Saw this tonight. It was actually really really good. Then ending left me in a real damn... state of mind, but it was pretty intense at times.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
The Hurt Locker
- Thread starter Hamrhed
- Start date
it was ok as long as you're not one of those people that are into accuracy, i know alot of guys that hate war movies when stuff is a little off
Yeah? Haha, damn I'm clueless then. I thought it was really good. Obviously, I didn't by the cowboy who plays by his own rules, but I thought that was more a minor annoyance rather than a full blown plot hole. I don't want to go and ruin it for everyone though, so I guess there is no way to discuss this yet haha.
This article accurately summarizes the main objections that I've heard about the movie while mostly ignoring "minutae objections" (things like "that guy's wearing the wrong patch" etc..):
http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/01/essay-15/
it seems like some of the strongest objections are the ones about him constantly putting the lives of himself and his men at risk. I read an article a couple of weeks ago where one soldier said, "I wanted the main character to die so that his men could get a leader that cares about their lives."
bc
http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/01/essay-15/
it seems like some of the strongest objections are the ones about him constantly putting the lives of himself and his men at risk. I read an article a couple of weeks ago where one soldier said, "I wanted the main character to die so that his men could get a leader that cares about their lives."
bc
I'm currently in the military and I have to say that The Hurt Locker is the WORST war movie, or any other genre of movie, I have EVER SEEN!!!!!! Try watching it with a few active duty army grunts, marines, SF, anyone and you will quickly realize that The Hurt Locker is so full of it. That movie is the biggest joke over here!!! HORRIBLE!!!
The movie is SO inaccurate that it's hard to just ignore it, and enjoy the movie. They were more focused on portraying the mentality of a soldier in war, than to portray an accurate depiction of what E.O.D team does in Iraq. I was both surprised, and disappointed to know that it got the best picture, and best director award. :scowl:
Thanks for that... you must have never seen Ishtar
Btw, thanks to you and your comrades for your service!Its a movie- not a documentary, so I personally don't really worry much about anything other than entertainment value. I enjoyed several of the performances in this film, but then again as others have noted, I enjoyed Point break
Didn't Penny Marshall direct Point Break? Are you talking about the flick about the surfers from North LA county that rob banks?
Sorry, as interesting as this movie sounds, that movie was a pile of garbage.
but then again as others have noted, I enjoyed Point break
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
*shoots gun into air until out of ammo*
Dude, the point of the film is that war is addictive. It's an anti-war film that uses a bomb disposal unit as its vehicle to display what adrenalin junkies are all about. It's not intended to be a real war movie.....
I personally loved the movie. Although a ton of people have been saying how inaccurate it is, what movie that comes out is accurate at all? Besides documentary's I suppose. Anyway, it's a good watch and I highly recommend it to anyone who hasn't seen it. I'd take it over Avatar, any day.
Believe me, I understood the "point" of the movie! A movie that depicts War, anti-war or not, is still a war movie. It's easy to make an anti-war movie, portray the idea that war is addicting to some and still be accurate! With the amount of veterans in and out of the military, a simple adviser with a good resume would have taken this film further with more respect. Especially now with the technology and experience film makers have in making films such as these.
Fact is, it infuriated many of my comrades, in EOD and in the actual elite units, because of its inaccuracies! "Platoon" for instance is a great, much more accurate anti-war movie. Adrenalin junkies don't roam around without rules, doing anything they want in war zones not reporting to anyone. The rules any unit has to "go out" are very strict and tracked with excruciating detail.
My opinion still stands that it is a horribly inaccurate and tasteless movie! Just know that the movie isn't respected by most of the soldiers and Marines that are actually fighting over here!
I doubt the movie would have been as good if it were completely accurate. Who wants to sit through a procedural of something like that? It's clearly a work of fiction and should be treated as such. Seriously, how many other war movies are "accurate"?
What about Apocalypse Now? Does that lose points for its inaccuracies?
When was Apocalypse Now made? 1979? I think the film industry has come some way in accurately depicting war. Especially a war that is a current event.
Like I stated before. The Hurt Locker wasn't well received by many in the military. At least everyone I have talked to or overheard.
Latest posts
-
-
-
How can Fender release a "Vintage" series with an unplayable bridge?- Latest: Fernando Costa
-
