Why SFC James is so reckless, and why you should and shouldn't see The Hurt Locker

Rating: Null/10 (3 October 2011)

The Hurt Locker won six Academy Awards©, including Best Picture.
Watching The Hurt Locker today, for the first time, I kept in mind the criticisms I heard in 2009 (its year of release in the US) from some active and retired military, that real bomb squad personnel would not be, or be allowed to be, so reckless. However SFC James is presented as an anomaly from the beginning, so if we accept higher-up Colonel Reed (David Morse) as another anomaly (and pretend for two hours and change that there are no safeguards against such anomalies in our military), we're on our way to a willing suspension of our disbelief. From a movie-making perspective, though, the most likely reason for SFC James' atypical bravado is the same reason the CSIs on CBS all forget they're not detectives and chase down suspects and interrogate them: it's more exciting that way. The film is exciting, and well acted. The disputed accuracy of its portrayal of Army bomb squads notwithstanding, it also has the feel of reality, perhaps owing to the acting, directing, editing, and heck, maybe the sound work too.
Why You Should See It You got the part about the six Oscars©, right? If the Best Picture, Best Director and Best Original Screenplay don't do it for you, how about Best Editing, Sound and Sound Editing?
Why You Should Avoid It You only watch comedies. You never read the paper because there might be a mention of someone getting hurt. You're afraid that if you see an Academy Award winning movie, you might hear a British accent, be forced to think, and find yourself using the word "film."
--from my review at www.1man365movies.com