OK, the action aspect has been described in other comments. No need to repeat that it's extremely well done, and that it's powerful. The first 30' of the films are so gripping you feel you're going to die with the artificer.
I'd like to say something about other aspects of The Hurt Locker. First, the fact that, though only focusing on the 3 main characters, the members of the EOD team, Bigelow manages to put Iraqi people in the picture. Not trying to tell the story from their point of view, which would be very difficult and might easily sound false. But showing how the war in Iraq is fought among common people who are desperately trying to live a normal life. This creates a situation of deadly uncertainty, which is well caught in the movie, and also moral responsibility. The final scene, where the artificer talks to the human bomb, is not just gripping and suspenseful: it's also a sort of moral allegory. Can the US troops there defuse the bomb, which is a metaphor of a country totally out of control? Well, the ending of the scene probably tells you what's Bigelow opinion on it.
But let's go to the little lower layer. If danger is an addictive drug (that's what the film tells you right from the start), it should be said that William James is not the only addict in the film. He tries to get back home and live a normal life again with his wife and child. He can't. He gets back to Iraq. Is this only James' problem? Or are the US on the whole addicted to war, violence, danger? I think the ending tells another story, not just that of the protagonist. The man who cannot stop gambling on his ability to deactivate bombs may be an image of a country which cannot stop gambling on its ability to win wars (or to persuade itself it is winning the wars it's started).
All in all, a deeper film than it may seem at a first viewing.
WATCH FULL MOVIE
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu