In (bad) war (movies), the first victim is truth

Rating: 1/10 (4 May 2010)

I cannot understand how this movie won Academy awards and Avatar didn't! Maybe this movie is an example of it's not what you know (or do), but who you know. In this case, the producers and Director of The Hurt Locker must have some pretty good connections with the Academy.
The first five minutes of the "Hurt Locker", just like in "Saving Private Ryan", appear to be extremely realistic.
Unfortunately the rest of the movie turns into predictable mush, ensuring this movie stays well below the standard of other, more realistic efforts.
For example, "Generation Kill", a TV miniseries, has to be, in my humble opinion, 10 times better than "The Hurt Locker", and so much more realistic.
It's 2012 now, and I think I finally get it. The Academy, at that time, was being patriotic (understandably so), and throwing it's support behind the troops. That is the real reason this movie won so many awards. I reckon they could have just shown a picture of the American Flag for most of the movie, and still won the 6 Oscars.
It's a shame really, because giving this movie the high IMDb score and the 6 Oscars devalues both systems badly.
I also can't believe the number of people defending this film. I'm going to write an app that captures their IMDb ID's, so I can filter these people out of all future reviews, to ensure I only get honest (or no "ill informed" - I can think of a better word) reviews.
Those people who call this "One of the best war movies ever", I suggest they go and watch a lot more war movies.
Go see films like the original 1930s, horrific, "All Quiet on the Western Front" or the claustrophobic "Das Boot" or the insanity of "Catch 22". If they want more accurate depictions, try Gettysburg or "Tora Tora Tora".
These films truly deserve Oscars, and ARE great War Movies. The Hurt Locker, IMHO isn't and doesn't.