100 BEST WAR MOVIES: 7. Zero Dark Thirty (2012)

 

            “Zero Dark Thirty” is the story of the manhunt for Osama Bin Laden and his assassination. It was directed by Kathryn Bigelow. It was her next film after winning Best Picture and Best Director for “The Hurt Locker”. She was the first female director to win Best Director. She co-produced “Zero Dark Thirty”. Her screenwriter again was Mark Boal. The duo had intended to make a film about the Battle of Tora Bora, but before they started production, Bin Laden was killed and they decided to shift the focus to how that came about. Luckily, a lot of Boal’s research was applicable to the new focus. The movie cost about $50 million. Some of that money to a recreation of Bin Laden's compound. The film was successful and made $133 million. It was acclaimed and made many critics’ top ten lists. It was nominated for Oscars for Best Picture (losing to the inferior “Argo”), Best Actress (Jessica Chastain lost to Jennifer Lawrence in “Silver Linings Playbook”), Best Original Score (Boal lost to Tarantino for “Django Unchained”), and Best Film Editing. It won for Best Sound Editing. The film was a favorite for Best Picture, but criticism of its depiction of the use of torture created a backlash.

            The movie starts powerfully with telephone calls from victims of the Twin Towers destruction on 9/11. Once the stakes are established, the film becomes the story of one woman’s quest to get Bin Laden. Jessica Chastain plays Maya, who is a composite character, but based on an actual female CIA agent.  She portrays the CIA operative as obsessive and persevering (to the point of being a pain in the ass to her superiors).  Her evolution from naïve to hard as nails in the world of black sites is a theme.  Bigelow and Boal made a great decision to concentrate on this woman and build up to the mission by showing the frustrating quest to locate OBL (the movie does not dumb it down for the current events-challenged masses). The quest involves torture ("enhanced interrogation") which leads eventually to a courier which leads to the compound Bin Laden was living in. It’s not an easy journey and includes the suicide bomb death of her colleague Jessica (Jennifer Ehle). The last act is the mission to kill Bin Laden. The SEAL team is America’s best special forces operatives and they are realistically played. The reenactment is mesmerizing even for those who know what will happen.  The flight into Abbottabad  has the best use of music that I can recall in a scene like this.  Not bombastic.  I would best describe it as SEALish.  The “assault” is a blend of POV  (through night vision goggles) and fly on the wall cinematography. It’s a happy ending that was not forced because it is true.

Chastain deserved the Oscar. She is perfect in a role that would normally be a male role. Chastain is well-supported by a strong cast. It’s not all-star, but you’ll recognize many solid performers.  The biggest surprise is Chris Pratt as a Navy SEAL.  He does inject a little humor into a deadly serious movie. He’s not the class clown, but elite military types often have good senses of humor.  By the way, there is also a major part for one of my favorite actresses - Jennifer Ehle (the miniseries “Pride and Prejudice”).

            I won’t give away the plot.  The movie works on two levels.  If you are like me and have a working knowledge of the war on terrorism, it is exciting to see some key events reenacted suspensefully.  It does help to know the basics.  The dialogue assumes that.  There are numerous references to KSM (google his ugly ass).  I almost envy the majority of Americans who will find the entire movie suspenseful because they do not know what will happen next.

ACTING:   A+                

ACTION:   A+ (6/10) the only combat is the kill mission

ACCURACY: A  (hard to judge since the CIA actions are classified)      

PLOT:  A               

REALISM:   A 

CINEMATOGRAPHY:   A

SCORE:   A

SCENE:  the mission

QUOTE:  Maya:  [to Navy SEALs] Quite frankly, I didn't even want to use you guys, with your dip and velcro and all your gear bullshit. I wanted to drop a bomb. But people didn't believe in this lead enough to drop a bomb. So they're using you guys as canaries. And, in theory, if bin Laden isn't there, you can sneak away and no one will be the wiser. But bin Laden is there. And you're going to kill him for me.

            Interestingly, the movie does not do the cliché of describing the mission plan.  This was a good decision for both the informed and the historical illiterates.  It also does not flesh out the SEAL characters.  However, small touches make it clear they are not only heroes, but professionals.  There is an understated scene where Maya watches them play horse shoes and is stunned to learn that they know they are going on the mission that very night.  Subtle, but brilliant.  The movie also avoids the cliché of the corrupt or clueless authorities.  No Americans are villains.  It does take to task the risk-averse, but they are portrayed as simply too careful.   Then again, Maya is portrayed as an obsessed bitch.  Thank God she was!  CIA Director Leon Panetta comes off well, but there is little reference to Obama and none to Bush, Jr.  The movie does not lionize Obama for giving the green light.  It does not demonize Muslims.  In fact, a CIA official is tellingly depicted on his prayer mat.

            As far as accuracy, I could detect nothing egregious. The Camp Chapman suicide bombing is accurately depicted. However, much of the movie depicts events that are still classified. I trust Boal when he says the screenplay is based on research.  It also does not sugar coat what happened in that compound.  Spoiler alert:  there is no attempt to take OBL alive.  As to the controversial depiction of torture and the actionable results from inhumane interrogation, I would be surprised if those types of things did not happen.  You may want to believe otherwise, but get your head out of the sand.   It is a crying shame that the ostriches prevented this movie from a deserved Best Picture Oscar.  It is a travesty that they deprived Bigelow of a director nomination.

            In conclusion, “Zero Dark Thirty” tells the story many had been waiting to see.  It does it in a well-crafted way that does justice to history.  It is better than “The Hurt Locker” and “Lincoln”.  It will have its detractors and where you stand on this is telling.  I can tell you this much, if the movie would have been about Tora Bora, where we completely botched the chance to kill the most wanted man on Earth, it would have been a very depressing movie. You would not have left the theater thinking “USA USA USA!” You did with this movie even though it was not trying to elicit that response.

The Mauritanian (2021)

 

            

                “The Mauritanian” is based on the memoirs (“Guantanamo Diary”) of Mohamedou Ould Slahi.  He was held for 14 years at Guantanamo Bay for suspected involvement in the 9/11 attacks.  The movie was directed by Kevin Macdonald (“The Eagle”).  It premiered on Amazon Prime.  The film was well-received.  It was nominated for Golden Globes for Best Actor (Tahar Rahim) and Supporting Actress (Jodi Foster).  It was also nominated for several BAFTAs:  Best Film, Outstanding British Film, Best Actor, Adapted Screenplay, and Cinematography.

                 In November, 2001, in Mauritania, Slahi (Rahim) is at a wedding.  His cousin is associated with Bin Laden.  Slahi is taken by the police for what he is confident will be a short time.  Instead, he is not seen or heard from for three years.  Four years after his arrest, his case lands on the desk of Nancy Hollander (Foster).  She takes it pro bono.  She learns that Sahim was imprisoned at Guantanamo because he supposedly fought for Al Qaeda, and helped organize and recruit for the 9/11 hijackers.  He's like the Forrest Gump of Al Qaeda -  where ever you look, he’s there.  Hollander is helped by her assistant Teri Duncan (Shailene Woodley).  They will go head-to-head with Lt. Col. Stuart Couch (Benedict Cumberbatch).  A friend of his was on one of the planes that hit the Twin Towers.  Hollander and Duncan visit the prison to interview Slahi.  He is understandably bitter and untrusting.  There is some conflict between the defense attorneys as Duncan thinks he’s innocent, but Hollander does not.  She plans to make the case about lack of evidence.  The movie flashes back to his interrogations.  At this point, the movie enters its two tracks -  his torture through the years and the attempt by Hollander to get him released.  The torture runs the gamut of water torture, heavy metal music, stress positions, humiliation by women, and threatening to imprison his mother. This leads up to the trial.

                “The Mauratanian” is a movie that all Americans should see.  You can still be patriotically bitter about 9/11 and yet admit that some wrongs were committed in overly zealous treatment of suspected terrorists.  Gitmo became infamous as the maximum security facility housing the most dangerous jihadists.  Undoubtedly, many of the prisoners belong there.  But there are a few like Slahi who were wrongfully detained and then tortured to make the detainment seem rightful.  His confession can be attributed to the success of enhanced interrogation techniques.  The movie is effective in depicting what he went through.  The cinematography uses surreal imagery to show the hallucinations Slahi underwent.  Keep in mind that what he received was worse than the movie portrays.

                The strength of the movie is in the acting.  The cast is stellar with Rahim and Foster standing out.  Cumberbatch and Woodley help make a strong quartet at the core of the film.  Hollander and Duncan are stereotypes from courtroom dramas.  Hollander is the cynical veteran who will work hard to exonerate someone she does not believe is innocent.  Duncan is the bleeding-heart liberal who refuses to believe he is guilty.  Couch is the most interesting character because usually the prosecutor is a villain in movies like this.  His character arc is not a familiar one.  Overall, the plot follows the pattern of most military justice movies.  The format of flashing back to the various tortures makes the film seem fresh. 

It won’t seem fresh to any conservatives that force themselves to watch it.  The film is clearly liberal.  It does not balance Salim/Hollander/Duncan with an equally determined prosecuting attorney.  Normally, a courtroom movie where there is a person of color on trial, you would have a white savior as his attorney.  Hollander and Duncan do fit this trope, but the movie is dominated by Salhi, especially through the flashbacks.  It does not flash back to the 9/11 attacks.  It assumes the audience knows what happened on 9/11, but is ignorant about what happened afterwards to bring the perpetrators to justice.  Some of the methods were featured in “Zero Dark Thirty”, but “The Mauritanian” covers them in more depth. “Zero Dark Thirty” was criticized for pushing the narrative that harsh interrogation got answers that led to Bin Laden.  Few have criticized “The Mauritanian” for showing how the techniques led to a false confession.

“The Mauritanian” is an important movie.  We have had other movies that have tried to show the darker side of the war on terrorism.  Movies like “Standard Operating Procedure”, “Rendition”, “Redacted”, and “Lions for Lambs”.  The importance is that Slahi’s story is a true one.  It packs more of a whallop because of this.  It is the best movie to chronicle the situation at Gitmo.  It does not smack of propaganda, although it is one-sided.  Both the Bush, Jr. and Biden administrations would argue it is not the story of an innocent man.  However, it is hard to watch it and not think the war on terrorism has been marked by some mistakes and violations of justice.  That does not mean that we sank to the level of the terrorists, it means the war on terrorism has led to questionable tactics on our side.

GRADE =  B+

HISTORICAL ACCURACY:  How accurate is it?  Considering the script, the movie makers did not bother to ask for the chance to film at Gitmo.  Instead, a very realistic set was created, with heavy input from Slahi.  Slahi also helped with the script.  One must admit that the script is based on “Guantanamo Diary”, so it is Slahi’s version of what happened.  And he had reason to tell a story that would create public sympathy.  The movie is very accurate if you believe Slahi’s account.  There is certainly less reason to believe it compared to the government’s case.  Slahi was actually arrested in his home, not at a wedding party.  This was two months after 9/11.  Although he was never charged, the government’s evidence pointed to his being a recruiter for Al Qaeda and a facilitator of 9/11.  He did fight in Afghanistan with the mujahideen against the communist government.  He later was trained by Al Qaeda and swore allegiance.  He claims he cut ties with the organization, but the CIA insisted he was a sleeper agent and there is some circumstantial evidence supporting this.  He did have some connections with Al Qaeda, but they seem to be sporadic and not consequential.  He admitted to being involved in 9/11 because of the torture.  All the torture in the movie is representative of American interrogation techniques.  Although Slahi claims it was worse in reality, it is also possible that the movie shows methods used against various prisoners and puts them all on Slahi.

As far as the characters, they are true to life.  Hollander was contacted by Slahi’s family.  She did construct her case based on lack of evidence.  As in the movie, Hollander came to believe Slahi’s story and they are friends since.  Duncan was her assistant.  Couch did drop out of the case when he learned the confession had been achieved by way of inhumane methods.  He did have a friend who was one of the pilots whose plane crashed into one of the towers.

NOW SHOWING: 12 Strong (2018)

                Jerry Bruckheimer produced “Pearl Harbor” and “Black Hawk Down”.  Let’s see where on that spectrum “12 Strong” falls.  The full title of the movie is “12 Strong:  The Classified True Story of the Horse Soldiers” and it is based on the book by Doug Stanton entitled Horse Soldiers.  It was Nicholas Fuglsig’s directorial debut.  The movie is the “true story” of the first Americans into Afghanistan after 9/11.

                The movie leads off with footage of previous terrorist bombings before 9/11.  Capt. Mitch Nelson (Chris Hemsworth) and his Green Beret team are tasked for Afghanistan to get revenge and stop another 9/11.  It’s time to break the news to the ladies.  Chief Warrant Officer Spencer (Michael Shannon) has the wife who is upset that he chooses his career over his family.  “I’ll love you when you get back”.  Sgt. Diller has the wife that pretends she’s okay with it.  She refuses pre-war sex.  “It’s the only way I can make sure you’re coming back”.  Nelson has the supportive soldier’s wife.  “I don’t care how long you’re gone as long as you come back.”  They reach a secret base in Uzbekistan and are briefed (key word brief) on the mission.  They are to link up with a Northern Alliance warlord named Dostum and his militia.  They will facilitate his assault on the Taliban stronghold of Masar-e-Sharif by calling in air strikes.  Nelson briefs his men on the suicide mission against potentially 50,000 bad guys and they are all on board.  Why not, they got nothin’ better to do.  He promises them “I ain’t losing one man.”  We’ll see about that.  A hairy Chinook ride (“the reason why the Army uses Chinooks is so we’ll be good and mad when we go into combat”) places them at an outpost ominously called The Alamo.  The next day, Dostum arrives on horseback.  Surprise!  He and Nelson have different philosophies of war and will have to gain mutual respect through the crucible of battle.    Although only Nelson is experienced with horses, the Americans ride off into history.  They are only supposed to call in air strikes, but pressure from the audience will result in them getting their hands dirty.  And result in the deaths (but not woundings) of numerous hajjis.

                It is hard to review a movie like “12 Strong” because to truly give readers a feel for its flaws I would have to give away much of the plot.  It’s the type of “true story” that leaves you craving the facts to clear up all the head-scratching moments.  I have seen enough war movies to know that sometimes the seemingly most ridiculous things are actually true.  However, the vast majority of the time that I have shaken my head (or laughed out loud), it was because a scene was indeed too good to be true.  “12 Strong” has a very high WTF quotient.  Obviously, there were horses involved.  There is the book and the statue at Ground Zero of a horse soldier to back that up.  However, it is hard to believe that horse rookies could do what these characters do.  I know people will argue “artistic license” and the non-war movie purists will just go with the Bruckheimer flow.  I assume the intended audience will be entertained.  Unless you are discerning about war movie clichés.

                The movie certainly does not break any new ground.  In fact, it assumes we are familiar with old ground.  Some of the clichés are cursory because we know them so well why bother wasting screen time.  The three wives represent the three stereotypes.  They get their minute and then bookend the movie with another minute. One of the men gets a sidekick but he is just there to remind us of “Short Round”.   At least the unit is not stereotyped, because the movie has no time to develop any other than Nelson, Spencer, and Diller.  I assume one of the others is from Brooklyn, but all I know is one wears glasses and another is black.  Nelson is the stereotypical green officer who will have to earn the respect of his battle-hardened crew.   Spencer is the wise noncom.  Diller is the flippant everyman.  Dostum is a fairly interesting character.  He gives us the Afghan perspective and you understand why he is skeptical of the American sticktoativeness.  Unfortunately, the screenwriter makes him a sage.  He’s like a Native American in a modern Western.  In fact, the horses are not the only element that reminds of a cowboy movie.  There is a charge straight out of “She Wore a Yellow Ribbon”.  There is a villain like Magua from “Last of the Mohicans”.  To establish his extreme hissability, he executes a teacher of girls.  This Bin Laden lookalike wears a very redundant black and sticks around for the classic showdown with Dostum.

                People will go to see the movie for two reasons:  Chris Hemsworth and combat.  A teenage girl walked into the theater and at first I thought she was in the wrong place and then I remembered who the star was.  He is pretty good, but the role is unchallenging.  He suffers no real command anguish and is always right.  The combat is surprisingly unengaging.  There is plenty of ammo expenditure and plenty of hajji slaughtering, but I think we are beyond cheering that.  Do we also have to be reminded that Special Operatives are killing machines?  Hell, these guys not only are able to ride horses competently with little instruction beyond point its head in the direction you want to go, but they can accurately mow down bad guys while charging.  They don’t need to be able to reload at full gallop, thankfully.  It’s a movie!  Bruckheimer must have looked over Fuglsig’s shoulder to make sure even the kitchen sink got in.  There are certainly lots of explosions.  In fact, the big “here we go” moment comes when a B-52 is brought in, but this results in a very underwhelming air strike for anyone familiar with how devastating those could be.  But then, what fun would it be if all the Taliban were vaporized from above.  Strangely, the movie gives the bad guys tanks and then only one round is fired.  You see what I meant by WTF?

                 For a war movie lover, fidelity to the facts can overcome clichés and silliness.  I have not read the book yet (so I’ll be reposting in the future), but my research has so far confirmed my concerns.  Basically, the gist of the story is true.  ODA 595 was inserted with the mission outlined in the movie.  The Americans did call in air support that was instrumental in the capture of Mazar-e-Sharif.  They did travel on horses and face terrible odds.  The names of the team members were changed (for no good reason), and only Nelson (Mark Nutsch) and Spencer (Joe Jung) were in the unit.  Dostum is a real person and although probably not a sage, is pretty close to the side-switching warlord.  I seriously doubt the villainous Rezzan killed his family.  Nutsch has stated that the movie is close enough, but his description of the action as “artistic license” is a big red flag.  I don’t question the bravery and accomplishments of the men, but the combat is unbelievable and unrealistic.

                 In conclusion, I will remind you that my reviews are of war movies by a war movie lover.  Some will see this movie and find it entertaining, which is fine.  But I warn war movie lovers that they may find it disappointing.  It does a service by telling the story of the first heroes of Operation Enduring Freedom, but it lays it on too thick.  No matter what your feelings are about artistic license, war movie lovers may also be disappointed by the lazy reliance on clichés. Still, it is the rare war movie that makes it to the screen these days.  We have to take what we can get.  It would be nice if the theater-going matched the anticipation.  Come on “Seven Days in Entebbe”, don’t let me down!

GRADE  =  C

NOW SHOWING: Zero Dark Thirty

               I rushed to see a movie today that I have been waiting more than eleven years for.  Ever since 9/11/2001.  For a few years, I had almost lost hope that the subject would ever arise.  Thank God it finally came to pass.  Then I had to worry about how Hollywood would handle the inevitable film treatment(s).  You know screenwriters immediately got to work on a rush take on it.  I really wanted to “see” the death of the most evil man of my lifetime, but I know that if inferior film comes out first, it poisons the waters for later takes.  When I heard that Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal (both of “The Hurt Locker”) were preparing a version, I felt a little more confident.  I need not have worried.  The other productions can shut down.  We now have the definitive retelling of the greatest manhunt in history.  It turns out that manhunt was led by a woman.

                The movie is amazing and is built around one of the outstanding real-life heroines in cinema history.  Jessica Chastain should win the Oscar for her performance as Maya.  She portrays the CIA operative as obsessive and persevering (to the point of being a pain in the ass for her superiors).  Her evolution from naïve to hard as nails in the world of black sites is a theme.  How ironic that the actual role model will not be able to reap the fame (at least not for a while, hopefully).  Bigelow and Boal made a great decision to concentrate on this woman and build up to the mission by showing the frustrating quest to locate UBL (the movie does not dumb it down for the current events-challenged masses).  Chastain is well-supported by a strong cast.  It’s not all-star, but you’ll recognize many solid performers.  The biggest surprise is Chris Pratt (from the wonderful “Parks and Recreation”) as a Navy SEAL.  Informed choice, considering elite military types often have good senses of humor.  By the way, there is also a major part for one of my favorite actresses- Jennifer Ehle (the miniseries “Pride and Prejudice”).

                I won’t give away the plot.  The movie works on two levels.  If you are like me and have a working knowledge of the war on terrorism, it is exciting to see some key events reenacted masterfully.  It does help to know the basics.  The dialogue assumes that.  There are numerous references to KSM (google his ugly ass).  I almost envy the majority of Americans who will find the entire movie suspenseful because they do not know what will happen next.

                The movie opens chillingly with a blank screen (no opening credits) and audio from phone calls from victims of 9/11.  Just in case you needed to be reminded about the stakes.  It closes with the mission.  In between is a fascinating quest to locate the most wanted man on Earth.  Bigelow throws in some shocking acts of terrorism to juice the narrative.  The reenactment of mission is mesmerizing even for those who know what will happen.  The flight into Abbottabad  has the best use of music that I can recall in a scene like this.  Not bombastic.  I would best describe it as SEALish.  The “assault” is a blend of POV and fly on the wall cinematography.  It is not frenetic like in “Act of Valor” (a movie I love).  You won’t feel like you are playing a first person shooter.   You will be on the edge of your seat.

                Interestingly, the movie does not do the cliché of describing the mission plan.  After all those days of waiting (angrily tallied on her bosses window by Maya), we are suddenly thrust into the big night.  This was a good decision for both the informed and the historical illiterates.  It also does not flesh out the SEAL characters.  However, small touches make it clear they are not only heroes, but professionals.  There is an understated scene where Maya watches them play horse shoes and is stunned to learn that they know they are going on the mission that very night.  Subtle, but brilliant.  The movie also avoids the cliché of the corrupt or clueless authorities.  No Americans are villains.  It does take to task the risk-averse, but they are portrayed as simply too careful.   Then again, Maya is portrayed as an obsessed bitch.  Thank God she was!  CIA Director Leon Panetta comes off well, but there is little reference to Obama and none of George W. Bush.  The movie does not lionize Obama for giving the green light.  It does not demonize Muslims.  In fact, a CIA official is tellingly depicted on his prayer mat.

                As far as accuracy, I could detect nothing egregious.  I have read extensively on the subject.  I read “SEAL Target Geronimo” and the mission is basically as chronicled in that book.  The movie does not add any explosions.  It also does not sugar coat what happened in that compound.  Spoiler alert:  there is no attempt to take UBL alive.  As to the controversial depiction of torture and the actionable results from inhumane interrogation, I would be surprised if those types of things did not happen.  You may want to believe otherwise, but get your head out of the sand.   It is a crying shame that the ostriches will prevent this movie from a deserved Best Picture Oscar.  It is a travesty that they have already deprived Bigelow of a director nomination.

                In conclusion, “Zero Dark Thirty” tells the story many have been waiting to see.  It does it in a well-crafted way that does justice to history.  It is better than “The Hurt Locker” and “Lincoln”.  It will have its detractors and where you stand on this is telling.  I’m not sure if it is a war movie, but whatever genre it falls into- it is outstanding.

grade = A