Wednesday, April 21, 2010

The Case for an Another Iraq War Movie


The Hurt Locker is another entry in the "movies about Americans in Iraq" category, and this one is an actual Oscar winner.

So first things first - is it better than Avatar? Well, yes. And it is good.

I have to admit, it does take a wee while to get used to. It is filmed almost entirely in patented and nausea-inducing shakey-vision. Only by focussing on the early appearance of the rare and wonderful Guy Pearce was I able to hold on to my slim understanding of the constructred reality and make it through to the second act.

The main action follows three soldiers in a bomb disposal squad, struggling not only with the disarming of various explosive devices but dealing with the hostility of the local populace who are either hell bent on them getting blown to bits or who seem completely unaware of what to do in a state run by the American military (ironic, I suppose, as I supposed the state under Saddam was fairly restricted as well). All of these actors are incredible, filling the roles of nervous newbie (Brian Geraghty as Eldridge), solid professional (Anthony Mackie as Sanborn) and talented yet unconventional hero (Jeremy Renner as James) admirably.

But to be honest, as good as they are, several of the scenes with them emoting and bonding are really a bit awkward to watch. But this is no fault of the actors, just of some fairly unconvincing lines of script, and the fact that the action scenes are just so damned good.

Well, they were to me. The slow, intense unfolding of the bomb diffusing scenes and of the stand offs with local paramilitary/insurgents were completely mesmerising. These scenes do stretch out for a while, but I really only felt the length of the 2 hour film during the talky scenes, as the near silence of the soldiers at work seemed a lot more realistic than some of the dialogue.

Of course, the film does have one major failing in logic: how any man would prefer to be in Iraq rather than with Evangeline Lilly just blows my mind (pardon the pun). But the rest of the film is slow, intense, and feels very realistic and disturbing. Until the characters open the mouths at least.

Verdict: The Hurt Locker is an amazingly atmospheric film that grips with its intensity, though when that intensity disintensifies, it can start to drag a bit. 8.5 triggers out of 10.

4 comments:

Off-Black said...

'Defusing' not 'Diffusing' :)
The wobblyvision was so nauseating I could only view the first half (listening to the second), therefore limiting it to a maximum 5/10. It is good, but not as good as it is made out to be. I thought it did some things very well, but others (admittedly mostly from a technical and accuracy viewpoint) quite poorly. Some parts are wildly implausible and illogical and get more so upon consideration. Reading around today, it is apparent the opinion of the film by those who have actually served in Iraq in the roles portrayed therein is generally very low.

missrabbitty said...

'better than avatar' is not a reason for me to see it...however...is it better than boy?..cos if that's the case i'm seeing it tomorrow...assignment or no assignment!

R said...

Oh dear, I have been having a bad proof reading run, obviously...

"Boy" and "Hurt Locker" are very differnt films, but "Boy" is definitely a lot easier to enjoy. And it is making "Poi E" popular again, so it has evidently hit a Kiwi nostalgic nerve or two. Let me know what you think, Missrabbitty!

R

missrabbitty said...

i loved boy...