Ex-CIA director calls ‘Zero Dark Thirty’ a ‘good movie’

WASHINGTON – The man who oversaw the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, ex-CIA director Leon Panetta, vouched Friday for “Zero Dark Thirty,” calling it a “good movie” even though the tale of the biggest manhunt in history had to be simplified for the big screen.

“It’s a movie,” Panetta said, laughing. “And it’s a good movie. But I lived the real story,” he told AFP in an interview.

Panetta, who is due to step down as US defense secretary this month, said the film should not be seen as a historical account of the secret operation that he was intimately involved with as the head of the CIA from 2009 to 2011.

“It’s a little tough for me to take everything I saw and all of the work that was done and that was involved in that operation… and all of the people that worked at it and think you could put that all into a two-hour movie. You really can’t.”

But Panetta indicated that the Oscar-nominated film did convey some sense of the years of legwork it took the CIA to track down the Al-Qaeda mastermind to a hideout in Pakistan.

“I think people ought to make their own judgments. There are parts of it that give you a good sense of how the intelligence operations do work. But I also think people in the end have to understand that it isn’t a documentary, it’s a movie.”

The film, starring Jessica Chastain as a relentless CIA officer, suggests that torture and abuse of some suspects helped generate information that led to the May 2011 raid that ultimately took out bin Laden.

The portrayal has sparked criticism from some senators, rights advocates and even the acting head of the CIA, Michael Morell.

But Panetta said harsh interrogation methods, including water boarding or simulated drowning, did play a role in locating bin Laden, though not a decisive one.

“The whole effort in going after bin Laden involved 10 years of work, in piecing together various pieces of intelligence that were gathered. And there’s no question that some of the intelligence gathered was a result of some of these methods,” he said.

“But I think it’s difficult to say that they were the critical element. I think they were part of the vast puzzle that you had to put together in order to ultimately locate where bin Laden was.”

Asked if the Al-Qaeda leader would have been discovered even without the interrogation methods widely condemned as torture, Panetta said: “I think we would have found him, even without that piece of the puzzle.”

The CIA and the Pentagon cooperated heavily with the filmmakers, who were given access to officials and even offered a meeting with a Navy SEAL commando familiar with the raid.

Panetta declined to offer a critique of how he was portrayed on screen by Hollywood star James Gandolfini.

“Somebody came up to me and said I saw you in that movie but you lost a lot of weight,” he joked.

And Panetta, who often speaks of his Italian immigrant parents, said he was grateful the actor chosen to play him shared his Italian-American heritage.

“You know, I’m glad that it was an Italian.”

source: interaksyon.com

How the US shapes its military’s big screen image

WASHINGTON – The CIA and the Pentagon pulled out all the stops for the creators of “Zero Dark Thirty,” staging interviews with officials and a Navy SEAL for an inside account of the hunt for Osama bin Laden.

Critics praised the movie’s gritty and gripping feel but, with the film due for release in major European markets this week, controversy has erupted over claims that it justifies US agents’ use of torture on detainees.

The access granted to director Kathryn Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal has turned the Oscar-nominated movie into the most detailed public account that exists of the May 2011 raid on a Pakistani compound to kill Bin Laden.

Nate Jones of the National Security Archives research institute dubbed it “the closest thing to the official story behind the pursuit of bin Laden.”

Bigelow has been forced to release a statement denying widespread allegations that the film set out to justify or sanitize the “enhanced interrogation techniques” employed during the so-called ‘war on terror’.

Although the assistance offered to the “Zero Dark Thirty” crew sparked accusations that the White House used the movie as a propaganda tool, cooperation between Hollywood and the Pentagon or CIA is nothing new.

The first film ever to win Best Picture at the Academy Awards, “Wings” in 1929, featured dogfight scenes with bi-planes thanks to help from the army.

It was the beginning of a relationship that has grown over decades.

The film industry covets access to hardware and expertise that only the armed forces can provide, while in return, defense officials want to burnish the military’s image on the big screen.

The Pentagon’s criteria for justifying cooperation on any film or television project is loosely defined, but until recently has never been seriously questioned by Congress.

“It just basically says: ‘Is it something that might be of benefit for recruiting and retention? And/or is it something that might tell the American public more about the US military?” explained Philip Strub, who leads the Pentagon’s liaison unit with the entertainment industry.

For the Pentagon, the decision whether to work on a film project all comes down to the script.

Characters in uniform need to reflect what officials consider to be an accurate picture of the practices and the ethos of the military.

If not, then the Defense Department refuses to grant permission to film at a base or to rent out US tanks or aircraft for a production.

To the Pentagon’s critics, the arrangement amounts to stealthy propaganda, with the military using its leverage to effectively censor screenplays.

“They make prostitutes of us all because they want us to sell out to their point of view,” director Oliver Stone told author David Robb in the book “Operation Hollywood,” which blasts the Pentagon’s role.

“Most films about the military are recruiting posters,” the director said.

It is out of the question for the Pentagon to assist movies with a sadistic drill sergeant, like a memorable character in “Full Metal Jacket,” or the reckless, rule-breaking soldier in “The Hurt Locker,” officials said.

“I wouldn’t claim pure innocence to the notion of trying to shape military portrayals so that they come a little closer to what we believe is the real military,” Strub told AFP.

Hollywood heavyweight Jerry Bruckheimer, producer of “Black Hawk Down,” “Top Gun” and “Pearl Harbor,” said the horse-trading with the Pentagon is about finding a practical compromise.

“If we feel it’s hurting the integrity of the film, then we won’t do it. And if they think it’s going to hurt their image, then they won’t do it,” he said in “Operation Hollywood.”

“So there are certain ways to change things, to change wording that they’ll feel comfortable with and you’ll get what you want.”

Sometimes attempts at compromise fail, and movie makers have to spend more cash tracking down old US-made military equipment in foreign countries.

Kevin Costner clashed with the Pentagon over the script of “Thirteen Days,” a film recounting the Cuban missile crisis.

Defense officials objected to the portrayal of Air Force chief General Curtis LeMay as a bellicose hawk, a description shared by most historians. But the Pentagon wanted his character depicted in a more positive light.

As a result, the production had to be moved to the Philippines at great cost.

Ties between the Pentagon and Hollywood frayed in the aftermath of the unpopular Vietnam War, and most movies about that conflict received no assistance from the military, including Stone’s “Platoon” and Francis Ford Coppola’s “Apocalypse Now.”

But the release of the gung-ho fighter pilot movie “Top Gun” in 1986 was a watershed, reflecting a shift in American attitudes and a resurgence of collaboration between the Pentagon and Hollywood.

Strub’s office receives dozens of proposals every year, and fewer than half get the green light.

He and his small team spend much of their time reading through scripts, looking for scenes or characters that are unrealistic, inaccurate or inappropriate.

But he dismissed the idea that the Pentagon coerces movie makers into sanitizing screenplays.

“The whole idea that we can force these creative people to do our bidding is quite hilarious,” he said. “There are people who won’t come to us just because they don’t want the perceived taint of having even talked to us.”

source: interaksyon.com