‘Hurt Locker’ May Do Iraq Right
by Tom TappFor those who’ve agonized over Hollywood’s portrayals of the Iraq War, I give you “The Hurt Locker.”
The film’s second trailer hit the Internet today and, as I sit here wearing my (apparently passe) Camp Liberty t-shirt, I must say it looks pretty good.
–
YouTube "Hurt Locker" trailer 2
Billed as the “first non-political Iraq War film,” “Hurt Locker” follows the story of Staff Sergeant William James, a maverick bomb removal expert who leads a team trying to save lives – including their own.
It was directed by Kathryn Bigalow, who is herself something of a maverick.
Bigalow has made her name in Hollywood as one of the only female directors of action films. Her credits include “K19: The Widowmaker,” “Point Break” and “Strange Days.”
That experience is evident in the trailer. Jeremy Renner’s Sergeant James is just the type of iconoclast Bigalow identifies with. Plus, the explosions look great.
The film received strong reviews on the Fall film fest circuit, especially for Renner’s “career-making” turn as James.
It will be released on June 26 so the rest of us can judge for ourselves.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
29 Comments
Kathryn Bigalow is a talent who just doesn't work enough. Her vampire classic 'Near Dark' is, in our humble opinion the best of an overworked genre… we look forward to seeing this and more from this underappreciated
director…
Hurt Locker was an interesting and sometimes disjointed look at the Iraqi war in my opinion. I felt there were a couple of times that some of the realism dropped away. When the EOD team is out in the desert blowing up ordinance and they come across a special forces team. The EOD guys taking up the defense of the group, after the second SF operator got killed seemed a little out of place.
Staff Sergeant William James was an odd duck. I couldn't decide if he had a death wish or was an incredible adrenaline rush seeker. His desire to kill the enemy seemed out of step with his being apart of the EOD.
I felt the best part of the film was it's portrayal of humanity on the part of the soldiers.
I saw this film earlier this year and thought it was pretty well done. Sergeant James comes off as a bit reckless but this may be the only way for him to perform his work, and keep his sanity. Guy Pearce gives the film a boost as well. It certainly didn't seem political but we'll let the troops determine that
The movie is very well done. Guy Pearce is amazing, and in my opinion the movie is not political at all. Definitely check it out.
U2Dave: why do EOD techs engaging the enemy seem a little out of place to you? All soldiers are warriors. What are they supposed to do, run away because they're not infantrymen?
And lots of techs have the lust like James does. Not all might operate as unsafely as the Hollywood-ized script portrays, but it's not uncommon, and in theater in 04, running incidents like that was downright commonplace.
I've seen the trailers and I'm impressed. So far, no political agenda, just brothers-in-combat going through their lives, sorrows, joys and daily routines. It won't be long before the left will be screaming bloody murder because the guys and gals haven't murdered anyone in cold blood (and celebrated it), nobody is tweaking or loaded, the language is rough, but not obscene, and nobody has made a racist crack. Ergo, it must be a right-wing hit piece. You can't win with them, so why try? The best thing about the film so far is that it humanizes the troops, and makes them seem less like total strangers fighting in a faraway land.
How come Guy Pearce plays an American better than most Americans?
L.A. Confidential, what great film.
Wow. Kinda left me breathless. Yeah, I had to remember to breathe. And that was the trailer. I'll be there this summer.
Wow. Kinda left me breathless. Yeah, I had to remember to breathe. And that was the trailer. I'll be there this summer.
"…the guys and gals haven't murdered anyone in cold blood (and celebrated it), nobody is tweaking or loaded, the language is rough, but not obscene, and nobody has made a racist crack."
Man, you stole all of my thunder.
The trailer even showed a soldier carrying an Iraqi woman rather than trying to rape her. With apologies to Barack, this is not the Hollywood I know.
And I'm guessing it's not the Hollywood that will be voting for Barack either.
OK, I saw this movie while I was stationed in Iraq and all I can say is it totally sucks. It's maddeningly inaccurate, aggressively biased, and just plain old bad as well. I watched it with about five other airmen (we're in the Air Force), and we were all completely aghast at how bad this movie was.
I could probably write 500-1000 words about what an agenda ridden piece of garbage this movie is, but it won't fit in a comment. The soldiers in it are all head cases who are out of control, and the story makes no sense at all. This was either made by someone who hates the military or simply was too lazy to actually research anything.
On my list for worst movie of 2009. It blows my mind that people are saying good things about it. I understand Jeff Wells liking it, but I can't get anybody who actually likes soldiers or understands the military at all being able to stomach this lazy hit piece.
I watched it and was not really sure if I liked it or not, though I appreciated the fact that it wasn't a hit piece.
I agree 100% about the scene with the SF team really seemed out of place, it seemed to me that they wanted to show that the EOD team could mix it up in combat. And yes the Staff Sergeant did seem a bit over the top to me.
But at least it didn't at any point bore me to tears or enrage me with it's politics like virtually every other movie I've seen about this war.
Ditto on that. And add Memento to the list.
Yeah, Memento was trippy….
Judging from the trailer this movie is something i would see. The problem, however, is that they should have focused on the real EOD specialist. I am talking about Navy EOD, which far supieror too there army, af or marine counterparts. A movie about Navy jammers would be bad either.
Because most Americans are practicing at playing Europeans.
Got it. It's all getting a bit convoluted, isn't it?
He and Crowe both played Americans better than Spacey. But then I'm beginning to think that Spacey really is from Mars.
Right….
Navy Jammers? Right….
If it received rave reviews, then, call me cynical, but I bet the trailers are hiding a bunch of anti-war and/or anti-Bush crap. "non-political"? Didnt they say "W" and "the Reagans" were pretty much right down the middle.
Hollywood has proven over and over again that it cannot come within a mile of even a vaguely political subject without being political.
I'll let someone else be the Charlie Brown to their Lucy holding the football. My bet is that its as political as hell.
Navy Jammers? EW guys (electronic warfare) who would predceed convoy and JAM any sign thus preventing IED to be set off wirelessly. The Army gave up on the warfare area in the Clinton era, thus NAVY EA-6B NFO and EWs were brought in a IAs to help out.
Neato–plenty of EOD techs say it's an okay movie. You have to understand that back in 04 and earlier techs really ran like that. Not all, but enough that they're still around and have a reputation.
And if realism ruins a military movie for you, then you shouldn't be watching ANY of them. I long ago accepted that I have to fight back my annoyance at uniform errors, tactical fallacies, and technical inaccuracies.
….and hey, isn't that just like the Air Force: sit around watching movies in your air-conditioned MWR tent while soldiers and Marines go outside the wire.
lol, that really may be true after all! Guy Pearce, Russel Crowe, Christian Bale and a few others all have absolutely uncanny abilities to play Americans; they are some of the best actors of their generations for it.
hello you all have time off. dont point fingers at someone just because they are in a different branch, and just because they chose to share their opinion also. share your opinoin, but don't go judging falsely on your military brother, man! that's my say on your comment.
um, you may want to remind your self of the fact that, yes, you have only seen the trailers, so that "so far" info doesnt in fact go "so far" at all… of course i hoped for the best, too, but if we really want to think it is that positive, we should do more homework first. you went pretty far with your assumptions for which a trailer simply is not enough. especially a trailer designed to dupe you just as it may have….
I am not sure what you are talking about, I am an Air Force EOD tech and we were attached to SF all the time. I do agree that we would never roam the open range without support, but we were in combat everyday our foot touched that sand. I did my fair share of sending lead down range, maybe not everybody gets that experience but there are techs out there that have on plenty of occasions
I highly suggest that you do your research before blabbing your mouth. Did you know that Air Force EOD runs 70 percent of all EOD related mission in Iraq. 70 percent!!! In the Air Force I ran circles around our Navy counter parts when it came to efficiency along with expediency. Anyone who would honestly say that one branch out performs another is someone that doesn't realize the importance of all branches in the armed services. As an Air Force EOD tech I am jump certified, Air Assault certified and I am also dive certified through the army. But the last time I checked the war in Iraq was not focused around Limpid mines. Do your homework before you make an erroneous comment like that.
You must be logged in to post a comment.