The Case for ZDT
-"...depiction is not endorsement, and if it was, no artist could ever portray inhumane practices, no author could ever write about them, and no filmmaker could ever delve into the knotty subjects of our time." --Kathryn Bigelow, director of Zero Dark Thirty

Being kept awake for 96 hours straight with rock music constantly blaring, forced into a small, coffin-like box, having chummed food forced down your throat and being waterboarded. These are the torture practices that Kathryn Bigelow’s Oscar-nominated film, Zero Dark Thirty depicts with pulse-racing realism. The scenes have brought about much controversy, ranging from politicians to movie stars who accuse the movie of being “inaccurate”, “misleading” and even pro-torture. However, when looking at the history of interrogation techniques used by the U.S. Government, as well as the history of torture in films, one will see that these accusations do not apply to Zero Dark Thirty

While Zero Dark Thirty has received rave reviews and has been loonominated for five Oscars, there are many critics of the film who are unwilling to stem beyond the use of torture in the movie. Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) heavily criticized Sony Pictures Entertainment in a letter they sent to the studio for using "grossly inaccurate and misleading” torture in these scenes. The three senators continue to express their disappointment over the film’s “suggestion” that torture played a key role in the procurement of information that led to the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden (Lavender).
However, during the Bush Administration's time in office, torture or, “enhanced interrogation techniques”, were a common and controversial practice in the war on terror (McManus). The Torture Memos, which were released shortly after President Obama took office, spoke of every torture method portrayed in the film, such as binding in stress positions and waterboarding. The decrees; drafted by the Director Assistant Attorney General John Yoo, advised the CIA, the USDD (United States Department of Defense) and the President on the use of physical and mental torment on detainees during the war on terror prior to 9/11 (Torture). Therefore, it can be concluded that the types of torture portrayed in Zero Dark Thirty were all common practices that have been utilized by the U.S. Government.
As it stands, multiple current and former CIA members have spoke about Zero Dark Thirty and its depiction of enhanced interrogation techniques. Acting CIA director Michael Morell released a statement shortly after the films release stating, "The truth is that multiple streams of intelligence led CIA analysts to conclude that bin Laden was hiding in Abbottabad, some came from detainees subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques...” (Press) Consequently, if Zero Dark Thirty did not include these scenes of torture, the film would be “inaccurate” and therefore, would be whitewashing history. Morell later states that there were other sources as well, those that were not related to torture. This is a fact that Zero Dark Thirty adheres to, as methods of torture are not used as the main source for receiving information from detainees. An extensive ground game, the retracing of past evidence and cell phone hacking all contributed to the success of the operation.
Some of the most damning evidence in the defense against Zero Dark Thirty comes from a January 29 press conference involving former CIA officials who had recently watched the film. One of the individuals present at the conference was Jose Rodriguez, former CIA National Clandestine Service Director under the Bush Administration. Rodriguez said that he “liked the fact that (Zero Dark Thirty) showed that interrogation techniques had something to do with the capture of bin Laden.” All of the men at the press conference, including Michael Hayden, former CIA Director, and John Rizzo, former CIA Deputy Counsel, disagreed with the assessment that the movie was inaccurate in its depiction of the role torture played in finding Osama bin Laden. They also expressed their belief that the film isn't receiving enough credit for its portrayal of other methods being used to find the whereabouts of UBL (“CIA”). In fact, the film depicts the use of enhanced interrogation techniques as an inefficient method for extracting information.
Throughout the first half of the film, torture is demonstrated quite often. It should be pointed out however, that never does a detainee being portrayed in the film release information while being tortured. The man who is seen undergoing abuse during the first forty-five minutes of the film releases information during a civilized lunch. How can a film be considered pro-torture if the act itself is portrayed as ineffective?
Unfortunately, there are those who, when viewing a movie, see only what they want to see. Shortly after the film’s theatrical release, Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Science members Ed Asner, Martin Sheen and David Clennon, admitted that they will not be voting for Zero Dark Thirty for any of the categories it is nominated in for the Oscars. They claimed that the film is pro-torture and have even gone as far as to urge other members of the Academy to vote “no” for the film. However, a few weeks after their statement was released, Sheen apologized for his belligerent comment and stated that Zero Dark Thirty actually does a, “great, great service” regarding torture. Perhaps Mr. Asner and Mr. Clennon will do the same once they actually do a little investigating themselves on the subject matter of torture in the CIA (“Zero Dark”).
If any film depicting an inhumane act meant that it was endorsing the act itself, then other films could also be chastised for the use of torture. Films like Reservoir Dogs and even Shrek are guilty of portraying torture in their films. Shrek, for example, includes a scene in which the “gingerbread” man is being tortured through a water-boarding-method. While Shrek is not in any way a pro-torture film, if we use the logic that depiction implies endorsement, then this animated movie does in fact advocate enhanced interrogation techniques, along with countless other films such as Pulp Fiction, Casino Royale and Casino. To say that a movie is pro-torture because it contains scenes with enhanced interrogation is similar to saying a war film is pro-war. It is an outlandish and irresponsible statement.
Those who oppose the Zero Dark Thirty are either uninformed, like in the case of Asner and Clennon, or are worried that the film will make the United States Government appear like the bad guy, A la Senators McCain, Levin and Feinstein. Though, one would think a failing economy and constant congressional gridlock would alone do a fine job of that. Zero Dark Thirty is a magnificent piece of entertainment. It depicts the decade-long manhunt for Osama bin Laden with care and accuracy and despite those who cannot find its true motive, Zero Dark Thirty deserves to be rewarded immensely come Oscar Night.