# "The Hurt Locker" new feature film on EOD/bomb squad GIs in Iraq



## CougarKing

Saw the trailers for this in the theater recently.

 "The Hurt Locker" Trailer One

 "The Hurt Locker" Trailer Two

Release date: August 2009


----------



## jmbest

Recently watched it....VERY good movie. Incredibly well made I thought.


----------



## observor 69

"The Hurt Locker" trailer:

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=hurt+locker&scope=video&filt=all&qs=n&docid=844451217563&mid=2731C5D3BFD2724D49FA2731C5D3BFD2724D49FA&FORM=VIVR5

G&M review 
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/arts/the-hurt-locker/article1212781/


----------



## tango22a

Sounds like a must see/purchase DVD movie!!

tango22a


----------



## MikeL

I saw this movie awhile ago.. this is the second release or whatever. It's kinda shitty.. an inaccurate. It has some enertainment value, but thats about it. Don't expect this to be an accurate movie on EOD pers an you'll enjoy it. Still dunno why on one of the movie posters they use a picture of a PMC.


----------



## CougarKing

Just saw the movie today. I liked it though I found one of the final action scenes more anticlimactic.

[SPOILERS FOLLOW]

I liked the scene where the EOD team come across some UK SAS commandos/UK Contractor mercs dressed in Hajji gear, and whom they have to fight alongside with to defend a position against some insurgent snipers.

While I realize that their having EOD for their MOS means they don't necessarily go into battle as a four man fire team as Infantry/11Bravos or other combat-related MOSes guys do, I still wonder why the EOD team was only composed of three men. And it also puzzles me why only one of the three men in the team was actually trained in EOD while the other two were mainly tasked with guarding and covering him.

 ???

And here's a funny, unforgettable quote from the movie:

_MP Sentry(holding SSGT James on the ground): WTF were you doing out there?

SSGT James: I was in a wh**e house!

MP Sentry: I'll let you go if you promise to tell me where it is! _  ;D


----------



## dustinm

CougarDaddy said:
			
		

> And it also puzzles me why only one of the three men in the team was actually trained in EOD while the other two were mainly tasked with guarding and covering him.



My understanding of this from my viewing is that all were trained in EOD however the Team Leader did the more complex disposals (and I assume for the virtue of cinema almost everything they showed was "complex.")


----------



## Petard

Just seen this movie

Don't bother wondering why there were only 3 soldiers in the team, or any of the other absurd tactics used in this movie.

I suppose the idea here was to show how someone gets so addicted to the adrenalin rush he begins to act like a junkie and do completely irrational things to get his high, and his team goes along because what else can they do.

Some of the scenes have an interesting style to them, if you can ignore some of the most totally illogical reasons why supposedly they are happening.

My fave absurdity, the EOD team, by themselves in the desert, coming across Brit contrators/bounty hunters who are capable of capturing some of the most wanted men in Iraq but fall to pieces as soon as the enemy starts picking them off; (sarcasm on) jeez, US guys, please take over our Barrett 50 and take care of the bad guys for us, they're kicking our *** (*off)

There are some good bits, there are times if you suspend your reason it does build tension well, and the part of the lead going home and how that is is possibly the one really believable part of the movie.

This movie could have been good, but to me it was a long way away from there.


----------



## Celticgirl

I just called Blockbuster and they don't have this movie, nor is it in their computer for the next month. Where can I find it?


----------



## dustinm

Celticgirl said:
			
		

> I just called Blockbuster and they don't have this movie, nor is it in their computer for the next month. Where can I find it?



The movie is still in theatre rotation. It will probably be several months before it'll be released on DVD. You can find copies online, if you're interesting in watching but can't get out to a theatre (and that's all I'll say aobut that. :camo


----------



## SARgirl

The movie was interesting, but it was also frustrating.  I hope the young lads watching this movie realise this is 'just a movie'.

In the movie, there were characters who made substantially delayed decisions, indecision's, poor attitude from some characters, the main character needlessly elevated risk to himself and/or his fellow soldiers due to personal and interior missions lead by uncapped emotion etc... etc... etc... .

Then the youngest solider, the one who kept falling to pieces throughout the movie until he was finally injured; what in the world was he even doing there... would a military not send a solider, who is obviously not copping, back home?  I don't know how this young solider in the movie even made it through military training (with regards to soldiers being strong not just physically, but mentally strong as well), little own the military finding him mentally fit enough to go traipsing about a war zone when he clearly could not cope and he clearly did not have the necessary mental skills.  Would lack of copping skills not come to light long before a solider got onto a tour?  Am I off base on these thoughts?

Yes, I realise it's 'just a movie'.

Yes, the movie is 'interesting', but I wish the director had made the movie more accurate.


----------



## Petard

It is just a movie. It as about as realistic as police investigation is in the movie "Point Break", the director's other big movie.

But even so there are absolutely ridiculous moments in the movie

Like why the EOD team was always left alone, as if the inner cordon closing off the area does absolutely nothing except spectate while the EOD team by itself deals with snipers, house clearing, or hostile vehicles breaking through.
How about the Iraqi sniper making incredible shots, but then takes a break while the good guys try to get their 50 going again? I had to laugh when they get it going again but then spot a bad guy lounging beside the shack catching rays like Oddball off of Kelly's Hero's.

I took the movie as being meant for entertainment purposes only, and if you knew nothing about military life it is an entertaining suspenseful film, but I think a lot of people might make an enormous leap of an assumption that it closely resembles a soldiers reality, IMO it does not.
Yet there are some critics saying that this movie does "tell it like it is" because it is based on the observations made by the journalist Mark Boal while he was in Iraq. If that's what Kathryn Bigelow set out to do, tell a realistic story, then this really is if not a bad movie then a misleading one.


----------



## ruckmarch

Celticgirl said:
			
		

> I just called Blockbuster and they don't have this movie, nor is it in their computer for the next month. Where can I find it?



I can't believe this movie is only being talked about now. Anyhoo.....I saw it early this year and it's alright but not as good as generation kill.

You can watch it online, if you know where to look



I must say the insurgent sniper that took out the British guys was rather good


----------



## Celticgirl

ruckmarch said:
			
		

> You can watch it online, if you know where to look



No, I don't...apparently, I'm out of the loop.


----------



## Roy Harding

Celticgirl said:
			
		

> No, I don't...apparently, I'm out of the loop.



Me either.  Apparently, you and I are members of a dying breed - law abiding citizens.


----------



## PuckChaser

If they had it released where I was, I would have paid the money in theater to watch it. I think it would have been worth it too, alas I had to watch it another way.


----------



## MikeL

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> Me either.  Apparently, you and I are members of a dying breed - law abiding citizens.



As far as I know its legal for us to download.. we just can't upload for others to download.


----------



## Roy Harding

-Skeletor- said:
			
		

> As far as I know its legal for us to download.. we just can't upload for others to download.



You may be right, I don't know.  

But it begs the question - who uploaded it in the first place? (And yes - I've been guilty of downloading pirated stuff - I'm certainly not holding myself up as a paragon of virtue here - despite my earlier flip comment).


----------



## Roy Harding

For the record.  A user uploaded a link to an online movie site.  I've removed that post until it can be determined if the site is legal or not.  I searched the net looking for answers, and came up with lots of OPINIONs - but no answer.

I'll not knowingly leave Mr. Bobbitt open to legal problems arising from postings here - so until the legality of the linked site is determined, it will remain removed.

For the user who posted the link.  I'm sure you had the best of intentions, and believed it to be a legal site - but as I said above, until it's PROVED legal (and I suspect the site may be exploiting some legal loophole somewhere - which makes it "shady" at best), let's not get Mr. Bobbitt's site shut down.


Roy Harding
Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## PuckChaser

For those of you who want to see the movie in Kingston, and don't like the prospect of downloading it, it is playing at the Screening Room: http://www.moviesinkingston.com/

Tickets are 8 bucks, but if you go on Tuesday they are only 5.25. Plenty worth it to watch this film, I think.


----------



## Smirnoff123

I saw this movie a few days ago, I really enjoyed it; though I did find a few parts a little dull.


----------



## Journeyman

I enjoyed it as well.....within the bounds of "cinema" versus "reality" 

-- although the bit with him running amok, alone, in down town Baghdad    _ri-iiight_


----------



## Smirnoff123

> -- although the bit with him running amok, alone, in down town Baghdad    ri-iiight



Yes, I found that pretty far-fetched as well


----------



## Mehlenbacher89

Heh, I just finished watching it, and coincidentally this was one of the first thread sI spotted upon logging in. I really enjoyed it. You don't see many modern war movies these days, let alone many from the EOD team standpoint.


----------



## Greymatters

Never heard of it advertised before, thanks for the reviews...

Edit - And I agree with Roy Harding's post, members should fell free to PM each other the download information, but shouldn't post it to the thread...


----------



## dustinm

Greymatters said:
			
		

> Edit - And I agree with Roy Harding's post, members should fell free to PM each other the download information, but shouldn't post it to the thread...



I would be wary of even PMing the information. In the legal world (as far as I understand), any communication between your computer and the Milnet.ca servers (posting and PMing being the big two) is considered "in the open" and available for scrutiny by lawyers if it were to be met with a court order.

Back on topic: are there any other "bomb squad" or EOD/IEDD movies like this out there? A quick Google search turned up nothing but references to this movie.


----------



## Greymatters

Neo Cortex said:
			
		

> I would be wary of even PMing the information. In the legal world (as far as I understand), any communication between your computer and the Milnet.ca servers (posting and PMing being the big two) is considered "in the open" and available for scrutiny by lawyers if it were to be met with a court order.



Either way, the idea is to prevent the impression that Milnet.ca approves of the activity by not allowing the information to be posted in open forums...

Also back on topic; there have been a couple EOD-related thrillers out there, but I dont recall any that focused on a specific EOD team as the main focus of the story...


----------



## 1feral1

I seen this flick on V-Australia somewhere between Australia and Los Angles.

As much as its just a movie, I did appreciate the region, buildings, mosques and overall layout. Definaltly brought back some memories, some not so pleasant.

I knew some US guys at TF Troy (they know who they are) who did this for real day in - day out. Hollywood will never get it right. I was however entertained by this movie, and I am happy to see films come out about 'my' war.

Later read that it was filmed in Jordan.

OWDU


----------



## Infanteer

I never knew EOD teams rolled alone and were also trained as snipers....

Movie was brutal; I liked Generation Kill better.


----------



## xena

Yeah, I wondered about the sniping bit too (cuz I was a clerk - what the heck do I know about EOD stuff?), and asked about it on a different forum, and the answer I got was that EOD types get trained to use the Barret to distance detonate munitions when it was too dangerous to approach.  I guess it'd be simpler to detonate something like unexploded cluster bomblets with a Barrett than try to walk up and fiddle with them.

That's the answer I got anyway.

I liked the movie.  Yeah, I know there were huge parts that were unrealistic, and I didn't let it bother me.  I liked the bit where he's following a wire and comes to a point where it spreads out in a bunch of different directions, and finds that he's surrounded by warheads, and says nothing but a rather understated "Oh boy."


----------



## Dean22

Infanteer said:
			
		

> I never knew EOD teams rolled alone and were also trained as snipers....
> 
> Movie was brutal; I liked Generation Kill better.



If you listened in the movie you would hear that the Team Leader was fully qualified on the weapon and he had been in Intelligence for 7 years.

As for the "ranger" I am not sure it takes much qualification to hold a telescope and be a spotter.


----------



## 1feral1

Dean22 said:
			
		

> If you listened in the movie you would hear that the Team Leader was fully qualified on the weapon and he had been in Intelligence for 7 years.
> 
> As for the "ranger" I am not sure it takes much qualification to hold a telescope and be a spotter.



Thats an unnecessary stab at someone who was just commenting on the reality of Hollywood.

Its just a movie and quite frankly far (very far) from reality.

I don't know who you think you are, or where you think you've been, but as a PTE (R), I would say no where, and in 'reality', your attitude sucks.

Kind regards,

OWDU


----------



## Journeyman

Dean22 said:
			
		

> If you listened in the movie you would hear that the Team Leader was fully qualified on the weapon and he had been in Intelligence for 7 years.
> 
> As for the "ranger" I am not sure it takes much qualification to hold a telescope and be a spotter.


How many threads now have you been told to "stay in your lane"?

Having once -upon-a-time qualified on a weapon prior to coming into EOD does not mean he'd have the weapon or use it.

His number 2 is a "Spotter" not a "ranger." And a sniper _team_ actually takes a fair bit of "qualification."

And while I'm sure there's a massive number of Intelligence Snipers in your XBox world, there aren't in mine.

Please.......stop posting about shit you know absolutely nothing about.


----------



## Kat Stevens

Journeyman said:
			
		

> How many threads now have you been told to "stay in your lane"?
> 
> Having once -upon-a-time qualified on a weapon prior to coming into EOD does not mean he'd have the weapon or use it.
> 
> His number 2 is a "Spotter" not a "ranger." And a sniper _team_ actually takes a fair bit of "qualification."
> 
> And while I'm sure there's a massive number of Intelligence Snipers in your XBox world, there aren't in mine.
> 
> Please.......stop posting about shit you know absolutely nothing about.



Polite round of golf clapping.  "Good shot old boy, hole in one, eh wot?"


----------



## Man_Bear_Pig

Dean22 said:
			
		

> If you listened in the movie you would hear that the Team Leader was fully qualified on the weapon and he had been in Intelligence for 7 years.
> 
> As for the "ranger" I am not sure it takes much qualification to hold a telescope and be a spotter.



LOL too true what a funny statement; another thing being he was wearing a CIB which is only awarded to infantry who take and return fire  along with an EOD badge, which is not done. Another thing they were wearing their skill badges in country and when you arrive in Kuwait they tell you take that crap off.

This movie had me excited for about thirty seconds and that is only because of word of mouth.  From my time in the country of Iraq I have never seen EOD roam around in a 3 man truck taking on every little mission possible. My experience they were actually an 1-2 hours late after the call up. Oh the memories......  :'(  

I can tell you that EOD is allowed to attend sniper school though only SOTIC though I have actually never met a single one who attends and have first hand family member who is a EOD SGT Major and he explained they rarely send anyone and the reason to be sent is for unexploded ordnance.

As for the spotter it was retarded, I was in amazement is the remaining to SAS members sat hopeless and on the ground as the two EOD got up with out calling in any 'dope' and fired away. I myself am a sniper and I wish I was that good. 

It was a mistake purchasing this movie for my I POD and they continue to prove movies about the Iraq and Afghanistan deployments will never be made correctly.

Take care MBP


----------



## blacktriangle

It was pretty much a comedy movie in my eyes...I sure was laughing.

The sniper part, going out to try to track down that kid, getting one of his men almost kidnapped by insurgents, and then...going back again. My girlfriend liked it at least...
hoooorah


----------



## Franko

Man_Bear_Pig said:
			
		

> I myself am a sniper and I wish I was that good.



So sniper or Ranger? *I'm calling you out as a Walt.
*


If your not....*prove me wrong* for all to see. Answer these easy questions:

1. Are you a tab ranger or a scroll ranger?

2. What was your Ranger class number?

3. What phase of the school did you like the most or least, and why?

4. Where did you go to Ranger school, Ft. Bragg or Ft. Benning ?

5. Who was your Ranger buddy in the school (optional)

6. What Ranger Unit have you belonged to?


I've grown tired of hearing your exploits.


----------



## The Bread Guy

This, from the Daily Beast, shared for fair use and research purposes:


> Moments before Oscar ballots are due, The Hurt Locker has gone from awards darling to awards disaster. Nicole LaPorte reports on nasty emails, an ostracized producer, and an ill-timed story.
> 
> When director Kathryn Bigelow first heard that Nicolas Chartier, the Frenchman who financed and produced her film, The Hurt Locker, had sent out emails last week urging members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to vote for Hurt Locker and "not a 500M film"' (i.e., Avatar), the first thing she did was pick up the phone and call Jon Landau, who produced Avatar, to express her horror.
> 
> "Kathryn and Jon's relationship goes back a long time, and everyone understands that we wish each other well," Hurt Locker screenwriter Mark Boal told The Daily Beast. "All sides have been extremely supportive of each other… Kathryn was shocked and appalled and embarrassed by Nick's poor judgment, and condemned it."
> 
> In the wake of The Hurt Locker controversy, one publicist claimed that some members of the Academy are demanding new ballots in order to change their vote.
> 
> And so a bomb was detonated in what has suddenly become a very nasty Oscar battlefield.
> 
> Until now, the campaign leading up to this weekend's Academy Awards had been relatively low-key and peaceable, at least by Hollywood standards. Bigelow and James Cameron (her ex-husband), who are perceived to be neck in neck in the race for Best Picture, have been blowing kisses at each other every opportunity they get. Inglourious Basterds' writer-director Quentin Tarantino has also been spreading the love (he endorsed Bigelow on Larry King Live). Even Harvey Weinstein, normally a bête noir this time of year, has kept his hijinks to a relative minimum. Although he's been pumping Basterds like crazy, his rallying is nothing compared to the smear campaigns he was accused of back in the day, when he muscled Shakespeare in Love to Oscar gold by allegedly bad-mouthing Saving Private Ryan.
> 
> Chartier's emails—which were first reported by Los Angeles Times Oscar blogger Pete Hammond, and which are a violation of Academy rules—was just the first scandal for Hurt Locker, which until now, was enjoying a near-perfect run. To this point, Bigelow, who is expected to be the first woman to win a Best Director Oscar, is the belle of the Hollywood ball. Her movie is regarded as the deserving David facing a Goliath (Cameron), who has already had his share of Oscar spoils.
> 
> On Friday, another blow came in the form of a front-page Los Angeles Times story—"The Hurt Locker Sets Off Conflict"—saying that several soldiers and Army veterans found the film an inaccurate representation of combat, and that the U.S. government had pulled its funding of the film after seeing the script.
> 
> Given that The Hurt Locker was released in theaters last summer (a more likely time for critics to come out of the woodwork) and that the due date for Oscar ballots was four days after the story ran, one Oscar consultant—who has nothing to do with Hurt Locker— called the article "Smear 101." (As TheWrap.com's Steve Pond has pointed out, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, and the Associated Press have all run stories about soldiers' and veterans' reactions, concluding that the majority of them approved of the film. The Daily Beast also featured a story about a real-life Marine EOD soldier who thought the movie captured his experience.)
> 
> At this point, most voters have already cast their ballots, thus the effect of the Times' revelations is minimized. However, one publicist claimed that some members of the Academy were demanding new ballots in order to change their vote.
> 
> According to Academy spokesperson Leslie Unger, once a vote has been sent in, there is no way to change it or receive a new ballot. If voters want to change their selections before they've sent in their ballot, they must initialize the change.
> 
> Behind the scenes, things are even uglier. Chartier, who was never cozy with his Hurt Locker comrades, has now been essentially tossed off the bus. Although he quickly issued an apology for his "extremely inappropriate" emails when the story first broke, the damage has been done. Not only is Chartier expected to be reprimanded by the Academy, which will make its decision on March 2 (most likely, he will be docked tickets to the Oscar ceremony), but it's unlikely that his fellow filmmakers will be offering him a plus-one.
> 
> "Everyone understands that Nic bears the responsibility for his mistake 100 percent on his own shoulders," Boal said.
> 
> A French sales agent who came to Hurt Locker's rescue when no one else would finance a movie about Iraq with no stars—Chartier put up the film's $15 million budget—Chartier was almost immediately ostracized from the production, and came close to not getting a producer credit. (When the Producers Guild of America, which limits the number of producers on an Oscar-nominated film to three, did not initially grant him credit, he appealed the decision and won. Contrary to reports, neither Boal nor the other producers wrote a letter on his behalf.) Described as a "reactive" personality prone to fits of anger, and who, at one point or another, tried to fire Boal, the film's accountant, line producer, and even the travel agent, Chartier was banned from The Hurt Locker set.
> 
> "It was a hard movie to get made," Boal said. "It was a challenging shoot, and it's the nature of those things that tempers can flare and strong disagreements can arise. And Nic was eventually asked not to come back to the set."
> 
> Chartier did not respond to voice message left at his office by The Daily Beast.
> 
> As for the Times story, Boal said, "I was disappointed in the reporting and handling of the story. It seemed like it was stating the obvious with a sense of discovery."
> 
> Besides the timing of the story, there were omissions, according to sources who worked on The Hurt Locker's publicity campaign. For example, the story quotes Paul Rieckhoff, the executive director and founder of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, saying, "We are not cowboys. We are not reckless."
> 
> Yet it is not reported that besides being an Army veteran, Rieckhoff is a Hollywood producer with his own films in the works. According to IMDb.com, Rieckhoff is a producer on nearly half a dozen war documentaries. Newsweek also recently published a piece, this one penned by Rieckhoff, that does not mention his role as a filmmaker.
> 
> In response, Nancy Sullivan, a Los Angeles Times spokesperson, wrote in an email: "Paul Rieckhoff was quoted in the story as the director of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, which is the source of his authority on the topic."
> 
> Boal said of Rieckhoff: "I think he's an articulate advocate for his point of view, and now he has a foot in Hollywood. I look forward to seeing his work as a filmmaker."
> 
> Even with this last-minute round of implosions, however, this year's Oscar campaign remains one of history's more claw-less. The Hurt Locker's troubles are nothing compared to what A Beautiful Mind faced in 2002, when every day seemingly brought a new slur against schizophrenic mathematician John Nash, the subject of the film. Or, in 1999, when Miramax was charged with the whisper campaign against Saving Private Ryan.
> 
> The closest this brouhaha comes to matching is, in 2004, when DreamWorks took out ads in the trades that quoted critics supporting actress Shohreh Aghdashloo in House of Sand in Fog over Renee Zellweger in Miramax's Cold Mountain.
> 
> Though that ploy proved ineffective— Zellweger won. Right now, The Hurt Locker camp is hoping history repeats itself.


----------



## MikeL

http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/01/essay-15/




> BAGHDAD — I long ago learned not to discuss war movies with soldiers. They tend to be detail-oriented and obsessed with authenticity. They frequently dismiss well-made, thought-provoking films because of some minor detail — the scope on a rifle is wrong, or the markings on a vehicle incorrect.
> 
> Last summer, I began to see rave reviews of “The Hurt Locker,” a movie about the Iraq war by Kathryn Bigelow. After a string of Iraq-related Hollywood flops, reviewers said this was the movie that finally brought home the reality and horror of Iraq. Soon I began to get e-mail from friends back in the states who loved the movie for its “realistic depiction” of the war. I’ve worked in Iraq over a six-year period, and they wanted to know what I thought.
> 
> Though I’m back in Iraq now, I put off seeing the movie, partly because I felt no need to be disturbed by memories that its graphic images would surely raise. But I mentioned the movie to a few soldiers. Predictably, none liked it. A group from the 2nd Infantry Division laughed uproariously, recalling the scene where a blood-soaked bullet jams a massive .50-caliber rifle. “A fifty cal? Blood would just lubricate it!”
> 
> Another soldier: “Remember the scene where the dude is running alone through Baghdad? Ridiculous!”
> 
> Finally, a few nights ago, I sat down to see “The Hurt Locker” for myself.
> 
> This time, the soldiers were right. The film is a collection of scenes that are completely implausible — wrong in almost every respect. This time, it’s not just minor details that are wrong.
> 
> If there is one rule with the military, it is that there is strength in numbers. No one soldier, no one vehicle, goes out alone. Ever. Four vehicles and a 20-man squad is the minimum that I have worked with in Iraq. A lone Humvee would not be allowed to clear the gate at any base in Iraq.
> 
> Yet, in scene after scene, the bomb disposal team, led by Staff Sgt. William James, appears to be fighting the war alone. They drive the streets of Baghdad, a three-man team in a lonely Humvee, with no back up. They single-handedly clear buildings, drive desert roads alone with no air cover and confront a truckload of potential enemy fighters — who turn out to be bizarre and incompetent British mercenaries. When the British are killed, the American explosive technicians turn out to be expert snipers and spotters as well.
> 
> In one sequence, Sergeant James sneaks away to a house he believes to be an insurgent base. Realizing he is mistaken, he then runs alone for what appears to be several miles through the labyrinthine streets of Baghdad to return to his base. Strangely, he encounters no U.S. checkpoints on the streets, though they were numerous in that period. And he returns, as if by magic, unscathed.
> 
> In 2004, with the insurgency in full swing, the chances of a U.S. soldier running through the streets of Baghdad and making it back to base were approximately zero.
> 
> The movie’s denouement — the explosive ordnance disposal (E.O.D.) team responds to a massive truck bomb in the Green Zone — is so completely wrong in every respect that it borders on farce. Insurgents did not operate freely in the Green Zone. They would never have kidnapped a soldier in an area with thousands of U.S. troops. And they would never have hung around an active investigation scene with their weapons. No American E.O.D. team in existence (or any other three-man squad) would go charging alone down dark alleyways when there are hundreds of infantrymen at hand.
> 
> These are mere details compared to the way Sergeant James repeatedly swaggers up to bombs. As Mark Boal, the screenwriter, well knows, many I.E.D.’s in Iraq are remotely detonated. Mr. Boal actually embedded with an E.O.D. team in Iraq, so he knows the chances of recklessly approaching even a single command-detonated bomb and surviving are quite small. Yet we are made to believe that Sergeant James has disabled over 800 bombs in this reckless, cowboy-like fashion.
> 
> More disturbing and implausible yet is the way the protagonist repeatedly endangers the lives of his team members. The soldiers I have worked with over the years are like brothers to one another. Never have I seen stronger bonds between men. Any soldier who routinely endangers his own life or those of his squad members would not be punched, as the movie’s star is in one scene. He would be demoted and kicked out of his unit.
> 
> “Our No. 1 job is protection of people and property,” said Rob Wagner, an E.O.D. team chief based in Diyala Province. “If we do our job the way it’s done in the movie, we would get people killed.”
> 
> Lt.j.g. Glenn Moffat, another member of the team, added, “We have to be level-headed and mature, to think things through — the opposite of the how it’s done in the movie.”
> 
> One of the greatest disservices of “The Hurt Locker” is the impression that soldiers in Iraq were masters of their destinies. If they snipped the right wire, made the right shot, cleared the right room, they would stay alive. In fact, the opposite was true. Certainly there were firefights, but the vast majority of U.S. deaths were from I.E.D.’s.
> 
> This is what was so absolutely terrifying about the war. A faceless enemy was catastrophically destroying U.S. vehicles every day with I.E.D.’s (and I can assure you the enemy did not stand in the open, as per several scenes in the movie). Regardless of your training, if you were in that vehicle when the button got pressed, you were dead.
> 
> I’ve covered a number of conflicts and Iraq was the least romantic, the one that looked the least like the war movies I grew up on. Yet Ms. Bigelow pulls one out for Hollywood. While many have praised the movie as anti-war, I believe — in a counter-intuitive way — that it glamorizes war. The Steely-Nerved-Protagonist Who Has Seen Too Much kills the bad guys in an action-packed setting and eventually signs up for more. His hard-drinking, P.T.S.D.-ravaged character becomes that much more romantic for his flaws.
> 
> I understand the argument that Ms. Bigelow and her team should be applauded for tackling certain issues and bringing the war home to Americans. Yet with so many scenes and details untrue, the actual war in Iraq becomes merely a dramatic jumping off point for the filmmakers.
> 
> E.O.D. teams are highly specialized. They do not fire sniper rifles, clear buildings full of insurgents, single-handedly engage a squad of enemy combatants or drive the streets of Iraq alone. What they do in reality is amazing enough: one of the most nerve-wracking and dangerous jobs on earth. It is done a disservice by this degree of dramatization.
> 
> When a filmmaker gets that many details wrong, it’s hard to believe she got the war right. “The Hurt Locker” is not a drama about a make-believe event. This is a movie about an ongoing war that has affected millions, in which 100,000 Americans are still serving. It deserves a minimal degree of historical accuracy and attention to detail.


----------



## caocao

That movie sucked big time...might be entertaining to someone with no military background.  Thank god I didn't pay to go see it in theatre!


----------



## The Bread Guy

This, from AP:


> A producer of the war story "The Hurt Locker" will not be allowed to attend the Academy Awards because of e-mails he sent urging academy members to vote for his movie. But he will receive an Oscar if his film wins best picture.
> 
> The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced the action Tuesday against producer Nicolas Chartier, who violated Oscar rules that prohibit mailings promoting a film by disparaging another.
> 
> Chartier sent e-mails seeking support for "The Hurt Locker," "not a "$500 million film"—an obvious reference to best-picture contender "Avatar." Chartier apologized in a subsequent e-mail.
> 
> While Chartier cannot attend Sunday's ceremony, he would receive his Oscar later if "The Hurt Locker" wins.



 :tsktsk:

This, from Salon.com:


> A bomb disposal expert who served in the Iraq war plans to sue the makers of "The Hurt Locker," claiming the film's lead character is based on him and that they cheated him out of "financial participation in the film."
> 
> Attorney Geoffrey Fieger says he plans to file the multimillion-dollar lawsuit in Detroit federal court on behalf of Master Sgt. Jeffry Sarver. He planned a news conference for later Wednesday.
> 
> Sarver claims the film's screenwriter, Mark Boal, was embedded in Sarver's unit and that the information he gathered was used in the film. The film is nominated for nine Academy Awards, including best original screenplay.
> 
> The movie's U.S. distributor, Summit Entertainment, says it "distributed the film based on a fictional screenplay" and hopes "for a quick resolution to the claims made by Master Sgt. Sarver."


----------



## wildman0101

explosive ordnance disposal is not a nice job
as far as the movie goes ....bogus
as for my mil qualifications pvt msg me
be prepared to examine my uer up close and 
and personal (if you willing to make a trip to bc)
and if your in the sunny okanagan your call
im in vernon   
regards,,,
           scoty b


----------



## Petard

I have to wonder what part of the movie this M/Sgt Sarver claims is based on him, I suppose for the movie producers it doesn't do them any real harm to settle with him, since doing so would indirectly give the movie the appearance of "street cred".

Yet I think Sarver's lawyer is going to have a tough time explaining just how realistically they might have portrayed Saver or any other EOD team...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOw8G3T4vsQ


----------



## James

I don't have any military experience, so take my opinion for what it's worth.

I didn't have much interest in the movie, but I decided to give it a chance because a good friend of mine kept hyping it. I was pretty disappointed. I thought it was going to be an honest look at the people who disarm bombs, and instead it felt kind of Hollywood to me. One part in particular: Buddy finds the kid dead and thinks the vendor that was with the kid is suspicious. So he decides to leave the base and follow this vendor. He then breaks into a house, and holds a guy at gunpoint. Then he freaks out, leaves, runs through Baghdad, and back to the base. After that I hard a difficult time getting into the movie. It just seemed to spiral out of control after that.

It had a couple funny parts (like when the guy was about to set off the bomb, but realized he'd forgotten his cloves), but other than that I didn't enjoy it.


----------



## Greymatters

Overwatch Downunder said:
			
		

> Its just a movie and quite frankly far (very far) from reality.



I finally got a copy of the film, ready to watch it this weekend, and then I read this, along with other comments about 'Int snipers'.  Im seriously disappointed in how good it was supposed to be...


----------



## PMedMoe

Nothing at all to do with the movie, but the actor, Jeremy Renner, visited a minefield near Bagram recently.

*Article Link*

Afghanistan - Better known for defusing bombs in Iraq in the Oscar-winning film "The Hurt Locker," actor Jeremy Renner braved a live minefield in Afghanistan on Sunday to draw attention to the tireless work of clearing mines that kill and maim years after being buried. 

Despite years of effort to dig up mines planted during decades of civil war and Soviet occupation, more than 650 square kilometers (250 sq mile) of Afghan territory are still considered active minefields. 

While 2009 saw a significant drop in numbers, thousands of Afghans have been killed or injured by mines or explosive war remnants over the past 30 years with many losing limbs or suffering serious scarring. 

To emphasize the scale of the problem, 39-year-old Renner teamed up with the United Nations in Afghanistan this week, visiting an Afghan de-mining team north of the capital Kabul. 

"It's tremendous," he told Reuters during his visit to a minefield in Bagram, about 100 km (60 miles) north of Kabul. 

"Seeing the guys firsthand is a wonderful gift for me," he said. "I don't think there are many guys in my position -- I'm just a silly actor -- that get an opportunity to come out to Afghanistan at a time of war and get to experience this." 

.....

Abdul Latif, a bearded veteran who has worked as a de-miner for 16 years, waved his metal detector slowly across the ground, demonstrating the task to Renner. Renner asked through an interpreter whether he gets a sense of pride from the job. 

"I do it because I love my country," the Afghan replied. 

Renner said he had decided to visit Afghanistan because he wanted to see the tangible work being done. 

"The possibilities are what I'm so attracted to here. The possibilities are endless for the communities and I think they deserve it," he said.

More at link


----------



## spear

It was an entertaining movie but not exactly what i was expecting for.  There is some confusing scene there when they chanced upon at some special units at the middle of a desert.  Im not in a military and i didn't know if its really possible for a regular unit to take over the sniping job when the special unit's main sniper got shot.  The thing is the movie itself didn't give any details if the main character also knows how to be a sniper's spotter, and his buddy who took over that sniper gun, didn't have any idea if he is actually a trained DM as well.


----------



## KrazyHamburglar

If your getting shot at by the enemy are you just going to stand there and wait for death to come or are you going to try something... he's surely not qualified as a sniper but a gun is a gun and they mostly work on the same basic principles.


----------



## Journeyman

_spear_ and _KrazyHamburglar_, you may wish to read the previous three pages to better understand the BS involved in that scene. 

It's not a matter of "I fired my C7 in basic, and the physics are the same for a Barrett .50, therefore...."


----------



## spear

Journeyman said:
			
		

> _spear_ and _KrazyHamburglar_, you may wish to read the previous three pages to better understand the BS involved in that scene.
> 
> It's not a matter of "I fired my C7 in basic, and the physics are the same for a Barrett .50, therefore...."



Yep too much BS indeed, especially that scene when he went alone the beehive.  I knew it was supposed to be the british SAS who got pinned down by enemy snipers (they looked so dumb in that movie).


----------



## 57Chevy

Who gives a crap of what the hell you flippen guys say about the film. I'm sure it wasn't meant to 
impress some overly trained, sharp shooting hard nerved bomb tootin ranger, who jumps into mine fields just because the wind is less than eight knots on a moonless night.
Your missing the whole idea of what the film is supposed to protray. Like all war films, they are not
true representations of what the hell really goes on in war ravished areas. And they never will be.
It does however offer a certain focus, and a general idea for alot of people who would like to know
as to what our soldiers are somewhat dealing with. And I think that is what is important.......no ?
Did you notice any Gun Tape ?  ;D


----------



## Journeyman

57Chevy said:
			
		

> It does however offer a certain focus, and a general idea for alot of people who would like to know
> as to what our soldiers are somewhat dealing with.


Ah, so you support the movie's premise that combat-experienced soldiers become psychotic war-lovers whose only glimmer of contentment and fulfillment lies in suicidal behaviour back in a war-zone. Got it.

That's a hell of a stigma to have to carry.


_Fortunately_, no one else I've spoken with thought of the movie as a documentary....so there's still sharp objects around the house


----------



## HItorMiss

Well to be fair JM there are a lot of people who when returning home say they would rather be back in the Afghanistan then here in Canada, there is certainly a missing of the Adrenaline rush and of course the lack of garrison BS to deal with.

All that being said I have never not once on any tour seen a mutiple tour vet doing anything near as suicidal or even remotely suicidal as those actions in the movie..... Thank F..K!


----------



## Kat Stevens

Any EOD guy that split from the programme like in the movie, even once, would find himself back home and facing a metric butt load of doodoo before he knew what hit him.


----------



## HItorMiss

I should freaking hope so LMAO!!!!

Some of it is obviously Hollywood thrill right and some of it is close to actuality, sadly though I found to much Hollywood and not enough actual. I think  BHD was as close as it gets for more real then Hollywood but that is just me.


----------



## Michael OLeary

Perhaps we need a thread were those with recent operational experience can provide recommendations for shows, documentaries and even movies that do present more realistic presentations. Cal it a _modern guide for newbies_ to ward off a new crop of those joining to seek the experiences of "The Hurt Locker" as a generation before others may have equally been mistaken in joining and expecting "Apocalypse Now."

Think about it, put together a few notes, and start a new thread when and where appropriate.


----------



## Kat Stevens

I can just imagine the shit storm you'd walk into if you grabbed a spider web of det cord and started reefing n it.


----------



## Journeyman

BulletMagnet said:
			
		

> ....I think  BHD was as close as it gets for more real ......


Especially the end when the fighting is done, and the UN shows up bringing out glasses of water  >


----------



## 57Chevy

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I enjoyed it as well



Quite the stigma....I see you enjoyed it as well.......... That's what cinema is. And I'm sure the general public realizes that, wouldn't you say ?


----------



## Journeyman

57Chevy said:
			
		

> Quite the stigma....I see you enjoyed it as well.......... That's what cinema is. And I'm sure the general public realizes that, wouldn't you say ?


So what's it going to be, entertaining cinema or a guide to general public understanding of what our soldiers are "dealing with"?

As _I've_ said, yes I enjoyed it as mindless entertainment and mocked it's shortcomings. 

_You_, however, are the one trying to say the critiques of its flaws are unwarranted, since it informs the sheeple.


Echoing Mike O'Leary's post, hopefully people don't take this as an indicator of what operations are like.


----------



## crooks.a

I've seen this film a few times now. Not the most realistic movie I've seen, but I quite enjoyed it. I definitely recommend watching it if you get a chance.


----------



## MPwannabe

I watched it yesterday. I really liked it! I agree about it's slight lack of realism though. The suspense they played in the scene's had me holding my breath a few times. Good flick!


----------



## aesop081

MPwannabe said:
			
		

> slight lack of realism



Slight ?


----------



## Kat Stevens

As in "Stalin could be a slight arsehole when he was drinking".


----------



## Teager

Veterans suit dismissed.



> NYET313-33_2010_120905_high.jpg
> LOS ANGELES – A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that an Iraq War veteran cannot sue the makers of the “The Hurt Locker” because he believes the Oscar-winning film portrayed him in a bad light.
> 
> The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled a lower court’s dismissal of Sgt. Jeffrey Sarver’s 2009 lawsuit against director Kathryn Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal was proper. Sarver, a bomb-disposal technician who was shadowed by Boal in Iraq, contended the film defamed him by portraying him as obsessed with death.
> 
> The court disagreed, saying the film was protected by the First Amendment and its fictional protagonist, even if he is based on Sarver, was shown to be a heroic figure.
> 
> The ruling states the justices agreed that reasonable viewers of the movie “would be left with the conclusion that the character Will James was a heroic figure, albeit one struggling with certain internal conflicts.”
> 
> The ruling further stated, ” ‘The Hurt Locker’ is speech that is fully protected by the First Amendment, which safeguards the storytellers and artists who take the raw materials of life — including the stories of real individuals, ordinary or extraordinary — and transform them into art, be it articles, books, movies, or plays.”
> 
> “This is a highly important precedent that will have major implications for the entire film industry,” said attorney Jeremiah Reynolds, who represented Bigelow and Boal.
> 
> “The Hurt Locker” won six Oscars, including one for Boal’s screenplay and another for Bigelow’s directing. It also won for best picture.
> 
> Sarver’s attorney, Michael Dezsi, says the ruling is disappointing, and he’s considering how to proceed, including an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
> 
> “Sgt. Sarver courageously defended his country and the liberties of this nation in the most dangerous of circumstances, and has now been repaid by the failure of the judicial system to protect his rights,” Dezsi wrote in an email.
> 
> Sarver sued over the film days before it won big at the 2010 Oscars. A Los Angeles federal judge dismissed his case the following year.
> 
> Boal was embedded with Sarver’s unit in 2004 and wrote about Sarver and other bomb disposal experts in an article for Playboy magazine titled “The Man in the Bomb Suit.”
> 
> Sarver said Boal wanted to stay with him exclusively because he didn’t trust other bomb techs.



https://blackburnnews.com/bri-entertainment/2016/02/17/court-upholds-dismissal-of-veterans-suit-over-hurt-locker/


----------

