Bigelow allows access but not control

Rating: 9/10 (19 June 2013)

Kathryn Bigelow's follow-up to 'The Hurt Locker' privileges the viewer to a glimpse into America's hunt for Osama bin Laden following the September 11 terrorist attacks. In 'Zero Dark Thirty', the unfolding events control the narrative, ensuring that the audience's expectations and emotions are of secondary importance, in contrast to the erratic narrative and visual styles which drive this film.
Jessica Chastain's C.I.A operative 'Maya' underpins 'Zero Dark Thirty', her driven, cold pursuit of history's most wanted man the framework around which the story unfolds. This is a film of talking, tension, torture and talkinglots of talking. The action set-pieces leading up to the final assault on bin Laden's compound are shocking and effective. But this is no action film in the vein of 'Black Hawk Down'. The true drama on show here comes from the narrative dialogue, Mark Boal's taut scripting and the restrained casting, with no pandering to the audience's expectations, serving to emphasise the drawn out, frustrating hunt for bin Laden, and the complicated, foggy moral highway which the film and its subject matter has traversed.
Upon release, the film was engulfed in equal measure with critical adulation and moral outrage. Bigelow's film deserves the former, but it is the subject matter alone that merits the latter. The intense torture scenes depicted, and particularly, the controversial use of water-boarding provoked outrage. But this outrage should be directed away from Hollywood, eastwards towards Langley. 'Zero Dark Thirty' never guides, never judges, never glamorises; the cruelty on show is born from necessity and not pleasure. Above all, it makes its target audience – an intelligent cinematic and politically literate base – to emote, think and above all, ask the question of paramount importance: is the torture of sometimes innocent individuals, justifiable, in the potential saving of thousands more innocent lives? Don't expect Bigelow or Chastain to answer this question for you. Great cinema requires audience participation long after the end credits have rolled.
The acting in 'Zero Dark Thirty' is exceptional, as we're left with the feeling of watching real-life protagonists embroiled in real-world events, rather than Hollywood players peddling their wares to an expectant Academy. However, Jessica Chastain's portrayal of the driven, obsessed Maya, both reinforces and contradicts this trend. She is a woman in a man's domain; she is a beacon of beauty amidst a visually and morally ugly world; and she is clearly a Hollywood A-lister in a film that values education over entertainment. The film lives and breathes because of Maya. It also comes close to demise because of Chastain's (deserved) status as the latest addition to the top echelons of Hollywood's acting royalty. To her credit, she becomes Maya for the film's lengthy duration, but in the world of modern cinema, no film is an island, no movie theatre a vacuum.
The supporting cast offer stellar support. Jason Clarke excels as Dan and would be Maya's love interest in a more mainstream production. Kyle Chandler and Mark Strong give spot on performances, their suits and ties offering a telling contrast to the night vision goggles and heavy body armour of the Navy SEALS who finally storm bin Laden's compound. Modern warfare is as much about intelligence gleaned from scouring for hours over data and monitor screens, as it is about boots on the ground and high-powered weaponry. The cinematic peccadilloes of the film's audience therefore, will greatly dictate as to their appreciation of 'Zero Dark Thirty'.
One uncredited cast member contributes massively to the effectiveness of 'Zero Dark Thirty', and that's the look and style of the film. Greig Fraser's cinematography evokes handsome, gritty modern cinema; the editing reminds the audience that this is not an easy ride – pleasure can be derived from experiencing and appreciating a film, and not merely from enjoying it. For a work so heavily invested in moral ambiguity and shades of grey, Bigelow's opus gives us extreme visual contrasts. Despite opening with a black screen overplaying audio from the victims of the terrorist attacks of 2001, the film's primary environs are hot, arid desert settings and bustling, noisy streets. The climactic final forty minutes of the film are a masterwork of tension and technique. But viewing is also torrid; much of the screen is almost completely dark as the SEALs breach bin Laden's compound, before we are privileged a view through the night vision goggles of the intruders. This at times uncomfortable viewing continues to remind us that this is a movie despite of and not for, the audience. Bigelow wants us to experience 'Zero Dark Thirty' above all else. If we subsequently enjoy her work, then it's merely an added bonus. Cinema as art. Discuss.
Kathryn Bigelow is a masterful proponent of action cinema. This is clearly on show throughout 'Zero Dark Thirty', but Bigelow's is not an action cinema born of explosions, stunts and larger than life heroes. Her brand of action is born out of the set-up: the drama of words and the almost unbearable tension of inactivity torn apart, as the game is at last, afoot. In a film of very few grace notes, the whispers of 'UsamaUsamaUsama' from the Navy SEAL during the fateful final confrontation, will live long in my cinematic memory.
'Zero Dark Thirty' is a masterful piece of modern cinema, and in my opinion, benefits from the apparent snub of the Academy voters. This is a film that doesn't ask to be liked. The viewer is at times placed in uncomfortable situations, both visually and morally. It is a film not to be watched, but to be experienced. But above all, like the very best of cinema, it asks questions, confuses and contradicts. It scars. In the film's final shot, the tear-stained Maya 'is' the audience: victorious, exhausted and left with a final question – what price victory, and above all, was it truly worth the struggle? The answer from this reviewer is a categorical yes.