The Hurt Locker

Let's tone down on the political stuff, ok? Or, we can move it to the cave, and you all can have at it. Up to you guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phaedrus

I was responding to your "it's just entertainment" point. Not to any specific point about "The Hurt Locker".

The Hurt Locker was remarkably free of any overt political points, and I liked that. I also liked some of the details they did get right, such as the cereal aisle scene, and the scene with the Colonel. I swear I have met that guy.

However, they didn't just get a detail or two wrong. They got so many of them completely wrong, and that, to me, is schlock. This causes me to ask myself, "self, why did such an utterly schlocky movie get nominated?" Most of the answers I can think of to that question range from incompetence, to a form of contempt.

As an aside the EOD community pretty much loathes the movie, and not just for technical points. (actually, they are pretty happy that the movie shied away from actual operational stuff, and doesn't put their guys in additional danger because of it)

Personally, I think the movie has been popular because of the hunger for information by the US public about the wars; so few people participate in the military anymore, that they do not have a frame of reference, and just about anything that doesn't involve "GI turns mass-murderer".

What I'd like to see is a really good dramatic movie about some of the more mundane details of life overseas. Think "The Odd Angry Shot", which was a movie about Australia's diggers in Viet Nam.

---

That is why I liked it. As far as the other details, I wouldn't be able to tell you what is right and wrong with the movie. I have no clue and admittedly, that is a problem in this country. Not enough people really know what some of these guys do. We should not know all of the details but we should be able to know and appreciate the basics of what they do on a daily basis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Janny

Let's tone down on the political stuff, ok? Or, we can move it to the cave, and you all can have at it. Up to you guys.

---

I haven't seen any political push in this thread. The discussion was simply if there was one in this movie and I think it was concluded that there was not one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MNCyGuy

I hope this doesn't come off as baiting because I'm actually kind of curious. If you would put on your screenwriter's hat for a second, how would your masterpiece Iraq or Afghanistan war movie lay out?

---

I would really like to see a movie produced around the actions of a Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT). A PRT is an amalgam of a bunch of different military, civilian and NGO/non-profit folks, whose mission is to bring stability to a province in Iraq or A-stan.

This results in a whole "soup-to-nuts" collection of things that happen. You could have gun fights, good guys, bad guys and just completely random "weird ****" that happens from day to day.

There are love stories, tragedies, and all sorts of human drama you could do with that.

Of course, PRTs are kind of short of "one man killing machines" and "psycho baby killers", which kind of turn off the Hollywood interest for that kind of thing.:wink:

Of course, you COULD make a movie about me. But Brad Pitt is busy for the next few years, so you'd have to wait to cast it.... Though I hear Mr. Bean is looking for work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phaedrus

I would really like to see a movie produced around the actions of a Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT). A PRT is an amalgam of a bunch of different military, civilian and NGO/non-profit folks, whose mission is to bring stability to a province in Iraq or A-stan.

This results in a whole "soup-to-nuts" collection of things that happen. You could have gun fights, good guys, bad guys and just completely random "weird ****" that happens from day to day.

There are love stories, tragedies, and all sorts of human drama you could do with that.

Of course, PRTs are kind of short of "one man killing machines" and "psycho baby killers", which kind of turn off the Hollywood interest for that kind of thing.:wink:

Of course, you COULD make a movie about me. But Brad Pitt is busy for the next few years, so you'd have to wait to cast it.... Though I hear Mr. Bean is looking for work.

---

Brad Pitt was already in this movie. Ingorius Basterds.

By the way, what did you thin of that movie?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yaman3

Brad Pitt was already in this movie. Ingorius Basterds.

By the way, what did you thin of that movie?

---

To be fair, and I know the question was directed at me, that movie was not clearly not meant to be accurate in any way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MNCyGuy

To be fair, and I know the question was directed at me, that movie was not clearly not meant to be accurate in any way.

---

I know that. I would hope everyone knew that. I was just extending the conversation.

I actually am interested in Phaedrus's idea. It seems like something that would be more suited to maybe a mini-series though. Lots of little ideas and a lack of one big overall conflict doesn't make for a great movie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MNCyGuy

I actually am interested in Phaedrus's idea. It seems like something that would be more suited to maybe a mini-series though. Lots of little ideas and a lack of one big overall conflict doesn't make for a great movie.

---

There are a lot of opportunities to make for an overall conflict. Lots of unexpected bad guys (a surprising number of the bad guys are NGOs, btw) and lots of Antigone moments where good guys get crucified for doing the right thing.

I would even take a few swipes at the US military in my fantasy movie. There are some swipes they have earned over the years.

I reviewed Greg Mortensen's "Stones Into Schools" in another thread, and the central story there would make an excellent war movie, imo.

Afghan: US bomb squad on the frontlines - Yahoo! News

I thought it was a pretty good flick, very intense. I'm not in the military so I can't speak to the accuracy of the details. I left the theater thinking this movie is awesome, but when I watched it on DVD I wasn't left with the same impression so I get why some say it was over hyped.

Just happen to have watched this movie tonight. I liked it; it was pretty intense. I'm not military BTW.

The sniper scene I thought was a little off. The SAS group seemed a little more incompetent than you would expect from a group out alone in the desert with two prisoners from the deck of cards. You would have pictured them a little more capable than the EOD team. I didn't have a problem with them manning the Barrett. It's my understanding that whatever your specialty in the Army, you're a soldier first.

The scene after the tanker explosion I thought was pretty far fetched. Those guys had other orders on the scene and they went way off the rails in chasing off into the desert in the dark. How is a guy not court martial-ed for leading that expedition, especially when it results in a friendly fire incident?

Overall, a good movie. I'm glad I watched it but now that it's over, I don't feel a need to watch it again.

Non-military that just watched it. I loved it, but I was also on a 3 hour plane ride, so my options for entertainment were pretty thin. I didn't like the sniper part. Not that I found it hard to believe a non specialist would know how to fire a special weapon.
I didn't like the fact that everyone was so clumsy, and that on several shots the guy missed by like 4 ft, and then hit the guy. Also, it seemed weird they stayed focused on the house, injured guy for so long, but when the third spotter mentioned he saw something on their flank, the spotter and rifleman didn't even bother to look. But, Renner's reaction when the third guy fired on the flank might have been one of the best, subtle lines of the movie.

What I liked about the movie was how they created intense moments by having absolutely nothing going on.

I really liked this movie and I really do think it captures what it's like there right now..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by linkshero

Non-military that just watched it. I loved it, but I was also on a 3 hour plane ride, so my options for entertainment were pretty thin. I didn't like the sniper part. Not that I found it hard to believe a non specialist would know how to fire a special weapon.
I didn't like the fact that everyone was so clumsy, and that on several shots the guy missed by like 4 ft, and then hit the guy. Also, it seemed weird they stayed focused on the house, injured guy for so long, but when the third spotter mentioned he saw something on their flank, the spotter and rifleman didn't even bother to look. But, Renner's reaction when the third guy fired on the flank might have been one of the best, subtle lines of the movie.

What I liked about the movie was how they created intense moments by having absolutely nothing going on.

---

it's not being clumsy it's being realistic.. that gun was sighted for someone else.. to just pick up a gun and be perfect with it is nearly impossible