Early reviews indicate that "Zero Dark Thirty" may not be the pro-Obama propaganda film everyone feared it would be. Far from it, early screeners are talking foremost about how the film provides a vindication of the George W. Bush administration's use of enhanced interrogation techniques.
Therefore, instead of being a film about what Obama has done, "[Zero Dark Thirty] subtly presents President Obama and by extension the entire Democrat establishment and its supporters in the media as hindering the effort to find bin Laden by politicizing [enhanced] interrogation techniques and striking a pose against them that was naive at best."
The vindication of the use of such techniques is so clear that reviewers in European newspapers have already begun to criticize the film's so-called glorification of "torture."
Moreover, even a New York Times' reviewer recently wrote, "[the film] presents the kind of torture which Cheney advocated -- but that president Obama ended -- as something of an information extracting necessity, repellent but fruitful."
The film turns on how a female CIA analyst pieced together information spanning years of terrorist detainee interrogations -- including interrogations involving waterboarding -- intelligence work, and other sources from both the Bush and Obama presidencies, to ascertain where bin Laden might be.
Without the information gleaned from enhanced interrogation techniques, would she have ever been able to do this? Early reviewers say the answer provided from the film is clear, and that answer is -- "no."