To bury The Hurt Locker under the stigma of just “another Iraq war movie” is a grave misinterpretation of the film. True, we might have all grown tired of the constant news coverage and the slew of films dealing with the Iraqi invasion, but Kathryn Bigelow and, perhaps more importantly, Mark Boal, give us a war film that is not about the war, who’s right, who’s wrong, but about the people within the war.

Foregoing needless scenes of recruiting, training, and drill Sargent tough talk, The Hurt Locker would rather focus on people than war film conventions. Needless to say, the film is exactly as it’s hyped up to be. It’s a powerful, riveting portrait of men in 24-hour chaos. The last I remember Bigelow was from K-19: The Widowmaker; a decent film, but something from the break she has had, must’ve wound up a beast within her, because The Hurt Locker is crafted with such precision and intensity, you’ll be as up tight and tense as the EODs.

The film follows a group of three EODs (Explosive Ordinance Disposal) on their final 40 odd days left of active duty. The film early on has a key scene which shows off a stunning explosion of intense intimacy, both in execution of the staging of the explosion, but also within the characters. This scene will dictate the unpredictable routine the EODs go through, day in and day out, as well as letting us into the Iraqi lifestyle. The audience and the characters will go on to learn of life’s brevity, and perhaps appreciate it. Make no mistake, this is a war film, and there is plenty of action, but the film tackles it in interesting and different ways.

I can’t get that scene or two of a limping cat rolling through the war-torn streets out of my head. This off-handed shot, adds a layer dialogue can’t.

We follow the characters in their routine, sometimes embarking on false alarms and other times, nail-biting situations. We tend to forget that this war is vastly different than previous wars. Rolling out to a mission, one of the EODs notices tanks just sitting there and makes a one-off comment on how stupid it is to have them in Iraq. The comment has a nice meaning to it, as we see later, with Bigelow’s crafty eye for action. Little details might have a greater, graver meaning to them. Nothing is as it appears. We see the team roll around in the city, sometimes disarming road side bombs, sometimes waving to the locals. Where do tanks fall into all of this? They don’t, and that’s the point of the comment. In the mundane routine of daily life as a soldier in Iraq, it’s either extremely boring or extremely dangerous. Your enemy is hidden and sneaky. Gone are the days of one-on-one Risk-style of combat. This is what Jarhead wanted to be.

Jeremy Renner has been under-the-radar for a while, although I’ve enjoyed him since Dahmer. Here, he will bust out of the shadows and into the Hollywood lime-light. It’s a damn great performance, perfectly fitting his persona he carries with him from film to film. People will be talking about Renner, but evenly matched is Anthony Mackie, last seen in Notorious as Tupac. He’s equally as complex and emotional. It’s another performance worthy of discussion.

But what ascends The Hurt Locker into greatness, besides the performances and Bigelow’s direction, is the theme of the story. The film wisely plays to no one opinion. To these characters, war is hell, it doesn’t matter if you’re a Democrat or a Republican. But the film captures a rare phenomenon of addiction to the high stakes involved with life or death. Some can play, others cannot. The life of a soldier for some is a job, a job they’ll be trained to do well, and for others, is an adrenaline rush. The Hurt Locker captures the rare voice of the day-to-day soldier, offering no answers, no political finger-waging, just the sneaky notion of life and death and fatigue.

Rating:

Tags: Anthony Mackie, Iraq, Jeremy Renner, The Hurt Locker