i thought i would be, it was poory directed towards the end, while it doesn't dramatize what happened it didn't feel like something real was happening either, too slow, dragged out, kinda all over the place, the important things are really worth only 2 mins of screen time maximum but in most scenes they dragged it out just so it felt bigger
i think it is interesting at how many people say the movie is propoganda, but the movie is critisized by the government for the torture scenes cuz they are claiming the torture in the scenes are exaggerations. so if you believe the government made this movie, then it is propoganda against itself???? i can never follow consipracy theory logic.
You don't put scenes in that don't progress the plot. If those interrogation scenes were not meant to progress the plot then why were they there? If they didn't provide any intel then they didn't progress the plot. Anyway you look at it most viewers will be biases towards the idea that those torture scenes progressed the plot and therefor must have provided useful intel.
Wasn't lame. And they only use green hues during the raid scenes where it makes sense, and even then not totally.
Apparently the helicopter was lowering into its own downdrift and caused to to go down.
"very clearly, kind of, in between"
WTH does that mean?
Because sometimes movies are so overtly propaganda pieces, it would be neglectful not to mention it. The politics often are the defining feature of some films.
First of all I'm in the military, attached to a command that sent Sailors into harms way to find him a lot! I understand the way women were and sometimes are still treated is upsetting but you're arguement is apples and oranges.
Of course Christie didn't know the chopper crashed. She's clueless.
Ben is SO lucky, Chrstie touched lightly pet his shoulder! so jealous.
Prop piece or not I WILL SEE THIS MOVIE!
Are you kidding? Read the book one of the Seal's wrote. It describes everything that happened just like it did in the film. The film was extremely accurate, and it's not fiction.
the movie had nothing to say. it's a fictional documentary with flat, emotioinless characters. the movie is afraid to take a stand on anything.
I totally disagree. The film just isn't taking a stand on what you want it to take a stand on. Check out Ignatiy Vishnevetsky's film review on MUBI called The Monitor Mentality, or A Means to an End Becomes an End in Itself.
She had an opinion that differed to the massive hoards of fanboys, how exactly is that justification to have a completely capable and talented film critic to leave a show?
The raid scene was incredibly inaccurate. A helicopter never crashed. They extended the whole thing out, when it really only took about 5 minutes from the landing to UBL's death. And the way he was killed was WAY off. He was face-to-face with the SEAL team member that shot him. He surrendered, and the guy shot him in the head.
The movie was so far off, it was stupid. It was still cool the way they did it, but there was really no need to embellish it that much.
The movie was propaganda, and it did imply that torture does have its merits, but it wasn't boring. Having said that, I realize that there's a very large segment of the population that only enjoy movies that are based on comic books... or movies that are actual cartoons. If you are part of that group, then yes, you will find it boring up until the last 30 minutes.
Most of us are just trying to live our lives, like everyone else.
Was this a poll you took?
Plenty of others have complained about Christie.
Look at a ll the crap she caught after her TDKR review.
Hey Christie, don't let the door hit you on the way out!
I don't think Bigelow and the writer had this agenda. I just think they are politically naive and didn't understand the implications it could have. The writer has responded by trying to blame the audience for misinterpreting the movie, but If it was well-written and well-directed (perhaps including some of the debate or discussion about how none of the information obtained from torture led to Bin Laden's death), then this controversy would not exist.
No probably having the largest economy and military does. Although I see your point, most powerful is more accurate.
I really love What the Flick but Matt Atchity checking his phone during the videos is driving me insane.
Movie is not a documentary. You will not know which information in this film is true or not.
don't watch this review before you see the movie please they spoil the entire movie.
Actually a helicopter did crash during the raid. You must have not done your research.
Wait till you see it, propaganda or not, torture controversy's or not, the film was extremely well made and the acting is incredible.
Yes, I mentioned the dark hours of the US in my first comment. You can reread it in my second reply. America has done some horrible shit, no one is fighting you on that. But frankly, it is natural. We are a young nation. May I remind you we were the first real republic that did not destroy itself since the Greeks. We have been going through internal and external hell. The depressions, the booms and busts, civil war, WW1 and WW2., and the Cold War.
Torture is really great at getting people to say things you want them to say even if it's not true.
why did she cry at the end on the plane?
Haha I love that you say you didn't buy her character when Maya is a real person who did all the things that Jessica's character did in the movie.
Didn't buy Jessica's character for a second.
Of course torture works. Anyone who doesn't believe that is in denial.
Also, What country has not done horrible shit? Every inch of Land on this earth has been fought over for. Whether by humans or by animals. Every country has its dark days.
Hopefully by now you've fixed that...
Jennifer Ehle's character was far more believable, and interesting.
As far as the politics, or lack of politics, of the film...I of course found the torture scenes revolting and hated Jason Clarke's character with a passion, but I honestly didn't feel the film was making any value judgments.
It was simply portraying the events dispassionately as they occurred.
@Alex Hajna Ummm, no. The raid was accurate. If you watched the Nat. Geo. version, that one was incredibly innacurate. A helicopter did crash, and the way OBL was killed is accurate. He wasn't face to face. The SEALs went into a hallway, he peeked his head out of a door, the pointman shot him. Afterwards, they cleared the room, and shot him some more.
I came to see a review about the movie and not about torture. Surely it is an important topic, but please say so in the title.
Except, that a lot of pro-torture media personalities are using this movie as justification, as if they've been vindicated. This, and I simply, cynically, do not have a lot of confidence in the intelligence of the average American to do any "background research" and find out the information about the courier did not come from the way the movie says it does, and may, even if they don't support it still, feel as though torture played a role, which is an unfair starting point to moral arguments.
sorry i wanted to write Argo, Zero Dark Thirty and Lincoln :)
Isn't it funny how Katheryn Bigelow has become the 21st century version of Leni Riefenstahl?
2 out of 4 panelists love that fact.
So that chick gives this a 9, but gives The Dark Knight Rises a 5 and Django a 7, that makes sense. Not!
The Hobbit was a better fantasy movie i think.
the rest of us are happy with her
I think I need to watch this one again.
I really just want to watch a review about the quality of the film without having to hear the liberal talking heads of Ben, Christie, and Alonzo (or whatever his name is). I don't mind people talking about real issues but at least have a counter point to your show...I get so fed up with these left wing nuts talking to themselves and implying that they are supremely right and anyone who doesn't agree with them is not intelligent or enlightened...what a joke.
I still don't get the, "It was so awesome I give it an 8" rating system. Awesome = 9 or above.
I am really getting friggin' sick of Christie Lemire. The 'cute' thing is not working anymore.
You do know that national security is not subject to FOI act right?
Bigelow Never Disappoints.
the only actor from this film who should have been nominated for and Oscar, was the guy who did the nude torture/waterboarding scene. the james gandolfini character was a waste of budget. any out of work actor who's struggling to pay next months rent, could have acted the part and paid far less for it.
its good but you really have to pay attention.
Here's an idea ... why doesn't everyone who is calling this movie propaganda GO AND SEE IT instead of jumping on the very, very predictable bandwagon! Open up your minds and look at it with some objectivity instead of immediately dismissing it.
Only 8.4 you guys are hard to impress
message me if you want a in depth review of Zero Dark Thirty
Always Great To See Another WHAT THE FLICK Review.
A better Soviet Union? People were dying of famine in the Soviet Union. They were lucky to get a few hours of electricity a day let alone a telephone. People had to wait years to get a car and you tell me America is simply a better Soviet Union? If you said We acted like a Soviet Union, I understand, but our infrastructure is a million times more stable and we have the strongest middle class in the history of the world. In 25 years America will still be in the same position it is today.
You fail to see my point. I am comparing the US to other empires from mankind's history. Never did I say that United States being better than past empires justify it. Plus, this is a republic not a democracy. I thought you said you read up on our nation's history. In a republic, the people do not have direct control over our government. If our government was based on apporval ratings, then we would've been out of the middle east by the 5th year. I dont like your strawman arguements.
Unless it's a documentary it is subject to false and suggested information.
Or they can find a replacement.
Ben has a nice Elvis doo today