The Hurt Locker

JP Liz

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0887912/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yct-sm_vw04

Sorry only trailer i could find

Kathryn Bigelow is directing

Jeremy Renner a terribly underrated actor is getting great reviews

Its doing the rounds at the film festivals

Charlize Theron, Colin Farrell, Ralph Fiennes and Willem Dafoe were all attached at some stage to this movie

JP Liz

I think this movie is getting released here and in UK this week or next

ChumpStain

I saw it recently enough,and it's pretty good too. Probably my favourite action film of the year so far. Jeremy Renner is great in it as is Anthony Mackie. Some excellent action set pieces and the tension is really cranked up to 11 in some scenes. Although I do think the film kinda has a system to it, character development/set piece/character development/set piece/character development/set piece but the directing and acting is good enough that it stays enjoyable. 8.5/10

Wolff

Ralph Fiennes is in it

bnt

I've seen a few reviews of this now, and they're all highly positive. Ebert makes a a few comparisons between this and Transformers:

“The Hurt Locker” is a great film, an intelligent film, a film shot clearly so that we know exactly who everybody is and where they are and what they’re doing and why. The camera work is at the service of the story. Bigelow knows, unlike the pathetic Michael Bay, that you can’t build suspense with shots lasting one or two seconds. Frankly, I wonder if a lot of “Transformer” lovers would even be able to take “The Hurt Locker.” They may not be accustomed to powerful films that pound on their imaginations instead of their ears.

Driver 8

Very strong film, I'd see it (along with Up) as the first real Oscar contenders for next year

MisterAnarchy

I saw it a few months ago,good film.

missingtime

Oh.My.God.

This films is awful. I hated every minute (of the few that I watched) of it. The acting, the scenes, the props...eww. There is a massive stench of failure off of it.

DingDong

I really like this film, its something along the lines of Generation kill.

Sad Professor

I've never been impressed with Bigelow's work before, but this was excellent. Not perfect mind you but very enjoyable with some very well directed moments of suspense. Definitely one of the better films of the year.

They made this for a 11 million. How much did Transformers cost again? :rolleyes:

Have to say that I enjoyed this a lot when I saw it last January. Odd to see a dvd rip of a film leaked 7 months before the actual film opens.

mike_2009

Hi,
It'll be a few more weeks before it's out over here....
Mike

JP Liz

Finally out this weekend over here

Heading to see it in the cinema myself. Seen it 8 times so far this year, with 2 viewings last week. It's a perfect film and one which will leave you drained afterward.

ScumLord

That's been on the net for months. Very good film.

Magic Eight Ball

I'm a massive Kathryn Bigelow fan, definitely gonna catch it this weekend.

Red Sleeping Beauty

When's it out ?

Magic Eight Ball

Alan Rouge wrote: »

When's it out ?

The 28th, This Friday.

Josey Wales

Really looking forward to this film.

I thought the recent Blog on empireonline was pretty good. It was suggesting that Kathryn Bigelow should be given the next James Bond movie.

Red Sleeping Beauty

Bigelow's weird isn't she ? I mean , she made Point Break which seems to be touted as her big hit. Near Dark's fantastic but eh, I reckon she's just got friends in high places. I was kinda surprised to see this film advertised on telly actually .

Never saw Blue Steel or Strange Days.

Alan Rouge

Alan Rouge wrote: »

Bigelow's weird isn't she ? I mean , she made Point Break which seems to be touted as her big hit. Near Dark's fantastic but eh, I reckon she's just got friends in high places. I was kinda surprised to see this film advertised on telly actually .

Never saw Blue Steel or Strange Days.

Being married to James Cameron can't have hindered her career. I've always been a fan of hers, Strange Days was a fantastic little sci fi and the Hurt Locker cements her position as being one of the most talented film makers working today.

Red Sleeping Beauty

Are her and Cameron still in contact ? He's such a priíck I'd imagine all his ex-wives have commisioned voodoo dolls to stick pins in sore places! As I said, ain't seen Strange Days but I'll wait to see Hurt Locker before cementing anyone/anything.

KeRbDoG

I have seen a preview of this movie - don't waste your money/time going to see this movie. It's a mediocre movie at best. No idea were the hype for this film is coming from. Can't believe it got 98% on RottenTomatoes.

At the end your asking yourself, was that it? Did I miss something? Did they cut a hour from it during the final editing thus making it a bit crap?

btw, when you get reviews from friends seeing it and you held off not going to see it because of this post - please feel free to thank me

romperstomper

coming after the brilliant generation kill, this is muck. overlong, stupid emotional plot (totally unbelieveable BTW), this dross should be avoided at all costs. do something useful and watch generation kill instead

Handsome Bob

UCI Coolock not showing this. Add this to the list alongside Mesrine, Bronson, Let The Right One In, The Damned United and **** knows what else. :rolleyes:

Boston

romperstomper wrote: »

coming after the brilliant generation kill, this is muck. overlong, stupid emotional plot (totally unbelieveable BTW), this dross should be avoided at all costs. do something useful and watch generation kill instead

I enjoyed it. If you're going to compare it to generation kill it will look poor, but on its own merits, it a fairly decent movie.

This film is weird,I was expecting something amazing going by the reviews.

It does what it says on the tin,it keeps you on the edge of your seat but then it gets a bit tedious,at the end you kind of think wtf.
There is no real substance to the plot,you could describe the film in 15 seconds,probably less.

hmmm

The Hurt Locker is two movies - one is a pretty good war movie, the other is the standard Hollywood "oh no there are bad people in the world I'm going to get all emotional despite being a tough guy on the outside" schlock.

At some point I assumed those two movies would come together to form a coherent whole - it never happened.

Red Sleeping Beauty

LZ5by5 wrote: »

UCI Coolock not showing this. Add this to the list alongside Mesrine, Bronson, Let The Right One In, The Damned United and **** knows what else. :rolleyes:

What about UCI Tallaght ? They usually got in a few of the smaller or more unique films, or at least tried to. It's weird though when you get a film like this. I'm assuming it was made at one studio or without a studio and then they got distribution afterwards ?

johnny_ultimate

Hmm strange to see such negative feedback here after such glowing reviews Stateside - but then it is a contemporary war film released in a notoriously patriotic country. Will give this a look, but a bit more cautious now!

mewmoo

Hey anyone know why Gate Cinema had The Hurt Locker in their coming soon section to be out today and its not on the front page of their site today?? Nor is it on the recorded messages when you ring the cinema.

It's really pissing me off. They did this with that film Orphan when it come out too. WTF?

There isn't an Omniplex anywhere near me, only a Gate Cinema.

MayoForSam

The film reviewer on Newstalk's 'Movies & Booze' slot today gave this a glowing review, one of the best movies of the year which has come out of nowhere. She was raving about the lead, Jeremy Renner, reckons this could be his big break like Colin Farrell in 'Tigerland'.

Not too many decent movies made about the Iraq war (looking at you, Jarhead - Three Kings was good though), this one seems worth a look.

Red Sleeping Beauty

MayoForSam wrote: »

The film reviewer on Newstalk's 'Movies & Booze' slot today gave this a glowing review, one of the best movies of the year which has come out of nowhere. She was raving about the lead, Jeremy Renner, reckons this could be his big break like Colin Farrell in 'Tigerland'.

Yeah right, do you reckon she spotted him in Tigerland before anyone else :rolleyes: bleedin critics

Not too many decent movies made about the Iraq war (looking at you, Jarhead - Three Kings was good though), this one seems worth a look.

Nah it'll take another couple of years before the Oliver Stone of the Iraq invasion makes a film .

AARRRGH

Awful, awful, movie.

If you like Steven Seagal and Jean Van Damme movies, or if you're a teenage boy, you'll love it.

Just watch the first 10 minutes (the guy lighting the smoke bomb, not using the robot, the bizarre taxi driver) to see how ****e it is.

MooseJam

Agree that this film is tripe

SPOILERS FOLLOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Guy Pearce gets blown up first scene - this means only one thing it's really dangerous and anybody could die this film is going to be so tense, could you be any more obvious.

There is no story in this film - it's just watching some guy do his job if you like watching some guy do his job you will love it, no tension at all after pearce gets wasted.

US soldiers kill people in Iraq these US soldiers don't, some nutter drives up to the EOD guy and they shout at him - very realistic scene especially the part where he didnt get riddled with bullets.

O yea theres some male bonding and some emotions show too - a bit much, really silly stuff buts it's directed by a woman so there you go.

The last scene he's suiting up with a big grin on his face after signing on for another year - LOL

I bet the US military made them write that in or else they wouldn't give them the gear.

AARRRGH

MooseJam wrote: »

I bet the US military made them write that in or else they wouldn't give them the gear.

You know the US military funds a lot of war movies? The use Hollywood as a recuitment/marketing tool.

Driver 8

Going to have to seriously disagree with some of the above posts.

There's no story, and it's just watching some guys do their jobs? So that'd make it a realistic, uncontrived (for the most part) look at the reality of the situation that men like those in the film live in.

You've completely misunderstood the last scene, to be honest. The opening quotation is "war is a drug". This guy has returned home, been completely unable to relate to his family and home life, and can only feel anything when he's possibly seconds away from death. That's hardly a ringing endorsement for the military "Come to Iraq and become estranged from your family".

I loved the Hurt Locker because it's neither flag waving jingonism or flag burning knee jerk liberalism. It's an honest, powerful film. And to say there's no tension is laughable. It's by the far the most tense film I've seen this year.

Red Sleeping Beauty

Well if it's an honest film then surely it would be a pro-war jingofest because that's what the war was/is ?

Alan Rouge

Alan Rouge wrote: »

Well if it's an honest film then surely it would be a pro-war jingofest because that's what the war was/is ?

Not for many of those who fought it. The film is one of the most exhilarating pieces of cinema in years, it really wears you down and leaves you feeling drained. I think a lot of people are expecting something along the lines of a Jerry Bruckheimer film and being disappointed that it's not all slow motion explosions and posing for the camera.

Driver 8

A lot of people seem to be expecting the film to either conform to their own political opinions or provide mindless explosions. It does neither.

MooseJam

Driver 8 wrote: »

It's by the far the most tense film I've seen this year.

SPOILERS FOLLOW

They got a pretty big name actor to appear in the first scene and get blown up to say this is really dangerous, anybody could die if Guy Pearse dies :eek:

thats pretty laughable

Driver 8

really silly stuff buts it's directed by a woman so there you go.

What's that comment about?

MooseJam

MooseJam wrote: »

SPOILERS FOLLOW

They got a pretty big name actor to appear in the first scene and get blown up to say this is really dangerous, anybody could die if Guy Pearse dies :eek:

thats pretty laughable

I think that was more a case of Bigelow attaching a big name in order to raise financing. The same thing happens with

Ralph Fiennes.

who is a friend of Bigelows. Raising financing for a film such as the Hurt Locker is difficult and given that they made it for 11 million shows just how tight it all was. If sticking in a few big names made it easier to appeal to investors then it makes sense.

MooseJam

Deleted User wrote: »

I think that was more a case of Bigelow attaching a big name in order to raise financing.

SPOILERS FOLLOW

There may have been a bit of that but they use him in the first scene and blow him up, he isn't a character in the film he's Guy Pearce, and they want you to know he's Guy Pearse and that they blew him up in the first scene to show how dangerous it is and how yes anybody could die after this

There's probably a name for it but whatever it is I don't like it - from then on there is no submersion for me - it's just a load of actors running around doing their thing - I'm sitting there waiting for CUT to sound out and everybody head off for lunch

Red Sleeping Beauty

Deleted User wrote: »

Not for many of those who fought it.

That's my point. If you decieve a nation and convince or coherice them to agree to a war of that magnitude and then the bodies come home, it's going to lead to what some will call "crazy anti-war liberalism". No film can claim to be down the line as there's just too many sides to it all. I mentioned Oliver Stone because his film Platoon was quite specific in regards to being loosely based on actual events/characters and grew from personal experience.

I've not seen this film by the way but I was shock (and still am) when I saw Empire's review that gave it five stars (a "classic" by their definition of what the stars mean).

http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/review.asp?FID=136506
(click for full review)

Plot

With their previous commander obliterated midway through their latest tour of Iraq, a US bomb disposal squad are landed with Staff Sergeant William James (Renner), whose recklessness in action borders on the insane.

Verdict
The most literally exciting film you will see this year. Forget the off-putting banner of another Iraq movie — go, watch, marvel, endure and book in the palliative of a stiff drink afterwards.

LuckyLloyd

Went to see it earlier. Thought it was fantastic. Well acted (Renner is superb), well directed, and managing to navigate its way through some murky emotional and ideological waters with aplomb. A very important addition to the war movie canon, because it is an incredibly realistic depiction of the conflict in Iraq. And that conflict (operation to subdue urban guerrillas who are held and supported by the local population) is an atypical one for war movies to tackle, and those that have tried haven't done so as successfully.

The action scenes are tense (the sniper scene in particular), the home land vignette towards the end cuts to the chase with the minimum of fuss, and ultimately the end product examines an aspect of war that most war movies don't want to know about (Apocalypse now excepted!).

Brilliant. Though if you don't like war movies, or think that an Iraq war movie should make a clear political statement against the American invasion - stay well away.

Ardent

MayoForSam wrote: »

The film reviewer on Newstalk's 'Movies & Booze' slot today gave this a glowing review, one of the best movies of the year which has come out of nowhere. She was raving about the lead, Jeremy Renner, reckons this could be his big break like Colin Farrell in 'Tigerland'.

I listened to that review too and was really excited to see this movie. She lied - it's distinctly average and, dare I say it, quite boring.

Alan Rouge

Alan Rouge wrote: »

That's my point. If you decieve a nation and convince or coherice them to agree to a war of that magnitude and then the bodies come home, it's going to lead to what some will call "crazy anti-war liberalism". No film can claim to be down the line as there's just too many sides to it all. I mentioned Oliver Stone because his film Platoon was quite specific in regards to being loosely based on actual events/characters and grew from personal experience.

I've not seen this film by the way but I was shock (and still am) when I saw Empire's review that gave it five stars (a "classic" by their definition of what the stars mean).

The film opens with the quote

War is a drug and over the proceeding 2 hours the film shows how it affects the men and the main character is shown to grow addicted to the thrill of it, so much so that when he gets back into the real world he cannot function and wants nothing more than to go back.

At the end of the film as he's holding his child in his hands he tells it that as you grow up some of the things that you love may not seem so special and that as you grow older there are fewer things that you love.He then says with "me I think it's one" and the next scene has him arriving back in Iraq.

For me that's what makes the film, it's not trying to be pro or anti war just show how war is something that you can get addicted to.

As for Empire giving it 5 stars, I agree that the film deserves them but at this stage 5 stars from Empire means nothing. The magazine lost all significance when they started to pander to the whims of every film maker who was willing to guest edit for them.

A lot of reviews have been going on about how Jeremy Renner is this great undiscovered talent. He's not, he's been working away and impressing in a number of films over the past few years aswell as starring in one of the most entertaining TV shows in years. That it's taking them so long to recognise his talent is their loss as I've been enjoying his work for years.

AARRRGH

Driver 8 wrote: »

A lot of people seem to be expecting the film to either conform to their own political opinions or provide mindless explosions. It does neither.

No, I just hoped it wouldn't be childish and unrealistic.

Again I repeat: the scene with the smoke bomb, not using the robot, and the crazy taxi driver (and their reaction to him.)

Utterly ridiculous stuff.

AARRRGH

AARRRGH wrote: »

No, I just hoped it wouldn't be childish and unrealistic.

Again I repeat: the scene with the smoke bomb, not using the robot, and the crazy taxi driver (and their reaction to him.)

Utterly ridiculous stuff.

I think the use of the smoke bomb and his refusal to use the robot was to illustrate his care free attitude toward the dangers of his job. He was addicted to the thrill of it, it's his drug.

There are numerous instances in reality of taxi drivers and civilians in Iraq who ignored friendly fire and continued to proceed toward American check points.

LuckyLloyd

Deleted User wrote: »

The film opens with the quote

War is a drug and over the proceeding 2 hours the film shows how it affects the men and the main character is shown to grow addicted to the thrill of it, so much so that when he gets back into the real world he cannot function and wants nothing more than to go back.

At the end of the film as he's holding his child in his hands he tells it that as you grow up some of the things that you love may not seem so special and that as you grow older there are fewer things that you love.He then says with "me I think it's one" and the next scene has him arriving back in Iraq.

For me that's what makes the film, it's not trying to be pro or anti war just show how war is something that you can get addicted to.

Yeah, I have a friend who did tours in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq as an officer. Honorably discharged, pension secured, house bought, wife and kids at home. Has been going back there to do private security work ever since cause he goes stir crazy when he's home in England for long stretches. And after 10 years in the Armed forces, there is no way he could do a normal 9 - 5 type thing, or 'normal' work really.