A review by Arcanix
First up, a whinge. The local film distributers here in Australia, in their great wisdom, saw fit to release The Hurt Locker to coincide with the 2010 Academy Awards. While this makes sense from a financial point of view, to be frank, it downright sucks for industry aficionados (like me) who have been aware of the film and its stellar reputation since its American release well over 8 months ago! I wish I could have seen it before the praise, before the hype. The thrill of watching something and knowing it’s new and special and perhaps undiscovered is a rarity down under. (Maybe I’m just not looking hard enough) Anyway the elegiac fact is that watching The Hurt Locker after it has saturated all media with news of its success results in a somewhat less intimate viewing experience.
That gripe aside this is undoubtedly a powerful film. Most great war films are just that, but The Hurt Locker has an arsenal of innovation at its disposal and is able to provide welcome new perspectives on the genre. The conflict of choice is Iraq. That is, The Occupation of Iraq or, more prosaically, the second one involving America. (A multi-national force to be more accurate) This choice of setting provides ripe opportunity for delving into the white-knuckle tension of Explosive Ordnance Disposal. (EOD) ‘War is a drug’, we are told; and the seemingly never-ending cycle of violence that plagues Baghdad provides a fitting scene for the elaboration of that thesis. The film is episodic in structure and each episode is a minor masterpiece in the fine art of suspense. The stakes are cranked up to 11 in the very first scene. You never know if or when each situation will detonate into sudden fiery doom. I loved how each scenario was allowed to play out to its natural conclusion without editing to speed things up. The tension is downright unbearable at times!
We are presented with 3 soldiers with contrasting personalities so that we may observe and reflect upon their varying reactions and coping mechanisms in the face of relentless and harrowing danger at every turn. Jeremy Renner plays Sergeant First Class William James, the leader of the outfit. He represents the traditional gung-ho American hero. He is not afraid to put the lives of himself and his team at risk to satisfy his seemingly insatiable lust for danger and personal glory. Both sides of this persona are examined in full. As a man of action his decisions are swift and often telling. However his pursuit for justice (where none can be had) occasionally threatens to lead him and his team recklessly astray. Anthony Mackie plays Sergeant JT Sanborn. He represents the staid, ‘by the book’ approach. This leads to an inevitable collision course with James. Finally there is Brian Geraghty as Specialist Owen Eldridge who represents the ordinary man. Suffering anguish and guilt he struggles to come to terms with his place and role in the army and the war. All 3 actors acquit themselves admirably but special mention should go to Renner who injects an understated surety and bravado to his character. He is a character worth rooting for despite his recklessness.
It seems remarkable that a woman (Kathryn Bigelow) could direct such a gritty and masterful war film with absolutely no female characters to speak of. Those who are aware of her previous films will know that she is no peddler of mundane chick flicks. Still, special congratulations are in order for breaking free of the metaphorical shackles of gender roles in an industry that has changed little in this regard for over a century. This is a fantastic film in more ways than one and is absolutely required viewing.