The Hurt Locker (Kathryn Bigelow, 2009)
December 22nd, 2009 | 4 Comments »
Pops, a military man, was all about war flicks. So, nearly every war movie I’ve seen since has played like recurring sequels to Platoon or Rambo (except for a few, like Three Kings or The Thin Red Line). Violence, confusion, desolation, retaliation, psychological breakdowns: same ol’ shit. The difference back then was we were watching movies about wars that had already ended. With The Hurt Locker (2009), there’s something disconcerting about watching an Iraq war movie while I wait for people I know to return from their tours of duty.
The opening sequence climaxes in single explosion depicted several times over in slow-mo over from different angles. Another episode in the life of an anti-explosives unit, led by some guy who really loves his job, stuck with the unthankful task of detonating IEDs with dudes who don’t love their jobs. All amongst the restless natives. Most of whom are either combative or cowardly, like alot of people whose country is being invaded and occupied. By war flick standards, this is a well-excectued one. The action sequences are on point and the adrenaline is palpable. So is the testosterone. Cat-and-mouse meets Russian Roulette, over and over again. Many tense wire-cutting scenes, snipering, shaky camera movements and utterances of “Roger” later, we’re back to we’re we started. In a meaningless war.
But wars, as much as we’d like to think otherwise, are not meaningless. Except perhaps to those who object to it but can’t articulate why, or those who have tired of objecting. The Hurt Locker “succeeds” because, in an era of fashionable moral ambiguity, it lacks a viewpoint. Like Barack Obama, it doesn’t overly patriotize or criticize, though very subtle traces of both exist throughout. Enough to appeal to both objectors and supporters of the war and possibly equally offend both sides as well. It’s a delicate balance, and as a selling point, this lack of viewpoint is a strength. As a statement on war itself, especially one that’s still going on, it fails. Which doesn’t erase the fact that The Hurt Locker is well-made. It’s just ironic that a movie about courage and risks would have neither.


hhmm. Wasn’t going to see this but now that I read this review I am interested.
What did you think of Jarhead when it came out like 3 years ago? Did you already review that?
Also…what about “Men who stare at goats”?
Oh and nagging you last time about “Son of Rambow”. ‘kay. m’done.
December 22nd, 2009 at 1:11 pmMan, I need to see before it wins big this awards season.
January 5th, 2010 at 2:21 amNathalie: I wasn’t too thrilled with Jarhead, and didn’t review it. I plan on watching it again, maybe once all the troops are back home! Haven’t seen Men Who Stare At Goats either, you? And yes, I will get around to Son of Rambow sometime in 2010
January 5th, 2010 at 2:17 pmI loved this flick.. Watched it again this morning. 1st time since the theater. Really tense and definitely makes you think about the situations our troops are dealing with over their
January 23rd, 2010 at 3:12 pm