War Junkie's 2010-07-29

Reviewer: Ian Holdsworth

This movie is ok, but I didn't think it was outstanding for a movie that has won an Oscar. The main character is a US Army Sergeant who is a Bomb Disposal Technician who has just been deployed to Iraq. He enjoys his job and the adrelien that goes with it. He is very good and professional at his job, but he seems to be addicted to the danger and violence. I thought the acting and special effects where excellent. I hope this movie reminds people at home in the U.S. and Australia what the average soldier is going thru and the dangers they face everyday.

Not My Bag 2010-07-26

Reviewer: R. Bailin

I'll give this movie a C for the realistic hand-held 1st person perspective of the horrors of war. This kind of movie isn't my thing, though. There really isn't a story. It's more like a day (or several days) in the lives of a small unit of soldiers. I felt like I'd enlisted for the 2 hours + of the movie. I watch movies for the entertainment value and there isn't any of that here.

A good fight 2010-07-25

Reviewer: J. R. Brideau

National Review gave a good rating...so do I. It's nice to see a movie that supports our troops while telling a story about heroes in a positive light. I not going to tell you anything about it because I got it blind sided and think it would stand on its own merit.

Not Funny At All 2010-07-25

Reviewer: Gabriel J. McDonald

This movie isn't nearly as funny as its publicity campaign made it out to be. I didn't laugh out loud once. I cracked a bit of a smile when the shrink got blown up, but that was such an obvious punchline and I could see it coming from so far away that the impact was really muted.

The Hurt Locker stars Jeremy Renner as the younger brother of Tom Cruise's character from Top Gun, who instead of fighting dastardly Russians gets to fight dastardly Iraqis with a blowing-stuff-up fetish. He's really reckless, doesn't care a mite about rules or authority, and all he ever thinks about is getting the job done, no matter how much danger it puts him in. Even though that's a character you can find in 80% of all war movies, we know this one is strikingly original because Roger Ebert said so.

The movie's wildly unpredictable originality continues with the introduction of a black sidekick who slaps him up and tells him to behave every time he disobeys the rules. Will he ever listen? That question is the most suspenseful thing in this movie.

As I said, I came into this movie expecting the kind of raucous comedy that the trailers promised, full of madcap war antics, silly clown suits with big collars, and witty dialogue exchanges like:

Soldier: [rifling through a box of things that "almost killed" the Jeremy Renner character] A wedding ring?
Renner's character: Like I said, things that almost killed me.

HAHAHAHAHA!!! That's such a hilarious line! And I SO did not see it coming.

But alas, those looking for any sort of comedic inspiration will be sorely disappointed. The movie bogs down in way too many overwrought bomb disposal scenes that are apparently meant to parody similar scenes in movies like "Blown Away," but these get very tedious very quickly. The movie also gets lost in its obsession with period details, but considering the fact that every Iraq War veteran who has seen this movie says it's howlingly inaccurate, I guess they studied the wrong war to get the details on.

The end result is a movie that, despite its daring (I'm surprised the filmmakers drew so little flak for something as irreverent as satirizing the Iraq War), really doesn't have much to recommend it, because it is in the end just a one joke movie. It's rare to see such subtle humor in the movies these days and these filmmakers do deserve credit for that, but for all the benefits of subtlety, you can't forget to be funny. Come to think of it, the humor in this movie is so low key, it's not unthinkable that they didn't intend it as a comedy at all and actually thought these tired war movie cliches that they had compiled actually said something about war. That's hardly unimaginable, considering the low today's movie industry has reached.

But I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

One of the worst movies ever made 2010-07-24

Reviewer: John Pines

After it won the academy award for best picture I decided to check it out. It was a shock to find that this movie has no plot, the acting is amatuerish at best, and even though there is a crew defusing bombs- no suspense whatsoever. Even though it's a story involving soldiers there are no villians or personal conflicts in this story. While one watches this film it appears that it goes out of its way not to be political and while events unfold these pains take all the wind out of its sails. The two worst scenes are when the soldiers are sniping some militants in the desert and even though they're shooting people there is no change of expressions on their faces whatsoever- just like they're doing a job. If you can call this a subplot, the hero James befriends some Iraqi boy making a connection with him. Later the hero finds him stitched up with an explosives inside him. Unfortunately, even though you think it would reveal some of the hero's character, it just doesn't go anywhere. Apparently, an academy award means nothing these days, the only indication that a film may be good is how much it makes at the box office. This was a 12 million dollar bomb. Even though it won an award, this movie is so vacuous it may actually be one of the worst movies ever made.