  
The Hurt LockerMPAA Rating:
 for war violence and language.Reviewed by: Greg Nielsen Offensive
Moviemaking Quality:
Primary Audience:
Adults
Genre:
War, Action, Adventure, Thriller, Drama
Length:
2 hr. 11 min.
Year of Release:
2009
USA Release:
June 26, 2009 (limited—4 theaters)
July 10, 2009 (wider) July 24, 2009 (wider—200+ theaters) DVD: January 12, 2010   
Relevant Issues
War in the Bible TERRORIST REVENGE—Love replaces hatred—former Israeli soldier and an ex-PLO fighter prove peace is possible-but only with Jesus IRAQ—What is the significance of Iraq in the Bible? Answer
“War is a drug.” “The Hurt Locker” is a movie about a bomb squad in Iraq on the last 30 days of their tour of duty. The group consists of three people. 2 of the men play bodyguards to James, the new bomb disposal expert. They don't get along, because James takes risks that could get them killed. That's the plot. No, I'm not leaving stuff out. Yes, it may absolutely pin you to the seat beyond riveting. I've seen a lot of movies this year. It’s a list that includes everything from the juvenile shocks of “Watchmen” to the cartoon that was the new “Terminator” movie. I've seen almost every action movie that you can think of, and I can't think of a movie more intense than this one. It's intense without having to resort to constant violence and gore, either. In fact, it is really rather limited in it’s violence. It’s just, when it happens, it’s very realistic and quick. Even if you have a weak stomach, you’ll probably be ok. And, oh my goodness, everyone in this movie is talented. If Jeremy Renner does not get a nomination for best actor at the Oscars, you know they truly don’t care anymore. He plays a character that a ham actor would make unbearable fast. Everybody else in this movie is just as good—from David Morse to Anthony Mackie. So, I’ll stop praising what is the best action movie of the past thirty years for a bit. I’ll talk about what you probably want to know about, which is why you might need to skip this movie. Needless to say, these guys curse. They curse like a James Ellroy novel, which is to say creatively and frequently. It would be very easy to focus on the fact that some of the commanders of these men are seen as either ineffectual or as just plain idiots. I support the army. I don’t think these people are idiots. However, I do know some people in the army, and they’ve told me some stories that’ll make you, and certainly me, worry for them. In the end, I think it’s just another way of adding to the realism. Besides, one of the ineffectual commanders is a nut case right winger, and the other is a politically correct idiot. One of these guys ends up in a bad way, and I won’t spoil which. Although everything I’ve stated here is mostly a political, not moral, question. I guess the only other thing you’d have to worry about would be, of course, violence. It’s a given in a movie like this. As I said, you do not see a lot of it. When it happens though, it’s quick and rough. They do bring up body bombs, too. Whereas terrorists hide bombs in dead bodies. It’s an important scene. Few movies really bring up how nasty the terrorists in Iraq are. Usually, you get stuff like in “Body of Lies.” Terrorists that will only kill other grown men and ineffectually hurt a big name American movie star. “The Hurt Locker” has the upper hand here, not just realistically, but morally. Nobody should be white washing what these people are doing over there to people who don’t follow their idea of religion. All this to say that, ultimately, even though there are some reasons you might not want to see the movie, perhaps you should anyway. Although, I understand still not wanting to see the movie. The Bible tells us to focus on what’s good and right, and there is some most definitely not good or right actions and people in this movie. The movie, however, is about the reality of what’s happening over there, and we can’t really ignore it. Sadly, the American army chose not to help make this movie. Normally, the various branches of the military help out on any movie getting made that involves them. They helped make, of all things, Bill Murray’s “Stripes.” “The Hurt Locker” got no such help. The director, Kathyrn Bigelow, had to finance it all herself. “Transformers 2” got the help of all four branches and real soldiers for extras. They look like morons in that movie who have to rely on a college kid and robots to fight space aliens. So, my tax dollars funded trash, although admittedly fun trash that I enjoyed, but did nothing to help out with the making of something that is a masterpiece. I guess what we can take away from all this is that the private sector really is better than the government at everything. Violence: Heavy / Profanity: Heavy / Sex/Nudity: None See list of Relevant Issues—questions-and-answers.   Comments below:
Positive
Positive - The delivery of this movie is handled ever so adroitly - I love it. Long shots are used in place of the frenetic blurbs they call “action shots” these days. The camera is frequently handheld but never too shaky that it requires its audience to bust out the dramamine. The acting is superb. You can really read the pained expressions on their faces, almost as if they were there and lived the life of an EOD soldier. The violence is handled incredibly tacitly, as it is in “The Dark Knight.” But like Batsy's latest romp, the violence is still felt. It lingers in the air like a brooding afterthought. Intangible, invisible, though still present long after the fact. Even so, for an “R” pic, “The Hurt Locker ” does well to show only what is needed in conveying its gravity. The same can be said for the amount of language. Albeit it's a war drama, the cursing is surprisingly scaled back. Positive - This film's quality is excellent, and this is probably the best movie I've seen this year. I agree with the reviewer in that if Jeremy Renner does not get an Oscar nod this year, it will be an utter shame. While the scenes in Iraq are well done and riveting, I found the last 20 minutes of the film the most compelling. This film accurately portrays the lack of roles some of our soldiers own after combat. The role of “soldier” in that this is the only role that Sgt. James is able to know, and it points out the huge need for support our returning troops need and deserve. Positive - I've had good friends come back from Iraq with stories that I simply didn't believe, and this movie gave me a glimpse of why I might have trouble understanding the war from my comfortable home here on these shores. As a work of fiction, it's intense, believable, and, honestly, oddly uplifting. I can't believe the Armed Forces didn't support this film, and my friends feel the same way. Negative
Negative - After reading main review at top, I decided to go. I go to maybe 4 movies a year now. I only watch morally uplifting or truthful movies. Anyhow, I enjoyed most of this film or the parts that dealt with their experiences with disarming the bombs. However, it slowly and deliberately decided to knock president Bush and the war. The key character that everyone looked up to says in response to being asked why are you doing this and says, “I don't know,” insinutately that the war effort was pointless, with undertones to the feelings of many about the Vietnam War. Made statements on the pointlessness of war. A colonel gets killed helping give therapy to a man on the bomb team. Interestingly, this movie comes off seeming like it is a real documentary-type movie, but it is all acted, and the script is not based on any truth. |
E-mail this page to a friend