Kathryn Bigelow and Zero Dark Thirty screenwriter Mark Boal are doing the media tour thing to defend their depiction of torture in the Oscar-nominated military drama — and how those tactics might have led to the killing of Osama bin Laden. The Senate, for one, wants to know more about where that information came from. Bigelow was supposed to be on The Colbert Report two weeks ago but backed out — she apologized to Stephen Colbert during yesterday’s show, saying “I was spooked by the Senate investigation.” Her carefully worded answers suggest “spooked” isn’t too far off. Funny that it took Comedy Central to bring out Bigelow’s most candid interview yet — and kudos for Colbert for asking strong questions about the filmmakers’ primary sources, whether Bigelow believed they were spun by the government, and what she thought about potentially being called before Congress.


I actually called this on this site way back into last year. I told everyone that all we would hear during “Zero’s” Oscar run was “torture.”
I was told that wouldn’t be the case. Well, look at the results. And as I said then, no, “Zero” will not win Best Picture. A vote for “Zero” is a vote for torture in many liberal Oscar minds.
Call it a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Why does Colbert always have to run around when a guest walks onto the set? He looks so stupid doing that it’s childish and pathetic there’s nothing funny about it and he should grow up and stop doing such a stupid thing. Many nights he runs around more than he did here.
He’s doing his best Chris Matthews impression.
You don’t really understand satire, do you?
“We took a journalistic approach,” wait no just kidding “We’re artists don’t bother us with pesky facts.”
I actually admire Bigelow’s work but she should have just done a fictional hunt for a fictional terrorist a la Abu Nazir in HOMELAND and been done with it. She and Boal have proven completely unprepared and ill-equipped to deal with this whole affair. “Depiction is not endorsement.” Really, Ms. Bigelow? Because everyone thought SCHINDLER’S LIST totally endorsed the Holocaust.
She is a talented filmmaker but she and Boal are totally out of their depth here.
Love that these free speech Hollywood hacks (Ed Asner and that no name other guy), who still bemoan the “Blacklisting’ that happened 60+ years ago, can dare to stand up and demand that a fellow artist and filmmaker defend her creative work and exceptional storytelling because a factual element of the story is disagreeable to them.
Don’t remember any of these bozos complaining about child rapist Roman Polanski being awarded Best Director for The Pianist a few years ago — in fact they gave him a standing ovation in absentia.
Hypocrites, fools and cowards.
I am an AMPAS member and I am voting for Zero Dark Thirty because it is an exceptional movie and because these two old buffoons are telling me not to. I hope that a bunch of my fellow members (who have actually worked in the last decade and aren’t 70 years old), look past this grandstanding and vote for free speech and great art.
Um, blatant factual inaccuracies on the central issue of a film that Bigelow herself touted as a piece of “journalism” has, let me check my math, ZERO to do with McCarthyism, and let me check my math, ZERO to do with the Polanski affair.
I don’t remember Ed Asner being featured giving a standing ovation in the Oscar telecast, you must have been paying pretty close attention. And you can’t be bothered to remember “this other no-name” guy’s name but apparently you remember that he too, was featured in close-up giving a standing ovation to Roman Polanski at the ceremony ten years ago even though you also said if something happened years ago it has no bearing on what’s happening now. Did I get all that straight? Or were you just talking out your keester and conflating “those people” who clapped for Polanski who have nothing at all to do with whether or not Bigelow might be a gifted filmmaker but a pretty bad journalist who made some very poor choices with this film?
Is it soooooo hard to focus on the excellent craftmanship of the film and not whatever people perceive to be its message. I thought the Oscars were about rewarding Art/Craft and not message/theme. Correct me if I am wrong.
Her sources are the CIA. Surprise surprise. She bought their line. The key moment that gives her away is that in Zero Dark Thirty, when the reveal comes that the Bin Laden courier was identified without torture five years earlier, and the information has been ignored and buried, her lead just shrugs. No self doubt. No questioning. Never a moment to wonder, “Why did we torture all those people?” There is no voice in the film arguing against these tactics, no conflict about using them in the heart of the filmmaker or any of the leads. This is at best at the shallowest possible look at the road that led to Bin Laden. Great drama springs from moral conflict. The film lacks it entirely.
@HW Wait, what? Who thought Schindler’s list endorsed the holocaust? Are you kidding? You do know what endorse means, yes? Don’t confuse approval with educating the public by recreating a most dire and malevolent time in human history. Depiction is not endorsement. When someone depicts a rape, or a murder on the news, etc. They’re not promoting the act!! Sure they may be “influencing” in unintentional ways but not condoning! Spielberg endorsing the holocaust? Are you mad?! Do you know anything about Spielberg? Perhaps you are the one out of your depth.