Cannes Film Festival 2013

Sony's Amy Pascal defends 'Zero Dark Thirty' after Academy member's attack

Film 'does not advocate torture'

<p>Jessica Chastain in a scene from Kathryn Bigelow's "Zero Dark Thirty."</p>

Jessica Chastain in a scene from Kathryn Bigelow's "Zero Dark Thirty."

Credit: Sony Pictures

Are you a fan of Awards Campaign?

Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.

Sony Pictures chairwoman Amy Pascal appears to have had enough of the accusations that "Zero Dark Thirty" advocates torture. Likely prompted by Academy member David Clennon's assertion "I will not be voting for Zero Dark Thirty - in any Academy Awards category" from a post on Truth-Out.org, Pascal released a statement with her opinion on the matter.

"'Zero Dark Thirty' does not advocate torture. To not include that part of history would have been irresponsible and inaccurate. We fully support Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal and stand behind this extraordinary movie. We are outraged that any responsible member of the Academy would use their voting status in AMPAS as a platform to advance their own political agenda. This film should be judged free of partisanship. To punish an Artist's right of expression is abhorrent. This community, more than any other, should know how reprehensible that is. While we fully respect everyone's right to express their opinion, this activity is really an affront to the Academy and artistic creative freedom. This attempt to censure one of the great films of our time should be opposed. As Kathryn Bigelow so appropriately said earlier this week, 'depiction is not endorsement, and if it was, no artist could ever portray inhumane practices; no author could ever write about them; and no filmmaker could ever delve into the knotty subjects of our time.' We believe members of the Academy will judge the film on its true merits and will tune out the wrongful and misdirected rhetoric."

Clennon, who is best known for his work on  TV series' "Thirtysomething," "Almost Perfect" and "The Agency" won an Emmy for a guest spot for "Dream On" in 1993. A longtime political activist, his remarks caused something of a furor since Academy members are specifically encourage by AMPAS not to reveal who they are voting for (assuming they are even voting).  It's unclear whether Clennon will be reprimanded for his revelation.

Overall, it's been a very up and down week for the "Zero Dark Thirty" crew.  The critically acclaimed thriller - which won more critics' groups awards than any other film this season - received five Oscar nominations on Thursday including best picture, best actress (Jessica Chastain), best editing, best original screenplay and best sound editing.  Shockingly however, Kathryn Bigelow wasn't nominated in the best directing category. This after winning the same honor from the New York Film Critics Circle, the National Board of Review, the Boston Society of Film Critics and the Washington DC Area Film Critics Association, just to name a few. She also landed DGA, BAFTA and Golden Globe Awards nominations, but was passed over for "Silver Lining Playbook's" David O. Russell. To say it was one of the biggest snubs in Oscar history is an understatement. Moreover, Sony Pictures and the studio have also been dealing with a controversy that the CIA mislead Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal regarding the use of torture in the hunt for Osama Bin Laden.  In something of a, um, silver lining, "Zero Dark Thirty" is expected to win the box office this weekend as it expands nationwide with a $22-25 million opening.

Pascal released her statement Friday because a one time contender to win best picture, "Zero Dark" is now fighting from its Oscar life after Bigelow's snub and attacks from the political establishment. Whether "Zero Dark" can use this underdog status to make a best picture comeback remains to be seen.  The last film that won the top prize without a directing nomination was "Driving Miss Daisy" in 1990.  And with a little over six weeks until Oscar Sunday, this is one story that won't be fading away any time soon.

Do you think "Zero Dark Thirty" still has a shot to win best picture? Share your thoughts below.

Greg-ellwood-sm
Gregory Ellwood
Editor-in-Chief, Co-Founder
With over a decade of experience in the movie industry, Ellwood survived working for two major studios and has written for Variety, MSN and the LA Times. A co-founder of HitFix, Ellwood spends his time relaxing hitting 3’s on the basketball court and following his beloved Clippers.

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Default-avatar

    frederick

    Any film that creates such a huge global debate as this one has deserves a top award

    January 12, 2013 at 7:40AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      danny I agree with you

      January 12, 2013 at 7:49AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      mrwilbert I have not seen the movie yet, but with all the buzz it has to be a awesome event.

      January 12, 2013 at 8:22AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Calvin Yeah, they should've given Triumph of the Will the Oscar....

      But I love Pascal & Bigelow's statement that "To not include that part of history would have been irresponsible and inaccurate." NO ONE has criticized the film for depicting torture. No one. The film has been criticized for showing that torture yielded vital information that led to bin Laden, when, in fact, it didn't.

      But the most egregious sin the film commits is its unabashed support for the CIA and the US military. When it comes to jingoism, only Argo rivals ZDT.

      January 12, 2013 at 4:11PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      JLPatt You have got to be joking. How anyone can watch the film and come away thinking it "unabashedly supports" the CIA and the military is beyond me. The film's genius is in the way it looks upon those two institutions with skepticism and weariness.

      January 12, 2013 at 5:28PM EST
    • Hal_9000_talkback_profile

      DylanS actually, this movie is quite underwhelming given how much people are talking about it and how "controversial" it is. The thing spurring the controversy is a small part of the film, not the film itself.

      January 12, 2013 at 7:42PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Edwin The film maybe glorifies a CIA agent, but I didn't get the impression that it glorified the CIA as a whole, and I certainly didn't think it glorified the military. If anything, I'm actually surprised it hasn't drawn any criticism for its depiction of Seal Team 6 as a bunch of--let's face it--frat boy grunts.

      January 12, 2013 at 8:19PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      GlennAU That movie about evil muslims created a huge global debate, too. That ZD30 is a great film is what warrants it a top award.

      January 12, 2013 at 9:31PM EST
    • Hal_9000_talkback_profile

      DylanS hahaha, I agree! It's as if James Cameron wrote the dialogue for that scene.

      January 12, 2013 at 9:31PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Silvana

    Just I hope with "Low Life" Marion Cotillard could be nominated to the Academy Awards in 2014...Do you think has she a chance with "Low Life"?

    January 12, 2013 at 1:45PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Chris138

    I kind of respect the Academy for nominating two of the most controversial movies from 2012, Django Unchained and Zero Dark Thirty, for best picture. I can't think of any other movies that have been people heated up in discussion like those two have.

    January 12, 2013 at 2:03PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Chris138 "that have been getting people heated up in discussion" is what I meant... typo.

      January 12, 2013 at 2:04PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    AL

    THIS IS NOT ONLY JUST A MOVIE, BUT ITS A BIT OF A JOKE... There was never even a picture of OBL's body. And we will never know if that operation eves existed at all. And torturing people, no matter for what reason, I JUST PLAIN WRONG and ILLEGAL

    January 12, 2013 at 2:06PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      DefRef Pouring water on someone isn't torture, not matter what crying liberal pussies say. Khalid Sheik Muhammad was waterboarded and if you've seen him lately, he's fat and healthy at his home in Gitmo.

      Compare that to what Islamist terror states like Iraq did, raping daughters in front of their fathers, shoving dissidents in wood chippers, cutting off appendages. It is a testament to the weak, soft, and self-hating First Worlder's comfy cosseted lives that they can get exorcised about water being splashed on a murderers face, but are silent about women having their genitals mutilated and homosexuals being killed by the same monsters who they weep over being made damp.

      The reason Hollyweird is able to make movies and preen their moral vanity is because George W. Bush did what was necessary to develop the intel that Obama has claimed all credit for the kill of OBL. I wonder how they're going to feel when Obama's failing foreign policies lead to Sharia which isn't too conducive to the movies they like to make for fun and profit?

      BTW, did anyone else notice the irony that we were lied to by Obama and company about a YouTube video no one saw supposedly sparking violence in the Muslim world, yet nothing seems to have happened after the worldwide release of a major studio picture depicting the death of the icon of Islamist terrorists? I thought "disrespecting the Prophet of Islam" (as Obama said at the UN) was a bad thing. Hmmmm, something's not making sense.

      January 12, 2013 at 3:10PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Almo Well, given Japanese soldiers who waterboarded American POWs were tried and executed as war criminals for having committed torture, I think it's less "what crying liberal pussies say" and more wanting America to practice what it preaches.

      January 12, 2013 at 10:34PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      DefRef No, Almo, we did NOT execute Japanese soldiers for waterboarding; they were executed for multiple atrocities like killing thousands of civilians in addition to torturing POWs.

      Think of it this way: A gang of bank robbers pulls a heist and in the process kills a guard and two customers. During the escape, a high speed chase in excess of 90 mph through the city occurs and a pedestrian is run down and there is great property damage before they are captured. Charged with robbery, murder, fleeing the police, rampant property damage, etc. the gang is sentenced to death for their crimes and executed.

      Years later, in order to push their "America the evil" meme, liberal pussies whine that we have executed people for speeding.

      This is what you're trying to do. Try doing it with someone who doesn't have the facts, you'll do better in spreading ignorance. Better yet, stop spreading ignorance, no matter how much it chaps your self-loathing.

      January 12, 2013 at 10:52PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      almo Don't quite get the accusation of self-loathing - I'm not American. You seem to have assumed otherwise, and ironically accused me of being ignorant in the same breath.

      January 12, 2013 at 11:04PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      DefRef I apologize then for the error. You just sound like the typical self-loathing American liberal pussies who try to excuse terrorists and damn their country with false equivalencies and made-up history; so it seemed a safe presumption about whom I was dealing with.

      My point still stands and your mistaken "history" - you probably heard it somewhere, assumed it to be true, and repeated it as it was intended by those who misled you in the first place - has been rebutted. Have a pleasant day.

      January 12, 2013 at 11:09PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      AL I wonder how Defref is so certain about history. What history? The school books history that have been edited for political purposes? Or maybe he ws there.
      But if one used common sense and have integrity, one would say that torturing another is just PLAIN WRONG, and a movie that makes it OK is pure garbage or political propaganda. But if Defref is so cool with it, why doesn't he try it on water-boarding? Maybe get some mates to do it on you and see how you feel after. Maybe if they do it long enough, he would even confess and sign on to a crime that you didn't commit... and that is all alright... in it NOT?

      January 13, 2013 at 10:41AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    jon

    The academy is so hypocritical and ridiculous. I will be boycotting the oscars. Never have they cared about violence before it was politicized.

    January 12, 2013 at 2:14PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Alex

    She did deserve to be nominated for best director. But to be clear, she wasn't "passed over by David O. Russell." He deserved it as well and he was a favorite to be nominated as well. Michael Haneke and Benh Zeitlin were the surprises.

    January 12, 2013 at 3:05PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      DefRef The stories about directors being snubbed lost their validity with the expansion of the Best Picture field to more than five movies. When it was five and five Pictures and Directors, you could correlate who got snubbed; now it's just a matter of the extra films not having room for their helmers. However, the fact that two or three of the movies considered most likely to win Best Picture (Argo, Zero Dark Thirty, Les Miz; Django never had a shot) having their directors bumped for the guys whose films have little chance of winning (Beasts, Pi) is odd. All in all, it looks good for Spielberg to win his 3rd directing statue.

      January 12, 2013 at 3:16PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Colin Biggs

    Take his vote away. He knew the rules going in.

    January 12, 2013 at 3:54PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      mitch I just saw the movie and saw no harm in what they did. who are we to say this isn't acceptable is outrageous. these people kill or fund the killing of innocent people. i believe you do what you have to do. amazing movie best of the year in my opinion. and bigelow deserves nomination.

      January 12, 2013 at 4:35PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Levi Then you would have take away the votes of Oprah, Reese Witherspoon, Cate Blanchett, oh hell, half the academy, because most of them do reveal who they are voting for and, in some cases, like the people I mentioned, actively campaign for the people they are voting for. Take all the votes away from these people and you have no awards show.

      January 12, 2013 at 8:56PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      M Hey Mitch. Torturing and promoting torturing is outrageous and dead wrong. OR maybe its ok if its not an American being tortured... right?
      What about your president sending drones to kill civilians (including children) around the world? Is that OK as well? its is your tax money he is using which makes you also accountable. Torturing and killing is just wrong, no matter under what flag...

      January 13, 2013 at 10:48AM EST
  • Dsc00002_talkback_profile

    loyal_mehnert

    "I don't care what they say about me as long as they spell my name right."

    That pretty much sums up the ZDT torture hysteria as it relates to Oscar. The ironic part of it all is that ZDT as a film is pretty middle of the road and not terribly memorable. Had it been released earlier in the year and directed by Peter Berg, I doubt people would have given a shit. But because it's K-Big and comes on the heels of THL, suddenly everything is turned up to 11.

    January 12, 2013 at 4:58PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      JLPatt Well, it's better than "The Hurt Locker" in every single way imaginable, so I don't see how that logic makes a lick of sense.

      January 12, 2013 at 5:27PM EST
    • THL isn't that hot either.

      January 12, 2013 at 5:43PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Paul Outlaw Saw that one coming.

      January 12, 2013 at 7:14PM EST
  • Image_talkback_profile

    jetenreiro

    Bigelow as always has the best response. If depiction meant advocating we wouldn't have Holocaust movies. I personally wouldn't vote for the movie for Best Picture but to do it based on views about torture is insanity. Shows that the left of our political spectrum can sometimes rear the same ugly head that we are so used to seeing from the right. Sad

    January 12, 2013 at 5:32PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    s2

    What a dick.

    January 12, 2013 at 6:48PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Hal_9000_talkback_profile

    DylanS

    "She also landed DGA, BAFTA and Golden Globe Awards nominations, but was passed over for "Silver Lining Playbook's" David O. Russell."

    Why is it automatically presumed that Russell is the one who knocked her out? I think arguably Haneke and certainly Zeitlin were bigger upsets. And they also missed the DGA.

    "To say it was one of the biggest snubs in Oscar history is an understatement."

    Probably not even the biggest snub in that category.

    January 12, 2013 at 7:47PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Levi

    Quoting Calvin: "The film has been criticized for showing that torture yielded vital information that led to bin Laden, when, in fact, it didn't."

    This is the reason I also did not like the film. Implying that valuable information was extracted due to torture, when this clearly did not happen, is a very dangerous impression to leave an audience. Many will not try to discover for themselves the facts, and thus will walk away with a favorable belief in torture as a successful evidence gatherer, when, in fact, it is categorically not.

    January 12, 2013 at 8:46PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Patriot truth missile

    CALVIN: thanks for making sense

    DYLANS: "underwhelming" -- you got that right. Osama bin Laden is the STAR of the picture. If he wasn't the super-villain they're chasing, you got NO picture. Long, boring, straight to DVD.

    EDWIN: "Frat-boy grunts" nails it. But I think Bigelo wants you to think they're a charming gang of goons.

    And the "climax" of the take-down? One bad guy shoots one gun, can't even see what he's shooting at, they pop him in a couple seconds. After that, it's like a beefed up New York SWAT team, knocking over a candy store, shooting up the place to get the sick old mobster hiding in the back room.

    Then you whack the mobster cause you're afraid -- with a good lawyer -- he'll walk free.

    But Bigelo hypes it up with the fuzzy, green shots, going into black screen, just hearing the SEALs whispering to each other, more fuzzy green stuff -- all very clever and some suckers will be breathless on the edge of their seats. U-S-A, U-S-A. Pathetic.

    January 13, 2013 at 12:08AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Andy

    The issue is not censorship here--it is US-condoned torture that occurs abroad and at home. The movie "normalizes" the use of torture and paints a picture of the good guys (CIA and the US) and the bad guys (Arabs and Islam)! Torture is wrong legally and morally. there is never a justification for it - whether called "enhanced interrogation" or "Secure Holding Units" (prolonged solitary confinement).
    Torture is a war crime - and those who allow it should be held accountable.
    Yes the movie is fiction - but that ignores the influence the media has over its viewers. The facts are that torture did not lead to the capture of Osama Bin Laden, and that is reinforced by statements from Diane Feinstein, John McCain, and Leon Panetta.
    We must demand that the Senate Intelligence Committee release the report on CIA involvement in torture - the people of the US deserve to know the truth. And may I recommend a 20 minute film about torture? "Ending U.S.-Sponsored Torture Forever" is produced by the National Religious Campaign Against Torture and is available at their website www.nrcat.org/factnotfiction.

    January 13, 2013 at 9:34AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Patriot missing Thank you, Andy.

      TORTURE IS NOT A FEMINIST ACTIVITY

      REAL WOMEN DON'T TORTURE

      CAN A TRUE MOVIE HEROINE BE A THUG?

      January 16, 2013 at 3:07AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Andy

    The issue here is not censorship.it is US-condoned torture that occurs abroad and at home. The movie "normalizes" the use of torture and paints a picture of the good guys (CIA and the US) and the bad guys (Arabs and Islam)! Torture is wrong legally and morally. there is never a justification for it - whether called "enhanced interrogation" or "Secure Holding Units" (prolonged solitary confinement).
    Torture is a war crime - and those who allow it should be held accountable.
    Yes the movie is fiction - but that ignores the influence the media has over its viewers. The facts are that torture did not lead to the capture of Osama Bin Laden, and that is reinforced by statements from Diane Feinstein, John McCain, and Leon Panetta.
    We must demand that the Senate Intelligence Committee release the report on CIA involvement in torture - the people of the US deserve to know the truth. And may I recommend a 20 minute film about torture? "Ending U.S.-Sponsored Torture Forever" is produced by the National Religious Campaign Against Torture and is available at their website www.nrcat.org/factnotfiction.

    January 13, 2013 at 9:40AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    supercommando440

    I saw the movie and found it quite interesting, however I read the book "No Easy Day" beforehand. If anyone is looking for a good read on the subject that focuses more on the men of DEVGRU than the film does, please read the book you wont be sorry. Thanks

    January 13, 2013 at 12:38PM EST Reply to Comment

Get Instant Alerts on Awards Campaign

Latest Posts
More Posts
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook
Top Stories From Around the Web