Fun Stuff > ENJOY
The Hurt Locker
pilsner:
Yeah, this gets commented on a lot although it's not obvious why the numbers are so lopsided. I'm like 99% certain directors don't direct with their dicks (except Tarantino obviously).
Rotten Tomatoes gave the movie a 97% (!) but says it only grossed a little over $12 million (!!!). As an indie film it apparently never made it out of limited release and got almost no promotion. Damn that is sad.
Boro_Bandito:
My friend just joined the Air Force for E.O.D., so I kind of want to rent this movie and worry about it for a while.
KvP:
It's a very good film, one of the best of the year and certainly the best "action" film of the year. It loses a bit of steam in the last third though, as the first two thirds are essentially "slice of life" segments where we tag along with this bomb squad, and there isn't much of a thematic arc. Until that last bit, at least. What the movie does have (that not just action films but most films in general lack) is an uncanny ability to to put the audience in the shoes of the characters. We're nervous because they're nervous, and not just because of the obvious threat of the bombs they're supposed to disarm. The editing and direction convey a lot of messages without resorting to dialogue - when you see the shots of Iraqis observing the soldiers, you feel at once the tenseness the soldiers feel because they have no means of identifying their enemies in civilian clothing, and you feel the mutual mistrust of the people whose country it's supposed to be.
It's a little edifying that this film is getting such a push because there's no one thing that you can point at and say "oh, it's all just hype over this thing". The director's previous work is mainly known for being parodied in Hot Fuzz, the cast is all young character actors with no star power to speak of, and it's a war film without a Big Message to be conveyed. It sets out to show in detail the experience of this one soldier and it does so while making very few if any big-picture judgments. The only reason it's as acclaimed as it is is because it's so exceptionally well made. Which is to say it has everything and nothing. Come awards time it'll lose out to Avatar or Up in the Air, despite being superior to those two films in nearly every way.
--- Quote from: TheFuriousWombat on 13 Jan 2010, 22:03 ---Is it sexist of me to be kinda shocked that this was directed by a chick?
--- End quote ---
The ex-wife of James Cameron, in fact. Avatar made more money today than Hurt Locker probably made its entire run. Oh well.
RallyMonkey:
I think the best phrase to describe the film is "emotionally exploitative". Possibly a perfect way to approach the subjects at hand, but not a good way to tell a story. Technically, the film was extremely impressive. I've never felt so tense in my life. But the story was extremely lacking, and that's what I go to a movie for.
pilsner:
There is an arc in terms of how William James goes from a nutty thrillseeker to a nutty guy seeking something more profound from the risks he takes. There was also a very traditional plot development in terms of how William James' unit progress from near hatred, through respect, through concern and finally end in resentment. While the movie lacked a strong plot structure to some, plenty of excellent movies (in my opinion) are not plot driven.
Take for instance Waltzing Waltz with Bashir, the animated documentary drawing on interviews from Israeli soldiers who were in the vicinity of a massacre of Palestinians by Lebanese Christian Fallengists. Even less of a plot than The Hurt Locker, but an equally significant emotional payload (and perhaps even more disturbing).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version