[getty src="162246554?et=YptQtYMiS8pO1HT5z4LsRQ&viewMoreLink=on&sig=Esh-gT1TQjTV-saQ8s43CyKEx5da0vMJl2T3HTDr2KY=&caption=true" width="594" height="446"]
Obviously the film itself is already propaganda just by the subject matter alone. The latest news over The Killing of Osama bin Laden by Seymour Hersh has brought me back to seeing what value the film has as historical narrative.
The video clarifies a point I agree with as far as how the film compares to the "facts." Did I already have a bias? Sure! When the movie first came out, if you didn't already think it was an exaggeration then there's something very wrong with you; but that doesn't mean I expected the film to be a true account from the get-go.
[embed]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lT8zWWYtvmA[/embed]
I thought it was interesting however -- when it was announced that it would be made -- how quickly it went through the process, immediately greenlit to production. If you already have a sense of what that timeline is between a major incident and a portrayal, aside from parody, I think it could have waited a little longer.
In the end, that film is the only visual representation that requires an additional context to keep it focused on the facts of what might have actually happened. Before the Hersh piece was published, it was already pretty shoddy. What upsets me about this is that anyone who wants to drive their point that what happened in the film actually happened, only has to either let the film speak for itself or add their own narrative to support what is shown.
It's still more high-brow than anything Affleck could make.
Updates:
9:48 CST PM: Title changed from Thirty "As" Garbage to "Is" Garbage.