By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
rocketpig said:
sapphi_snake said:
rocketpig said:
sapphi_snake said:
rocketpig said:
Most people I know have seen The Hurt Locker. YOU may not care about it but most people I know in real life who are movie fans sure do and I have yet to hear anyone say they were disappointed in the film when they walked away from it... unlike Avatar.

I completely agree that Avatar is one of the most important films in the past decade (though I may argue that The Two Towers and the technology behind Gollum was more important) but where we differ is that I don't think it deserves any awards past best visual effects for it.

Fine, we can agree to disagree. We obviously have different visions about what makes a great movie. Still hope that hope that army recruiting movie doesn't win.

Yes, that's a fine example of a propoganda film.

I can see the posters now:

"Join the Army, visit Iraq, get scared shitless, possibly die!"

Brilliant.

Or... Join the army, visit Iraq, show your bravery, proove that you're a man, live an exciting life, "protect" your country, kill "terrorists", be a "hero", reinlist after you come back home cause civilian life is just way too boring, return to Iraq whith rock music in the background, be a badass.

 

Yes, because everyone wants to become disenchanted with their own family. That's really a great upside of war. There aren't thousands of stories of people coming back from a warzone and not being able to cope with civilian life.

Where you see a badass going back to war, I see a man who has lost the ability to operate in civilian life and chose the enemy he knew over the enemy he didn't understand. It's a tragedy what these young soldiers go through and how it effects them for the rest of their lives and the movie did a pretty damned good job of showing it.

Still think you're right? Here's a quote from Bigelow herself:

"I always want to make films. I think of it as a great opportunity to comment on the world in which we live. Perhaps just because I just came off The Hurt Locker (2008) and I'm thinking of the war and I think it's a deplorable situation. It's a great medium in which to speak about that. This is a war that cannot be won, why are we sending troops over there? Well, the only medium I have, the only opportunity I have, is to use film. There will always be issues I care about."

Still want to ramble on about how The Hurt Locker is a propaganda film? Shit, just the fact that the movie is directed by the same person that did Strange Days should have been enough of a clue that Bigelow would never create a pro-war movie.

On a funny side note, I just noticed that Bigelow is competing against her former spouse (Cameron) for Best Picture. Interesting.

The Cameron / Bigelow angle is interesting, and Cameron has said a couple of times he'd be happy to lose to her film so I wonder if he's being nice or actually giving a hint.  Also, if Bigelow wins she will be the first female director to do so.

Personally, I'd like her to win as I think from a pure direction point of view her efforts were clearly the best of the films nominated, but I guess that's nothing compared to the politics behind actually winning so we'll have to see.  Until Avatar went gangbusters The Hurt Locker was clearly the big favourite, gathering awards like a magnet, but Hollywood is desperate for 3D to succeed and I think there will be huge pressure to reward Cameron for his success with the format with Avatar.

The Hurt Locker is still the better film critically, though.



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...