How many of you have seen The Hurt Locker...

[Chalkperson]

Just wondering, I think it is superb, you are literally in the Humvee with them, made me think of Kevin, he was the Gunner in the Humvee when he was Blown Up by a Suicide Bomber in Adfghanistan...so, anybody else like it...

[IcedNote]

Haven't seen this yet, but I think it's almost to the top of my Netflix queue. From what I've heard, I'm expecting great things.

*edit* - Just checked...and it's next in line.

-G

[Lance]

Haven't seen this one yet - but you've piqued my interest! Grazie!

[DavidRoss]

Terrific film. Superb craftsmanship. At times I forgot it was a fictional movie.

[IcedNote]

Just watched it...and I actually didn't find it all that great (gave it 3 out of 5 on Netflix). I couldn't connect with any of the characters, and I didn't find the story arc convincing at all. Pretty blah from this vantage point. Don't understand all of the fuss...

I thought HBO's "Generation Kill" was handled much better.

-G

[Chalkperson]

I'm not sure that you were meant to connect with any of the characters, in fact she kills off the two Movie Stars that are in the cast pretty quickly, as a portrayal of the life of soldiers in the Iraq War I thought it was really good, she could only afford one Humvee so it's not too realistic in that regard, it's like a fly on the wall documentary and you just follow these guys as the finish up their tour of duty, let's see if it beats Avatar, I sure hope so...

[Barry]

I watched it a few weeks ago in the middle of one of the blizzards that had us snowed in for the weekend.
Liked it, but wouldn't go quite so far as to say I loved it.

I certainly appreciated seeing a movie about our involvement in Iraq that didn't paint the U.S. as villains though.

[Chalkperson]

I watched it a few weeks ago in the middle of one of the blizzards that had us snowed in for the weekend.
Liked it, but wouldn't go quite so far as to say I loved it.

I certainly appreciated seeing a movie about our involvement in Iraq that didn't paint the U.S. as villains though.

And featured real explosions, the Soldiers all told them that the Hollywood explosions are totally ridiculous so they used real bombs...

[HoustonDavid]

As a former Marine, I can tell you that explosions simulated in Hollywood war or action movies are
indeed super exagerated. A typical Hollywood grenade explosion is more like a 105 mm artillery round,
and you can work upward from there. Grenades and mortars make relatively small (but decidedly
undramatic by Hollywood standards) explosions. You don't see "flames" except maybe at night.

Don't get me wrong, they are lethal, just not dramatic. If a round explodes near you, chances are
you will have shrapnel wounds, not blast wounds, and a mortar round at close range can deafen you,
at least temporarily. If you are caught in the open, mortars are very lethal; and they are high
arching, unlike artillery, and come down much like a rock thrown straight up, and thereby get into
small spaces like trenches and foxholes.

The Improvised Explosive Devices (IED's) being experienced by nearly everyone in Iraq and Afghanistan
are as different as night and day from the grenades, mortars, and artillery experienced in previous 20th
Century wars. They are essentially mines set off by stepping on a primitive pressure plate, or by remote
control. They can be underfoot (or roadway), in packages strewn like fake garbage, in walls, or a dozen
other easily disguised locations. If they are meant for troops, they usually contain shrapnel; if they are
meant for vehicles, they are usually large enough to destroy all but the most heavily armored vehicles,
and their occupants. These are the devices seen in "The Hurt Locker".

They are very cheap to construct - usually the same ingredients as a so-called fertilizer bomb - very
hard to detect - little or no metal parts for detectors in the case of large and very effective vehicle
bombs. One of the most effective aspects of the IED campaign by insurgents and Taliban forces is the
perpetual fear they induce in our troops. In most previous wars, there was something referred to as
"behind the lines" or a friendly firebase, a place where one can take off their helmet and put down their
weapon without fear of the enemy - a temporary sense of security and safety. The advent of IEDs (and
suidide bombers) has changed all that and consequently our troops don't have a safe zone anymore -
they are in perpetual danger. Think of being in a constant state of adrenaline rush, which is one of the
central problems depicted in the film.

I was not involved in the modern wars of the 21st Century and am glad for it. But I fear for the consequences
of constant danger and perpetual fear and its toll on our fighting forces today. I honor their service and
Semper Fidelis.

David Sherman

[Chalkperson]

Did you notice that the three lead Actors, standing behind the Director after receiving the Best Picture Award, went into straight into character and started behaving like Soldiers...

[HoustonDavid]

I'm surprised that nobody with a military (or history) background didn't take me to task for the not
observing the difference between IED's used by insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. In Iraq, there
were bounteous arsenals of explosive devices left by a modern Iraqi army after the cessation of
fighting at the so-called end of the U.S. invasion in 2003. The Iraqi army was summarily dismissed
and many took off their uniforms and became part of the insurgency that continued the war and
is still active today. Before the U.S. could destroy them, the insurgents simply raided the Iraqi
army ammunition dumps and supply depots to acquire weapons, and ammunition, including mortar
and artillery rounds, which they improvised into IEDs, as depicted in the film "The Hurt Locker".

Afghanistan is quite different in that there were no extant ammunition and supply depots to raid
for existing explosive devices. The Taliban are well versed in making such devices from simple
but available chemicals and implements, primarily fertilzer and fuel oil, which is simple to turn into
an explosive device; witness the fertilizer bomb used by Timothy McVeigh in Oklahoma City. These
IED's can be set off by crude wooden pressure devices which are almost undetectible because
there is little or no metal involved in their makeup. Deadly shrapnel, used for anti-personnel mines,
can be anything as simple as broken glass and stones. The IED's in Afghanistan are often crude
but very effective because they are so simple and thereby deadly.

[Corlyss_D]

^^^
Iran is supplying the Taliban with the same sort of weaponry they supplied to Iraqi Shiites. The IEDs in both are not the primitive fertilizer bombs; they are extremely sophisticated "shape charges" with Iranian fingerprints all over them.

[Chalkperson]

I'm surprised that nobody with a military (or history) background didn't take me to task for the not
observing the difference between IED's used by insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. In Iraq, there
were bounteous arsenals of explosive devices left by a modern Iraqi army after the cessation of
fighting at the so-called end of the U.S. invasion in 2003. The Iraqi army was summarily dismissed
and many took off their uniforms and became part of the insurgency that continued the war and
is still active today. Before the U.S. could destroy them, the insurgents simply raided the Iraqi
army ammunition dumps and supply depots to acquire weapons, and ammunition, including mortar
and artillery rounds, which they improvised into IEDs, as depicted in the film "The Hurt Locker".

What the US did not know when they invaded was that the Iraqi Army had no Bases, they had Ammunition Dumps instead, my friend Col. Bob worked with General Petreaus training the Iraqi Army, before they could do that they had to build Bases in which to train them, Bob handed out millions of dollars in cash in order to do this, it's quite a funny story but way too long to post here...

[Chalkperson]

^^^
Iran is supplying the Taliban with the same sort of weaponry they supplied to Iraqi Shiites. The IEDs in both are not the primitive fertilizer bombs; they are extremely sophisticated "shape charges" with Iranian fingerprints all over them.

Also, Afghanistan does not have that many regular roads, most of them are just paths that vehicles travel on, it's so much easier to plant IED's in Afghanistan than Iraq because of this...

Col. Bob is on his way to Afghanistan and I am much more concerned for his safety this time, in Iraq after he was initially deployed in Fallujah and other hot spots he lived in the Green Zone and worked out of one of Saddam's Palaces, there is no equivalent in Afghanistan...

[HoustonDavid]

Both the sophisticated Iranian devices and the simpler but primitive fertilizer bombs are in use
by the Taliban. Out in the country (which is most of Afghanistan) fertilizer is abundant and the
more sophisticated shaped charges are not as available, although I'm sure the Iranians are
trying their best. Chalkie, your friend is going to be under the same constant stress as all the
personnel in that most dangerous part of the world, and the danger is very real. I wish him the
best and Semper Fidelis to a fellow warrior.

[AbbyInk]

I sadly haven't seen it yet. I'm patiently waiting for it to come from Netflix.

It looks really interesting I just don't know how I missed hearing about this film until it was nominated for Best Picture. It would have been nice to see it in the theater.

[DavidRoss]

Hi, Abby! I see you joined last June. We haven't "met" yet, probably because I wasn't participating during most of the time since you joined, so please let me extend a welcoming hand and belated greetings to you. Hope you enjoy the flick when Netflix delivers it--just don't set your expectations too high based on the Oscars. View it in the context of a small, relatively independent film production--not a Hollywood blockbuster--and I suspect you will be impressed (unless the nature of the subject matter turns you off).

See you around more often, I hope! Welcome aboard!

[HoustonDavid]

I finally got to see it (I'm not buying DVDs at present) when my lovely chess partner rented it and
we watched it together. She usually gets turned of by gory violence, but she turned her head when
it got bad and we both enjoyed the overall film a great deal. It was quite realistic about many aspects
of military life, the adrenaline and coolness needed to deal with extreme tension, and the long-term
effects on individuals exposed to it, IMO.

The only criticism I had was the incident with the special ops team and the sniper rifle. I would not
expect explosives device experts to take over as a sniper team and spend most of a day acting in
that capacity. They are not trained to do so and it would have been considered a waste of their
extremely valued expertise. I have heard similar criticisms from other military personnel and I agree
with them, but overall most military personnel found the film authentic and a reasonbly accurate
portrayal of military life in Iraq at that time in the war.

[jserraglio]

I've heard so much about it, I intend to see it very soon.

also want to see . . .

Moon
Shutter Island
A Serious Man
District 9

Any opinions/warnings about those would be greatly appreciated.

[AbbyInk]

Hi DavidRoss,
Thanks for the warm welcome.

I've still yet to see The Hurt Locker but I'm looking forward to it. I'm rather into independent films so it should be enjoyable.

Speaking of independent films....I recently saw Moon and I do have to recommend it. Moon has a really interesting story line and pays homage to late seventies and early eighties sci-fi films. Check it out.

[HoustonDavid]

Abby, I apologize for not welcoming you in my post. Glad to have you aboard as we say in the
Naval services - most Marines won't admit it, but we are a bona fide member. Hope you enjoy
the voyage and post here often.

[Lance]

I haven't seen this one yet. Do you HIGHLY recommend it?

[HoustonDavid]

Lance, if you REALLY liked "Saving Private Ryan" and its raw and realistic portrayal of war, you
will enjoy it. I didn't find it quite measured up to that quality standard, but it is very well done.
I know you as a lover of classic movies, a la TCM, and it would be a "great leap forward" from
war movies of the "classic" era like "Sands of Iwo Jima", but I'm sure you are also of the more
"modern" era.

[Chalkperson]

I haven't seen this one yet. Do you HIGHLY recommend it?

Yes, because it is the closest thing yet to showing the reality of the Iraq War from a grunts perspective, there are no Politics whatsoever in it, an eye opener, also when you see the gunner in the Humvee you can think of Kevin...

[jserraglio]

This suspenseful low-budget movie deserves all the acclaim it has received. The scene where the EOD team tries to help the poor Iraqi man chained to a bomb vest is excruciating. But the image that will stay with me occurs in the desert scene where a fly crawls into the eye of Sgt William James and he doesnt brush it away.

The characterization of James is fascinating: in movie terms, he reminds me of Sean Devine (Kevin Bacon) in Mystic River and Ben Wade (Russell Crowe) in the 3:10 to Yuma remake.