A question about "The Hurt Locker"

[solidstatemind]

Seriously, I know I'm behind the times, but I finally sat down and watched it tonight.

...And I just was absolutely stunned at how completely and utterly average it was. To the point where I feel like I must have 'missed' something.

The cinematography was very good.
The acting had its moments, but I would simply describe it as 'solid'; nothing spectacular.
Same could be said for the directing.
The story had an interesting hook (IED disposal), but aside from that was actually pretty formulaic.

I mean, don't get me wrong- there were a few really gripping scenes, but 5 Oscars? REALLY?!? I'm sorry, but to give it Best Picture puts it up there with Saving Private Ryan, and it isn't even in the same galaxy as that film. (For the record, SPR absolutely shattered me. It took me an hour, 4 cups of coffee and a half a pack of cigarettes after the movie was over before I was able to compose myself enough to just drive home from the theater. Schindler's List is the only other film that comes to mind that had that type of affect on me.)

Also, don't think I'm sort of anti-war guy. I understand the need for conflict. I don't necessarily agree with why we are in Iraq, but I'm not like an "NO BLOOD FOR OIL!" protester or anything. It may also be worth noting that I have a very close friend who was a marine, and my family's military service goes back a long, long, long way-- just mostly not in this country-- so I'm not against the military establishment as a rule.


The crazy thing is, apparently I'm not the only one: the thread on "Good War Movies" in this very same forum is going on 4 or 5 pages now, and there are a total of 6 references that I counted to 'The Hurt Locker'. (I may have miscounted. It's late now and I'm getting tired.)

So, do you really think this was better than Up, A Serious Man, Inglourious Basterds, and District 9? Why?

I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, but I'd like to hear your opinion, along with some examples to support your view. After all, I've missed the point before...

 

[AWDMANOUT]

Because, to Americans, it hits home.

This is something that's actually going on, right now. My cousin is actually in the US military at this moment, searching for IED's. And that's what makes it stick out more than another Pixar movie, a movie I never saw, a comedy/action about a war that happened around seventy years ago, and another scifi making social references (granted, I loved all those movies, except A Serious Man, which I previously stated I never saw).

 

[HuntrRose]

It's the things it tells without actually saying out loud that makes it a great movie.

 

[Glamorgan]

I have no idea. I completely agree with you on this one. I was struck by the fact that, well, The Hurt Locker didn't really have much of a point. It was still a good films, but I don't think it deserved everything it got.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

I didn't enjoy it, I found it rather dull and drawn out. I really don't want to see 30 seconds of a guy walking towards a car. So you're not alone.

 

[AgentNein]

It's a movie that explores an aspect of the nature of the modern soldier, and aspect we rarely see. The main character's essentially an adrenaline junky. He makes stupid decisions, acts impulsively, at times it feels like he'd be at home in a more stereotypical action hero movie, except he's in the (comparatively) real world. In one way you could argue that it's a deconstruction of the typical action movie.

The main character reminds me of Detective McNulty from The Wire (best show that's ever graced television). He's doing these things that are essentially good, or positive, but the force that's driving him to do it isn't necessarily good or healthy for him. Go watch all of The Wire. I'll wait.

Definitely not your typical war film (and I didn't see it as pro-war in the least). I found it to be an interesting change of pace.

 

[Sacman]

Oh thank god I thought I was the only who thought it was utterly average beyond belief...

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

The Wire (best show that's ever graced television).

You're joking right? One word: Firefly.

 

[Cyan.]

Its a terrible film.

The oscars are rigged, and this film suits well americas current political regeme. Its what they want people to see and helps shape their image of the millitary in a positive light (hidden behind shades of "realistic" negativity).

I laughed aloud about how all the arabs were portrayed as dirty untrustworthy evil people, always scheming against the Americans. It was great.

The cinamatography was decent tho, the scene shot from top down where he pulls on one wire to expose about 10 bombs is clever.


But its obvious as hell the reasons this average film did so well. ITS A CONSPIRAZY LOL

 

[x434343]

I mean, don't get me wrong- there were a few really gripping scenes, but 5 Oscars? REALLY?!? I'm sorry, but to give it Best Picture puts it up there with Saving Private Ryan, and it isn't even in the same galaxy as that film. (For the record, SPR absolutely shattered me. It took me an hour, 4 cups of coffee and a half a pack of cigarettes after the movie was over before I was able to compose myself enough to just drive home from the theater. Schindler's List is the only other film that comes to mind that had that type of affect on me.)
They're technically in different categories. SPR is an action-based WWII film, whilst Hurt Locker is a drama-based 2GW film. Remove the war bits, one's an action film and one's a drama film. You may have been looking for an action film, but this is more of a drama film.

So, do you really think this was better than Up, A Serious Man, Inglourious Basterds, and District 9? Why?
Well, to put bluntly HOW it won, remember this: It's the first SOLID 2nd Gulf War film that's been made and released to general audiences. Jarhead was sub-par and about the 1st Gulf War, and Generation Kill is HBO series, so it's not really a film. This war is a part of our culture at this point, like how Vietnam is part of my parent's late-teens, and how WWII is part of the Greatest Generation's culture. To see a film that neither advocates nor encourages war is rare, so I guess Hurt Locker won because it was in the right place at the right time.

Responses in bold. Sorry if they sound deriding, I do NOT mean that.

 

[Good morning blues]

The Hurt Locker was one of the most suspenseful films I've ever seen. No other movie had me on the edge of my seat or indeed provoked any comparable emotional response like that one all year.

 

[WaveringRadiant]

I never saw A Serious Man. Inglorious Basterds was good, but not what I was expecting. And District 9 was awesome, don't get me wrong, but... I really enjoyed The Hurt Locker. Enough to watch it twice in two weeks (a rare thing).

It provided an up-close-and-personal of the war and the people involved that I've never found in other movies, news reports or documentaries. What really struck a chord:

Spoiler

once James' tour is over - after all the defusals, finding the kid he befriended filled with explosives, and accidentally shooting his teammate - we see him, wearing normal clothes, standing in a normal, spotless, American supermarket, staring blankly at a shelf of products.

That's one of the most starkly contrasting, moving scenes I've ever seen in any movie.

To be honest, I never thought about the film's agenda. For what it's worth, I'm decidedly against the war. If anything, I thought the Arabs weren't, as Cyan put it, "portrayed as dirty untrustworthy evil people, always scheming against the Americans"; the people James encountered were as pissed off as you or I would be if another country's military was running through our backyards. I felt sympathy for them.

Anyway, I'm no film buff, nor do I have any interest in the Oscars, so I can't comment on their decision, but I loved The Hurt Locker. Oscar or not, it's a great movie.

 

[Guest_Star]

Agree with the OP; "The Hurt Locker" is nothing more than average.
By-the-numbers story, not very interesting or even likeable characters, badly done research on the army stuff, etc...
Some of cinemategraphy was very good and several of the actors made an effort, but... the overall impression is mediocre.

*edit* And best movie last year? "Moon".

 

[solidstatemind]

I mean, don't get me wrong- there were a few really gripping scenes, but 5 Oscars? REALLY?!? I'm sorry, but to give it Best Picture puts it up there with Saving Private Ryan, and it isn't even in the same galaxy as that film. (For the record, SPR absolutely shattered me. It took me an hour, 4 cups of coffee and a half a pack of cigarettes after the movie was over before I was able to compose myself enough to just drive home from the theater. Schindler's List is the only other film that comes to mind that had that type of affect on me.)
They're technically in different categories. SPR is an action-based WWII film, whilst Hurt Locker is a drama-based 2GW film. Remove the war bits, one's an action film and one's a drama film. You may have been looking for an action film, but this is more of a drama film.

So, do you really think this was better than Up, A Serious Man, Inglourious Basterds, and District 9? Why?
Well, to put bluntly HOW it won, remember this: It's the first SOLID 2nd Gulf War film that's been made and released to general audiences. Jarhead was sub-par and about the 1st Gulf War, and Generation Kill is HBO series, so it's not really a film. This war is a part of our culture at this point, like how Vietnam is part of my parent's late-teens, and how WWII is part of the Greatest Generation's culture. To see a film that neither advocates nor encourages war is rare, so I guess Hurt Locker won because it was in the right place at the right time.

Responses in bold. Sorry if they sound deriding, I do NOT mean that.

Not at all! thanks for the thoughts: actually, come to think about it, you're probably very accurate in regards to the war-action as opposed to war-drama observation. That said, I think it's not unreasonable of me to say that the advertising campaign kind of set me up for that.

It's the things it tells without actually saying out loud that makes it a great movie.

See, that's the sort of thing I'm interested in, but examples would be appreciated, because I must've missed them the first time through.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

Better then District 9 or Inglorious Bastards? No, but you gotta remember that for some reason, these are the guys who believe that the best movies are movies like Avatar and Slumdog Millionare, which while both not actually bad, are no where near that good in my eyes.

Then again, if it was a publically open award, I could gurantee that Twilight: New Moon or Transformers 2 would be on that list. I'd rather have Kathyrn Bigelow win an award over Micheal Bay.

 

[quiet_samurai]

That and District 9 were my two favorite films last year, and comparing it to Saving Private Ryan isn't fair. SPR was meant to be an action with alot of shocking moments and meant to convey the atrocities of war. Hurt Locker is more of a drama and meant to convey the lives of soldiers in the current war. Two completely different types of movies.

And A Serious Man was terrible. The dialogue, plot, acting, actors and entire premise was bland and had abcolutely nothing to contribute. The only intriguing part was the story the Rabbi told about the "Goys" teeth. Other then that it was a boring anti-climatic piece of shit.

 

[AgentNein]

The Wire (best show that's ever graced television).

You're joking right? One word: Firefly.

Oh I love Firefly, but it's pulpy adventure. Some of the best pulpy adventure that's ever been seen, but pulpy adventure. The Wire is television approaching great literature.

 

[L4hlborg]

Hurt locker managed to be the first movie in a while that just made me want to sleep. It was boring as hell. Or maybe it was just that I'm not American and I don't really give a shit on the subject.

I've only seen the opening scene of Up and I thought it was really interesting. Inglourious Basterds was absolutely brilliant and a Serious Man was extremely funny in a clever way. I can't really see any way that The Hurt Locker could be even nearly as good as any of these.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

The Wire (best show that's ever graced television).

You're joking right? One word: Firefly.

Oh I love Firefly, but it's pulpy adventure. Some of the best pulpy adventure that's ever been seen, but pulpy adventure. The Wire is television approaching great literature.

Ah, all is good then.

 

[Anah'ya]

It's IN. (or was, anyway)

That's the only plausible solution I could come up with. It had to get Oscars, jut so that the movie industry could feel better about itself.

Personally the movie bored me to tears and the cinematography and acting were sup-bar at best. So in this Taffer little world she can't come up with a better reason than that the movie was a success based on popularity and "importance" of the subject. I mean, you can't be taken serious if you don't go and throw praise at a crucial and acclaimed flick like that... yadda yadda.

There are first-account current conflict books in my shelf that would have made for a superior movie experience. And no, they are not filled with bloodshed. They are down to earth. More so than Hurt Locker was (I mean what the hell was with the British PMC guys? Was that moment just added to show the superiority of american troops?).

Those were all just personal opinions, by the way.