The Hurt Locker --- way overrated

[jadedeath]

Originally Posted by repete66211

And that's part of the reason it didn't ring entirely true for me. Any character must have flaws and be accountable for his actions. Making this guy into a Rambo seems like a cheap move to me, as if saying the story would have been less interesting if he were a normal, by the book guy.

I can disagree with that too... I mean, he could have been a buy the book type guy and still had the movie been exciting.

I use the example of the opening scene with Guy Pearce. He seemed to be a by the book guy and look at how intense that scene ended up being.

Logan

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by repete66211

The Hurt Locker has elements of realism, placing the viewer in a "boots on the ground" perspective of the current conflict, even if the main character's behavior is suspect. What bothered me most about it was the suspended reality of the sniper scene and, especially, the use of yelling, quick cuts and shaky camera to manufacture a sense of urgency and tension. I didn't feel all of the behavior--secondary and main characters alike--had motivation. They were in some very tense situations, but the style of filmmaking didn't make the tension ring true for me. It's still a good movie though and I think it will have "longer legs" than Avatar in the years to come.

+1 for the "nuts":
One of the reasons Iraq movies "mysteriously" haven't caught on with the public is
A) the documentaries were more interesting, and
B) most of us were set to declare George Clooney's "Three Kings" the "definitive" Iraq movie, and move all others on as unnecessary.

But "Kings" was set during the first Gulf war, and didn't capture the particular paranoia of the later Bush Jr. occupation, that literally any kid hustling DVD's or any local peasant watching you from the street with a cellphone was already your next insurgent carbomber.
Up till now, it's been a thankless task trying to find the right movie that defined warfare in the 00's, without a lot of "why are we here?" handwringing that, again, the documentaries did better--But make it a tense, paranoid genre-thriller, that shows that there's adrenaline and fear on the ground, depending on the soldier's particular psyche, and there's more of a statement to be remembered later by history.

(And that's "remembered", as in "Boy, remember when 3-D was new?" a year or two from now. )

[Idioteque...]

I personally thought it was an alright movie but it's far from being the Best Picture ever. It's an okay movie. Not much happens and some random stuff happens that has no effect on the plot. Sure it deals with paranoia of war and addiction but what war movie hasn't done that? This movie didn't bring anything new to the table and the acting was decent. Renner was good but not Best Actor worthy.

And please don't give me the character study defense, what good war movie doesn't have that? All war movies are character studies in a sense. This is no different. If I want a movie about the horrors of war, I'll take Thin Red Line. Now that's a piece of art. The characters aren't even well developed to form a bond with them. The only one we have a slight sense of is Renner's character that's it.

[DeeChizzle]

Originally Posted by Idioteque...

Not much happens and some random stuff happens that has no effect on the plot. Sure it deals with paranoia of war and addiction but what war movie hasn't done that? This movie didn't bring anything new to the table and the acting was decent. Renner was good but not Best Actor worthy.

You're probably referring to the random sniper scene. IMO the sniper scene itself was not the focus of the scene, but rather the exchanging of the capri suns. It was the first time in the film that the three of them were working as a cohesive team and most importantly James was finally acting as a true team leader by putting the welfare of his teammates before himself.

As much as you will disagree the Iraqi War cannot be compared to previous wars therefore this film is rather different than past war films.

As unrealistic as this film was the fact is that I.E.D.'s are the #1 killer of US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. If this film did anything successful it was successful in portraying how horrifying and deadly those effin things are.

[Idioteque...]

Originally Posted by DeeChizzle

As unrealistic as this film was the fact is that I.E.D.'s are the #1 killer of US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. If this film did anything successful it was successful in portraying how horrifying and deadly those effin things are.

I had nothing against the sniper scene except the random cameo by Ralph Fiennes, I'm moreso referring to him jumping into a house for the little kid and that's it. I was like wait what?

I agree, that's definitely a risky job but it did nothing a documentary couldn't have done. And just because the Iraq war is different from other wars doesn't make Hurt Locker a fantastic film. It's one of the best Iraq war movies but I honestly don't see a difference between this or Jarhead. I think this is more entertaining than Jarhead though.

[sfmarine]

Originally Posted by Idioteque...

I had nothing against the sniper scene except the random cameo by Ralph Fiennes, I'm moreso referring to him jumping into a house for the little kid and that's it. I was like wait what?

I agree, that's definitely a risky job but it did nothing a documentary couldn't have done. And just because the Iraq war is different from other wars doesn't make Hurt Locker a fantastic film. It's one of the best Iraq war movies but I honestly don't see a difference between this or Jarhead. I think this is more entertaining than Jarhead though.

I agree...it was definitely more entertaining than Jarhead. I believe Fiennes played an SAS operative. So his whole team got wiped out and the EOD team ended up saving the day. It just didn't add up for me.

The other thing that was pointless was when he went into the village looking for the boys family.

[Idioteque...]

Originally Posted by sfmarine

I agree...it was definitely more entertaining than Jarhead. I believe Fiennes played an SAS operative. So his whole team got wiped out and the EOD team ended up saving the day. It just didn't add up for me.

The other thing that was pointless was when he went into the village looking for the boys family.

Exactly, and I don't want the realistic argument either. It's a fictional movie, so therefore the writer and director control this world and give us an entertaining piece. If it was a documentary I accept, if it was based on a true story I accept but it wasn't. It was a work of fiction. These things happen but the movie was more about the bomb squad if anything.

[Show spoiler]Oh yea and when Doc gets blown up,

doesn't Brian's character feel nothing after what like 10 minutes?

No alludes to any of the people that passed away and what was the point of having famous actors being meaningless? When I saw Guy Pearce and Ralph Fiennes I got all excited.

[sfmarine]

Ya..I was ticked when both Pearce and Fiennes got the same amount of screen time..roughly 3 mins each and then adios.

[Edo]

Originally Posted by metalgeargreed

More like deserves to win.

+1

[Idioteque...]

Originally Posted by sfmarine

Ya..I was ticked when both Pearce and Fiennes got the same amount of screen time..roughly 3 mins each and then adios.

No offense, but I'd take Pearce over Renner any day.

The movie also failed on an emotional level with me.

[jadedeath]

Originally Posted by Idioteque...

No offense, but I'd take Pearce over Renner any day.

The movie also failed on an emotional level with me.

I can agree with that, after I saw Pearce's name on the box and him in the first couple of minutes in the opening scene I figured that he was the main character, not some

[Show spoiler] cannon fodder used to set up the worst actor in existence

Logan

[GreenScar]

I saw this in theater and really got pulled in by it. I was on the edge of my seat throughout and the suspense was great.

I can see why others feel that the movie was lacking, most movies do. It would be easy to go through and pick apart best picture nominees (this year probably more than others).

I thought the character development in the film was more about the characters surrounding Sgt James than James himself. Both Sanborn and Eldridge progressed and changed due to the influence James had on them. I think James was an adrenaline junky that tried to change and struggled throughout with what he was but in the end accepted it.

I thought the whole part

[Show spoiler]about James seeking out Beckham

was more about him and his son than what he was actually doing. He caught himself once he was inside the house in a great WTF am I doing moment.

Interesting side note. A friend of mine is a reserve that has been over there and just signed up to go back. He says the only position that's readily available out there is on the bomb squad. No waiting. He wants to go into the medical field and the waiting list is a couple of years for that.

Anyway - obviously to each their own, but in my opinion it belongs in the list of 10 that were nominated. There were probably other films less deserving of the nomination

[Sussudio]

GS - Nice to hear your thoughts and good to see you posting...it's been a while!! Miss your movie threads...

[Travis]

I saw it on a plane, cropped and edited for content, not the best way to see a film. It seemed very good and I will see it again. One of the best of 2009 for sure. That is not hard, 2009 didn't have many great or good films.

[Sussudio]

Originally Posted by Travis

That is not hard, 2009 didn't have many great or good films.

That's how I feel too

[Ray O. Blu]

Originally Posted by sfmarine

So his whole team got wiped out and the EOD team ended up saving the day. It just didn't add up for me.

Actually, the guy that was walking to get the tire iron was the only other person from Fiennes squad that was killed.

I think this movie might've just been too difficult for some viewers to pay full attention to all the details because it wasn't a mindless action flick like Rambo or Iron Man. Patience is a virtue.
I enjoyed it myself. It deserves to win every award it's nominated for. Heck, Crash and Shakespeare In Love won Best Picture Oscars, and people have the gall to say this film isn't worthy.

[Idioteque...]

Originally Posted by jadedeath

I can agree with that, after I saw Pearce's name on the box and him in the first couple of minutes in the opening scene I figured that he was the main character, not some

[Show spoiler] cannon fodder used to set up the worst actor in existence

Logan

I didn't recognize Pearce at first, thought it was Renner until he was gone. Renner isn't an awful actor by any means, he was good in Jesse James. Though it should be a sin to say his performance was better than DDL's or Sam Rockwell. Sam Rockwell overshined him in Jesse James. Renner wasn't able to keep up with the Rockwell, Pitt, or Affleck.

Originally Posted by GreenScar

I saw this in theater and really got pulled in by it. I was on the edge of my seat throughout and the suspense was great.

I can see why others feel that the movie was lacking, most movies do. It would be easy to go through and pick apart best picture nominees (this year probably more than others).

I thought the character development in the film was more about the characters surrounding Sgt James than James himself. Both Sanborn and Eldridge progressed and changed due to the influence James had on them. I think James was an adrenaline junky that tried to change and struggled throughout with what he was but in the end accepted it.

I thought the whole part

[Show spoiler]about James seeking out Beckham

was more about him and his son than what he was actually doing. He caught himself once he was inside the house in a great WTF am I doing moment.

Interesting side note. A friend of mine is a reserve that has been over there and just signed up to go back. He says the only position that's readily available out there is on the bomb squad. No waiting. He wants to go into the medical field and the waiting list is a couple of years for that.

Anyway - obviously to each their own, but in my opinion it belongs in the list of 10 that were nominated. There were probably other films less deserving of the nomination

That could be an interpretation, no one can be too sure. I just felt the execution was very weak. The other 2 really don't develop either, I think the last 10 minutes where Anthony Mackie shows emotion is where character development is worked on.

Originally Posted by Ray O. Blu

Actually, the guy that was walking to get the tire iron was the only other person from Fiennes squad that was killed.

I think this movie might've just been too difficult for some viewers to pay full attention to all the details because it wasn't a mindless action flick like Rambo or Iron Man. Patience is a virtue.
I enjoyed it myself. It deserves to win every award it's nominated for. Heck, Crash and Shakespeare In Love won Best Picture Oscars, and people have the gall to say this film isn't worthy.

Oh just because we didn't like it makes us like nonsense like Rambo? It's not a difficult watch at all. It's just not worth of its praise. I believe someone mentioned it'll be forgotten in a few years? That is if it doesn't win Best Picture. Up in the Air was a superior film and deserves the win but it'll prob be snubbed for this or Avatar. It's not a special film, there have been many better films with the same message.

[The New Fury]

Well I don't have any GREAT reason of why I loved this film so much, like everyone on here has to have it seems lol, but I felt it was just a great tension filled movie and I thought Jeremy Renner's acting was outstanding. I've seen every movie in this years Best Film category and I definitely believe it should be between this, Inglorious Basterds or Up In The Air! I ABSOLUTELY hated Avatar as a movie and The Blind Side and Precious. So many cliche' filled movies this year jebus!

[Bullseye]

Originally Posted by Elvis

Maybe we should do one for every film that has been nominated for a best picture.


This is a great film btw...not my favorite of the year but in my top 5 for sure and yes much better than Dances with Avatar (might as well say that before the topic comes up).

* Up in the Air is by far the best film of the year. But it will be forgotten very soon as some have said.

Mesrine is best film of the year and yes this is totally over rated. It's still a good movie though.

[Doughoef]

Overrated? Well, I haven't heard anything about it from anyone who's seen it, only a little academy awards chatter on the radio. It's still totally worth seeing and easily among the best I've seen from 2009. The fact that the director is a woman amazes me.