I know–it took me long enough to get around to reviewing last year’s best picture winner. Well, sorry. Life’s busy–what can I say? For those of you who don’t remember, this was the film that aced out Avatar for best picture, pitting a former husband and wife against each other in many different categories. So the important question first: was it actually better than Avatar?
But that’s not exactly difficult, all things considered. I mean, Avatar was basically Dances with Smurfs, in 3D. It was an effects-driven movie. The effects were awesome. The plot? Not so much. So really, it would have been surprising (and disappointing) to me if Avatar had won best picture. Is Hurt Locker more enjoyable?
It’s a real downer of a movie, folks. It’s about a soldier over in Iraq who disarms bombs. It does a fantastic job of portraying how brutal and stressful things must have been/are over there right now, but you won’t exactly be whistling Zipahdee-doo-dah once the credits start rolling. It’s more than capably told, very well acted, has an intriguing plot . . .
And it just left me kind of lukewarm. Three stars for me. I think this is because the characters in the movie are all so detached, it’s hard to really get engaged with them. They’re all emotionally scarred, so you don’t really want to invest in them, fearing you’ll get burned before the movie’s through.
That said, it’s a thinking movie, and I do recommend it if you’re in the right mood. Can’t help but feel disappointed, however. Any of you see it? Care to contradict me?