When it was revealed that the Obama administration provided information about the raid on and death of Osama bin Laden to director Kathryn Bigelow for the movie she was making about the event, some people found that a little weird to hear, even after the fact. Because, um, isn’t that information kind of on the extremely classified side? And doesn’t it look bad for a president to appear so “tight” with Hollywood during an election year? (I’ll continue laughing about that second one after writing this post.) Well, conservatives — who don’t believe anything Barack Obama does can ever be good to begin with — are up in arms over this seemingly “oversharey” exchange between the president and a Hollywood type. But make no mistake — they don’t care about Kathryn Bigelow. This is all about Obama. (WARNING: There are some politics in this post. All of you are entitled to your opinions about everything.)
Bigelow, along with screenwriter Mark Boal, have been working on this bin Laden movie, Zero Dark Thirty, since before the terrorist was killed. As a result, they’ve had to take a different approach to their film, and that involves a bit of research. Requests for access to experts and information — serious and otherwise — probably always reach the highest levels of government, and in the case of the U.S. military, several of those requests are often granted, within reason. Take, for example, the Pentagon and The Avengers. While the military had provided their expertise in the form of consultants on previous Marvel movies, they denied The Avengers their assistance because of a lack of clarity concerning the military’s role. Fair enough.
But this is, clearly, a very different situation. This is about a movie inspired by real-life events. Not just real-life events, but world events that concern the entire globe and the fight against terrorism. That’s, um, a bit more sensitive than figuring out who Nick Fury answers to. So, yes, it is a bit strange that Bigelow and Boal had access to such sensitive information when they are people who make fictional movies. Even if the movie covers the two administrations preceding Obama’s and even if the movie is not set for release until after the election. (So, no, it’s not going to be any kind of propaganda.)
However, the complaint being issued against Bigelow by conservatives at Judicial Watch is petty at best:
“These documents, which took nine months and a federal lawsuit to disgorge from the Obama administration, show that politically-connected filmmakers were giving extraordinary and secret access to bin Laden raid information, including the identity of a Seal Team Six leader.
“It is both ironic and hypocritical that the Obama administration stonewalled Judicial Watch’s pursuit of the bin Laden death photos, citing national security concerns, yet seemed willing to share intimate details regarding the raid to help Hollywood filmmakers release a movie ‘perfectly timed to give a home-stretch boost’ to the Obama campaign.”
Why is it petty? Because besides the fact that they automatically disagree with everything this president does anyway, Judicial Watch is just upset that they still don’t have access to bin Laden’s death photos. This is a big deal among some people, not limited to conservatives — why haven’t the photos been released to the public? And if the administration refuses to release them, then what are they hiding? These are questions for a whole other blog, let alone this particular post. (Let alone me, the girl who writes about things like Stephen Colbert on the Maxim Hot 100 list.) I’m not nearly informed enough on the global effects of bin Laden’s death photos to try to take a stab at why they have not been released, only to say that maybe it would give Al Qaeda and other organizations a martyr and a rallying cry, something to put on posters. That is one opinion by someone who is better at writing about lighter matters, like movie films.
Anyway, what I mean to say is that Judicial Watch thinks that it’s unfair that they asked for death photos, but some “politically-connected” (that means liberal, let’s be honest) filmmakers got other information for their Obama-loving movie. (Which it actually isn’t.) And I have a feeling that they are being the tiniest bit hyperbolic when they say the information Bigelow and Boal received was “extraordinary and secret.” So, they (Judicial Watch) should just stop whining.
I heard one comparison being made to a possible scenario of George W. Bush sharing similarly private information with conservative filmmakers about September 11, and how there would have been an uproar by liberals if such a thing occurred. And here I actually do have an opinion: Not. The. Same. Thing. At. All.
Think Progress points out that some conservatives tend to believe that only they can represent the troops accurately in the media, as if they somehow took ownership over patriotism.
You know who owns patriotism? Nobody. The whole point of this country is that people who disagree with each other can co-exist and be free to disagree. Anyone who wants to can make a movie about the American military.
Except Michael Bay. And Brett Ratner.
(via Think Progress)
Published: May 25, 2012 02:06 pm