@09tarheel:

In no way did I imply that my statement was fact. I even said the word "thought" in the first line of my post, I guess in order for it to be apparent I'm talking about my opinion I need to write imo every few words?

09tarheel said:
I don't ususally like "war" movies but thought The Hurt Locker was great, mainly because it didn't really seem like a war movie.

Tht's the only instance in which you used the word "thought" (when you reffered to the quality of The Hurt Locker).

"its not like Avatar was actually deserving of winning an Oscar"

This statement doesn't suggest opinion, but rather fact.

Also what does not winning technical Oscars have to do with anything? Is it just that you are such a big Avatar fan that is why you are so upset that about the Hurt Locker?

I'm not a big Avatar fan, I just hate all the love The Hurt Lokcer's been getting, mostly because I see it as undeserved. And you saying that Avatar deserved no technical Oscars is quite frankly so ignorant that it's beyond you being able to get away with saying that it's just your opinion.

but it is not the type of movie to win an Oscar

And yet it won 3, and should've also won the 3 tehcnical Oscars (Editing, Sound Editing, Sound Mixing) that The Hurt Locker undeservedly won.

Then they weren't anti-war films, were they?

My opinion isn't a fact. Never said it was.

They were anti war but through the prism of 'bring the troops home cause we can't win this war'. They were still anti war just not anti war because it was illegal and/or genocidal. That was as left as it got in the mainstream media during the war in 'Nam'.

When I watched The Hurt Locker, I saw one guy who became addicted to war and a bunch of others that were a mix of scared, confused, and a mess of other emotions.

If anything, I walked away from that film with a sour taste in my mouth about the Iraq War, not a positive feeling. The thing is that I'm not even sure that's what Bigelow was attempting to do with the movie because there was so little political message in the film. It was about a bunch of guys trying to survive. There were no heroics, no grand posturing, just a bunch of guys scared shitless with one borderline lunatic freaking most of them out.

I seriously question exactly what fucking movie some of you were watching. It seems as if you went into the film wanting to take an anti-US stance and started manufacturing "messages" when the movie didn't give you the ammunition you wanted.

Who was the "hero" in the film? The lunatic? If anything, I just felt sorry for that character. War had changed him into someone who couldn't survive in normal society. Yeah, that's a ringing endorsement for the war.

The thing is about The Hurt Locker is that you could take those characters and put them in almost any war on almost any side of battle and it works as a film. That's not propaganda, that's a character piece.

remove the word ''US'' in his post and you'll see the point :)

I of course meant Avatar was not deserving of the best picture Oscar (Disclaimer IMO, better?) although I should have made it more clear by stating "the" Oscar not "an" Oscar, I was not considering the smaller awards.  But sure Avatar was deserving of wins for most if not all of the technical awards.

Of course after criticicing me for not suggesting my comment was opinion, you go on to say -

"And yet it won 3, and should've also won the 3 tehcnical Oscars (Editing, Sound Editing, Sound Mixing) that The Hurt Locker undeservedly won."

without suggesting that it is your opinion anywhere.

I just hate all the love The Hurt Lokcer's been getting, mostly because I see it as undeserved.

Well the good news for you is that The Hurt Locker made $48 million worldwide and Avatar $2.8 billion. Avatar's impact on the industry has and will continue to be much larger than The Hurt Lockers'. I'd think everyone involved with Avatar would take the recognition they have gotten (both financially and critically) over The Hurt Locker's any day of the week.

When I see a movie with the message "why the fuck are we having this stupid war in the first place" I'll say "now that's an anti-war movie". Movies that focus on soliders and how they try to survive and treat the opposing side as a force of evil threatening the survival of the soldiers who are the main characters will never be anti-war movies, but will have the opposite effect.

1. The "US" part is very important in this argument.

2. Why should we feel sorry for soldiers?