From NY Mag
Inside Mark Boal’s and Kathryn Bigelow’s Mad Dash to Make Zero Dark Thirty
Mark Boal was on the phone with the CIA. It was April 29, 2011, fourteen months after he had collected a pair of Academy Awards for writing and producing The Hurt Locker,
and he was back at work. Boal had spent the better part of the years
since 9/11 as a journalist, traveling in hot zones, embedding with
troops, and covering the “war on terror.” Now, he and director Kathryn
Bigelow, his Hurt Locker partner, were deep into a new
project—not a sequel but a different kind of war story, which would take
both of them back into that film’s difficult location shoots and
Bush-era moral murk. Their plan was to depict the ill-fated attempt,
just months after 9/11, to capture or kill Osama bin Laden in the caves
of Tora Bora. Their story would be what Boal calls an “East meets West”
drama—“of cultural differences,” adds Bigelow—“irreconcilable,” adds
Boal. “To an extent,” says Bigelow. “But I don’t want to give away the
whole—” says Boal. “Okay,” says Bigelow. The two have worked together
for about a decade, since Bigelow brought Boal into the business, and
this intimately negotiated finishing of each other’s sentences,
overwriting each other’s language, is actually the way they talk, at
least in front of a reporter.
Boal—who, at 39, still considers himself as much a journalist as a
screenwriter—had spent more than a year researching and writing and was
close to finishing a screenplay. “I wasn’t done done, like,
ready to shoot,” he says, “but I was far enough along so that I was
spending money to have scouts in Kazakhstan,” which was to double for
Afghanistan. He was also far enough along to deploy both the carrot and
the stick in his ongoing back-and-forth with the CIA. Boal had to make
the agency believe that it couldn’t prevent the telling of a story that,
“let’s face it, was a military and intelligence failure,” he says, and
at the same time convince his contacts there that he and Bigelow would
handle the subject responsibly enough that the agency might want to help
them understand what happened. “I was trying to set up a fact-checking
call,” he says of that Friday evening. “I said, ‘We’ll be fair, but I
have a number of questions for you.’ And they said, ‘Great, but can we
punt this to next week?’ ”
Two days later, on May 1, Boal and Bigelow were in his Los
Angeles office, working into the evening, when their phones started to
fill with messages from friends and colleagues passing along rumors of
some very big news. That night, along with the rest of America, they
watched President Obama enter the East Room of the White House and
announce that Navy SEALS had killed Bin Laden in a raid on a residential
compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. In the spirit of the moment, neither
of them mentioned that their movie was now, in all likelihood, about to
fall apart.
The Tora Bora movie did, in fact, self-combust, but just eighteen months later, Zero Dark Thirty,
the tough, unsparing film that rose from its ashes, is about to land
right in the thick of an already congested Oscar race. (Last week, the
New York Film Critics Circle awarded the movie, which opens December 19,
Best Film and Best Director.) Before the raid, the filmmakers had
planned to make a narrowly focused, closed-ended story that would have
ended on a note of irresolution and futility. But Zero Dark Thirty
is something else: a stark procedural epic that stretches from 2001 to
2011—ten years of fitful intelligence progress and setbacks so
staggering that, by the time the virtuosic reenactment of the Abbottabad
raid arrives, audiences will be tallying what that achievement cost
America, and what costs may be yet to come. It’s a movie that confirms
Bigelow and Boal’s position as probably our most prominent and least
sentimental cultural custodians of the post-9/11 war era.
When, on Oscar night in early 2010, Kathryn
Bigelow made history as the first woman to earn a Best Director
statuette, it seemed less the bestowal of a prize than a long-overdue
coronation. Until that moment, Bigelow had been, in the words of Amy
Pascal, the co-chairman of Zero Dark Thirty distributor Sony
Pictures, “one of the most overlooked, underappreciated directors
working—including by our own community.” The intensity of that language
reflects the degree to which Bigelow was, in taking the stage for what
she called “the moment of a lifetime,” being heralded more as a
benchmark than as a person—Hollywood’s Great Lady of the Glass Ceiling.
Bigelow never expressed public frustration at being made into a
symbol, but she never quite acquiesced to it either—as anyone who sees Zero Dark Thirty will
realize, triumphalism isn’t her thing, even at moments of triumph. Nor
did she ever indicate that she saw herself as overlooked or
underappreciated, though that was hard to argue, especially when people
spent more time discussing her two-year marriage to James Cameron in the
late eighties than her extensive filmography. Bigelow is 61, a number
that seems like a typo when you meet her, but one that reminds you she
has the résumé of a veteran: Her long pre–Hurt Locker career encompassed a quarter-century of successes, misses, cult triumphs like Point Break and Near Dark, compromises, and, though you won’t hear it from her, opportunities she should have had but didn’t. The Hurt Locker’s
six Oscars offered a chance to change that equation—to make what Boal
calls “the big studio movie that you do after you win, after you get
some cachet and stuff.” Bigelow’s partnership with Boal, who met her
about ten years ago when she inquired about a story he’d written for Playboy,
has taken her into new and rewarding territory, his journalistic cred a
complement to her unsentimental, realist aesthetic. Their
collaboration—she calls herself “a delivery system for Mark’s
content”—is so intense that many assume it is, or was, romantic,
something the two have never acknowledged, denied, or discussed. In
conversation, that intensity is something to behold.
After the Oscars, when their Tora Bora project still couldn’t find any takers, they sold a large-scale drug-war drama called Triple Frontier
to Paramount. (Boal: “I wasn’t ready to pitch it, so she said—”
Bigelow: “I’ll talk you through it in the car on the way.” Boal: “She
has this theory, what is it, the door handle—” Bigelow: “Doorknob.”
Boal: “That when you go through the door—” Bigelow: “It’ll sort of
jell.”) The project was hot; Tom Hanks and Johnny Depp were rumored as
co-leads. “And then it stalled,” says Bigelow. “So that’s when we jumped
back to Bin Laden.”
Bigelow and Boal had had the Tora Bora project in mind for a while, but even after The Hurt Locker, they couldn’t sell it to a studio; the subject has long been considered box-office poison, and despite all the acclaim, Hurt Locker
was the lowest-grossing Best Picture winner since the fifties. Instead,
they secured $45 million in financing independently from Megan
Ellison’s company Annapurna Pictures. A 26-year-old movie lover and
investor-producer, Ellison is the daughter of Oracle CEO Larry Ellison
and—there is no delicate way to put this—unbelievably rich. In the last
two years, she has plunged into the business as a sort of SoCal Medici
for American auteurs (she’s backed films for, among others, Paul Thomas
Anderson, Spike Jonze, David O. Russell, and Bennett Miller). She agreed
to give Bigelow complete creative and business control. For a while, it
seemed like everything was settling into place.
Of course, Bigelow and Boal had always known Bin Laden might be
killed or captured. Even as he wrote and she started to puzzle through
how to re-create the distinctive and forbidding Afghanistan terrain, the
two of them had the what-if conversation “many times,” she says. “We
had it pretty close to May 1, actually.”
“I was fairly convinced that another decade was going to go by,”
says Boal. “That they would find him as an old man in Caracas or
something. That was a pretty reasonable opinion to hold if you were
familiar with the way the intelligence case had been developing. The
trail had gone cold. So I don’t think I was the only person who was
surprised. Half of Congress was surprised.”
At first, Bigelow and Boal thought their movie could be
saved—that all Bin Laden’s killing had done to the story was to give it a
new climax. Besides, the project that nobody had wanted to touch a
month or a year earlier was, overnight, a hot property. After the news
broke, “I hate to admit it, but we called her right up,” Pascal says.
“We knew she and Mark were working on this, and then and there we said,
‘Hey, are you still doing that movie? Let’s get together!’ ” Without
seeing a script, Sony committed to distribute the film. Pascal imagined
it would probably be a mission-driven narrative focused primarily on the
raid, a guaranteed showcase for Bigelow’s phenomenal skills as a
director of action.
“I might’ve pitched it that way,” Boal says, a little sheepishly.
“I didn’t know what it was. Probably for a month after he was killed, I
was trying really hard to frame these two events—2001 in Afghanistan,
2011 in Pakistan—into one narrative.”
“We talked about it a lot,” says Bigelow.
“You were more of a holdout than I was,” says Boal.
“I was really hungry to hang on to the first version,” says
Bigelow. “Even if it was a kind of compressed version of that film, an
opening or a prologue.” But two months after the raid, they both came to
the same conclusion: There were no possible fixes—and even if there
were, “it would be perverse,” says Boal, to try to market a movie about
failing to capture Bin Laden in the wake of his killing. In the end, the
only element of the original project that would survive into Zero Dark Thirty
turned out to be its first two minutes, a wrenching sonic collage of
voices from 9/11—first responders, emergency operators, worried family
members, frantic victims—that immediately and brutally reopens the
wounds of that day. Everything else—two years of work—was scrapped.
“Now, that sucked,” says Boal, laughing. And it’s not as
if he could complain to friends that the death of Osama bin Laden ruined
his movie. “No,” he says dryly. “Because there’s nothing sadder in the
world than an unmade screenplay, right?”
That summer, before reconceiving the project, Boal had gotten
back in touch with the CIA, pushing for access to fresh details both
about the Abbottabad raid and the intelligence that led up to it, and
pressing his case that, among many newly hatched Bin Laden projects,
theirs was the likeliest to reach the finish line. It worked. According
to memos released at the request of the conservative group Judicial
Watch, the CIA decided to cooperate because “Mark and Kathryn’s movie is
going to be the first and the biggest. It’s got the most money behind
it, and two Oscar winners onboard.” The CIA recommended extending
preferential treatment to Boal, noting that the project had “the full
knowledge and support of Director Panetta” (played in the film by James
Gandolfini). Judicial Watch and GOP noisemakers like Long Island
congressman Peter King were hungry for evidence that the CIA was
offering inappropriate cooperation—and possibly revealing classified
material—so Hollywood could make a movie that would get President Obama
reelected. But the two most scandalous reveals in the CIA memos are (1)
that the agency is rather too agog about Hollywood (one Argo-esque
e-mail discusses the importance of establishing “stronger relationships
with CAA”) and (2) that the CIA uses emoticons. “I want you to note how
good I’ve been about not mentioning the premiere tickets :-),” wrote
George Little, at the time the agency’s director of public affairs, to
Boal.
The raid’s backstory was hard to come by, but as he researched,
Boal began to hear from intelligence insiders about a woman—a CIA
“targeter” who had worked on virtually nothing but finding Bin Laden for
a decade. By the time Boal returned from reporting in Washington to Los
Angeles, he and
Bigelow knew they had found the narrative spine of their film in the character they called Maya.
Bigelow knew they had found the narrative spine of their film in the character they called Maya.
The “girl”—as she is referred to in one of Zero Dark Thirty’s
climactic lines—is a subject about which the filmmakers remain cagey.
Since she is still an active agent, Boal won’t say whether they ever
spoke face-to-face (“We’re probably not gonna get into the weeds of who
we met with or didn’t meet with, ever”). But it’s clear that he wanted
the film to move past the traditional definition of docudrama that has
stretched from All the President’s Men to United 93 and
into a genre he calls a “hybrid of the filmic and the journalistic”—a
piece of entertainment that doesn’t just re-create a story but advances
it. Maya was the missing piece—the element that might make that happen.
“The juicy thing about Maya was the surprise of it,” Bigelow
explains. “That there was this person who did this. But I don’t want you
to think I was either excited about or resisting doing it because it
was a woman. The excitement was because the character was central to the
story. The fact that there is this other dynamic was exciting, too, but
not … motivating. Not decisive.”
“I think what you’re saying is, if I had said, ‘Hey, it’s a guy,’ you would have been just as happy,” says Boal.
“Exactly,” she says. A couple of minutes later, though, she
circles back to it. “At the first New York screening, this woman came
out of the theater, and she was crying and shaking, and she came up to
me and said, ‘It wasn’t a woman, though, was it?’ And I said, ‘No, it
was!’ There’s something exciting to me as a filmmaker to work with the
hand you’re dealt. And with Maya, we happened to be dealt a royal
flush.”
Still, Boal and Bigelow didn’t make it easy on themselves. Killing Bin Laden was rumored to be the on-the-nose working title, but ultimately they went with the catchy-but-WTF Zero Dark Thirty
(it apparently means 12:30 a.m., when the raid took place). They chose
to confront the audience with an excruciating sustained sequence of
waterboarding, abuse, and humiliation in the first twenty minutes,
presenting the scenes in a defiantly uninflected observational style
that already has people arguing about whether the movie is endorsing,
condemning, or forgoing judgment about torture. They didn’t cast stars;
the major male role, a CIA interrogator called Dan, is played by
Australian actor Jason Clarke, and Jessica Chastain was not yet an Oscar
nominee or a Broadway leading lady when she signed to play Maya. “I
love movie stars, don’t get me wrong,” says Bigelow, “but in a piece
like this, where you want the aesthetic to feel as real as possible, you
need the audience to be able to create an original relationship with
the person onscreen.”
Most strikingly, Boal and Bigelow chose to keep Zero Dark Thirty
as in-the-moment as possible. Virtually all we know of Maya and Dan is
what we see them do onscreen. Their backgrounds, their personal lives,
whatever decisions led them to the Islamabad prison where we first
encounter them, are left for us to fill in, or—perhaps more to the
point—to dismiss as irrelevant. “Everyone says ‘backstory’ like if you
don’t have it, you’re missing a pillar of the house,” says Boal. “I’m
not a huge Freudian. When I meet somebody, I’m not interested in what
they were doing when they were 6. I like characters that are defined in
the very existential present tense.”
“It is a very, very different kind of narrative,” Pascal
acknowledges. “It doesn’t have three acts. It doesn’t tell its story
conventionally. But we felt that if, at the end, you feel the way you’re
supposed to feel, that after this epic but also intimate odyssey, the
world has changed, then it didn’t matter if there was a traditional
‘character arc.’ ”
Production took place over a tight fourteen weeks this spring in
India and Jordan. Those who were there talk of a spirit of camaraderie,
but the mood wasn’t light. “You know, I’m a hippie vegan girl from
Northern California,” says Chastain, laughing. “I’m not comfortable in
this subject matter at all.” With the help of Boal—who did unusual
on-set double-duty as screenwriter and hands-on producer—she threw
herself into research, but still, after a week of shooting the torture
and interrogation scenes, “there was one day when I had to walk away and
just start crying, which was even harder because my character was not
like that at all. When I watch the scene, I can see that my eyes were a
little red.”
“There were no big trailers or anything,” says Clarke, noting the
difficulty of working in areas hostile to signs of American excess. “We
tried to maintain a very small footprint in the places we were
shooting. The production was small and focused, without fat, because it
wasn’t necessarily a great idea to have it look like a huge movie set.”
One shoot, in an actual prison in Jordan, was especially hard on
Chastain. “One day, we drove up to the gate and they wouldn’t let us
through,” she remembers. “I said, ‘What’s happening?’ And the driver
said, ‘You have to get out of the car. The guards want to see you walk.’
I was so angry. I thought, Well, I could just turn around and go
back to the hotel and then the movie doesn’t get made, or I can get out
of the car and walk past these guys who haven’t seen a woman in a long
time. I didn’t necessarily feel completely safe.”
Boal fretted all through the production about the ongoing outcry
from the right. (The actual film barely engages with politics: There is
one sly joke at Donald Rumsfeld’s expense, and the transition from Bush
to Obama is experienced by the main characters only as a distant news
report.) “I knew that the movie, once it was completed, would speak for
itself,” says Boal. “But I was very concerned during production that the
political conversation would get so loud that it would reach the level
of interference. I mean, to shoot in India and Jordan involves
interactions with those governments.”
“When you’re dressing streets in India to look like Pakistan,” says Bigelow, “it’s not uncomplicated.”
They would shoot for six days, and on the seventh, Bigelow would
lead the cast and crew in dry runs for the fearsomely complex sequence
that ends the movie. Re-creating the Abbottabad raid required the
construction of a full-scale replica of the three-story building in
which Bin Laden was concealed, and not, says Bigelow, “the usual thing
of two-by-fours and painted canvas. We really built it—we put pylons
into the ground so that the structure would withstand the rotor wash of
Blackhawk helicopters coming right near it.” Oh, they also built two
helicopters after consulting with avionics experts about what the
stealth helicopters used in the raid, which have never been
photographed, might look like.
“I approached it months in advance,” says Bigelow. “The goal was
to be as accurate as we possibly could without, obviously, having been
there. I didn’t want it to feel like a movie. So it had to be shot on a
virtually moonless night. That meant having very little illumination,
and I found a cinematographer who agreed with that.” Bigelow envisioned
the raid unfolding in long takes that would follow the SEALS from the
helicopters to the outside of the compound and through the doors, then
up two flights of stairs. “Ordinarily, yeah, you’d probably take every
floor and put it on a different stage. But because I wanted all these
contiguous shots, that wasn’t an option.”
Bigelow also wanted to shoot the entire raid two ways—once
objectively and once through the night-vision goggles the SEALS wore.
The goggles have an unearthly black-on-green effect that’s usually added
in postproduction; in Zero Dark Thirty, the scenes were actually
shot through those lenses. “You just can’t artificially create it,” she
says. “When I look through night-vision goggles, I see the way light
sparkles on whatever particulate matter is in the air—it creates a kind
of exquisite filmic haze.” The Abbottabad set didn’t even have a
removable wall, called a “wild” wall, that would allow a camera to take
in an entire room. “It wasn’t a temptation for me, but it was for the
art department,” says Bigelow. The production designer, she adds, “did
create one. He said, ‘I know you’re going to want it.’ I said, ‘Which
one is it? That one? Okay, we’re never going to use it. And,” she says,
beaming, “I never wilded it!”
“Our whole focus was making sure we were looking right, moving right, sounding right,” says Chris Pratt, of Parks and Recreation,
who makes a joltingly credible transformation into a Navy seal in the
raid sequence. “It was not easy. There were twenty of us [actors] on
night shoots all the way through. A lot of the time, even though we knew
that Kathryn and Mark were right there, collaborating to get what they
wanted, it could end up feeling a little chaotic. There were people who
were frustrated, there were people who were pissed off. But through it
all, Kathryn was the leader—she was able to just really focus on how we
were going to get what we needed to get.”
“She was the captain,” says Chastain. “And her confidence meant
everything to me, because I was playing a woman who was supposed to be
confident and that could not be further from what I felt. People don’t
know she does this, but sometimes I’d do a scene and right afterward, if
you’ve done something she likes, she goes “Whoo!” Like she’s at a football game. Like, ‘Yeah! We’re doin’ it!’ It really helped.”
By the time Zero Dark Thirty wrapped in early June, Bigelow had shot 2 million feet of film, necessitating two editors working in tandem: There Will Be Blood’s Dylan Tichenor initially handled many of the agency sequences while Argo’s William Goldenberg concentrated on the raid.
Eighteen months from reconception to opening day represents a
remarkably swift turnaround for a film, but still, the cultural
landscape has changed even faster. For one thing, the raid has become a
commodity. No Easy Day, a firsthand account written by a former
member of seal Team Six, has been on best-seller lists for three months,
and authors Peter Bergen and Mark Bowden have also published books
about the mission (“Maya” appears as “Rose,” an “analyst in her
mid-thirties … with deep knowledge of al-Qaeda,” on a couple of pages of
Bergen’s book, and briefly as “Jen,” described as someone “who’d spent
half a decade tracking” Bin Laden, in No Easy Day.) Everyone
wants a piece of the SEALS: A somewhat slipshod docudrama about the raid
aired last month on the National Geographic Channel, and a bunch of
SEALS got to star in Act of Valor, a propaganda drama initiated by the Navy itself, that became a surprise hit last spring. Most prominently, Showtime’s Homeland, which
hadn’t yet aired when Bin Laden was killed, is now finishing its second
season, and the intensely driven Maya, whose mission seems to be her
whole life and who is willing to be damaged by the damaging job she’s
agreed to do, may call to mind that show’s Carrie Mathison.
“I never thought we were going to be first,” says Boal. “But I am
trying to be the first one to bring this to the screen in a
high-quality way with a brilliant director.” We’re wrapping up our
conversation now, in a conference room on the Sony lot in Culver City—an
unnatural habitat, since Bigelow is arguably the least on-the-lot
director working in Hollywood. I ask the two whether they plan to work
together again. Across the table, they exchange, not for the first time,
a let’s-coordinate-our-answers glance. “I think we both want to,” says
Boal. “It’s up to the movie gods.”
When Bigelow talks about the challenges of filming Zero Dark Thirty,
it’s easy to assume she likes moviemaking to be hard. “I love it—” she
starts, and then says, “No. Not to be hard. To be real. But yes, for
this, arduousness should permeate the scene, the frame, the performance.
I find that working with a story that is credible and real and not
invented is very galvanizing. It’s kind of a grinding stone against
which you can sharpen yourself.” But, I ask, while she’s shooting in a
Jordanian prison or wrangling black-ops helicopters, does she ever say
to herself, “The next movie I make is going to be easier”?
“Oh, I say it all the time,” she says, smiling. “All the time. I just don’t mean it.”
*This article originally appeared in the December 17, 2012 issue of New York Magazine.
