Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Zero Dark Thirty (2012)

This is topic Zero Dark Thirty (2012) in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=001923

Posted by Mark Ogden (Member # 43) on 01-07-2013, 01:52 PM:

Dramatization of CIA intelligence gathering efforts following 9/11 and leading up to the raid in Pakistan that took out Osama Bin Laden.

*****

How you feel about this movie, at least the first half of it, might depend on how you feel about the CIA’s use of torture . . . or excuse me, enhanced interrogation on detainees following 9/11. The film makes the case that pivotal information was gained by use of decidedly non-Geneva Convention procedures, although if the film is to be believed, the biggest piece of intel and the one that finally led to the raid was obtained by the CIA after they bought a Lamborghini for one guy. As you all know, the Government is denying that any of this happened, and the filmmakers swear that their research is sound. Whatever, but it can be difficult to watch at times (“Your friend is an animal”, one of the tortured ones tells a CIA agent, referring to his tormenter. It’s not hard to disagree).

But overall, it’s not that compelling a movie. Mostly it’s just a pretty dry and suspense-free presentation of the investigation. There’s a lot of dialog spoken in rapid and clipped CIA jargon, the agency operative played by Jessica Chastain gets into a lot of people’s faces, characters come and go, and a lot of Arabic names get tossed out without any real clear indication of who they are or how they relate to the investigation, a reflection on the CIA’s own confused handling of the matter. The last third or so, which depicts the actual Seal team raid using top-secret Area 51 helicopters, is pretty intense. But since it’s not a spoiler to say that Bin Laden gets whacked, there is little real tension to it, which can be said for the entire movie.

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 01-19-2013, 08:53 PM:

personally I thought the first thirty minutes of the movie was tedious and plodding. The movie overall was good, but not as great as some are gushing over it. The soundmix was tremendous though, the loudness and sudden explosion at the Marriot Hotel nearly gave the guy sitting next to my left nearly a heart attack.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 02-17-2013, 12:59 PM:

We had some people (as typical on R-rated movies) ask "how bad" this one was, so I looked up the Parents Guide on IMDB and found this:

quote:
Zero Dark Thirty is one of the most violent, frightening and intense movies ever. Profanity is used constantly. Even an adult can be disturbed by the torturing scenes.

We watched it yesterday and I would have to say that the above is a gross exaggeration. The torture scenes didn't strike me as anything worse than has ever been shown in movies before. The profanity is definitely not "constant" and while the movie is definitely intense, I wouldn't categorize it as one of the most violent, frightening and intense movies ever. Far from it in fact.

The most controversial parts of the movie are the torture scenes, but I think the controversy is overblown. I thought they were well done. They got the point across without being overbearing the way horror movies are. If it happened, it happened.

I got bored with the first two-thirds of the movie. The CIA techno-speak got tiring. I suppose if you're a person who's really into that sort of thing it would be fascinating, but I found myself getting lost among all the Arab names that were being tossed around.

I thought the ending raid scene was poorly shot. As typical with modern action scenes, it was hard to tell who was where and what was happening, with all the super-fast cutting and such. The fact that it took place in darkness didn't help (and yes I know that the real thing took place in darkness).

Overall I would have to say I enjoyed it, once things picked up and I got into the flow of it. Best Picture? Ehhhh, I think Argo was better.

3.5 stars.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 02-17-2013, 07:36 PM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
We watched it yesterday and I would have to say that the above is a gross exaggeration. The torture scenes didn't strike me as anything worse than has ever been shown in movies before. The profanity is definitely not "constant" and while the movie is definitely intense, I wouldn't categorize it as one of the most violent, frightening and intense movies ever. Far from it in fact.

Film ratings work a bit different in almost every country, in the Netherlands this one is rated at 16+ and in Belgium at 12+...

And I agree, this movie is far from being one of the most frightening and intense movies ever. Maybe some people find it more frightening, because it is "based on true events".