About "Hurt Locker" is a big insult to vets
|March 1st, 2010||#1|
| || |
"Hurt Locker" is a big insult to vets info
|March 2nd, 2010||#2|
| || |
For me it is a film and is thus fiction. No film, book or any other characterisation ever depicts everyone in a good light, regardless of what happens in reality.
The sooner we separate entertainment from fact the better our following generations will understand what has gone before and not some cinematic screen shots depicting the directors imagination.
This comes from a "loggie", who has never had a film made about his courageous exploits, but then what is exciting about 19 hour days, irate commanders and farting soldiers?
|March 3rd, 2010||#3|
| || |
Only watched this film up until the point where the "hero" takes off his gear and says something like "if I'm going to die, I'll die comfortable". Haven't got around to seeing the rest but intend to at some point
Of what I saw, and bearing in mind I've never worked in a warzone nor with bomb disposal, even I felt the "hero" came of as an gung-ho, un-professional git. Outside of that, the film as far as I’m aware is fictional and while based in an actual real-time warzone, its made by Hollywood and that mob have always had a habit of perverting the view of the real world. I think if you are going to watch something like this, you will have to take it with a grain of salt (or perhaps a bag).
I read Eight Lives Down by Chris Hunter prologue to his book here http://www.randomhouse.com.au/Editor...tLivesDown.pdf and found it to be a good tale of professionalism and stress that bomb disposal personnel face in the field. If Hollywood wanted to make an authentic film then perhaps they should have focused on an actual event. They did this with Generation Kill and Blackhawk Down and because these films kept pretty close to the books they were based on and because they were written by either people who were there or from the interviews of people involved in the battles, they came off with an authentic image of the events involved (at least from my POV).
Just my two cents worth.
Everybody thinks they’re gonna get a chance to punch some Nazi in the face at Normandy and those days are over, they are long gone.
|March 3rd, 2010||#4|
| || |
I think I saw the movie. The french name is "démineurs" or "demolition team", as their job is to defuse bombs and IEDs.
And I dont think that the movie is a real slap to the face to vets. It's not. The movie is about a man who became an action junky, looking for adrenaline... for action.
So you will see him through a lot of reckless actions... Some might seem unrealistic. But it's not so outrageous. And I would say that it fits the character...
And you see him at home, bored to death in the civilian life, living in a crappy home... Speaking to his baby son about how he is bored and how he lost interest in what he loves in war.
So, he doesnt respect security protocols, the same protocols that turns a professional army into a bunch of undisciplined gunmen... But are the protocols always respected on the field?
|March 3rd, 2010||#5|
| || |
May I ask what is so objectionable? (I havent seen the movie yet, I am asking a serious question).
From the articles you posted, it would suggest that the film over-sensationalizes the role of EOD people. I can understand that frustration, but what it the difference between this and RAMBO/John Wayne/Hells Angels and the zillion other overhyped war movies that have been going on since the age of silent pictures.?
I am not saying you are wrong, but this type of overblown/overexaggeratted war movie have been done many times in the past. Distasteful?: Yes, New?: No.
I guess my only advice is to take it for what it really is: a piece of fiction.
"My center is giving way, my right is in retreat situation excellent. I shall attack." -Foch
I am from NYC. I fly a French flag because I work in Paris.
Last edited by mmarsh; March 3rd, 2010 at 16:39..
|March 3rd, 2010||#6|
| || |
I guess that while this war is still going on, and the popularity that it has received, I really don't like the world getting the somewhat skewed outlook on what we are doing over here.
You can have an adrenaline filled movie, and they could have done that, but the producers took it down a path that isn't realistic.
As stated in the LA Times article, the DoD pulled out of an advisement role because of script changes. The military was on board, but then pulled out because of that.
They could have had the same result with a little bit better advisement.
|March 3rd, 2010||#7|
| || |
The power of theater... it cannot be ignored.
The ancient Southeast Asian Kingdoms like the Sriwi Jaya Kingdom are sometimes called "Theater Kingdoms" because the legitimacy of the rulers was often supported by theater. Rituals, Wayang shows and others.
Tried finding an internet source on it.
The only thing I could find was this Amazon.com reference to a book that uses that term. Negara: The Theater State in 19th Century Bali by Clifford Geertz.
The word "theater" just gave me a whole bunch of World War II stuff... "Pacific Theater."
But I know for folks who study these kingdoms, it is not an uncommon way of referring to them.
Sometimes the internet just does not cut it...
So there should be a moral responsibility for those creating these things to try to keep things fairly accurate.
|April 28th, 2010||#10|
| || |
Too many times, the general public will see a movie like this and ASS-U-ME that it is the real thing. I have tried and tried to explain to people who ask me about my experiences what it is like and become frustrated when they use movie references. Bottom line, I think, is that people see this movie and automatically think that the are subject matter experts and pontificate about what it is like, when they have never been outside the U.S.
I have seen this movie and feel that it does a disservice to the brave soldiers who are in EOD, who risk their lives everyday doing what they do.
Gunner. Sabot. Sniper. Is not an appropriate use of ammunition.
|Can USA really win a big war?|