{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
originally posted in:TFS The Floods Sanctuary
1/27/2013 11:13:55 PM
21
Zero Dark Thirty: Labled As Pro-Torture
So, I just got back from watching ZDT and must I say it was a really good movie. Im surprised how well a movie in which we all knew the ending was kept interesting and kept you on egde for the better part (Take notes Halo Reach). If you havent seen it yet I highly recommend it.
Anyways when I got home I started researching and looking up extra info on the movie (I usually always do this with movies I really like, last being Les Miserables) and on wikipedia I came across a huge section in the criticism section. Divided in two: Release of classified information and torture. I wasnt surprised in the info part that most complaints were from Republicans and good ol' Bush folk, saying the movie was a way to boost Obama in the recent elections, but what really interested me was all the criticism lableing the movie as 'Pro-Torture'.
Now for those of you who have seen the movie, what did you think? Is the criticism correct? I for one during the movie never thought 'Damn, torture was the right thing to do' or 'the torture totally was justified for the information obtained'. It was more '-blam!- me, this movie is realistically brutal in its open showing of torture'. Not once did I get a feeling this movie had a Pro Torture incline to it nor did it serve to justify the CIA's 'enhanced interrogation program' in its illegal Black Sites authorized during Bush's presidency. I find most of the criticism to be childish and simply a way to stab the director and those who helped in the project, utilizing them them as scapegoats in the never ending arguments over the controversial years of Bush's presidency.
Anyways enough about me. What are your thoughts on the criticism? And your thoughts of torture in general nowadays? Is it a justifiable action? Necesary means to an end?
Discuss.
-
Terrorism is an ineffective method of gaining HUMIT in most cases.
-
18 RepliesMaking a movie out of successfully murdering a man is wrong. Doesn't matter what he did in return. Flame me.
-
19 RepliesCan someone please explain to me what we should do to a captured terrorist if we needed information to potentially save 1000's for a terrorist attack? The terrorist are a different type of enemy. They shit all over the Geneva convention.
-
3 RepliesWas that a good movie? I don't think I will support it because they were given so many facts that I don't think Hollywood should have access to. And I don't like them capitalizing on high profile news stories.
-
I despise the movie. It was heavily implied that torture was one of the best, if not the best, method of acquiring intel. The movie failed to explore the morality of it, or the legality. And as far as the plot goes, it was boring as -blam!-. Because of the torture scenes, I simply couldn't find the main character likable in the slightest.
-
3 RepliesJust like Django is pro slavery?
-
pro_torture MLG 420Xx_N0sC0p3_Xx
-
2 RepliesEdited by TGI Skuldier: 1/28/2013 10:29:30 PMI dunno its weird watching war films about stuff that happened recently. You suppose people had this much criticism for WWII movies etc. when they came out?
-
16 RepliesThe enemy tortures us, so I see no harm in torturing them as long as it is to save lives (and somewhat humanly no midevil shit)
-
2 RepliesOnly terrorists would say its unjustified.
-
1 ReplyI didn't think it glorified torture at all. If anything, it highlighted how horrible it was. It does get results though, it can't be denied. If the sort of people who get tortured want to blow other people up, then I dunno, I guess I don't have much of a problem with it.
-
7 RepliesIts just a massive "Murica F**k Yea" propaganda and so I will not be watching it.
-
I don't watch generic war movies. I watched Hurt Locker cos it won oscars but not otherwise.
-
The movie was pretty inaccurate, as is the director's pattern for war movies. The CIA has made it public that they don't support the movie and that it made them look very bad by exaggerating and often just making up what goes on in torture.
-
9 RepliesHaven't seen the movie; only reason I'd watch it would be to see the stealth chopper. [quote]What are your thoughts on the criticism? And your thoughts of torture in general nowadays? Is it a justifiable action? Necesary means to an end?[/quote]Torture is never necessary or justified.
-
While i do believe that torture isnt necessary in most cases, i do believe it is some what acceptable to use on those who are trying to cause us harm.
-
Edited by brandorobot: 1/28/2013 9:23:59 PMFrom what I know about the movie it supposedly implies that Osama was found due to information obtained during torture am I right? Which is not accurate.
-
I know this is not what the thread is about but I thought the movie sucked anyways. The lead female did an amazing job but yeah. Movie sucked. OT: Of course it's labeled as pro torture because that's exactly what it is. Like it or not this stuff goes on and always will. Those who think this stuff will ever stop taking place are delusional. Like it or not every country at all time is at war on one level or another. There is no better solution. "You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline."
-
This is stupid. It's an accurate representation of what really happened. If they didn't include the torture, then people would complain that it's not accurate.
-
@ Reach: Reach tried the same s***... they tried to turn it into a character drama, the problem is that they didn't create investment in the characters. As for it being pro-torture, no. It showed the reality of torture though. Nothing they got from torturing prisoners was necessary for them to find Osama. They already had the information about Ibrahim Saeed, what, a little after 9/11, they simply tuned it out, and they found Osama's hideout by tracking Ibrahim Saeed. Every other lead they discovered via torture was a lie or a trap, and the prisoners mislead the investigation into thinking Abu Ahmed was dead. Really the only thing torture contributed was having them pay attention to information surrounding Abu Ahmed AKA Ibrahim Saeed, and that led to them checking out information they already had lying around. Really, the bigger thing I get is that the US government was grossly incompetent.
-
Oddly enough, the film Rendition, which features the method of torture significantly in the film, doesn't get slapped with a 'Pro-torture' film, despite that torture and the idea of it being used as an ethical question is a big part of the plot. I think the criticism is silly. Critics like to challenge anything they don't like about a film, and do occasionally go over the top.
