Hurt Locker, The

The average user rating for this Movie is 8.1 out of 10 (based on 399 Votes).

Tim C. gave it a1:
I have completed 2 tours in Iraq and Afghanistan with the US ARMY. This was by far the worst movie I have ever seen. Nothing in this movie is the way things are done over there. Nobody drives around by themselves! Nobody leaves their FOB by themselves to "investigate" somebody. EOD does not even come out at night. They wait until the next day to use the robot to blow up the IED. They hardly ever, ever make "the walk" as the movie so ridiculously put it. Anyway, do not think this movie is the way it is. This movie is complete make believe!!!

Forrest L. gave it a10:
I am a Marine combat veteran and I rate this movie as the most realistic war movie I've ever seen. It really captures the intensity and the individuality of combat and the changes it causes in all of its participants. Movies like Full Metal Jacket and Apoclypse Now and even Saving Private Ryan are cartoons - Hollywood director's fantasies of what war and conflict are. Most war movies are laden false events and dramatic devices and political "messages" but Hurt Locker embraces the realities of war and the people in them. This is a movie I'll keep for my children and grandchildren to show when they ask me what war was like.

Thomas H. gave it a3:
Watch The Messenger instead, why the critics are rating this so highly is a mystery. It doesn't even compare to Apocalypse Now and Platoon. Heck it's just awful, watch Jarhead instead.

Dorene N gave it a10:
I was glued to the TV screen throughout the whole movie; great acting by the whole cast and great direction...deserves an award! for me it was just better than Avatar.

Daren P. gave it a0:
More like crap locker,not like it was at all. EOD doesn't cruse around all by themselves in summer 04,let alone wear some bomb suit in 120+ heat AND not brake sweet. Stopped it 18min into what crap.

[Anonymous] gave it an8:
A very good film with some memorable scenes, it is very easy to give this film a high rating however on reflection it certainly does not desrve the 10/10 that many critics have dished out so easily for this film. I would say Moon is a better film and that got a 67 (84 from users) from the critics, who I believe have been a little out of touch with reviews for 2009 films.

Don C gave it a1:
If you want to watch a documentary about IED's in Baghdad in 2004 and you don't know any better, this is your movie. Quickly looses its intensity with repetitious chasing, shooting and explosions, with cardboard characters. Says nothing of any consequence other that "war is hell but gosh is the adrenaline rush addictive!" and tries to make us sympathetic toward a character who would rather be recklessly defusing bombs in Iraq instead of spending time with his wife and young child at home. Don't waste your time or money.

Jim H gave it an8:
I watched this as a personal double bill with Full Metal Jacket. While I would say that FMJ is flawed it also has higher dramatic points and more involvement int the end, including some gut wrenching, unforgettable sequences. Everything about Hurt Locker is done well. It's flawless. But that does not ensure greatness. A few days after seeing it I remember only a little about it: mostly Brian Geraghty's scenes. He's given a juicy role and he fills it well. The rest is really merely good.

Etienne W. gave it a10:
Masterclass, truly wonderful cinema. The detractorss of this movie don't get it, and I pity them for not being able to appreciate the genius of this production. To those that see and enjoy movies as high art, I envy you the thrill you are about to experience.

Adi P. gave it a0:
I do not know what to say so I just say it will lose Oscars.

Nicole J. gave it a3:
Considering the reviews, I was thoroughly disappointed. It simply failed to engage me. It felt like a horrible waste of 2 hours. At this point, I can only hope the critics don't waste any more energy promoting this one during awards season.

Craig L gave it a5:
Don't believe the hype very average.

hal b gave it a7:
A very good film about a small contingent of soldiers (explosive ordinance disposal -- i.e., bomb squad) in Baghdad in 2004. Well directed, well acted, well plotted and paced... and blessedly non-political. But for me, it didn't live up to the hype. Yes, Renner does a fine job in the lead role. Yes, there are moments of tension, moments of mute horror, and moments of dramatic catharsis. But I found this film oddly 'flat' overall. Still, it's worth seeing this if you want to see a compelling story about the war in Iraq. [I think it would have been better to see this on the big screen, rather than on my little 27" flat screen.]

peter C gave it a10:
Most definitely the best film of 2009. I'm reading a lot of negativity from some viewers here, as for example the ending was sudden. Thats war the there's no epic battle before you leave your duty behind and return home, so it being sudden in many regards went with the films depiction of the Iraq War. Also I did not see any hype behind this movie it just kinda crept in and took a lot of people by surprise with no hype whatsoever. Though on the film. If you like war films that don't follow the over the top climatic battles and heroes like Saving Private Ryan, but prefer more subtle films that show it more so for how war really is, you will enjoy this film

Tom R gave it a10:
I'd never heard of it until I rented it. I had zero expectations and was blown away by this movie. This is on par with "Full Metal Jacket." Each war makes a soldier wacky in its own unique way.

Ryan S gave it an8:
Truly an immersive war movie. An eye-opener. As I was watching it I was thinking about whether this is as good as classics like "Full Metal Jacket," and it's nearly at that level.

Eric L gave it a10:
Amazing. Not to be missed.

Jacob T gave it a10:
Absolutely the most compelling movie I've seen about war. I don't know what people dislike about this movie, but I loved every fucking second of it.

John L gave it an8:
This movie is a total rush with no political overtones. Extremely intense!

R L gave it a10:
Wow! What a movie. Outstanding . I dont watch many flicks because so many are crap. But this one is different: Suspenseful. Believable and pushed every emotional button. Watch it.

John B. gave it a5:
Very average movie, not sure what all the hype is about.

Alene V. gave it a10:
Extraordinary. More than a war film - a profound human drama.

Brent S gave it a6:
I decided to check out this movie based on the ridiculously high score this film received on Metacritic, and when I watched it, I was shocked at how overrated this movie was. Don't get me wrong, I thought it was a decent movie, and I enjoyed it for the most part. But it is far from one of the best War movies I've ever seen, and there wasn't even really a plot, not to mention the ending was sudden, and it sucked. Usually the critics are harsh and the average viewer can enjoy a movie for what it is. But this time, the Critics seem to really like it and the average viewers are walking away disappointed because its not nearly as good as the critics are claiming it is.

robert i gave it an8:
True to the pumped up, hormonal realities of combat.

Fistsoflove 69 gave it a5:
It was not what I would call an action movie, it was a good drama but not an action movie. The ending is sadly more true to life than you'd imagine.

Elwenil gave it a10:
Excellent from start to finish. A must have purchase on BluRay for the sound and visuals in HD. A story about soldiers doing a job in a war rather than another political statement that seems to always be hidden in movies like this. I'd compare The Hurt Locker to Black Hawk Down and if you liked BHD, you should like The Hurt Locker.

r w gave it an8:
A very realistic and suspenseful film, with terrific acting (particularly from the lead actor) and well defined characters.

David M gave it a3:
I'm sure there intentions are good and they might consult with soldiers that have been there. But as a medic that served in Iraq with various Special Forces Group and CIA. I'm really disappointed with how they portray how we work and what we do. Kathryn Bigelow makes it look like we run around doin whatever whenever we feel like. As Lt. Gen. Hal Moore says, Hollywood never gets it right. PLEASE calling all directors who wish to take on a war film. GET IT RIGHT! We go out there not wishing to die but willing to give our lives for our country. For those who have given their all, get it right for them. Not for drama sake.

Joe S gave it a6:
Has two or three memorable set pieces that have one or two memorable action sequences. All the Iraqi's are little more than placeholders to move the story along ("cowering moron," "fawning kid who likes soccer," "guy with cell phone and bad timing," etc.) The American soldiers' behavior and their repercussions make no realistic sense either. An action movie with better pedigree than Michael Bay, but hardly the film that the critic's are gushing about. Lower your expectations and you'll be fine.

Kyle M gave it a10:
If Avatar beats out this, and the other nominees for that matter, I'll be mad.

S gave it a10:
I finally saw the war movie The Hurt Locker. I absolutely LOVED it!!! In my opinion, it is hands down the BEST movie of 2009 and one of the best movies I've seen in many years. Brilliantly and intelligently directed by Kathryn Bigelow, who definitely deserves an Academy Award for Best Director, The Hurt Locker is intense, suspenseful, exciting, and thrilling. The acting is superb, especially by main actor Jeremy Renner, whose performance is totally real, raw, and brilliant. Renner deserves an Academy Award for Best Actor. I warn you that you won’t sit and relax through this movie. You’ll empathize with the characters and feel deep within your gut intense emotions that make your heart pound. You can see The Hurt Locker this week on DVD.

Peter G gave it a3:
"Critics" did it once again.... so inaccurate. It allmost hurts that much better movies are getting terrible reviews and boring crap like this (well, someone will get a edification or just good time...maybe) gets so many 100s. We should end reading their bullshits so they will lose their pointless work.

Bryan B gave it a7:
As another Vet and EOD tech I give this film a 7. Yeah it’s inaccurate from a military perspective, and certainly from an EOD perspective. It’s sometimes fun, and sometimes funny, and generally is very nice to look at. However, like most, I feel the characters were shallow and difficult to "bond with” or care about. As another review stated, I feel that the script or plot was very weak, in that I felt I was simply watching a meandering team run around searching for a purpose, or from another perspective, that there was no defined goal or task to be accomplished by these characters. From a “real-world” EOD perspective our guys, and yes gals, do some wonderful and usually risky work "over there" and while Ms. Bigelow captured some of that work, and the feel of Iraq, it falls just slightly short in most of its attempts. Some specific thoughts on the film include the very pretty “daisy-chain” IED that Jeremy Renner pulls up from the ground with the really pretty red detonation cord. There is some fact used in making this scene, although it would look drastically different in real life, and as stated by many would be defused with a robot if at all possible. Yes I disarmed many IED’s by hand, although they were rare occurrences that I took on a case by case basis. Were the inaccuracies used to hide the classified work of EOD technicians, or were they simply a failure to portray real world scenarios accurately? Perhaps both. I will agree with many Veterans that the uniforms were often inaccurate, and the scenes with the crew out on their own are very inaccurate. In other words nobody travels alone in Iraq. EOD specifically would have a large security contingent of Military Police or Army Engineers to protect them, since, as many Veterans have stated, EOD are not Infantry or front-line combat troops. Yes, like all Soldiers, they can fight, however it is not the primary purpose of their existence. That of course is bomb disposal, which in this film, is both inaccurately and accurately depicted. Examples would be the car bomb scenario which seemed fairly accurate, tense and disturbing as it is in real life. Oh, just a note here, Yes EOD technicians will remove the bomb suit to “die comfortably” when the amount of explosives is determined to be large enough to nullify the use of the suit. Why wear the armor if it’s useless? Another reviewer stated that an Army Sergeant would not dare question the authority of a superior as we see in this film. Well I don’t know about the other Veterans, but questioning authority seemed to be a regular occurrence in Iraq, especially when you consider Soldiers are placing their lives on the line, sometimes to brand new leaders who graduated West Point last month….lol….sorry gentlemen….you know your education was useless in combat. An old saying is “Better to be tried by twelve than buried by six”. In other words even a lowly Private in the US Army can voice his opinion in a situation where safety, or mission is jeopardized by a poor decision of a superior. Okay, so my most favortist moment of the film? Well, when poor Jeremy Renner comes home of course. I can completely relate to the “Shock” of walking into a store in the United States. The cold florescent lights, illuminating rows of packaged food products for the American consumer to purchase, are very eerie and I feel this is a beautifully crafted scene. I am sure many Veterans can agree that leaving a third world nation, surrounded by death and coming home to the land of WalMart is an insane experience. Darnit….I cursed myself writing this…..my wife just asked me to go to WalMart…..LOL. So, if you want to see a decent depiction of Iraq, and bomb disposal there, feel free to check out what is a gritty, often scary, and sometimes grotesque look at life disposing bombs in Iraq. The story is lacking, but much like many films these days, its pretty and always a joy to look at……just don’t expect a solid plot with character development…..because these characters are expendable, just like real Soldiers.

Andre gave it a10:
This is a great film about the personal battles faced during war. I don't think it set out to make a statement about the Iraq War itself but how we as humans learn to cope. It's a small story with some very intense action and a handful of heart. Renner gives a helluva performance. Worth seeing!!!

Thayer H. gave it a10:
Truly a masterpiece. Don't let other reviews fool you, this movie is not for everyone. If you truly love films, approach this movie with an open mind and you will be pleased. Only those who are too institutionalized by Hollywood's formulaic processes disliked it, as is evidenced by the polarizing reviews. They just don't get it. People who came in expecting big explosions, standard, unrealistic story arcs, and some sort of solid antagonist, The kind of people who are uncomfortable in a movie experience that doesn't tell them how to feel and what to think.

Seth A. gave it a9:
Excellent film. Don't let extreme liberals stray you from watching one of the best war films of the decade. Everything seems very real, including the psychological damage the war causes the soldiers. A must see for any person who calls themselves a war film appreciator.

Eric O. gave it a10:
The best movie of 2009. It is not a fantascy science fiction kind of a movie. It is real and it brings you down to earth. These type of soldiers are the bravest in the history of human warfare.

James gave it a5:
I absolutely cannot figure out why the critics are raving over this. It was a suspenseful made for TV drama with no plot, unnecessary scenes, mediocre acting, little character development, no deep probing as to their cause - AND TOTALLY FAKE and UNBELIEVABLE SCENES. All you people saying it was 'realistic' need to read the reviews by ex-soldiers who say it was not only tripe - but that they were borderline offended by it - and in fact it poorly portrayed Iraqis as well. 5 points for keeping me on the edge of my seat, 0 for everything else.

Jeff gave it a0:
As a Soldier, I had high hopes for this film. I'd heard great things, and couldn't wait to check it out. I was utterly disappointed - I heard over and over again that this movie captured what it's "really like over there." All it proved is that no one in Hollywood has a clue. Still.

Alex S gave it an8:
A very, very good " Iraq war" movie. I liked it, but still the critics are pissing themselves too much it seems. The ratings for this movie are so great everywhere that my expectations were too high. I liked the fact that this film did not tried to get into politics also.

Bullitt gave it a4:
Was suspicious from the start, this could have been a good film if there was at least a plot. But it also seemed totally inaccurate to me, and I'm no soldier, but I'm smart enough to identify this film has more in common with point break than anything in real world war conflicts. Avatar has more realism.

Eric S. gave it a0:
I hated the War Lover, directed by Katheryn Bigelow. I am shocked to see that critics are falling all over themselves to praise and push it on the American public, which has already soundly rejected it at the box office. No one has acknowledged that "The Hurt Locker" is an exploitative ripoff of "The War Lover", a 1956 film with Steve McQueen. "Hurt"takes the psychological complexities of "Lover" and sensationalizes and simplifies them to make a blatant pro-war propaganda piece. Katheryn Bigelow is our equivalent of Leni Riefenstahl, a female director who glorified war and Nazi invasions. Katheryn Bigelow took the premise of "The War Lover", originally a novel by John Hersey, without transferring one iota of the intelligence of the original. In "Hurt" Bigelow unselfconsciously supports the war in Iraq and suppresses the reality of war and the nature of the American involvement there. She glorifies the lead character, a blind killer, who is shown in "The War Lover" as a maniac. How naive to think one could make a war movie about Iraq without having a political POV! This is why all war movies about this war are flops. They are all idiotic in the same way. The Hurt Locker does not reveal any truth, they are in denial of the truth. In my own review, I point out that Bigelow's "Hurt" tries to resurrect the permanently discredited Western genre, an old canard that male directors couldn't touch with a ten foot pole. A male director making "Hurt" would risk accusations of chauvinism, racism, and sensationalism, if not open complicity with the Pentagon in an effort to recruit new cannon-fodder. At the very least, SOME movie critic should point out that Bigelow uses every cliche in the Western book, and her characters are superficial and nonsensical, archetypes that even her apparent target audience, 12-year-old-boys, would reject. The most disturbing thing is that many critics have heaped high praise on this dumbed-down debacle, as if they are also complicit in supporting the war aims of the military. At least those critics who laud The Hurt Locker will inadvertently expose their incompetence as reviewers and complicity in prolonging the slaughter of civilians in ugly imperialist wars. Duly noted.

RIcky Blue gave it a1:
I'm with RW on this one. I thought this was a dumb, empty movie and haven't found a single review that points out what I've missed other than it was some kind of adrenaline rush. "It was so real, man." What kind of ivory tower institution do you people come from? This movie is disrespectful to American soldiers and Iraqi civilians alike. It's just another lame Hollywood vision of reality that allows people to pat themselves on the back for saying absolutely nothing. I don't know. It's an empty movie with bad dialogue and ridiculous, two-dimensional characters.

Brendan D gave it a1:
Seldom are war films and war politics able to be separated, but this is ridiculous. It's one thing to open up a dialogue about the rightness and wrongness of political and military decisions -- the great ones do that. It's a completely different thing, however, to put such a shiny gloss on it. This movie is to war movies what "Crash" was to race movies: a film that functions more as an idea than a story. It certainly wasn't boring; but then, neither was "Crash." However, I like films that probe a little deeper. If you want to see something that will make you question your beliefs on war (whichever side you fall into), check out "The Thin Red Line" or "Battlestar Galactica" and ditch this schlocky nonsense.

r m gave it a0:
Walked out of the theater. Boring movie full of negative cliches.

michael w gave it a10:
Simply the best movie in a military setting.... Nothing quite like it.

Jody T gave it a10:
If this movie does not get an Oscar, something is terribly wrong in Hollywood!

barbara w gave it a10:
I really liked this movie. It made the confusion, fear of the war real. The humanism, the desire to do a job well, how the three members of this team got through the days differently..I thought it was great film making.

joe b gave it a10:
best film of the year - bar none.

cj j gave it a6:
As an EOD tech i can tell you ther are many unrealistic things in the movie. Back when this story actually took place and the reporter was embedded with the unit EOD did run around without much security and did do most IED's without the robot. The scene with the snipers took place on the demo range and EOD did regularly go without a convoy as it was accross the street from the base and security if it was there stayed up range. EOD did not have dediicated security back then. All the crap about leaving the base alone at night and breaking into the families home was crap. the smoke grenade scene was crap. the VBIED scene was crap. The brittish guys were suposed to be blackwater or something. EOD does carry a .50cal sniper rifle but not for shooting people. The blackwater guys shouldnt have been there either way. While EOD are not special forces they do have training from one of the hardest schools in the military as all branches attend the same school.It has about a 57% attrition rate the last i checked and it is 9-12 months long with 12 hour days and you cant even take notes home to study because they are classified and locked up each evening. While much of the movie is far fetched and turned hollywood, do give EOD their due because it is an incredibly difficult job that many even if willing, dont have what it takes to perform anyway. Aside from all that the acting was pretty good, but didnt deserve all the rave.

Kevin V gave it a4:
The Hurt Locker has been done before, only not in Iraq, and perhaps not so intelligently. The conflict between strict protocol and an independent rule-breaking soldier is nothing new. In fact, none of the characters in The Hurt Locker break army stereotypes. This doesn't make the movie any less poignant, but leaves it feeling stagnant. The only way this movie breaks new ground is by setting the story in Iraq.

E F gave it an8:
I hate films that obey the Hollywood formula, with pointless explosions designed for 14 yr olds. This is not one of those films. Every year less than half a dozen films are actually any good in my opinion and this IS one of those. Good story involving unlikely friends, which doesn't try to embellish war. Some rope moments but generally good, not too sure about the ending. Good Solid Film.

Frank R gave it a9:
this was an extremely intense movie, i was on the edge of my seat through the majority. For the naive people like RW who gave this movie a 0 because it's a "fairy tale set in current event setting", congratulations you just gave the exact definition of what a large selection of movies are, this one just happens to deal with a current event you are tied into and you took things personally. Get over it, it's a great movie.

Alex K. gave it a5:
The movie was fairly exciting and suspenseful, but the ending left me feeling detached from the characters. Seriously, if the film is trying to be deep and thought-provoking it shouldn't fall back on cliches of heavy metal listening, liquor swilling, and punching contests.

Keith P gave it a10:
I like The Hurt Locker. The movie isn't boring. This movie gets an A+ from me. I highly recommend this movie.

Bill F gave it a10:
By far one of the best war movies made. This movie may or may not be an accurate representation of what bomb squads in Iraq are faced with but it is a fantastic film regardless.

h zac gave it a4:
This movie was good for the first 20 minutes of the movie suspenseful then the rest had me rumbling my lis and slouching in my chair don't see it

Jim P. gave it a10:
An awesome film about the adrenaline of war, and why those who do it well, do it very well!

R W gave it a0:
Really!?!? 10's for this garbage. This movie was so painful to actually sit through. There of course were all the stereotypes of us military people. If this movie was about a race or sexual orientation all those 10's given by the masses of clueless people would have been 0's with long rants about how insensitive and demeaning the movie was toward people it was supposed to be about. This movie is a fairy tale set in a current event setting. Characters are ridiculous stereotypes who apparently have no oversight which is sort of an inherent part of the military (for those of you who have never bothered to serve). The situations are erroneous and overly contrived. Basically this movie was an atrocity. If it fits your political stance and reinforces your beliefs great, but please don't try and pass this off as an example of what is going on in Iraq. Thanks.

Andrew R gave it a5:
This movie was not nearly as good as the critics seem to think it was. Not absolutely horrendous but not that great.

Michael M gave it a7:
Good film, not great. The camerawork really disappointed me. Some of it was spectacular, but some of it was shaky close ups that were just plain annoying. I Love artfully filmed close up shots, but I simply couldn't focus on what was being filmed or going on. Sniper scene in the desert was great. Acting was good, but nothing fabulous. Again, good movie, not great.

James G gave it an8:
Great movie, get over the lack of realism. Realistic scenarios would not have worked. The movie is about the tension and feeling of Iraq that it creates, and it does a good job. It does seem highly overrated by the critics, but I think there is really their way of telling the industry "give us more Iraq films!". Also keep in mind this film was sold for only 1.5 million, it was very low budget. You have to adjust your expectations. All the ratings of zero are completely irresponsible. On no conceivable rating scale could this movie be a zero. People rating it a zero are really just saying they personally couldn't watch it given the lack of realism. That is completely different from how critics rate movies, critics do not just give their own idiosyncratic personal opinion.

Canaan B gave it a10:
Do not trust the naysayers, this movie was absolutely great!

michael j gave it a9:
I enjoyed this movie and thought it was very tense. I am suprised by the reaction from current armed service members. What if the criticisms of the inaccuracies and unrealistic nature of this movie are totally true? Does that make this movie automatically shitty? Is "Apocalypse Now" an insulting, bad or offensive movie because Vets feel it didn't reflect their actual service experience in Vietnam? Apocalypse Now is an incredible movie, as is this one.

Alan gave it a10:
Amazing. Great to see the people who cant appreciate a brilliant film. If you want to see a brainless big budget Hollywood action movie like transformers 2 etc, no1s stopping you. Oh and Hannah F, there isnt any British army in the film, its clearly a private company, the clues are obvious. Please think more

Eric and Eric gave it a0:
The only good thing about this movie is that it only cost two dollars for the pirated copy that we bought here in Afghanistan. We would be embarrassed if any of our money actually made it to anyone involved with making this movie. This movie is horribly inaccurate, unrealistic, and down right awful. The worst part is that it is getting such great reviews because the critics have obviously never been outside except to get more popcorn.

James P gave it a10:
one of the most thrilling war movies ever made. Jeremy Renner is going to become one the new actor to look out for.

JC T gave it a1:
Critics who gave high scores are mostly boring movies and this is one of them. With limited music and tons of slow suspense drama, this movie is not quite popular and epic enough for people to watch. If this movie ever goes for a Oscar nomination, be it that way.

Neil F gave it a10:
"Total bore"? "Forced tension"? What are the people knocking this film on?

Alex P gave it a10:
This is the "Platoon" for this generation. Simply brilliant filmmaking.

James O gave it a10:
Anyone who gave this movie below a 6 is being dumb. Its a great movie, go see it.

Hugo S gave it a6:
The Hurt Locker is another pointless attempt at glorifying the act of bravery and the demon that is war but it fails as a reflection of it and as a movie. I'm not an army guy, you could say i'm actually the opposiste of it and was incredibly hyped to watch this film; what an incredible dissapointment. I'm not an expert on how the military works but I can see where the army guys in the comments section are coming from, it really feels like they had a series of unrealistic set pieces before having a script and that's what they went for. It simplifies a conflict, it shakes the camera constantly missing the point of shaking a camera on a movie. It is extremely pretentious and goes on and on without any form of narrative. When it looks like an interesting idea is about to start and develop a plot it just stops and moves on into another annoying moment of camaradery and funny portraying of one of the most annoying main characters of the year. Don't believe the hype, this is just another example of how critics tired of being forced to watch Dance Flick and any other film their boss asks them, watch a movie that it's not awful and think it's the second coming of Christ. This is just another movie with a few ideas but poorly executed.

Hannah F gave it a0:
Oh dear... What a serious serious disappointment....! I genuinely feel like I have wasted 2 hours of my life... After watching what I thought was a great trailer, I went to see this and felt totally cheated by the speed, excitement & nitty gritty detail it's supposed to portray. The pretentious and unimpactful slow scenes did little to inspire the imagination of what clearly is a grueling job these men have to endure. And what was with the way they portrayed the British Army to be a bunch of dithering fools? There was nothing intense about it, so many reviews comment on the thought provoking insight to the Iraqi war. The result for me was slow, unsubtle and laboured. So many scenes felt disjointed and unnecessary to me, it was like watching Big Brother! I absolutely would not recommend watching this movie, in fact I even feel that a complaint to Odeon for picking such a dull film is in order. Pants!

Greg Q gave it a7:
Not much depth here. Well filmed and great acting all around, but the events in the movie don't match what really happens. Very entertaining, though.

Bruce D gave it a10:
I don't even like war movies. But this is an amazing film. Perhaps even "perfect."

Michael W gave it a10:
An instant classic which surpasses many of the most esteemed war films from the past. The Hurt Locker is on the short list of greatest war films ever made.

Rob M gave it a10:
Best movie I have seen this year, and by far one of the best war movies made. This movie cut the crap and focused on the characters above everything else, no over the top gun slinging. To anyone who simply watches this movie and then writes it off as crap probably just doesn't have the mental capability to see it for what it is. Movie critics usually have some idea of what they're talking about and in this case I can't agree more with them, except maybe the last two.

V M gave it a6:
I thought this movie dragged on without much of a plot. I also thought some of the things they did were implausible. I'm an Army and have been to Iraq.

Dave D. gave it a3:
Total bore. Walked out after 30 minutes. Watched two bomb-defusing scenes with forced tension and ridiculous mini-plots involving innocent bystanders that entered the scene simply to create tension, and then quickly exited. Seriously. I can't believe this film is highly rated. The theater management allowed me to save my night by watching Soul Storage instead!

Ann M gave it an8:
Primarily a character study of three unusual soldiers and their takes on the war - love it, hate it, and stop-this-improvising. James is an exaggerated but unforgettable character. Interesting scenery. Suspenseful. Much of the action was unrealistic; derived from other war movies instead of from Army procedures.

Ray K. gave it a0:
I was excited to see this movie for a number of reasons, not the least of which was it's critical buzz. When I walked out, I was appalled. Not by the technical inaccuracies or the unbelievably inane behavior and portrayal of the characters. That just makes it fiction. What offends me and what will offend anyone whose put in his time downrange is that everyone out there seems to think this is such a great movie. Every gushing review I read talks about Hurt Locker's harsh and uncompromising realism. BS! Do NOT watch this movie thinking that anything happening on screen is even remotely close to true to life. Nothing, NOTHING about this movie is close to being "real." From my perspective, GI Joe is a better movie because it doesn't pretend to be something it's not and then fail miserably at it. Katherine Bigelow might have fooled all the civilians but she's not fooling anyone else.

Jeremy C gave it a9:
This was not a documentary about bomb disposal. This was a film about the human reaction to the overwhelming fear and finality of war. It's about the despair that feeds in Eldrige, the denial of the Col., the emptiness of Sanborn, and the certainty of war that drives James. This film must be interpreted through the opening quote. War is a drug. This film is about how human beings respond to that stimulus and how and why it becomes an all-consuming entity to some and a dice game to others. This was an excellent film.

Sam F gave it a10:
This was an absolutely amazing film. Bigelow does an outstanding job at not only developing these great characters very well, but does a masterful job at building up the tension and suspense perfectly. Also, the performances (Jeremy Renner and Anthony Mackie in particular) are stellar. Overall, this is a great film and I hope people see this one.

Wes gave it a9:
As a service member I think some of my fellow colleagues are missing the point of the movie. Who cares how Hollywood is portraying us? We know the truth, and if civilians are dumb enough to think that's how we are then let them. I thought it was a good movie and worth the price of admission.

Tom B gave it a9:
Really good film focusing on character study and interaction in extreme circumstances. Take it for what it is! Don't let Hollywood ruin it!

Ken H gave it a10:
Not only the best movie about the Iraq War but one of the best war movies EVER! Rarely does a war movie capture the feverish intensity, conflicting morality, and brutal reality of battle and the soldier. Simply awesome!

Kevin R. gave it a2:
I don't know where to start. Anyone who gave this movie a rating of 7 or higher (10....are you kidding me!) has been duped. They must be people that only like a movie because it gets good reviews from critics that have no clue about what is actually going on in Iraq (especially what an EOD team does). I was looking forward to seeing this movie because of the good reviews and was extremely disappointed. I'll start with the good. Pros: Good camera work, a realistic display of the landscape of Iraq and the explosions of IEDs. Some tension filled moments. Unfortunately, the good moments can’t stand up to the very bad. Cons: Extremely unrealistic. Some laughable moments: A humvee traveling around Iraq alone (are you serious?) and then running into a British mercenary team, the British getting their ass kicked, and then the EOD team saving the day with some sniper (if you can call 350m sniper) skills. An EOD soldier walking up and diffusing IEDs left and right (that’s why they have the robot, they blow them in place!). A three person team basically doing what they want without any chain of command (what Army are they in?). Three EOD soldiers wandering off into a town at night in order to hunt down the source of a VBIED (suicide mission?....also, see lack of chain of command above). A soldier sneaking off the FOB to hunt down the boy’s house (come on, I give up! ......if you have ever been to Victory/Liberty the premise is even more ridiculous). I saw one review where the guy said that people in the military were against this movie because they were military elitist and the movie made them look bad. The problem is the exact opposite. Rambo was more realistic. The problem with this movie is that it looks and feels real, so the general public doesn’t get how ridiculous it is. Finally, some say that the unrealistic aspects don’t matter because what is important is the message that is portrayed. However, this message isn’t accurate because real soldiers aren’t having these outlandish experiences. The way this movie is filmed makes it appear true. Those, like me, who have been there can’t help but laugh at how untrue it is. Unfortunately, this movie tricks the general public into believing that it getting, and thus understanding, some insight into what soldiers have experienced. False knowledge is worse than no knowledge at all.

Mark S gave it a1:
I find it almost unbelievably ironic that someone here ("Jason B") suggested that servicemembers aren't liking this movie because it is not "propaganda". Actually, Jason, most of the nonsense that you just saw in "The Hurt Locker" is EXACTLY that...the guys in this film ARE playing Rambo, and that is what we hate so much. It speaks to your complete ignorance of the reality of situation in Iraq and what we've experienced of it that you think this piece of trash film actually portrays soldiers.

Tom A gave it a2:
The big mistake that Bigelow made here is setting the movie in Iraq, with American soldiers as the focal point. If you're going to set a movie in a modern theater of war and attempt to portray real soldiers doing real things, then GET IT RIGHT. Otherwise, set your crappy movie in The Shire and make the hobbits your EOD squad. That'd have about the same level of realism.

simon f. gave it a3:
Good idea for a film, however you feel no connection with the actors at all, you really don't care what happens to them.

Jonathan B gave it a10:
Just superb. Hush up all veterans and appreciate a rollicking good ride. Thanks.

Jim S gave it a5:
Expected much more, given the reviews. It was mostly a dull and predictable film with an implausible storyline. It had a few redeeming moments, but overall, it was just another unrealistic war movie. It did not deliver as billed.

Ned W gave it an8:
I completely understand why the service personnel here are angered by this film and I sympathize with them. An inaccurate portrayal of this war would anger me, too, had I been in the service, I am sure. However, I am not a soldier and was not one in 2004. I have little knowledge of how this kind of work really is carried out. I, too, wish that Ms. Bigelow and her writer had spent more time making sure that they had their facts straight. As a viewer I wish that I had been shown a more correct picture of how the modern ‘sappers’ do their jobs. But, that having been said, this film stands on its own as a very exciting and suspenseful drama. As it happens, my job was in the film industry for forty years. I know how films work, I know how they often misrespresent. So my perspective here is to criticize only those aspects which concern the construction and execution of a movie regardless of its real-world inaccuracies. This film does a great job of making you sit on the edge of your seat for two hours. It works on its own level. So I have given it an 8. The odd thing here is that while many of our service personnel have been angered by this movie, I will wager that many of these same people probably loved certain films that I, as a film professional, would be tearing my hair out at. I have talked to so many people over the years and have had to sit and listen to them extoll the virtues of a movie that to me was the very limit of incompetence. Let me ask our military men and women to think about that for a moment. If I had a half hour to converse with you, I am almost certain that you would mention a movie you loved that I would rip apart seam by seam and toss into the toilet. Really, ladies and gentlemen, it all depends upon your point of view.

Rob n gave it an8:
I enjoyed it. It is entertaining and well-made, but does seem to lack some cohesion as far as plot and theme. Each scene feels like an independent episode from a mini-series rather than part of a film with an overall theme. The theme itself is not apparent until the end, at which point it is anti-climactic. The camera work and acting is great. I would describe it as an action/suspense popcorn movie more than a serious war film.

Jason B gave it a9:
What's with all this military elitism in the other comments? Would you be satisfied with any portrayal of the military short of outright propaganda? This movie is not intended to be an absolutely realistic portrayal of the military. It's intended to huumanize and de-politicize the military experience, which it does brilliantly. Seriously, do you have any idea the way you're portrayed in the media? Either you get the anti-war 'death machine' portrayal or the pro-war 'ubermensch' portrayal. The characters in this movie are relateable to civilians and were put into situations where a single mistake or oversight could mean death. It strips back the pro-war and anti-war propaganda and makes you feel for the situation the soldiers have been put into. But I suppose you just wanted the military portrayed as a bunch of Rambos.

Angry Vet gave it a3:
I borrowed this from a buddy while stationed here in Afghanistan. The movie was so poorly done and the acting and script were so bad that I thought it was an official Army movie in order to stop PTSD. It made me sick to my stomach when I went on Metacritic and saw what high ratings the movie received from the critics. Which goes to show that those critics have absolutely no idea what it's really like out here and in Iraq. I'm ashamed to have even watched the ripped copy of this 'film', if you can call it that. What a joke.

B M gave it a5:
Overrated. The movie is basically a series of well crafted set pieces without anything to hold it all together. The director attempts to fill in those gaps with much pontificating about what war means and how it affects those involved. It's all been said before, but in much more effective ways.

shawn gave it an8:
Nicely acted. a taut thriller. and some really damn good cinematography. what i really appreciated was they didn't try to load the movie down with a central plot. the idea of some super sly enemy bomb maker would have ruined this movie. we've been there and done that one enough. barring the rampant inaccuracies i do lament that there was a missed opportunity to show the real carnage and utter horror these bomb makers inflict on the iraqi ppl. it was alluded to when the main character was back home. after reading a number of these reviews it occurs to me how polarizing this movie is. by those that have never served and those that have. i have served in one capacity or another for close to 20 years.13 yrs in uniform, these past 6 as a private contractor. its understandable why the military experienced will blanche and boil about this movie. but ur judging a HOLLYWOOD movie based on realism. that alone seems flawed in the extreme. u are applying a high level of bias to a purely fictional account because it doesn't sync with the reality we have experienced. its a movie ppl. rating this based on realism is like rating Star Wars on its realism. Hollywood is not in the business of realism its in the business of selling movies. get over yourselves.

Kevin A gave it a9:
I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. It was exciting from the get-go and never lets up. As far as it being realistic? I'm not one to ask as I've never served. For all of the comments by those who have served, it would be beneficial to both list the blatant accuracies that you site, and to refer some movies that do portray the soldier's plight in an accurate way. In the meantime, this movie was spectacular, realistic or unrealistic.

James C gave it a9:
I found this movie really suspenseful that kept holding my breath. I don't fall in the military camp though. Otherwise, I would probably be up in arms too.

mr critic gave it a10:
Ok so many soldiers and military ppl are not liking this movie cuz they say its not real ok good maybe it not BUT the movie is brilliant specially the tension they have created in few of the scenes SOOOOO my militants pal ITS MOVIESSSS enjoy them.

PJ W gave it a10:
Amazing performances and a great story. In my opinion, the best movie of the year so far. Jeremy Renner is incredible.

um..... yum? gave it a7:
Its a good movie, hovering above okay. The critics went high wire with this. I don't really support the troops, I don't think this war is necessary. We did this out of reaction and not thinking. This film definitely did not convince to have a respect for the troops but them again that wasn't the point of the movie. I don't like the characters especially the main character. He's annoying and arrogant. Their all overly masculine people and there was that conversation between the two guys talking and one if them makes fun of the other, teasing him that he probably went to Harvard. Its as if going to a good school is a pussy thing to do and war is for strong big boys that are real men, its all bull shit. I'm happy he got shot. There was some images that turned simple things like a bullet hitting the sand really beautiful. Overall, I liked this film. I came with a open mind and enjoyed myself. Its probably not gonna become the years best and I'm not sure if its gonna be up there but its better than a lot of stuff that came out this year especially this summer.

89D 40 gave it a3:
I should begin by saying that I have never in my 41 years been so excited to see a film. You see, I am a recently retired 89D (that's EOD, or Explosive Ordnance Disposal) Master Sergeant. The last 16 of my 22 years in the Army were spent in EOD, including two full tours in Iraq and a short stint in Afghanistan. As it happens, I was an E-7 section chief in Baghdad in 2004 (this is the same position and rank as the main character in the movie). So, again as it happens, it seemed to me like Hollywood made a movie about...me (and my soldiers). I'd never felt so honored by and excited about a film. That is, until I saw it. From the very beginning, it was very unfortunately clear that Ms. Bigelow was attempting to recreate what I'll call "the Iraq experience", but tragically, without a good faith effort of consulting those who have actually HAD that experience. THAT, my civilian friends, is why the servicemembers here are (I think, to a man) appalled and angered by this film. It isn't that it is mildly inaccurate in the military-specific details...it is that the film as a whole is little more than sheer fantasy. While that in itself is not a bad thing, it becomes VERY obnoxious when the fanciful characters and events are worshipped as worthwhile or profound by folks who simply don't know any better. Why this is so frustrating is because this movie has gotten much attention for its focus on "the experiences of the individual soldier". Ironically enough, what you saw in this film bore absolutely no resemblance to either my wartime experiences or my military experiences as a whole, and I do not think that I am alone with this perspective. All that said, I enjoyed the acting, and the scenery was quite good. Not enough, though, to salvage this flawed and borderline insulting interpretation of a war that is in desperate need of some real lucidity.

Peter B gave it a3:
I realize I'm way in the minority on not liking this movie. Like Jarhead, this is another movie that portrays most in the military as pychos or malcontents. Is it too hard to have a more balanced view? Yes, there are some of these types in the military, but the majority are great Americans. On a side note, anyone in the military will just shake their heads at quite a few implausible situations.

Peter R gave it a1:
I am so glad some of our men and women in the armed forces are speaking up about the inaccuracies in this film. I didn't like this film for other reasons, but know that I have read their comments here, I am angry, appalled and embarrassed. Bigelow didn't claim this film is realistic, but she sure seemed to try to pass it off as such, and the critics and others ate it right up. I truely am embarrassed that this film is getting the "special treatment" from critics that should know better. Sad.

Mimi S gave it a2:
Add me to the list of those who squirmed in my seat and tanked this movie's rating. Congratulations to Hollywood that it took a movie that wasn't distracted by well-known, high-vis movie stars for the general public to think this was a great movie in comparison to other Iraq War movies recently released, almost all as equally unrealistic but blessed with having the name power to carry the movie. It is also no surprise that many military folks, especially those of us who have been deployed, really hate the unrealistic portrayals, the many inaccuracies that this movie has. I suppose I can be like the average civilian and just enjoy this movie as being entertaining I just can't do it. The was just so much wrong with it from the unitforms (in 2004 we were still in desert uniforms) to the scene where the EOD team had to take over the sniper duty over a bunch of Brit mercenaries? The real deal are not that inept. Wish they used better military consultants, then we wouldn't have to suffer the indignity of yet another unrealistic Iraq War movie

Geoff R gave it a10:
Superb story, acting and cinematography. Definitely agree with Damion K, people need to know how to rate a movie, and th fact that this movie isn't totally realistic isn't the point. Its fantastic.

Damion K gave it a10:
First of all, to all the people who rated this movie as a zero, I've had to adjust my score up to a 10. A zero is a movie that makes no sense, has no acting, no plot and is so bad that you cannot sit through it. Rating movies as a zero is generally a testament of ignorance and blatant disregard for helping other people judge whether or not a movie is worth seeing. That being said, this movie isn't necessarily about military accuracy, which is where so many people are getting hung up. The movie is broken down into psychoanalyzing the personalities of three very different people and their perspectives. On one hand, you have the cool, rational team member, Anthony Mackie (Sergeant JT Sanborn), whose sole goal is to survive the campaign. He is sharply contrasted by Jeremy Renner (Staff Sergeant William James) whose goal, apart from the adrenaline rush, is to make a difference in the lives of the people in Iraq. Brian Geraghty (Specialist Owen Eldridge) plays the intermediary - caught in a war he has no idea why he's involved, depicted by his inability and indecision about fighting unless absolutely provoked, but willing to do the best he can. The acting and cinematography in the movie is superb. Each of the three characters brings something different to the table. I was on edge for much of the movie because the people's perspectives, emotions, and actions were volatile to the point that there was no real predictable outcome. Anyone could die at any time, anyone could turn against each other (given the group dynamics), anyone could be left behind. The art direction of each combat scene shows you only what you need to see to establish the feeling of tenseness. It's simply fantastic. There was some "irrational decision making" that occurred during the movie (such as splitting up down alley ways to hunt for possible suspects). But you have to look at those scenes as more than just their face value. The particular scene in which the three team members split up, leads to a confrontation between Specialist Owen and Sergeant James in which William was forced to admit his guilt, mostly to himself. It was perhaps the first time, in a long time, that he had stepped outside of his own shoes to see what his decisions were doing to those around him. It is much more poetic than spelling things. If I had to complain about this movie, it would be that it went on a little bit longer than necessary. But it is hard to say what some of the established mood would have been if scenes were cut short.

King H gave it a10:
No need to wait 10 years for this film to become a classic. It is one NOW!

Bill T gave it a1:
This film was garbage. I couldn't help laughing during the dramatic chase scene at the end of the movie, the tense sniper battle in the desert, the vigilante soldier's escape from his FOB, and the crazy soldiers drinking whiskey in their room. All four of these scenes were unrealistic. A British merc is unable to use a .50 cal sniper rifle to kill an insurgent sniper who is 350 meters away? Want to know how to kill an insurgent at 350 meters away? Pick-up your M-4 and use your scope to shoot him. I had trouble watching this film because it was so unrealistic and boring. I hope people don't consider The Hurt Locker to be THE Iraq War movie. If you want to see a good movie about the war, watch Generation Kill.

richard h gave it a10:
Fantastic film. Tense and riviting drama. Realistic and genuine.

Sam R gave it a9:
A lot of people are giving this movie bad reviews because they think its unrealistic. Well, first of all, it is. Second of all, who cares! This movie is not a true story its simple a fictional chapter of what a three man EOD squad COULD HAVE have been like. So please stop quibbling and enjoy it. This was by far the best film I have seen in 09, just edging out Public Enemies. Renner is fantastic and the other two are fantastic as well adding to the tension of their relationships and missions. All in all, this movie blew me away. And although I thought that it took a small step into becoming one of the Bourne movies when Renner is running around Baghdad. I can find no other major critiques. A solid 9 out of 10.

A Khan gave it a9:
This is a very intelligent and gripping thriller.

Jeff A gave it a9:
What a great film all around. I would be very interested to know how realistic this account is because I left the theater with a more profound respect for those who serve in our modern wars as well as a deep sadness for the world to which they return. The experience is as intense as it is educational.

jeff h gave it a9:
The most intense and realistic war movie I have ever seen.The cast of unknowns keeps you on the edge of your seat and to think that this masterpiece was directed by a woman is remarkable.

Bob W gave it a9:
Intense, suspenseful, engrossing.

Josh E gave it a9:
I understand, a little, how certain people connected to the military may get upset by the lack of realism in the representation of how these men go about their jobs, but name one thing that Hollywood makes that is realistic. Love, no. Attractiveness of average people, no. True events, no. Transforming robots... OK, I'll stop now, because it's endless. That's not the point with this film. It's not the "How," it's the "Who" and the "What." The mundane for these men is life or death at the flip of a coin or, in this case, switch. It's about a man who is overwhelmed by choosing 1 cereal in a crowded aisle and only knows peace when he is alone with a bomb because it's the only time he knows what to do... disarm it. Despite the lack of realism, this movie only improves my admiration for the men that risk their lives in any capacity for our freedom and that of others. "The Hurt Locker" is a film, not a documentary. It is compelling for its intensity and the how close these characters are to oblivion as part of their daily routine. I think it's an excellent film and hope that others can look at it is a situation with probable characters, and what this situation does to them, and not how they aren't travelling with the right amount of Humvees or aren't using the robot enough. It's a story, and one that is well told and acted... Something that is truly rare in the cinemaplex now-a-days.

John Q gave it a10:
This maybe be one of the best war movie's I have ever seen. It is equal to and in some ways better than Apocalypse Now, Full Metal Jacket,and Platoon. I cannot remember a time when leaving a film with this feeling in my stomach. Apart from the brilliant suspense and action, apart being about war this film's messages is about human nature. It is most definitely a work of fiction. People who criticize it as not being realistic missed the point entirely. I have never been blown away like this by a film EVER. If you have ever experienced something (no matter what it is ie, drugs, sex, danger, nature) that completely touches you to your core, and cause you to reevaluate how you want to live your life, then you will get this movie. The moral of the story has nothing to do with war, but of the wants and needs of the human physique. This film is absolutely brilliant and if you don't think so, your not smart enough to get it and are probably a dull shallow person.

s a gave it an8:
I think the point was the character becoming so enveloped within his experience as a soldier that he was unable to remove himself from the war when the opportunity arose. On this level I think it was very effective (reports of depression etc. in Iraq war veterans). Certain scenes did stretch plausibility (especially the part when the lead character goes vigilante). As non-military though, I didn't have any difficulty believing in the fantasy. Also, it effectively created a sense of irony as I sat in the theater sipping my soda and munching on popcorn while some soldiers were trapped in a firefight while baking in the desert.

Isaiah G gave it a10:
This film will keep you at the edge of your seat with adrenaline running through your veins. Through the most of the film the main character plays cat and mouse with armed explosives to save the lives of others including himself. This film is probably the best film this decade.

Domo R gave it a10:
Jeremy Renner proves without a doubt he is a major talent thanks in large part to Kathryn Bigelow's impeccable direction. He has always been good but this puts him way, way over the top. And as far as Bigelow is concerned, I've always admired her muscular direction but felt something was left wanting. With The Hurt Locker she has found the perfect vehicle to flex her guns and one up the old boys' network. Great movie.

john B gave it a10:
The Hurt Locker, Movie Review by BANJO52.blogspot.com The Hurt Locker: 4 (on a scale of 1 low to 4 high ) In this study of a U.S. Army bomb squad in Iraq in 2004, director Kathryn Bigelow grabs us by the throat in the first few minutes and never lets go. I find myself tempted to say this is the best war movie I’ve ever seen, though spending much thought on art as a competition can become as wrong-headed as the Oscars are. So I'll just say I don’t remember feeling any more involved in the elite films of this genre—for example, Apocalypse Now, Deer Hunter, Platoon—than I was during Hurt Locker. Original but not self-conscious in technique, the action scenes, along with the landscape of a distressed city and its inhabitants, feel absolutely immediate and real. Ditto the desert scenes. There is some gore, though not the mindless exploitation of it that I've come to expect in action movies. More prominent is the interplay among the three main characters, which poses important questions about leadership, friendship, recklessness and responsibility, courage, grace under pressure, loyalty, obedience, heroism, the independent personality--and, always one of my favorites: when and how a character can seem both arrogant and sympathetic. Toward the end of the movie, I find two problems, neither of them fatal. First, there are indications of the probable outcomes of two of the three main characters. Why not the third, who might be the noblest of the group? Did I miss a line? Secondly, there’s a bit of drift toward didacticism, or at least summarizing. However, it is fairly well controlled, never develops into full-blown propaganda, lasts for only five or ten minutes, and doesn’t even begin to override the method that has dominated: action, and imagery, and characters revealing themselves without a lot of instruction from the script on how we should feel or what we should think. If you assume this will be, or should be, a facile anti-Bush or “War is Hell” flick, stop supposing and go see an admirable effort to avoid both glorification and condemnation. The Hurt Locker is closer to work than play for an audience; good art requires more effort and attention than entertainment does. But see it anyway. It's a disturbing wealth of visual and psychological experience, concerning some of humanity's oldest, most troubling themes.

Danita gave it a10:
Great story line and acting with such a realistic feel and directing, it had an organic, documentary feel to it. Awesome all around. And funny if you had enough spine to laugh.

SGT K gave it a0:
this is the worst movie about iraq. its totally inaccurate. it maks EOD out to be some sort of Special Forces and they're NOT. the things they do in this awful movie are not what the do over here.

Scot T gave it a10:
Terrific movie......one of the better war movies I've seen.

h c gave it a9:
Felt shell shocked coming out of this film---really intense piece but with very little big action CG crap--yet psychologically totally thrilling. This is definitely a fictionalized story, but I don't care, the acting, direction, writing--structure--all of it was terrific.

Dale M gave it an8:
This was a very different kind of war film. When you come right down to it, the horrors of the war in Iraq are probably nowhere near the horrors that WWI soldiers went through, especially the WWI presented in "All Quiet on the Western Front." However, in WWI the soldiers were by and large either drafter or duped into fighting for something they never really understood. In the Iraq War of The Hurt Locker, the soldiers are still fighting for something they don't quite understand. Many of the people they are supposedly fighting for would just as soon blow them up, and even the kids on the streets jeer at them. In Iraq, as contrasted to WWI, however, the soldiers are volunteers. What motivates them to fight and be brave? Is it possible they have become addicted to war? Sounds far-fetched but this film makes it seem pretty plausible. The soldier in this film has repeated edge-of-death experiences as would be expected since he has to defuse bombs. In his spare time, he tries to find a human face or a reason for why he is risking his life. For instance, perhaps he is really fighting for the young boy selling DVDs with whom he plays some soccer. Or perhaps, he is fighting for his buddies and comrades-in-arms. None of these quests for the meaning of war prove successful. Yet when he returns to peacetime in the states, life is even more meaningless. Only that edge-of-death, adrenaline-filled existence in war seems to have much meaning to him. Time to volunteer again! In WWI a soldier might have had a locker of mementos from home to remind him what he was fighting for. In Iraq, the soldier has a locker of mementos from all the edge-of-death experiences he has lived through.

Carl C gave it a3:
I think that the reason so many of the servicepeople are upset at the lack of realism in this film is not because of the technical inaccuracies (we don't care much about that stuff), it is because it completely fails to capture what it is like in Iraq (or in any war). Lack of attention to detail is one thing, completely constructing reality is another. This director did the latter, and seems to have fooled a lot of people with it. Really people...this film DOESN'T show what war is like, nor what soldiers are like. Don't be fooled...please.

Robin S gave it a3:
Good acting & camera work but didn't feel an emotional attachment to the characters.

Billy S. gave it an8:
Finally, a movie about the war in Iraq that has no political slant in either direction. A war movie about war and the soldiers fighting it. On that basis - Excellent.

Ed S gave it a6:
As a movie, it's hugely thrilling and entertaining, full of atmosphere, menace, and grit. But the comments of other viewers who seem to have first-hand experience indicate that the story is quite unrealistic, which is what I suspected. I have not served in the military, but I find it hard to believe that a three-man EOD unit in a Humvee could operate with such autonomy, with so little direction by senior officers, for example roaming around the desert and just happening upon an SAS team. I'd bet that real EOD specialists are more likely to be Bible-reading born-again Christians than binge-drinking brawlers. I'm motivated to seek out the 1970s British TV series with Anthony Andrews (of "Brideshead Revisted" fame) called "Danger: UXB," which I bet will stand up well.

J gave it a10:
To all of you military types complaining that this movie wasn't realistic enough, it's not a documentary. It's a work of fiction. Period. The Hurt Locker isn't concerned with the nuts and bolts of making every tiny detail as 100% accurate as possible. If you want that, watch the Military Channel, or better yet go re-enlist and get shipped back over there if want an "authentic" experience. This is the first war movie in ages that paints its soldiers as real, complex people instead of cartoons or psychos, and all you can do is complain? Sheesh. Luckily, for the rest of us, this film will do just fine, because the enlightened viewer will realize that The Hurt Locker isn't about the details, but the big picture. It's a document of what a war like this means and how it affects the participants on both sides. It's neither pro-war nor anti-war, but instead just shows the ways things are without pronouncing judgment on its characters or their actions. It's also a showcase for some of the most impressive action and suspense set pieces to grace the cinema in a very long time. Hard, sharp, and honest, The Hurt Locker is one of the year's very best films. THAT'S the reality.

Adam C gave it a9:
Outstanding and realistic warts and all realism makes this movie compelling viewing. This isn't a war movie. This is a movie about ordinary people who do an extraordinary job while facing their own problems.

Joyce T gave it a10:
Relentless, devastating and totally awesome. Not a political soapbox, but a good war movie is always a moral one. Go see it. Make everybody you know go see it. An effort this fine deserves some box office heat.

Jeffrey S. gave it a9:
Realistic depiction of Army soldiers action, emotions, pain and suffering.Suspenseful as their rotation winds down. The audience never knows who if any will survive till the end.

Gordie A gave it a0:
Clearly there are people voting here that are working for the studio because this film is not at all engaging and people that say it is good are either being payed to say so or are movie morons.

Chris B gave it a10:
Best war movie since Private Ryan and Platoon. Not for the fain of heart. Truly riveting and intense. Why would one ever go back once their tour is over?

Barbara K gave it a0:
I wanted to walk out, but stayed for my sister. I was shocked by the total lack of realism and the way EOD was portrayed. It made a mockery of the infantry guys. They don't hide!!! Makes me sick that this is getting such high marks. There are too many holes and unheard of procedures to list. Where was the consultant?? Total Hollywood movie. Many better out there.

Aron R gave it a10:
Regardless of the technical or militaristic accuracy of the film, (and I feel like I have to remind some reviewers here that making training videos and/or documentaries is NOT what Hollywood does) - this IS a fantastic piece of film-making that director, cast and crew should be enormously proud of. A must see for all film enthusiasts!

Travis T gave it a1:
Echoing the voices of the veterans here. This movie seems to be what the director thought people wanted to think the war is like. It is not a war movie, it is a fantasy, done up to make the masses think it is reality. Simply terrible, and bordering on disrespectful in my opinion. I think though that the most appalling thing is how many people, professional critics and otherwise, actually use the word "realistic" when talking about it. I watched it with a couple of other soldiers and we were quite literally alternating between laughing and wondering "what the hell". "The Hurt Locker" is more like a cable TV drama. I was glad when it was over, and immediately rushed home to voice my displeasure over the internet (albeit against the shouting voices of the masses who think this thing was delivered by god). Also, while I'm at it, you want to see realistic, watch Frontline's "A Company of Soldiers" or "Waltz With Bashir". Those hit so close to home they were hard to watch.

Jon M gave it a10:
One of the best films of the year thus far, and certainly the best Iraq war film. Well performed and well directed -- hopefully this baby will earn some Oscars.

Ella C gave it a10:
Absolutely the most compelling movie I've seen in several years. Beautifully directed and acted. Riveting from start to finish.

Andrew gave it a0:
I am still deployed and this is truly the worst war movie I have ever watched. Without even acknolwedging how far from the truth the tactics are and lack of security in every scene, EOD is falsely portrayed as some sort of special forces unit. I have sat on many IED's and regardless of the fact that units are not allowed to travel outside of a 3 vehicle or 4 vehicle security concept, EOD is not comprised of 3 enlisted defusing bombs. The robot is always extensively used and more importantly EOD personnel are never foolish enough to handle ready to go large ordnance to diffuse it. Every time we found an IED from 155 shells to mortar rounds, they were always blown in place. The few times an IED was taken was when it was fully dismembered by a disrupting detonation. I watched a little over half of this movie before turning it off as it was too painful and ridiculous to watch.

Norm G gave it a4:
Maybe I have seen too many war movies. Too many World War II movies, too many Vietnam War movies, too many Iraq War movies. I get it. War is chaotic, terrible, brutal and attracts wackos. The Hurt Locker taught me nothing new. I didn't care about the characters and I certainly didn't learn anything about the U.S. mission in the middle east. I am not an expert on combat operations but I would guess some of the activity was unrealistic. I was bored and the movies seemed way to long.

Janshc D gave it an8:
Superb pacing. To the point. Reminds me of an excellent English series called UXB. The question is not why are we doing this, rather - if we are doing this, how shall we succeed. Or is it all a dream? It may very well be - that is but one of several question left hanging. Highly recommended.

Ken F. gave it a9:
Outstanding -- one of the best war films I've seen in years. It seemed incredibly realistic to me, but I haven't been there and I don't know what "realistic" actually looks like. I appreciate the comments from several other voters who have been in the military (and perhaps even in Iraq) and who say that some aspects of this film are very unrealistic. I appreciate their service too. But even if The Hurt Locker falls short in some of its military details (just like most war films, even the best of them), it is an outstanding film.

Joseph B gave it a9:
Extremely tense from the get go! Very much like the tension in from the Clouzet movie Wages of Fear. I found myself not breathing so as not to set something off.

Michael J gave it a10:
This movie is a great character study and a must see. one of its most masterful strengths is how no character in the movie ever feel invincible I found myself constantly wondering if this moment was the character's last. the movie's theme was not forced and instead rather subtle (even enough to make some viewers miss some of it) though very powerful. the ending is by far the most well put together i have ever seen in a war film. NOTE: In terms of accuracy and factualness though some scenes may seem fake (sniper scene) my sister who i saw it with is a psychologist who works for the VA, she told me that the characters were dead on in terms of emotions and the way the interact.

Stephen J. gave it a4:
I didn't hate it, but was never grabbed by it either. Some meandering sub-plots overly long sequences. Wait for it on DVD.

Scott A. gave it a10:
One of the best films of the year or any year. Masterful.

TDKinDallas gave it an8:
I can't believe this movie is not in wide release. Extremely suspenseful! I had to keep telling myself to stop clenching my fists, repeatedly. I would have gave it a 10 if it had been more believable, but who cares? Go see this film. I agree with the other reviewer that this is a movie for civilians and thank goodness. I will be going again. I disagree with the reviewer about shaky camera work. I had to leave Cloverfield, but I never felt bad in this one and I really don't remember the shakiness.

Mark S gave it a10:
I've given myself a few days for the experience of "The Hurt Locker" to sink in, and am now convinced that it deserves a place on the same altar as "Full Metal Jacket," "Platoon," and "Saving Private Ryan." It is an entirely apolitical Iraq war film, but what's more: a thoroughly engrossing human drama about working in the most hazardous and unpredictable of conditions.

Brit gave it a10:
The film IS both realistic and accurate. See it really puts a perspective on things.

Michael S gave it a3:
I totally agree with Brad M's review. If you have any military training whatsoever, you are going to hate this movie. I left this movie angry because of all the tactical aspects of this movie that were just completely wrong. Things were done that no one in their right mind would do. Also, the sniper rifle scene was just pure fantasy. I wanted to like this movie. I was real excited about seeing it. It also just went on too long.

Alex L gave it a10:
A very gripping character study.

Richard B gave it a4:
This was a taut, well-acted, intense movie which could have been better if the director had not used the hand-held camera method for much of the film. People shouldn't have to take doses of Dramamine before seeing a movie in order to keep their last meal in place. I propose a rating system that let's viewers know in advance that jerky camera techniques are used in a movie so that those of us who are subject to motion sickness can avoid the film.

Richard B. gave it a4:
This was a taut, well-acted, intense movie which could have been better if the director had not used the hand-held camera method for much of the film. People shouldn't have to take doses of Dramamine before seeing a movie in order to keep their last meal in place. I propose a rating system that let's viewers know in advance that jerky camera techniques are used in a movie so that those of us who are subject to motion sickness can avoid the film.

Richard J gave it a9:
This is an excellent depiction of this most unusual war where the enemy has little to identify them to our military. It is the best film about the war with terrorists that we will see for a long, long time.

Jud C gave it a10:
This is possibly the best war movie ever. You feel like you should take a shower by the time you get home. Short of doing a tour of duty in Iraq, it can't get any more realistic and harrowing than this. Is it possible to get post-traumatic syndrome from a film?

Brad M gave it a3:
I really wanted to like this movie. It was very disappointing to me. The military aspects of the movie were completely unrealistic (Specialists do NOT speak like that to lieutenant colonels, no Humvee rolls by itself ever, infantry platoons don't cower in alleys waiting for EOD to roll up, and no EOD team is trained as countersnipers...among many other things), the character interactions were very contrived, and it was...dare I say...just not interesting. I think this was a great concept which was poorly executed. It was a movie by civilians for civilians, which I guess is why so many critics love it so much.

Kristina R.W. gave it a10:
The best movie I've seen in years! Jeremy Renner is insanely good in this movie. As are Anthony Mackie and Brian Geraghty. I haven't watched the Oscars since the late 90s, but if Kathryn Bigelow, Mark Boal and all the actors are nominated, you bet I'll be sitting in front of my TV rooting for them all to win statues in 2010.

Dennis B. gave it a10:
WOW! Unbelievable film. From the virtual cameos of James Morse and Guy Pearce, to the main players, nobody misses a beat. If you liked HBO's "Generation Kill," you'll love this film as a logical progression of the telling of the story of the Iraqi War. The performances and filming are so real, this movie makes you (MAKES YOU) empathize with the characters. You don't just watch this film; you become a part of it.

Leif J. gave it a5:
This film is a very weakly scripted, so it is hard to find anything compelling in the film... except for the action which revolves around a character's private obsession with stoic victory in battle. A manipulatively gloomy soundtrack, lipstick-red blood show and slow-motion blow-ups say "Yes ma'am" to the director's vision. What we get is an inadvertent picture of a military bending toward breakdown in discipline; there's no sense of higher command or political certainty. The audience I sat with lightly applauded the end of the film. It was hard to tell if they were glad it was over, or were swept up in the fictional heroics.

Grace M. gave it a10:
Offers the most realistic suspense and action I have ever seen. Mesmerizing.

Tim H gave it a9:
Pretty good, but for a movie about a explosives specialist defusing bombs in Iraq there weren't nearly enough explosions OR transforming robots.

Fantasy gave it a10:
A tremendous movie on the war in Iraq. It is a war we can never win as it is about two different cultures. We value life and the enemy doesn't. None of our boys want to be there but they are pawns in a game of life. Once we leave Iraq the two religious warring factions will kill each other. Democracy will never take a foothold in the Middle East. As for our hero he has an obvious deathwish that sooner or later will be fulfilled. The acting, script, and directing is first rate. No holds barred look as to how ugly this war truly is. NO one will ever win.

Zee M gave it a10:
And Why Is This Movie Only In Limited Release? This is an absolute amazing movie, suspense, thrilling, nail bitting, hanging by a thread, on the edge of your seat fantastic. If this movie was in Wide Release, It would've made a lot!

Chris C gave it a10:
One of the best directed films I've ever seen. Manages to be realistic while still telling a compelling narrative, which is hard. Perfectly portrays the tension and constant threat from all sides you imagine the soldiers in Iraq have to face. Film of the year so far for me, by far.

Z. H-R gave it a10:
One of the best war films I've seen in a long time.

Aaron S. gave it a10:
Finally-the first great film about the Iraq War. Unlike previous attempts at portraying the recent conflict, 'The Hurt Locker' doesn't come saddled with an obvious message, heavy handed politics or phony B.S. Instead Bigelow, her fine cast of relative unknowns and a first rate techinical crew deliver an intense, incredibly absorbing visceral experience. The film is amazing in its ability to transport you right into the fray. As a previous comment states-the tension in this film is almost agonzing. Every element of filmmaking combines to create an almost out of body experience. It's also the rare action picture made with intelligence as well as skill. 'The Hurt Locker' is fully deserving of every bit of acclaim it has (and will yet) recieve. Multiple Oscar noms are quite possible and a Best Director Oscar for Ms. Bigelow is very much deserving. DON'T MISS THIS ON A BIG SCREEN!

Chase R gave it a10:
The best Iraq war film to date, and one of the best war films of all-time.

A F gave it a1:
Waste of time.

Steve H gave it an8:
Very realistic movie with great acting. I'm not an Iraq veteren so I cannot vouch for authenticity but it seemed real. I think the movie was a bit too long and a few scenes didn't quite make it.

Shaz K. gave it a4:
Morally, is it fair to fashion an action/thriller out of misery (American or Iraqi)? Or we are supposed to ignore that, as well? If you praise this film because it is ambivalent or not passing any "facile" judgments about war you admit war is too complex, is that not an opinion too? Are American critics falling over this film and calling it the "best american film about Iraq war" because it does not show the torture and the suffering gone through by the Iraqi people? Oh, that would be passing a "facile judgement" right? By focusing on a group of American bomb squad is maybe a good cinematic decision. It makes the film more tense and compact but ignoring the plight of the invaded and make them come across as a tribe deserving of such treatment makes this film more dubious than ambiguous. While I did enjoy the film's various action set-pieces, I find the idea that it took a film about the plight of the soldiers rather than the other sides to get the critics sympathy flowing, disturbing.

Cydney S gave it a10:
Last week a real stinker (public enemies)... to this week and one of the best films ever (hurt locker). No one breathed for the first hour. A film for both sexes. Fabulous fabulous fabulous.

Derek D gave it a10:
By far the best film about the Iraq war, the best war film of the decade and one of the best war films of all time. A taut and intense thriller that does a better job then most war films in portraying the effects of modern combat and the Iraq war on the soldiers who risk their lives every day fighting; or in this films case defusing bombs in hopes to save the lives of soldiers and citizens. Bigelow does an excellent job with this film and deserves much acclaim. Her use of little to no music really enhances the tension. The cinematography is also very well done. The performances are fantastic, especially from Jeremy Renner and Anthony Mackie, both deserving of an Oscar nomination. This film needs to be seen by everyone. It is not a political war film, it doesn’t set out to take one side or the other, it doesn’t care who is right and who is wrong, or should or shouldn’t we be there, all this film sets out to do is make us understand what the soldiers are going through, the impact this war has on them and reminds us why we must always, no matter what the circumstances, support our troops. This film is by far one of the best of the year, a contender and deserving of a Best Picture win and definitely Kathryn Bigelow’s masterpiece.

Kenny R gave it a10:
Incredible movie. If you have to choose between this movie and Transformers 2. Save your money and check out this one.

lola lulu gave it a10:
One of the most realistic war movies that I've ever seen.

Ed N gave it a10:
Easily the best war movie since Saving Private Ryan and on par with Platoon. The film is real, restrained, and it keeps you on the edge of your seat for two and half hours. In a season dominated by movies inspired by and meant to sell toys, here at last is some honest-to-God filmmaking.

James C gave it a10:
One of the greatest war films ever made (by man or woman). It's wonderful to see Kathryn Bigelow at the height of her artistry.

Pat N gave it a10:
Just watch it.

Notary D gave it a9:
A nearly flawless film. The plot is simple, the characters complex, and the tension unbearable at times.

Kevin S. gave it a10:
This first great Iraq war film. Visceral and powerful. A character based film without any ugly Hollywood agenda. Up until this point, American soldiers have been portrayed as either ignorant southern hicks (Stop-Loss) or blood thirsty rapists (Redacted). The Hurt Locker gets the US soldier right - they are warriors for peace, trying to make a difference.

Matthew M gave it a9:
Bigelow's POV work is incredible, sucking you into this hot, confusing, and terrifying world. Renner nails the gung-ho army ranger, who loves to stand out from his comrades but at the same time treat them like family. What I loved is how the soldiers are in a pointless battle that they cannot win or really change, yet they are committed and hooked to it... I am a film snob, but this is the only movie all year besides Sin Nombre that I really enjoyed.

Alan Z gave it a10:
The Hurt Locker is a stunning and horrific achievement that will leave you with shattered tears. I would suggest not having any social plans after seeing this movie, you might be too broken for speech. I only wish that those who bear the responsibility of bringing us to this tragic place could be forced to watch what they have so recklessly created. This film borders on the masterful but proceed with caution.

Michael B. gave it a10:
Absolutely my favorite film so far in 2009. Incredibly tense action with a truly breakout performance by Renner. And Kathryn Bigelow fulfills her promise as a director, too. Just plain exceptional filmmaking.

CLOSE THIS WINDOW