There are 2 major differences between The Hurt Locker and Full Metal Jacket:
Full Metal Jacket is actually good.
Full Metal Jacket is actually good.
The Hurt Locker: Iraq's Full Metal Jacket?
- Thread starter mrhappyface
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I saw this not that long ago in Cineworld (europes biggest cinema, or so im told) in glasgow, so my setting personally for it was good. It was by mere chance I got to see it as me as the girl i was with flipped on it lol. Heads for hurt locker and we were in there.
So I went in with high hopes, the day had gone well and this was two days after the movie won its Oscar. So yeah i was expecting of it.
However, I left the cinema on a "Meh". It was fun watching the yanks hiding towards the beginning. And the film as a whole had it's moments. But idk. I mean it's better then some war films i've seen. Iraq's full metal jacket? I'm not feeling it.
The plot had a few holes that annoyed me, the characterisation was off at points, the score was good thought. The effects were good but they had to be considering the nature of the movie. It's good, it feels down to earth more but it still felt loose. The beginning - he enters the kill zone, he leaves the killzone (running might I add) then the bomb goes off and he's dead? I mean it even said he was out of the killzone. Things like this distracted me. I just didn't get immersed.
If we're gonna compare Stanley Kubrick to Kathryn Bigelow? Please.
And yes, Us brits do have the best military unit in the world, but yanks, take a chill-pill. If youre sick of the SAS showing you up, train your green berets harder. Don't make british bounty hunters out as shit just for the hell of it. I really am sick of american war movies forgetting that the brits have always done most of the fighting. It's fucking annoying. I so wanna direct a war movie and just have the characters slag the yanks off all the way through. Be more realistic.
So yeah. Hurt locker was ok. I really don't think it deserved best picture at all though. I'm more concerned that it got best film at the BAFTAs. I expect blind patriotism from the americans but not from the brits in support of americans. This is all wrong.
So I went in with high hopes, the day had gone well and this was two days after the movie won its Oscar. So yeah i was expecting of it.
However, I left the cinema on a "Meh". It was fun watching the yanks hiding towards the beginning. And the film as a whole had it's moments. But idk. I mean it's better then some war films i've seen. Iraq's full metal jacket? I'm not feeling it.
The plot had a few holes that annoyed me, the characterisation was off at points, the score was good thought. The effects were good but they had to be considering the nature of the movie. It's good, it feels down to earth more but it still felt loose. The beginning - he enters the kill zone, he leaves the killzone (running might I add) then the bomb goes off and he's dead? I mean it even said he was out of the killzone. Things like this distracted me. I just didn't get immersed.
If we're gonna compare Stanley Kubrick to Kathryn Bigelow? Please.
And yes, Us brits do have the best military unit in the world, but yanks, take a chill-pill. If youre sick of the SAS showing you up, train your green berets harder. Don't make british bounty hunters out as shit just for the hell of it. I really am sick of american war movies forgetting that the brits have always done most of the fighting. It's fucking annoying. I so wanna direct a war movie and just have the characters slag the yanks off all the way through. Be more realistic.
So yeah. Hurt locker was ok. I really don't think it deserved best picture at all though. I'm more concerned that it got best film at the BAFTAs. I expect blind patriotism from the americans but not from the brits in support of americans. This is all wrong.
True, but this is the closest a Iraq War movie has come to becoming GOOD, so I'm not ready to say it sucks...yet.Julianking93 said:
Yeah, but still, I didn't like the Hurt Locker.mrhappyface said:
I just thought it was...medicore at best.
Take one current and topical war, insert every hoo-rah bullshit cliche, diss the Brits and wrap it all in a stars and stripes. Guaranteed oscar material.......but not much cop in my opinion.
It was meh at best, a timefiller, packing, the needless condiment in a sandwich that's already perfect.
It was meh at best, a timefiller, packing, the needless condiment in a sandwich that's already perfect.
How does it diss Brits!? How the fuck are they portrayed in a negative, stupid manner? It avoids stupid stereotypes, it makes the competent fighters, and more Americans die in the movie than Brits, so how is that bad?
They were idiotic. Something that seems to crop up fairly often in US war films..........if they're even mentioned at all (U571, I'm looking at you!)mrhappyface said:
And as for avoiding stupid stereotypes. Gung-ho hero that cares not for authority and does things in his own dangerous and rebellious way........sound familiar?
Just my opinion, and my opinion is that the film was entirely ordinary.
QUICK EDIT: A lot of mercs in modern war zones will be ex-special forces. Brits will be ex-SAS. The money is massive.
The Pacific premiers this sunday, you guys excited? All the same directors and hopefully all the same awesomeness of BoBAjimboB said:
I wouldn't call it the Full Metal Jacket of Iraq movies, I would more equate it with Saving Private Ryan, since they are both in the same sort of mindset, even though I believe Saving Private Ryan was a WAY better movie. If I were to equate Full Metal Jacket with an Iraq movie it would be Jarhead, but like you said, Full Metal Jacket was a much better movie, hell, its one of my favorites of all time.
I loved Hurt Locker. Sure there were some un-realitic moments, it wouldn't hold the audience's interest if it were totally realistic, but it did a far better job than any other Iraq movie so far of giving a good look at what it's like to be deployed there; at least from what I've been told by people who were there. It will stand as one of the best war movies of all time and it will stand as Iraq's Full Metal Jacket for the time being. As the years go by, more and more movies about the Iraq War will be made and maybe one of those in the future will top Hurt Locker, but for now it will stand as the best Iraq War movie. And I do think that it deserved the Best Picture award, but I don't think that it deserved best director. That award should have gone to James Cameron or Quentin Tarentino.
One more thing...I get the feeling that people here only hate Hurt Locker because it got Best Picture. I'm willing to bet that if Avatar or Inglorious Basterds won, then the same people who hate Hurt Locker now would be saying that Avatar or Basterds sucked and that Hurt Locker should have won Best Picture. Just a thought based on what I am seeing.
One more thing...I get the feeling that people here only hate Hurt Locker because it got Best Picture. I'm willing to bet that if Avatar or Inglorious Basterds won, then the same people who hate Hurt Locker now would be saying that Avatar or Basterds sucked and that Hurt Locker should have won Best Picture. Just a thought based on what I am seeing.
No, it's because the video game nerds are butthurt that their flashy sci-fi movie didn't win any major awards, and was forced to settle with Cinemtography, Art Direction, and Visual Effects (which are honestly three of the biggest technical awards). Now I haven't seen Avatar yet, but only because I've been ridiculously busy and probably won't see it till it hits DVD, but when it does, I'll be one of the first to pick it up.Fox242 said:
No producer in their right mind would ever hire Michael Bay to direct something as politically-charged and dramatic as Hurt Locker. Bay's style of directing can be summed up thus:Fox242 said:That's because it didn't deserve it, Basterds should've wonthink about it, if someone like...say, Michael Bay directed Hurt Locker, doing the EXACT same stuff as Bigelow did, would it received half the acclaim it has? Hurt Locker was a good movie, even great, but not a "best picture at the oscars worthy"
Actor: I just need about 40 seconds of dialogue to explain what?s going on before we can?
Bay: TOO LONG LETS MAKE STUFF EXPLODE NOW OKAY
Michael Bay directs brainless action-fests with crazy special effects, while Kathryn Bigelow is known for making smart action movies with real characters and minimal special effects.
I think we are making the wrong call comparing this stinky dead fish to other war movies. If you are looking for a good analogy, I would say Hurt Locker is to realistic war movies as Beverly Hills Cop or Lethal Weapon are to realistic police movies.
The first time I saw this (with several other members of my infantry platoon) we almost thought it was a comedy. That someone could have thought this was a realistic treatment of the largely imaginary Hollywood concept of 'war junkies' rather than a tired rehashing of 'be afraid of crazy soldiers' simply amazes me. Then again Scott Pilgrim flopped so I guess I'm merely saddened.
The first time I saw this (with several other members of my infantry platoon) we almost thought it was a comedy. That someone could have thought this was a realistic treatment of the largely imaginary Hollywood concept of 'war junkies' rather than a tired rehashing of 'be afraid of crazy soldiers' simply amazes me. Then again Scott Pilgrim flopped so I guess I'm merely saddened.