Plot Intro
Iraq, 2004. During the Iraq War, a team of bomb disposal experts gain a new member - Sergeant William James (Jeremy Renner). We then follow them in a series of dangerous missions during the final days of their rotation in Iraq.
Doug says...
Our first Best Picture directed by a woman - and more shockingly, still the only one - The Hurt Locker is a War Film. Following a team of bomb disposal experts in Iraq, we see explosions, tense battle scenes, and lots of the usual ‘men being men’. Nothing feels particularly new in terms of what’s being discussed and although the film touches on the long-term mental damage that can be done to these people, it ultimately shies away from it.
Criticism has been made of this film that despite showing the gore and damage of war, it somehow ultimately glamorises it. I’d actually agree with this, and reading a bit about Kathryn Bigelow and her obsession with violence backs it up. It’s an action film first, and the main character - Sergeant James - is drawn to it in what is clearly an unhealthy relationship but which is never fully explored.
Unsatisfying and ultimately irresponsible as a war film, The Hurt Locker does impress as an action movie. The tense scenes where soldiers and insurgents shoot at each other are strong, and the more unusual angle of the bomb disposal team means there’s variety to the scenes rather than endless marksmen eyeing each other down.
Bigelow toys with the audience impressively too. One scene involves the soldiers noticing random people filming them and gathering on balconies to watch them. The tension builds and builds until - nothing. While I think it’s a clever technique to keep audience members on their toes, I still think these scenes were a bit of a waste. As a viewer, I wanted there to be some reason why there’s strangers malevolently filming them.
There’s also hints of something more exciting which never quite materialises. The film is shot in juddering, choppy angles with handheld cameras, lending it an air of a documentary. But then in surprising moments, Bigelow becomes more poetic. After the first bomb blast of the film, she cuts away from the documentary style, and shows slow-motion imagery of the gravel flying and the unlucky disposal expert tumbling through the air; disassembling different events from the bomb blast and showing them elegantly and excitingly. It only happens once or twice through the film, and left me wishing she’d embraced that side of her film-making much more.
Acting-wise, everyone does a decent job (Ralph Fiennes has the most bizarre miniature cameo) but I still left the film feeling unsure of why Bigelow has made a film that on one hand seems to be trying to explore the reactions of men in high-stress situations, and on the other somehow glamorise war. One review said that Bigelow appeared to be making an advert for the army, and I don’t disagree. A confusing, if at times gripping, mess.
Highlight
The moment in the first scene with the bomb blast is beautiful to watch, and stunningly disassembled. If Bigelow had followed this style more, I think it’d be a far greater piece of work.
Lowlight
The film starts to lag in the second half, and with the very little effort put into separating the characters, I started to be confused about what was happening to who. Distancing.
Mark
5/10
Paul says...
The Hurt Locker is a film with a few interesting statistics. As Doug says, it’s the first and, so far, only Best Picture to have been directed by a woman (Kathryn Bigelow) and the first and, so far, only time that a woman has won Best Director. At the time, she was only the fourth woman to have even been nominated for the directing award and, since then, only one other woman has been nominated (Greta Gerwig for Ladybird in 2017). The 82nd Academy Awards also marks the first time since 1943 that the number of Best Picture nominees was increased from 5 to a maximum of 10, so The Hurt Locker managed to defeat other strong 2009 hits such as Avatar, The Blind Side, District 9, An Education, Inglourious Basterds, Precious and Pixar’s Up. It nabbed six Academy Awards, and interestingly, it is the lowest grossing Best Picture winner when adjusting for inflation.
It’s also our first war film since The English Patient in 1996 (I’m discounting The Lord of the Rings’ fictional war from this), and in my opinion, it’s one of the strongest depictions of war in the Best Picture canon.
James Cameron (who used to be married to Bigelow and apparently persuaded her to direct the film) suggested that it could be the Iraq War’s Platoon, and indeed there are strong similarities between the two films. Both depict a cohort of men being torn apart physically and psychologically due to the horrors they encounter in the most well-known war at the time of the film’s release. Neither films follow a particularly clear-cut story. The Hurt Locker works almost like a series of extremely tense vignettes, loosely connected by the same team of soldiers and a focus on bomb disposal.
But I would say that The Hurt Locker is a whole lot more emotionally involving than the relentlessly testosterone-fuelled Platoon. Bigelow stages each bomb disposal scene with incredible suspense. I found myself fearing for my own life as Jeremy Renner fiddles around with wires in a bomb, or finds himself being shot at by sniper insurgents that we can barely see. The film begins with the phrase “war is a drug” and Bigelow and her screenwriter, Mark Boal, perfectly capture how horrific, destructive, yet glamorously thrilling war can be- much like an addictive drug. When Will returns home, you can feel his exasperation at the mundanity of choosing a cereal in a supermarket after a year of saving lives. They also emphasise the randomness of the destruction- some action scenes lead to death, some don’t; some quiet scenes lead to death, some don’t. And, frighteningly, there’s no predicting it.
I was also interested by the depiction of the Iraqi people. Like most American war films, you can’t expect much depth from the non-American characters. Nonetheless the Iraqis watch the goings-on around them with an eery, accusatory stillness. Many of the scenes in which the soldiers desperately try to defuse a bomb are peppered with shots of locals just watching from a distance, most of them obscured by windows, fences or clothing. One even tries to introduce himself to a panicked soldier who shouts at him to go away. The impression I get is that the Iraqi people are just trying to get along with their lives, while the gung-ho, emotional American soldiers are scrabbling in the sand and dust, causing more destruction than they are trying to prevent. Despite claims that Bigelow has overly-glamorised war, I don’t feel particularly motivated to join or support the United States army.
My only really quibble is the same as my one for Platoon - the lack of story. There are some small corners and changes but ultimately this is a compilation of short thrillers, which are superbly made but after a while I was hoping for some kind of structure or movement towards a climax. Admittedly, this isn’t the reality of war, and this is what Bigelow is aiming for, but there were periods where the film was becoming tedious in its lack of structure.
Highlight
Jeremy Renner’s first bomb defuse scene, in which he manages to defuse one bomb, only to discover a wire leading to about 5 others hidden in the rubble, is enough to make you sweat.
Lowlight
There’s a lengthy scene in which our heroes are shown passing the time by punching each other in the stomach. It shows how screwed up they are because they can only gain a thrill out of aggression and physical pain, but it goes on a quite some time.
Mark
8/10
No comments:
Post a Comment