I personally couldn't watch it. Glorified tough guys if you ask me. It's all bs. I imagine these guys driving pickup trucks with testicles hanging off the back to show how macho they are.
Actually no, your synposis is quite wrong. Most Navy Seals are quite articulate, have Master degrees in their selected fields of study. You'd never believe what most are like.
The real story is the woman investigator who won't give up, and forces the pursuit to it's end. The male characters are supporting roles in my opinion. I didn't see anything hanging from her skirt.
I believe you that the woman was fictional. Like the OP said, it's only reminiscent of a documentary It doesn't matter for the sake of the story as long as you understand it's just a story. The Kathryn Bigelow character "Maya" was actually inspired by a female intelligence officer who was critical to the manhunt but a combination of fact and fiction.
I only mentioned Maya because I think SHE was the one who drove the story line, not a bunch of Rambo characters with soupped up Humvy's.
I'm watching 'Targeting Bin Laden' on the Military Channel right now...not sure I'm going to need to see the movie now....was planning on going in the morning too.
There is a straight to DVD movie that is going to be released soon that is the exact same thing as Zero Dark Thirty. Hollywood is trying to make money off of Bin Laden's death. There are a lot of rumors that too much was leaked for to producers of these movies such as "how" they actually raided the base. Seals were pissed off because you are not supposed to discuss military tactics. It is all propaganda, not entertainment.
I've just arrived back home from watching it, so while the imagery is fresh in my mind I'd have to say I thought it was an excellent movie. Very interesting to watch, and with none of the usual glorified Hollywood violence....although there was most certainly some violence to it, I thought it was portrayed in a realistic manner.
The lead character drew me in....not in a feel-good sort of way, just with interest.
The reviewer Matt Taibbi is awfully wrapped up in, and bothered by, the movie's opening scenes of torture, and most of his review centers on this part of the movie. I'd say he is clearly not in favor of torture, but to me, that makes his movie review (the point of his article) less objective about this film's overall story. He turned his review into a political diatribe. Unless any of us in this forum actually lives this kind of clandestine type of life and security occupation in the special forces, or the intelligence community, we don't know for sure how realistic this movie was, or, how prevalent torture is used, or, is effective. In fact, I winced far more watching James Bond, strapped naked to a chair with an open bottom, and whipped with that giant rope and knot, in the first Daniel Craig "Bond" movie Casino Royale. Nobody seems to have been offended by that scene. Lots of brutality shown in the classic WWII movie "The Bridge On The River Kwai". How has that movie survived all these years with out the stigma of "torture" branded around its' neck? Same for lots of other classic war movies. How about these "Expendable" action movies with Sylvester Stallone? No one complains about the violence in those movies. I am personally in favor of my intelligence agencies' use of rough tactics, I suppose, in order to win a war on terror, and don't see how this movie "Zero Dark Thirty" should be singularly criticized for an opening movie scene about an interrogation method that resulted in Bin Laden's demise.
I agree...it's Matt Taibbi after all - you'd get a better review if Stevie Wonder was asked to review a movie.
Ditto on your torture comments.....First Blood showed "Rambo" being tortured, but no-one ever raised a hue and cry about that...granted it was fictional, but taken in the abstract it was based just as much on fact as anything in ZDT.
Movie critics are just ordinary folk elevated to sainthood by the movie goers. Anti war movies have been out since film was invented. The critic's personal bias plays a role only in directing those who had already made up their minds one way or the other whether to see the film.
Apocalypse Now 1979 was supposed to end America's lust for war but has gone on to become a huge hit. Platoon 1986 was created to show man's inhumanity to man and also is now a classic. Full Metal Jacket 1987 was filmed to show the futility of all war and insanity of it all. Still on disk selling well and on cable.
Even newer films such as Jarhead 2005 was filmed as a biography of what war does to man. Terrible things.
The audiences still fill the theaters and the critics never, ever admit how wrong they were. Soldiers who were there in each war vary on their accounts of what actually happened.
ZDT will be judged no differently in a couple years. No matter the supposed political reason for making it, it was well done just as a film. Torture and brutality is sopped up by the viewer and the critics who walk on water simply know where the stones are. Scarface with the chainsaw scene never drew a whimper from the critics, they all made snide comments about the accents.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Triumph Rat Motorcycle Forums
3.9M posts
167.7K members
Since 2002
A forum community dedicated to Triumph Motorcycle owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, racing, cafe racers, bobbers, riding, modifications, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!