Winner of the 2010 Oscars for Best Picture, Best Director (for Kathryn Bigelow, the first woman to ever win that award), and Best Original Screenplay, nominated for Best Actor (for Jeremy Renner).
I don't like to give away spoilers, but this one happens in the opening scene of the film. If you haven't seen it yet, and you want a surprise, then skip ahead to the next paragraph. So, the movie starts, and there's Guy Pierce (from Memento and LA Confidential), suiting up and getting ready to disarm an Improvised Explosive Device (IED). He's the team leader, and he's the only actor there that I recognize, so I feel pretty safe in thinking that the movie will be about him. A few agonizingly, teeth-gnashingly intense minutes later, he disappears into a cloud of debris, and I am left feeling that this film could have anything happen to any character at any time.
Most films of this genre begin with a scene of that level of intensity, and then are satisfied to back off until the finale, feeling that as long as the beginning and the end are memorable, the rest of the film just has to not be awful. The Hurt Locker, however, maintains that level of intensity in every single scene. Even scenes that in other films would be there for the sake of comic relief or easing the tension - the team members getting to know each other during down time, or the new team leader befriending a local boy who sells him bootleg DVDs - are riddled with tension, a sense that something bad not only could, but must happen at any second. This film does for action movies what the original Night of the Living Dead did for horror movies - it leaves the viewer with the feeling that the safety net has been removed, that the expectation that there must be a moment for the audience to catch their breath is no longer valid.
Having never been to war, I have no experience upon which to draw, but this film feels very authentic to me. It seems to me that this is an accurate portrayal of what it would be like to be in a war zone. The screenplay was written by a journalist who had been embedded with some soldiers, and that experience really shows in the final film. The sense of constant unease, the ever-present knowledge that any of the characters could be killed at any time, just feels more accurate to me than, say, Inglourious Basterds (which, I know, was not exactly going for accuracy), in which you know from the start that Brad Pitt just has to survive until the end because he's the star of the movie.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I liked this film up until the end. The ending ruined this entire movie for me. Do you think it deserved to win the Oscar? Especially over Avatar and Inglorious Basterds?
ReplyDeletewww.diaryofamoviefan.blogspot.com
I'll be honest with you, I didn't really care for Avatar. Maybe it made all the difference that I didn't see it in 3D Imax, but the story didn't really grab me. Inglourious Basterds was very enjoyable, but not really my favorite Tarantino flick. It was basically a mash-up of WWII and Spaghetti Western. Great, very entertaining, but not really Best Picture. If anything, my Oscar second-guessing would give the award to Precious.
ReplyDeleteI definitely see your point about the ending, though. I didn't let it ruin the movie for me, but it could definitely have been better.
ReplyDeleteOkay, Avatar seriously had to be seen in IMAX3D! Everything about that film was the visuals. I mean, sure the story is somewhat basic but the intensity, and the heart in that film, along with the characters omg I love it lol. There are very few films that I put in my top 5 and Avatar is seriously like number 2 right now. Inglorious Basterds I thought was clever, of course not my fav. Tarrantino flick either but I wanted him to win something, it was so good, and I really loved the French girl, her and Christophe Waltz made that film. I have been dying to see Precious but no one wanted to see it with me because it looked "depressing." I bet if I had seen it I would vote that over the Hurt Locker as well. The Blind Side was good, but not oscar worthy. But then again I didnt think The Hurt Locker was either.
ReplyDeleteTo me, though, that's why Avatar isn't a Best Picture. I recently saw my first Imax 3D movie (How to Train Your Dragon), and I have to admit, it was my best movie theater experience in recent memory. I'm sure that Avatar was much more absorbing in that format. But I just feel that, if the movie doesn't hold up without the Imax tricks, then it shouldn't win. I wouldn't have minded seeing Inglourious win, but in my heart I would have felt a bit like it was a make-up Oscar. Precious is definitely a depressing movie. Very well done, and it had something important to say, but I definitely cannot see myself watching it again. My fiancee almost made me turn it off several times, not because it was bad, but just because it was too much, too bleak.
ReplyDeleteHow To Train Your Dragon was awesome! I loved that movie! Sure, Avatar is visually beautiful especially with the imax and 3D added, but I've seen it without and its still pretty good to look at and yeah the story isn't very original but I think every other aspect of that film is. James Cameron created an entire world, language, species and developed a story for these creatures, and this whole world in a matter of a few years and I think it got over looked. I still want to see Precious and I'm sure it was really good, and The Hurt Locker makes me feel like the only reason it won was because Kathryn Bigelow was a female director and the Academy wanted to make history and the fact that it was a War movie set in present day in Iraq. But, again thats just my opinion. I think I'm the only person that didn't enjoy The Hurt Locker lol.
ReplyDelete