The hurt locker

won best picture as well! It's great example liberal guilt propel in the thompson death open movie senator same name it's many allusions debate home side & sorry be said, but as for tone war being prosecuted I'd like think on the level! Boring enough it's gotta be oscar quality & different black hawk down for example as not mash korea, but war we'd won @ least no closed policing action waiting for anglo-afghan four war movie turn honor in slaughtered!

good movie

ok

100% amazing haha

great movie

Hurt Locker explores an aspect of war that often receives less attention: it’s addictive qualities. The film opens with a quote reading “The rush of battle is often a potent and lethal addiction, for war is a drug.” This is an important element to keep in mind as you watch the film. It reaches to cover many sectors of life, including family, death, and dreams. The addiction theme stands as a constant throughout the movie, threading into each of the other conflicts presented. Several of the conversations between the team members mirror those of addicts. In fact, the entire movie is like experiencing a convincing argument from an addict defending their compulsion. By the film’s conclusion you are manipulated into empathizing with the compulsion for war. As meticulously made as this movie was, it lacked a certain amount of soul. I still think Inglourious Basterds should have won Best Picture.

The Hurt Locker was one of the best films I've seen in a long time. I loved Avatar, Up, District 9, and Up In The Air, as well as some of the other nominees for the 2010 Best Picture Academy Award, but The Hurt Locker won, and rightly so.

The film is beautifully crafted and tricks you into thinking the carnage beautiful with its slow motion captures of exploding roadside bombs and its shimmering deserts seen through the scope of a sniper rifle. The film opens with a quotation from a New York Times war correspondent who states that "War is a drug." By the end of the film we understand the allure and know why the protagonist walks off the plane with adrenaline in his veins and rock music in his ears. In this world he is a powerful man, one with the ability and the taste for looking death in the face and beating it. You can tell this film is expertly written and acted because the viewer can see inside the heads of each of the characters without a lot of exposition.

The soldiers and specialists in the film are good at what they do, but that by no means guarantees their safety. This film has long stretches of incredible tension. There aren't any cheap tricks like false alarms and jangly music to make you jump. It simply lays out the scene and lets you know how close everyone is to death at each second. In one scene the protagonist is frantically searching a car with a bomb in the trunk, trying to figure out how to defuse it, while a group of men (clearly the bomb-makers) are watching calmly from a nearby rooftop, hoping for his death. One of the men has a video camera. It makes me shiver just thinking about it.

As Roger Ebert said, this film is nearly perfect.

It's not lightly that I criticize this Oscar winner for Best Picture. But, I do.

In general, "The Hurt Locker" is a visually stunning film that looks at a different aspect of war than we're used to seeing. I don't feel like the general story arc or the message are much different from other modern war films, but this one looks good and its scenes are interesting and disorienting enough to warrant attention. Much of it feels real, much of it feels heavy and it shows a moderately skilled hand at crafting tension.

Which may be why the end of this film is so unforgivable. Change the soundtrack and it would only be disappointing. Edit the sound so the last line in the film is audible (which it's not, even after playing it four times), and it would only be typical. Don't do any of this, and you have a film that doesn't know what it's spent 125 minutes saying. That wants to make sure the pubescent masculine demographic still tell their friends that "this movie is freaking awesome!" That is more about ducking out the side door, leaving the story standing, as it were, in a cold breeze in its underthings, than was "Lost in Translation."

To be perfectly clear, I'm not arguing against what happens at the end. With the proper treatment, this is the conclusion to the film that says the most. And it's a striking example of the power of music and attitude in cinema, the way this conclusion - the correct and proper conclusion - can nearly ruin the movie when given the absolute worst treatment possible.

This film is worth watching to anyone who hasn't been there. It's worth it for the reminder that there are things happening that we can never understand. Just, for goodness' sake, hit stop immediately after you see the protagonist mumble inaudibly to his child.

5/10

There is a reason this movie beat out Avatar at the 2010 Academy Awards- it inspires emotions through more than pretty pictures and is original. Not for the faint of heart, this movie bluntly explores some of what it means to be in EOD in the Middle East, without being colored by propaganda or throwing in pointless side plots to please viewers. Watch it, but keep your 10 year-old in their room.