It has been lauded by the New York Times as the best action movie of the summer. The New Yorker calls it quite a feat. A classic that will be studied 20 years from now. And Time gushes that its a near perfect movie.
Makes me wonder if any of those reviewers even know what EOD stands for.
The latest film from the director best known for the surfing bank heist flick Point Break, Hurt Locker is a duly admirable first attempt at an Iraq war action movie. Director Kathryn Bigelows skill at delivering action, explosions and digital mayhem come through, but the film will strike most military viewers as a bit tone deaf.
But thats Hollywood, right?
Sure there are bomb suits, PackBots, plenty of red, green and black trigger wire, enough C4 to bring down the Green Zone and scores of tweaked out Joes waiting for the bomb squad to see whats under that block of Styrofoam on the side of the MSR.
And itd be fine if it all stopped there.
The movie centers on the quietly intense and a bit loose-cannon-esque Staff Sgt. William James (Jeremy Renner) who steps in to replace an EOD detachment sergeant whos killed during a mission in Iraq mid-way through the deployment.
The films strength comes from the intensely psychological approach taken by the screenplay, with the interplay between an EOD techs studied intellect, selflessness and inherent recklessness moving the action in unexpected directions. James leads his team Sgt. J.T. Sanborn (Anthony Mackie) and Spec. Owen Eldridge (Brian Geraghty) –through a smoldering cauldron of daisy-chain IED ambushes, suicide vest defusing and bomb-making terror cells.
And all that excitement is fine. But the movie jumps the tracks when the team gets involved in a bizarre sniper duel with a team of contractor Saddam hunters, sponsors a booze-fueled combatives tournament in their hooch and when James embarks on an impromptu off-FOB outing with a pistol on his belt wearing ACU trousers and a civilian sweat shirt.
Its understandable when Hollywood doesnt get it quite right. They want drama, action and flow so they take some artistic license. Im not begrudging them for relying so heavily on the bomb suit (Ive never once seen an EOD tech wear one to diffuse a roadside bomb) or fudge the radio chatter or get the raid stack wrong theres no nit picking here. But Hurt Locker is not the best action movie of the summer and it will not be studied 20 years from now. Some of the scenes are so disconnected with reality to be almost parody. And thats where a film plugging along just fine breaks down.
Its a good first attempt at an Iraq war movie that finally does some justice to the men and women who fight there. Maybe weve come through the long dark period of Abu Ghraib guilt-ridden films that tell us how bad we are as Americans and how bad an idea the Iraq war was. Theres plenty of heroism, drama and excitement in the Iraq narrative that lends itself well to the silver screen without having to engage in moral critique.
So, bravo to Kathryn and Mark Boal (the screenwriter) for bursting through the Iraq-war-guilt envelope with a solid base hit. Maybe this will encourage other filmmakers and studios to support the myriad films that could be made from the simple drama of the job our troops do every day in the worlds war zones.
Hurt Locker has been playing in limited theaters in Los Angeles and New York City since late June and will be released in major cities nationwide July 10.
– Christian
{ 11 comments… read them below or add one }
The real question is why does Hollywood constantly stray away from military reality? We were Soldiers was an excellent movie, granted the ending was not historically accurate, but it capture the essence of service. The same with Blackhawk Down, but now we have had a series of Iraq based movies that seem to drift into unrealistic scenarios, leaving the FOB in a sweatshirt and a 9mm? or contractors? Gimme a break. Now I know why Duece Four is never going to get a movie made.
The movie was just that,, a movie their is very little reality to it. The notion that it will be studied 20 years down the road?? For what??
Why does hollywood stray from military reality? Um, maybe because of the contemt that most of us green-suiters seem to hold the “media” and “hollywood”. It is clear to me that she attempted to tell an interesting story and got zero cooperation from the military. I guess Transformers was a better recruiting venue. Oh and if you think there aren’t booze fueled contractor antics, off-FOB shenanigans, etc, then you’ve drank the kool aid. And Abu Ghraib guilt? Hell, that’s the movie that ought to be made. We ought to be forced to stare down our failings.
The movie deserves tepid praise for the way the scenes were staged; it maintained tension despite the pivotal scenes each being generally about the same thing–an EOD call out.
But any military observer will tear it apart for the completely whacked out character behavior…it was clear they had no military consultant at all, or if they did, they chose to completely ignore his advice.
I have seen the whole thing, and while the first half is tolerable, the second half will just make any military viewer go cross-eyed for the sheer stupidity of it.
ahh c’mon!
they just collected all “dangerous situation” from other hollywood films and made a film about “our guys loosing lifes in long away evil empire” fictional story. and for get some kids and hormon loaded teenagers into kinos they garnish this shit with spezial efects and 24-action-talking..
welcome to hollywood wich were long bankrupt unlees they were selling their movies in own owned kino-industry.
ps. last time i was in a “millitary film from hollywood was that with 3 kings.. then.. nothing
I keep seeing military people write “diffuse” in the context of defusing bombs.
Does “diffuse” have a special meaning in military jargon or is it a misspelling ?
Saw it, suxed!
Funny thing i noticed in the film is the refer to James as a Staff Sergeant, look at his rank he is a Sergeant First Class. Im a vet of the military and I will be re enlisting towards mid august. A staff Sergeant wears three up and one down, meaning three tripes like a sergeant with a rocker under those stripes. In the film you can clearly see he has two rockers which indicates a Sergeant First Class. The best viewable of this is when he plays soccer with the kid ( sorry to spoil for those who havnt seen it ) all in all i liked it
sorry for some of the miss spelling my brain tends to go faster then my fingers
lol
Corrected Text below
Funny thing i noticed in the film is they refer to James as a Staff Sergeant, look at his rank he is a Sergeant First Class. Im a vet of the military and I will be re enlisting towards mid august. A staff Sergeant wears three up and one down, meaning three stripes like a sergeant with a rocker under those stripes. In the film you can clearly see he has two rockers which indicates a Sergeant First Class. The best viewable of this is when he plays soccer with the kid ( sorry to spoil for those who havnt seen it ) all in all i liked it
Here is a link to the picture, not like it matters just wanted to back up my posting with facts lol
http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o88/snakeuo/HurtLocker_Photo.jpg
Really enjoyed the film, but this is an article that needed writing.
What I thought rang true was the portrayal of a solider who failed to re-adjust to his home life — the awkward scenes in the grocery store back home and with his wife in the kitchen seemed indicative of some of the EODs I’ve met stateside. Some adjust perfectly and some just can’t adjust to the normalcy of American life and become broken men… at least for a few years, sometimes forever.
But the sniper scene was silly and, despite capturing great tension, so were a lot of the green-suit scenes.
Makes me wonder about all the inaccuracies in my favorite war movie ever: Apocalypse Now.