A difficult film to review

Rating: 6/10 (1 December 2010)

In 2004, three Explosive Ordnance Disposal technicians who are wearing uniforms from two years in the future defuse a serious of fiendishly clever improvised explosive devices (IEDs) in war torn Baghdad. Sergeant James, the new team leader, begins taking increasingly questionable risks. He has become hooked on the adrenaline of matching wits with master bomb makers, and in the end he finds that nothing else in his life matters anymore. He and his two comrades will find themselves forever changed by their experiences.
I have been a fan of director Kathryn Bigelow since 1995, when I first saw her film 'Strange Days.' I later became a fan of 'Near Dark' when it was released on DVD, and I have enjoyed most of her other film and television work. Did she deserve an Oscar for this film? I believe that she did, although her screenwriter didn't. She made a great looking film outside of the studio system on a tiny budget, and she cast unknown actors who delivered star-making performances under her aegis.
Mark Boal's script, as many have noted, is underwhelming and episodic. There really isn't any narrative thrust. Sergeant James is the only person with a complete character arc and some degree of depth. Sanborn reveals that he wants a son at the end, whereas Eldridge's minor arc culminated with him killing an insurgent, but for the most part they're relegated to the background. There are a few touches of verisimilitude (bootleg DVDs, white and orange taxis, the gunner throwing a water bottle at civilian traffic to move it out of the way), but for the most part the scenarios and the actions of the protagonists are extremely unrealistic. I won't go into detail about the technical inaccuracies (in a film that was touted for its realism), but an experienced soldier can find something wrong in nearly every single scene (and why oh why did some characters wear flags on both shoulders? Argh). Mark Boal is no Stanley Kubrick, that much is clear.
'The Hurt Locker' was filmed in Jordan, and although I didn't think that it looked very similar to urban Iraq, Bigelow chose some great and occasionally beautiful locations. As with most war films, the locals are used as set dressing and have very little interaction with the characters. There is no reference to the sectarian conflict between Sunnis and Shiites, and no real insight into the political or economic struggles that the country continues to endure. In a two hour movie about the Iraq war, the protagonists only interact briefly with about three Iraqis. This film won't tell foreigners anything about Iraqi culture or how warm and friendly most Iraqis are. It does do a good job of showing and how ruthless and heartless the insurgents are, and hints at how damaging this form of warfare is to the Americans and how it can make them become heartless too.
Finally, I don't want to bash EOD or the dangerous job they do, but this film dramatizes their heroism to mythic proportions. EOD will go out on missions with an escort/security platoon after another unit has found an improvised explosive device. Combat engineers and even regular infantry units are tasked with actually going out to LOOK for IEDs, often and sometimes tragically falling victim to them. To me those men are more heroic and deserving of recognition than the EOD technicians, who operate in a controlled environment and usually use robots to approach the devices.
In summation, I'm glad that Hollywood finally appreciates Kathryn Bigelow's work, but I think this film is quite overrated. I loved Marco Beltrami's morose score, and Barry Ackroyd's camera work and lighting, but technical prowess doesn't make up for sub par writing.