There have been a couple of constants where Iraq War cinematography is concerned. One, movie makers ignore the public appetite for movies supporting the anti-terror war message in favor of drab, depressing, preachy anti-war politicking featuring marquee names and little else.
Two, those movies, which predictably bomb at the box office, are the rage of the film critics who levitate in ecstasy at the opportunity to praise that which trashes Bush, the war on terror and the military all at once.
So how to explain “The Hurt Locker” and the critical rapture that surrounds it? Here’s a new offering that has none of the political messaging of Hollywood, doesn’t contain a single marquee name, and the critics are cheering.
New York Times tastemaker A.O. Scott bluntly proclaimed it "The best nondocumentary American feature made yet about the war in Iraq." Joe Morgenstern of the Wall Street Journal also raved: "A first-rate action thriller, a vivid evocation of urban warfare in Iraq, a penetrating study of heroism and a showcase for austere technique, terse writing and a trio of brilliant performances."
The plot is disarmingly simple, if I can use that pun. The film follows a team of U.S. Army technicians in Baghdad disarming IEDs (improvised explosive devices). The audience shares the unnerving tension, even paranoia of the soldiers, feeling the prospect of death lurking around every corner, hidden behind every wall, and in the slightest of movements of every Iraqi stranger.
Morgenstern is not kidding about "austere technique." This has to be the quietest war movie ever made, and it’s a quiet movie about… bombs? Outside of a few breaks of inside-the-movie music (rock music from boom-boxes or video games), there is no mood-establishing music until the 1:02 mark – a sensual eternity.
Director Kathryn Bigelow never provides the viewer with the audio cues warning of impending crisis, leaving the viewer conditioned to expect disaster constantly. There is no Dolby-Stereo wizardry or enormous special-effects monsters in "The Hurt Locker." This film operates on a maddeningly vulnerable, heart-pounding human scale.
This is not a pro-war movie; it is a movie about war, period. It is certainly the first Iraq War movie that drains all of the political rhetoric out, offering instead just the microcosm of American troops in a theatre where terrorists really are blowing people up with a quick dial on their cell phones.
Some leftist critics have found that lack of politicking to be political. Tara McKelvey of the American Prospect complained that the movie was "propaganda," an "effective recruiting tool" for the Army. Yet McKelvey can't even seem to convince herself.In another passage, she stated the movie "shows the paranoia, rage, and brutal recklessness of soldiers trapped in the downward death spiral of the Iraq war."
The soldiers here are not bigoted monsters. In New York magazine, critic David Edelstein suggested "The Hurt Locker might be the first Iraq-set film to break through to a mass audience because it doesn't lead with the paralysis of the guilt-ridden Yank."
The central character of the movie, Staff Sgt. Will James, is not guilt-ridden, but he's also not your standard G.I. Joe action hero. The soldiers under his command are so unnerved at his reckless bomb-disabling antics that they briefly consider taking him out with friendly fire to keep him from getting them killed.
Ice seems to flow through Will's veins as he takes apart bombs that could blow up a city block. And yet when he returns home to his wife and infant son, he's clearly unnerved by the tedium of rolling through a supermarket deciding which cereal to buy, as the syrupy sounds of Muzak suggest a stark contrast with the exploding ordinance of a war zone. While his squad dreams of going home in one piece, he's clearly much happier hovering over a bomb fuse. There is no dramatic "Top Gun" hero ending, where he's applauded by a cast of hundreds. In the end he’s as conflicted as when he was first introduced.
Some Iraq veterans have complained the movie isn't militarily realistic about what Army bomb squads actually do, but that reminds us of the D-Day vets who said the opening act of “Saving Private Ryan” wasn’t realistic enough. The viewer certainly feels he is trudging along with the troops on very perilous ground.
It’s a good movie to see, if only to remember the next time you come across a veteran deserving a nation’s gratitude.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Cripes man, add a link!
August 8, 2009 - 07:22 ET by IckCripes man, add a link to the movie's official site or something. Don' make me search for it!
Where are the other links to articles referenced?
Sheesh. The Hurt
August 8, 2009 - 07:25 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsSheesh.
The Hurt Locker
D
Write Congress and Senate and tell them what YOU think!
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
Sounds like a movie worth
August 8, 2009 - 08:25 ET by jdhawkSounds like a movie worth seeing. My oldest son is an Army surgeon at Walter Reed. He sees what IEDs and the other implements of destruction do to the human body. If it weren't for soldiers and marines, like this movie depicts, there would be a lot more of our guys coming home in pieces.
By the way, everyone, if you see one of our servicemenbers along the way this summer, perhaps, in your travels, walk up to them and thank them for their service. It may sound akward to do so, but, believe me, it will mean so much to them.
Last year I was having
August 9, 2009 - 08:03 ET by Seabeach4348Last year I was having breakfast with some friends in a local restaurant, and there were three servicemen (Army I think) eating at a table nearby.
We asked the manager to give us their check so that we could pay for their breakfast, and we did.
When the servicemen were ready to leave, the manager said that we had paid, and they came over and thanked us
We said, "No, thank YOU for your service! Buying breakfast for you is the least we can do for you."
Gee, the first war movie in
August 8, 2009 - 10:00 ET by JerryGee, the first war movie in 9 years that doesn't trash America and the military. Who'd a thunk it? No need to be political now that it's Obama's war. Operation "Demonize Bush" is over. Mission Accomplished. America no longer has to be portrayed as evil.
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
I hate to be the antagonist
August 8, 2009 - 11:49 ET by congruentI hate to be the antagonist here, but did anyone watch the ending of the movie? The movie plays a trick on unsuspecting viewers. The plot twists and turns and you begin to think the main character might be, in some sense, courageous(gasp!). At the end of the movie all fears of this being an actually balanced Iraq war film are laid to rest and the entire film is reinterpreted. The movie isn't about comraderie, or courage, or doing what is right despite fears of imminent death. It's about the psychology of war as interpreted through the filmmaker. There's not a single courageous act in the whole film. The main character turns out to be a complete war addict and all of his actions are selfish in that they are done just to feed his "high." The other characters are either completely crazy, completely scared, or completely disillusioned. I think Brent missed the main thrust of the film. I went into the film thinking I was going to get something that was balanced; I left feeling disgusted.
I agree with you. Brent is
August 8, 2009 - 23:45 ET by zfI agree with you. Brent is way off base. How about a real pro-America movie that not only shows the heroism of our soldiers, but shows the absolute dedication most of them feel to the mission/cause in Iraq (which we won, by the way, though Obama is doing his best to unravel that) and the war against terror in general. Fighting evil, by the way, and the conservative principles of freedom and defense that lead to the war is not "political rhetoric" and removing it from the movie only creates a celebration of moral vacuum.
We did need any "neutral" war movies, we need unabashedly pro-Iraq war movies. That's the only way we can get some balance to the mainstream (or at least the pop culture mainstream) and counter the distorted view of Iraq that such mediums as the movies have created and will foster down the line. (Think Vietnam.)
I was also shocked by this statement, "he's clearly unnerved by the tedium of rolling through a supermarket
deciding which cereal to buy, as the syrupy sounds of Muzak suggest a
stark contrast with the exploding ordinance..." What, why is Brent using liberal terminology like that? That's what liberals think, "having a family and doing things like grocery shopping is dullsville man real sticky-sweet syurpy mushy sentimental stuff, better to live a life of sex, drugs and acting spontaneously (aka like a rude a*hole) man!" Shocking that Mr. Family Values is making a typical far left point. They can't stand a quiet, modest way of living.
Bozell also seems to agree Iraq was nothing more than brutality and paranoia around every corner and parrots uncritically a lefties overblown rhetoric that Iraq was a 'death spiral."
Quiet War Movie? Sounds more like to me artsy fartsy, anti-bravery boring crap to me. And apparently, it fooled one conservative.
How is that statement in any
August 9, 2009 - 19:39 ET by balboaHow is that statement in any way characterized as a liberal one? You think shopping for groceries is exciting?
Re; War Addict
August 9, 2009 - 06:08 ET by packmanCongruent:
I don't know if you write from an experienced perspective or not, but having personally served in a war zone, the main character is precisely the guy I would want riding point. War makes people crazy - or crazier. And don't fool yourself, there is no one in combat that isn't afraid or completely scared. But it precisely those kinds of skills, lack of fear, call it whatever you want in some of us, that ultimately save American lives. Semper Fi.
Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread... ~Thomas Jefferson