ACADEMY AWARDS: BEST PICTURE #5: ZERO DARK THIRTY

ZERO DARK THIRTY

**** out of ****

This incredible dramatization of the ten years-long mission to apprehend/kill Osama Bin Laden takes a staggering amount of information and presents it clearly and compellingly in two-and-a-half hours, which is a testament to the skill of all involved, especially Mark Boal's Oscar-nominated script, Dylan Tichenor and William Goldberg's Oscar-nominated editing (Goldberg is also up for the same category for ARGO), Kathryn Bigelow's direction and a tour de force lead performance from Oscar-nominated Jessica Chastain.  So, in that order...
The responsibility for the mechanics of presenting that vast amount of information in a cinematic form falls largely on the screenplay by Boal, who won an Oscar for his last collaboration with Bigelow with 2009's THE HURT LOCKER.  Even though his ZERO DARK THIRTY screenplay is nominated for Best Original Screenplay, the material is largely already there in the historic events and governmental records and the interviews, but assembling it all would be the first stage of editing, the writing stage editing, and it's basically a 10 years long movie that needs to be edited down to no more than 3 hours, and in a comprehensible, gripping way.  In all this is Boal's script successful.
The editing by Tichenor and Goldberg is basically the same in a second stage; the vast raw product to be assembled coherently and cinematically.
Bigelow proved apt with such material with her Oscar-winning Iraq War-based psychological thriller, THE HURT LOCKER.  ZERO DARK THIRTY is similar territory; the War on Terror, Middle East war politics and perils, the ethics and feelings of warfare.  This is perhaps her masterpiece though, so far at least.  Despite being the first (and so far, only) woman to win the Academy Award for Best Director, all of Bigelow's previous works; POINT BREAK, K-19: THE WIDOWMAKER and THE HURT LOCKER have all been distinctly masculine films with hardly a female presence to be found.  ZERO DARK THIRTY is no chick flick to be certain, in fact it's just as rough and tough as anything Bigelow's done before, but through its factual basis, her lead character is a woman, Maya (Chastain).
Chastain has proved time and again her aptitude and range as an actress, but Maya is, to date, the best character she has had the opportunity to play.  Maya is a hard-edged, tougher-than- nails woman, but unmistakably a woman character.  The most common pitfall in movies aspiring to create a "strong female character" is making what Roger Ebert referred to in his review for Pixar's BRAVE (2012) as an "honorary boy", that being a character we're told is female and looks feminine, but in none of her behavior or personality does she portray feminine traits.  Boal's script, Bigelow's direction and Chastain's performance all contribute to avoiding such, and doing so while keeping the character in one believable figure.  She dominates the workplace with a furious drive, the occasional humorous demonstration, and Chastain's naturally demure sensibility counters her harsher aspects creating a well-rounded and believable personality.
Interesting to note is how the film addresses politics while sidestepping any apparent partisanship, and still, it became the most politically-charged mainstream film of the year.  The film does not allow itself a dog in this fight.  While still in production, political righties threw accusations of inappropriate access to information given to Boal and Bigelow by the Obama Administration and further accused the film of being pro-Obama propaganda that would remind voters of his executive order to take out Bin Laden in time to sway the 2012 presidential election.  Of course, it would be no falsehood; President Obama did give the order, but to appease those accusers, Sony agreed to reschedule the film from its original October 2012 release to a limited December 2012 release and a wide January 2013 release.  In the final product though, Obama is only seen once briefly in a television interview and is never referred to by name.
When the film was finally released, the political fury switched sides as political lefties condemned the depictions of torture that allegedly portrayed the practice favorably.  Unfortunately, these well-meaning accusations are rubbish, and torture was as much a fact of the involved events as Obama's executive order to which conservatives protested.  Even many conservatives felt that the film vindicated their politics by showing successful results from so-called "enhanced interrogation" and the difficulty of obtaining information from "lawyered-up" detainees.  I believe these gloaters are incorrect as well.  ZERO DARK THIRTY is a political film, but a very neutral one, uninterested in giving any opinions, only in showing the events as they were with cold apathy.  In my own personal political views, I abhorred the use of torture the film addresses, but I doubt that through all of it not a single piece of useful information was obtained.  It simply defies logic and probability to believe so, however, this film does not justify such practices, nor is useful information obtained through them; not directly anyway. 
ZERO DARK THIRTY is a factual account of the ends justifying the means, but it leaves the viewer with the question, is it still worth it when the end justify the means but you've lost your soul?  What was all of it worth?  10 years, all for one man, a man who, above all others, deserved to die, deserved the justice of hellfire, but presented an unlimited array of moral quandaries.  When all is over and the powerful obsession has reached its fruition, what then?  Do you feel proud or simply allow yourself a mission well done and move on?  Could it have been done better?  What was the why of it all?