Zero Dark Dirty Business Information

     Director Kathryn Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Baol firmly stated in an interview, that is to air tonight on ABC’s Nightline, that no classified documents were used in the making of Zero Dark Thirty. These fimmakers deny claims that the White House provided classified info. This film details the Navy SEAL mission that killed Osama bin Laden so it is no surprise that this is a hot topic. This film discusses something that our country had to do, and telling the story in film is a way to express this 'success' and whatnot. 

    The pair mentioned that claims they received top-secret help from the Obama administration on the details of the raid came down to partisan politics. “I certainly did a lot of homework, but I never asked for classified materials; to my knowledge, I never received any”, Boal said. “And I think as far as the controversy goes, you know, how can I put this — it was an election year. It was surreal and bizarre to have … I mean there were major players in the Republican Party characterizing the script and the movie before I had written a word, and I found that just really baffling”.

     Although Boal did tell Nightline that he spoke to people with intimate knowledge of the Navy SEAL mission, including some in the military and the CIA, but that their identities are shielded in the film. To quote the article: 

"Bigelow and Boal had been working on a film about the unsuccessful hunt for bin Laden but changed direction when the terrorist leader was killed on May 1, 2011. Sony Pictures picked up the movie later that month, before the script was completed. The NYT’s Maureen Dowd wrote a column in early August 2011 reporting that the film was getting “top-level access to the most classified mission in history” from the Obama White House. Soon afterward, GOP congressmen began asking for an investigation. Zero Dark Thirty’s release was pushed back until after the Presidential election; it now comes out December 19."

     This controversy of she-said, he-said seems to be running on things with little to no substantial evidence. The topic is a personal one, that I understand, and politics is a touchy issue with drastic radicals on each side of the fence as well as those in between it. Even more so that the there was actual facts placed in a film, people may take the film as the actual truth. That's the iffy things about films. They can be about one thing but also be hinting at vital cultural values. Take the German film M for example. 

     This impacts me as a filmmaker, student, and consumer because it allows me to come to the realization that film and politics do not mix. When they do, things get blown out of proportion and as a filmmaker I am not sure if I want to be part of that heated debate. Student-wise, I need to realize that although Bigelow and Baol may have gotten actual sources, this is a film and may have some facts dramaticized. It is not a documentary. Alas, as a consumer, I have come to realize that what is shown in the media is what they want to be shown. Some may want to show the truth, but there could be some important facts that are not hidden. What isn't shown does not exist on the screen. It's not all black and white, there are gray areas. This film controversy only highlights that. On another note, it is nominated for the Oscars for Best Picture.