User Score
7.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1235 Ratings

User score distribution:
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. hzac
    Oct 10, 2009
    4
    This movie was good for the first 20 minutes of the movie suspenseful then the rest had me rumbling my lis and slouching in my chair don't see it
  2. Sarah
    Mar 8, 2010
    4
    What a disappointment. Like others have already said it lacked a real plot line, the acting seemed too "cheesy" and "artificial", the script was boring, and to me it actual gave off a negative representation towards the US military. I have to say though that the idea did have potential; some parts were believably realistic, but others were just over the top and almost "awkward". I What a disappointment. Like others have already said it lacked a real plot line, the acting seemed too "cheesy" and "artificial", the script was boring, and to me it actual gave off a negative representation towards the US military. I have to say though that the idea did have potential; some parts were believably realistic, but others were just over the top and almost "awkward". I understand it's not "your typical movie" but it can't be classified as a "documentary" to me either. I'm still unsure of what to think... and I am SO surprised it won Best Picture at the Academy Awards. I think the recent hype with the US military's involvement in that country is the one thing that fed it's popularity. It seems everyone has been brainwashed with that topic. Expand
  3. RichardB
    Jul 20, 2009
    4
    This was a taut, well-acted, intense movie which could have been better if the director had not used the hand-held camera method for much of the film. People shouldn't have to take doses of Dramamine before seeing a movie in order to keep their last meal in place. I propose a rating system that let's viewers know in advance that jerky camera techniques are used in a movie so This was a taut, well-acted, intense movie which could have been better if the director had not used the hand-held camera method for much of the film. People shouldn't have to take doses of Dramamine before seeing a movie in order to keep their last meal in place. I propose a rating system that let's viewers know in advance that jerky camera techniques are used in a movie so that those of us who are subject to motion sickness can avoid the film. Expand
  4. Bullitt
    Jan 3, 2010
    4
    Was suspicious from the start, this could have been a good film if there was at least a plot. But it also seemed totally inaccurate to me, and I'm no soldier, but I'm smart enough to identify this film has more in common with point break than anything in real world war conflicts. Avatar has more realism.
  5. JesseJ
    Mar 7, 2010
    4
    Not a very good movie. No were near as good as some critics say it is. And it definetly did not deserve 6 oscars. Best Director: Inglorious Bastards Best Picture: District 9 Best Sound Mixing: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen Writing (original): Inglorious Bastards Sure maybe it deserved the other 2 as I am not a professional in those areas but it definitely did not deserve these 4. Not a very good movie. No were near as good as some critics say it is. And it definetly did not deserve 6 oscars. Best Director: Inglorious Bastards Best Picture: District 9 Best Sound Mixing: Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen Writing (original): Inglorious Bastards Sure maybe it deserved the other 2 as I am not a professional in those areas but it definitely did not deserve these 4. The voters were all biased since its a movie based on war and america's so called glories. I can already think of many (MANY) war movies that are so much better than this, Pearl Harbor, Black Hawk Down, etc. etc. etc. The academy is so biased towards animation movies, anti american movies (including District 9) and movies with a lot of action. Seriously, last year I was greatly disappointed in the oscars, but I still stood by their side, but from this year on, I am never watching the oscars again as they make the most stupid and sadistic choices. Expand
  6. ChrisS
    Jun 2, 2010
    4
    The problem with this movie is that it keeps up the suspense until the end, and you keep thinking something is going to happen, but then it starts a whole new story. The only reason this won the oscar is because Hollywood is desperate for movies that are boring enough to look deep. Anything so they wouldn't need to give it to Avatar. Overall, 09 was a crappy movie year. Just give the The problem with this movie is that it keeps up the suspense until the end, and you keep thinking something is going to happen, but then it starts a whole new story. The only reason this won the oscar is because Hollywood is desperate for movies that are boring enough to look deep. Anything so they wouldn't need to give it to Avatar. Overall, 09 was a crappy movie year. Just give the award to MW2. Expand
  7. JohnS.
    Jun 9, 2010
    4
    This movie was reasonable for a war movie, but it shamefully pushed the director's media based view any chance it got.
  8. KevinV
    Oct 31, 2009
    4
    The Hurt Locker has been done before, only not in Iraq, and perhaps not so intelligently. The conflict between strict protocol and an independent rule-breaking soldier is nothing new. In fact, none of the characters in The Hurt Locker break army stereotypes. This doesn't make the movie any less poignant, but leaves it feeling stagnant. The only way this movie breaks new ground is by The Hurt Locker has been done before, only not in Iraq, and perhaps not so intelligently. The conflict between strict protocol and an independent rule-breaking soldier is nothing new. In fact, none of the characters in The Hurt Locker break army stereotypes. This doesn't make the movie any less poignant, but leaves it feeling stagnant. The only way this movie breaks new ground is by setting the story in Iraq. Expand
  9. ShazK.
    Jul 10, 2009
    4
    Morally, is it fair to fashion an action/thriller out of misery (American or Iraqi)? Or we are supposed to ignore that, as well? If you praise this film because it is ambivalent or not passing any "facile" judgments about war you admit war is too complex, is that not an opinion too? Are American critics falling over this film and calling it the "best american film about Iraq war" because Morally, is it fair to fashion an action/thriller out of misery (American or Iraqi)? Or we are supposed to ignore that, as well? If you praise this film because it is ambivalent or not passing any "facile" judgments about war you admit war is too complex, is that not an opinion too? Are American critics falling over this film and calling it the "best american film about Iraq war" because it does not show the torture and the suffering gone through by the Iraqi people? Oh, that would be passing a "facile judgement" right? By focusing on a group of American bomb squad is maybe a good cinematic decision. It makes the film more tense and compact but ignoring the plight of the invaded and make them come across as a tribe deserving of such treatment makes this film more dubious than ambiguous. While I did enjoy the film's various action set-pieces, I find the idea that it took a film about the plight of the soldiers rather than the other sides to get the critics sympathy flowing, disturbing. Expand
  10. StephenJ.
    Jul 24, 2009
    4
    I didn't hate it, but was never grabbed by it either. Some meandering sub-plots overly long sequences. Wait for it on DVD.
  11. NormG
    Jul 28, 2009
    4
    Maybe I have seen too many war movies. Too many World War II movies, too many Vietnam War movies, too many Iraq War movies. I get it. War is chaotic, terrible, brutal and attracts wackos. The Hurt Locker taught me nothing new. I didn't care about the characters and I certainly didn't learn anything about the U.S. mission in the middle east. I am not an expert on combat Maybe I have seen too many war movies. Too many World War II movies, too many Vietnam War movies, too many Iraq War movies. I get it. War is chaotic, terrible, brutal and attracts wackos. The Hurt Locker taught me nothing new. I didn't care about the characters and I certainly didn't learn anything about the U.S. mission in the middle east. I am not an expert on combat operations but I would guess some of the activity was unrealistic. I was bored and the movies seemed way to long. Expand
  12. DaveT
    May 19, 2010
    4
    Mediocre guy action flick, nothing special. The only reason American professional reviewers gave this thing good reviews is to please the papers the write for so they wouldn't be labeled as "against the troops". Better acting and action in any WWE produced flick.
  13. Aug 21, 2010
    4
    This movie is like a 4 day old pizza. Bland, run of the mill, and generally lucklustre. The fact that it scored the Oscar nod only confirms the suspicion that politics, rather than substance, is the name of the game when the red carpet is concerned.
    Non-existent character development, zero story arc, and cliched scripting make this a thoroughly forgettable movie.
    ...I'll add this to the
    This movie is like a 4 day old pizza. Bland, run of the mill, and generally lucklustre. The fact that it scored the Oscar nod only confirms the suspicion that politics, rather than substance, is the name of the game when the red carpet is concerned.
    Non-existent character development, zero story arc, and cliched scripting make this a thoroughly forgettable movie.
    ...I'll add this to the growing list of movies that make me wanna jump behind the lens and avenge the egregious wrongdoings that have been leveled against a tired movie-going public.
    Expand
  14. Mar 26, 2011
    4
    I was extremely disappointed with this movie, the story is boring and the characters are impossible to like, there was only one good part and it was extremely short and had all of the movie been like that moment it would have been fantastic, but instead it's a bad movie that isn't enjoyable.
  15. Sep 2, 2013
    4
    This movie works only because it appears so real, it's the source of the suspense, the action, the atmosphere, characters, plot... etc. This is also why it fails. While it may be more accurate than many other war movies, this one was built on realism. However an informed viewer will note that the movie does not portray well the soldiers' lives and the Iraq war. Many bomb squad members saidThis movie works only because it appears so real, it's the source of the suspense, the action, the atmosphere, characters, plot... etc. This is also why it fails. While it may be more accurate than many other war movies, this one was built on realism. However an informed viewer will note that the movie does not portray well the soldiers' lives and the Iraq war. Many bomb squad members said so themselves, including the ones that were interviewed by the movie makers. All the portrayed military operations are inaccurate. This movie is a lie. However can it still be viewed as a regular war action movie? I'm afraid not. Without the sense of reality the movie loses all interest. To conclude, not only does this movie fail at what it sells for, which is a close enough portrayal of wartime, it also fails as an action movie. The only praise I can give is the amazing work achieved by the actors. You will enjoy this movie though if you do not know much about the Iraq war, like most Americans unfortunately. Expand
  16. Jan 1, 2014
    4
    Jeremy Renner is great in his role, but for me the film didn't live up to my expectations due to its length and not having as much action as the trailer showed.
  17. Apr 25, 2013
    4
    This is a movie about bombs. Lots of bombs. Desert bombs.

    The End. That's pretty much it. Oh sure, a few other things happened. You wanna hear about 'em? OK. I'll provide you with a little more, oh faithful reader. I'm still not sure what the title The Hurt Locker refers to. It's not about well-secured first aid kits, nor is it about gymnasium facilities for actors William, John,
    This is a movie about bombs. Lots of bombs. Desert bombs.

    The End.

    That's pretty much it. Oh sure, a few other things happened. You wanna hear about 'em? OK. I'll provide you with a little more, oh faithful reader.

    I'm still not sure what the title The Hurt Locker refers to. It's not about well-secured first aid kits, nor is it about gymnasium facilities for actors William, John, or even Mary Beth.

    This celluloid endeavor was directed by Kathryn Bigelow; the deft hand behind such legendary screen classics as Point Break and Blue Steel. It stars Jeremy Renner as Staff Sergeant William James, an expert at diffusing bombs. Joining him on the Explosivity Disposaling Unit are Sergeant JT Sanborn (Anthony Mackie), and Owen Eldrige (Brian Geraghty)

    Renner has been nominated for an Academy Award for his performance. I'm not sure why this is. The supporting performances most notably Mackie's were, in my opinion, superior. All Renner did was act "cool". Oh, so "cool". Desert "cool". But if looking "cool" is the only criterion used for award recognition, then David Caruso should be nominated for a Nobel Prize.

    The film centers mostly on the antics of Sergeant James. James loves dismantling things that can blow you into a zillion pieces. He'd rather do that than live a peaceful life in a nice home with his beautiful wife. We're shown some of his domestic life, but the movie doesn't show the good stuff. No. Instead we see him cleaning out the eavestrough of his house.

    Now I've cleaned out a few roof gutters in my time, but the one depicted here has to be the gunkiest gutter in the history of home maintenance. And he's cleaning it out with his bare hand!!! C'mon, use a scoop, or a trowel, or a toy shovel, a stick, a shoe, anything. I'd rather diffuse bombs in Iraq than have to clean out that gutter in that fashion.

    Another scene worth mentioning shows the guys after getting a little snockered engaging in an activity where good judgment and mental acuity would be a distinct disadvantage. The "game" involves taking turns hitting each other as hard as possible in the stomach. My wife, while watching this powerful and touching scene, turned to me and asked, "Why do men do those kind of things?"

    You know, we men just have to chuckle when women ask us such questions. It was obvious to me, but I patiently explained it to her that this was a gesture of endearment. Women hug. Men try to smash the bejabers out of each other. It's their way of saying, "You're OK in my book." And nothing says it better than a ruptured spleen.

    A word of warning here to those prone to seasickness: the camerawork in this film is of that hand-held style that so many directors are wont to use these days. I suppose they feel it gives their movies that gritty, realistic, documentary look which is ironic, since documentary filmmakers rarely use the technique anymore. Besides, if it's supposed to look realistic, then why don't I see the real world that way through my eyes? Although if I did, I'd be making an appointment and pronto with an ophthalmologist or a brain surgeon.

    If you have a tough time watching this film due to that camera style, then avoid The Bourne Ultimatum at all costs. You would not survive. Its visuals are worse than any bone-jarring experience you could imagine

    I once took a ride on a gigantically tall roller coaster. Its peak disappeared into the clouds. It was called the Red Ripper, or the Brown Streak, or the Green Puker something like that. Anyway, all I know is that I was smiling after that ride. I wasn't smiling after The Bourne Ultimatum.

    In closing, I should say that even though I had some reservations about renting the DVD of The Hurt Locker, I was able to take something positive from it a lesson.

    The lesson learned is, pay attention to your reservations.
    Expand
  18. ThomasH.
    Feb 2, 2010
    3
    Watch The Messenger instead, why the critics are rating this so highly is a mystery. It doesn't even compare to Apocalypse Now and Platoon. Heck it's just awful, watch Jarhead instead.
  19. KyleD.
    May 21, 2010
    3
    Hello, I pirated this movie, and I didn't like it very much. From all of the hype, I was expecting a lot more. The rise to the climax felt loosely strung together, and there was hardly any character development at all. If you've seen the trailers, you've seen the best parts already. It also came to my attention that the director indirectly called me an idiot and wished for Hello, I pirated this movie, and I didn't like it very much. From all of the hype, I was expecting a lot more. The rise to the climax felt loosely strung together, and there was hardly any character development at all. If you've seen the trailers, you've seen the best parts already. It also came to my attention that the director indirectly called me an idiot and wished for innocent people's children and spouses to be locked up in jail. I can't support someone with such a sick sense of morality. Expand
  20. AlT
    Mar 14, 2010
    3
    12th greatest film of all time? Give me a break!! Absurdly overrated, notably by American critics. The characters are unrealistic and are insulting to the highly trained extremely well disciplined soldiers that risk their lives detecting and disposing of IED every day. The sniper section is unrealistic, with a headshot on a moving target at some considerable distance. There is no plot - 12th greatest film of all time? Give me a break!! Absurdly overrated, notably by American critics. The characters are unrealistic and are insulting to the highly trained extremely well disciplined soldiers that risk their lives detecting and disposing of IED every day. The sniper section is unrealistic, with a headshot on a moving target at some considerable distance. There is no plot - this film is just a sequence of set pieces. The film has no emotional centre and lacks character development - you feel nothing for the characters at the end. The score is unmemorable. The acting average. It does have good ideas, but on the whole it is poorly executed. 9 oscars was a vote in support of the war effort, not in support of the quality of this film. Downright poor. Expand
  21. Joeshmo
    Jun 1, 2010
    3
    You know, i haven't even seen the movie, but I can't imagine this movie could be so good. Seeing the user score is an average 7.1, (before my comment) the only reason the critics gave it an overall 94 is because they didn't want to make anyone mad just because the film is about wars in Afghanistan, or something. Avatar, the best created movie in my book, was well thought You know, i haven't even seen the movie, but I can't imagine this movie could be so good. Seeing the user score is an average 7.1, (before my comment) the only reason the critics gave it an overall 94 is because they didn't want to make anyone mad just because the film is about wars in Afghanistan, or something. Avatar, the best created movie in my book, was well thought out, with amazing visual effects, and voice overs. That movie only got a 84!! That is still a really good rating, but i think Avatar should have gotten the 94 and The Hurt Locker get the 84. Also I want to talk about The Dark Knight. That movie really makes you think. Heath Ledger's psychopathic, insanely evil performance won him an academy award for being a mad dog whose main goal in life is to show everyone that they can become a mirror image of himself. Leading actor Christian Bale's performance of darkly kind night watcher over gotham city known as Batman was so amazing I was stunned. They really capitalized in this movie how much The Joker can aggrivate him and make him uncontrollably mad to the point of almost killing someone. The Hurt Locker is no where as amazing as the writing of Avatar, and the amazing, horrific, and violently great acting of the Dark Knight. It dosen' deserve the publicity it has gotten. Expand
  22. PeterB
    Aug 10, 2009
    3
    I realize I'm way in the minority on not liking this movie. Like Jarhead, this is another movie that portrays most in the military as pychos or malcontents. Is it too hard to have a more balanced view? Yes, there are some of these types in the military, but the majority are great Americans. On a side note, anyone in the military will just shake their heads at quite a few implausible I realize I'm way in the minority on not liking this movie. Like Jarhead, this is another movie that portrays most in the military as pychos or malcontents. Is it too hard to have a more balanced view? Yes, there are some of these types in the military, but the majority are great Americans. On a side note, anyone in the military will just shake their heads at quite a few implausible situations. Expand
  23. simonf.
    Aug 17, 2009
    3
    Good idea for a film, however you feel no connection with the actors at all, you really don't care what happens to them.
  24. RobinS
    Aug 4, 2009
    3
    Good acting & camera work but didn't feel an emotional attachment to the characters.
  25. PeterG
    Jan 12, 2010
    3
    "Critics" did it once again.... so inaccurate. It allmost hurts that much better movies are getting terrible reviews and boring crap like this (well, someone will get a edification or just good time...maybe) gets so many 100s. We should end reading their bullshits so they will lose their pointless work.
  26. DK
    Feb 14, 2010
    3
    Rather weak movie. I lost interest halfway through and walked out. It wasn't very realistic and lacked cohesion. I still don't know what the plot was about by midway through the story. Mixed with amateurish acting and photography, I'm surprised that there was potential under the surface but not surprised that it didn't break through. Nothing like Generation Kill as Rather weak movie. I lost interest halfway through and walked out. It wasn't very realistic and lacked cohesion. I still don't know what the plot was about by midway through the story. Mixed with amateurish acting and photography, I'm surprised that there was potential under the surface but not surprised that it didn't break through. Nothing like Generation Kill as someone else mentioned. A lemon. It has it's moments, but they don't make a movie. Expand
  27. lesliemiller
    Mar 10, 2010
    3
    This is a documentary masquerading as a movie. Critics may see a subtle narrative here but this is simply one staged, violent episode after another. WHY OH WHY DID THIS WIN BEST PICTURE???? Is this Hollywood at its anti-war self yet again?
  28. Mark
    Mar 27, 2010
    3
    Movie looks good but is so unrealistic, but it shows why fake wrestling is so huge no brain drama.
  29. MichaelS
    Jul 20, 2009
    3
    I totally agree with Brad M's review. If you have any military training whatsoever, you are going to hate this movie. I left this movie angry because of all the tactical aspects of this movie that were just completely wrong. Things were done that no one in their right mind would do. Also, the sniper rifle scene was just pure fantasy. I wanted to like this movie. I was real excited I totally agree with Brad M's review. If you have any military training whatsoever, you are going to hate this movie. I left this movie angry because of all the tactical aspects of this movie that were just completely wrong. Things were done that no one in their right mind would do. Also, the sniper rifle scene was just pure fantasy. I wanted to like this movie. I was real excited about seeing it. It also just went on too long. Expand
  30. 89D40
    Aug 10, 2009
    3
    I should begin by saying that I have never in my 41 years been so excited to see a film. You see, I am a recently retired 89D (that's EOD, or Explosive Ordnance Disposal) Master Sergeant. The last 16 of my 22 years in the Army were spent in EOD, including two full tours in Iraq and a short stint in Afghanistan. As it happens, I was an E-7 section chief in Baghdad in 2004 (this is the I should begin by saying that I have never in my 41 years been so excited to see a film. You see, I am a recently retired 89D (that's EOD, or Explosive Ordnance Disposal) Master Sergeant. The last 16 of my 22 years in the Army were spent in EOD, including two full tours in Iraq and a short stint in Afghanistan. As it happens, I was an E-7 section chief in Baghdad in 2004 (this is the same position and rank as the main character in the movie). So, again as it happens, it seemed to me like Hollywood made a movie about...me (and my soldiers). I'd never felt so honored by and excited about a film. That is, until I saw it. From the very beginning, it was very unfortunately clear that Ms. Bigelow was attempting to recreate what I'll call "the Iraq experience", but tragically, without a good faith effort of consulting those who have actually HAD that experience. THAT, my civilian friends, is why the servicemembers here are (I think, to a man) appalled and angered by this film. It isn't that it is mildly inaccurate in the military-specific details...it is that the film as a whole is little more than sheer fantasy. While that in itself is not a bad thing, it becomes VERY obnoxious when the fanciful characters and events are worshipped as worthwhile or profound by folks who simply don't know any better. Why this is so frustrating is because this movie has gotten much attention for its focus on "the experiences of the individual soldier". Ironically enough, what you saw in this film bore absolutely no resemblance to either my wartime experiences or my military experiences as a whole, and I do not think that I am alone with this perspective. All that said, I enjoyed the acting, and the scenery was quite good. Not enough, though, to salvage this flawed and borderline insulting interpretation of a war that is in desperate need of some real lucidity. Expand
  31. AngryVet
    Aug 15, 2009
    3
    I borrowed this from a buddy while stationed here in Afghanistan. The movie was so poorly done and the acting and script were so bad that I thought it was an official Army movie in order to stop PTSD. It made me sick to my stomach when I went on Metacritic and saw what high ratings the movie received from the critics. Which goes to show that those critics have absolutely no idea what I borrowed this from a buddy while stationed here in Afghanistan. The movie was so poorly done and the acting and script were so bad that I thought it was an official Army movie in order to stop PTSD. It made me sick to my stomach when I went on Metacritic and saw what high ratings the movie received from the critics. Which goes to show that those critics have absolutely no idea what it's really like out here and in Iraq. I'm ashamed to have even watched the ripped copy of this 'film', if you can call it that. What a joke. Expand
  32. DaveD.
    Aug 23, 2009
    3
    Total bore. Walked out after 30 minutes. Watched two bomb-defusing scenes with forced tension and ridiculous mini-plots involving innocent bystanders that entered the scene simply to create tension, and then quickly exited. Seriously. I can't believe this film is highly rated. The theater management allowed me to save my night by watching Soul Storage instead!
  33. CarlC
    Aug 4, 2009
    3
    I think that the reason so many of the servicepeople are upset at the lack of realism in this film is not because of the technical inaccuracies (we don't care much about that stuff), it is because it completely fails to capture what it is like in Iraq (or in any war). Lack of attention to detail is one thing, completely constructing reality is another. This director did the latter, I think that the reason so many of the servicepeople are upset at the lack of realism in this film is not because of the technical inaccuracies (we don't care much about that stuff), it is because it completely fails to capture what it is like in Iraq (or in any war). Lack of attention to detail is one thing, completely constructing reality is another. This director did the latter, and seems to have fooled a lot of people with it. Really people...this film DOESN'T show what war is like, nor what soldiers are like. Don't be fooled...please. Expand
  34. DavidM
    Jan 14, 2010
    3
    I'm sure there intentions are good and they might consult with soldiers that have been there. But as a medic that served in Iraq with various Special Forces Group and CIA. I'm really disappointed with how they portray how we work and what we do. Kathryn Bigelow makes it look like we run around doin whatever whenever we feel like. As Lt. Gen. Hal Moore says, Hollywood never gets I'm sure there intentions are good and they might consult with soldiers that have been there. But as a medic that served in Iraq with various Special Forces Group and CIA. I'm really disappointed with how they portray how we work and what we do. Kathryn Bigelow makes it look like we run around doin whatever whenever we feel like. As Lt. Gen. Hal Moore says, Hollywood never gets it right. PLEASE calling all directors who wish to take on a war film. GET IT RIGHT! We go out there not wishing to die but willing to give our lives for our country. For those who have given their all, get it right for them. Not for drama sake. Expand
  35. NicoleJ.
    Jan 25, 2010
    3
    Considering the reviews, I was thoroughly disappointed. It simply failed to engage me. It felt like a horrible waste of 2 hours. At this point, I can only hope the critics don't waste any more energy promoting this one during awards season.
  36. BradM
    Jul 18, 2009
    3
    I really wanted to like this movie. It was very disappointing to me. The military aspects of the movie were completely unrealistic (Specialists do NOT speak like that to lieutenant colonels, no Humvee rolls by itself ever, infantry platoons don't cower in alleys waiting for EOD to roll up, and no EOD team is trained as countersnipers...among many other things), the character I really wanted to like this movie. It was very disappointing to me. The military aspects of the movie were completely unrealistic (Specialists do NOT speak like that to lieutenant colonels, no Humvee rolls by itself ever, infantry platoons don't cower in alleys waiting for EOD to roll up, and no EOD team is trained as countersnipers...among many other things), the character interactions were very contrived, and it was...dare I say...just not interesting. I think this was a great concept which was poorly executed. It was a movie by civilians for civilians, which I guess is why so many critics love it so much. Expand
  37. Aug 16, 2010
    3
    This film is vinegar. Low budget unknown cast with cameo appearance by Guy Pearce and Ralph Fiennes who's flippant delivery summed up this film and probably his pay check.Guy Pearce gets killed before the credits finish.
  38. Dec 10, 2010
    3
    Its a downward spiral with overated movies. Inception,Monsters. I cant help but think its the pitch and the hype that does it when the Emperor has no clothes. Lets say its 'Eagerly awaited, theirs 'Oscar Buzz' before it even comes out and without paying attention that the 'Buzz' is coming from the people who market the movie. I dont care who your are and how much you say you like this, IIts a downward spiral with overated movies. Inception,Monsters. I cant help but think its the pitch and the hype that does it when the Emperor has no clothes. Lets say its 'Eagerly awaited, theirs 'Oscar Buzz' before it even comes out and without paying attention that the 'Buzz' is coming from the people who market the movie. I dont care who your are and how much you say you like this, I say your lying to yourself as its slow paced and boring (odd for a explosives movie) yet I argue with a mass of people who are eager for the new McMsg burger because someone on tv told them to. Expand
  39. Aug 24, 2014
    3
    I understand the importance of creating heroes surrounding the American military; however, I found this depiction overly run-of-the-mill. Sure, Jeremy Renner gives a fine performance--but I'm left missing some much needed heart.
  40. Jan 20, 2013
    3
    "The Hurt Locker" is, at times, very gritty and gripping entertainment. Clearly, it caught the imagination of the Hollywood Limousine Liberal reviewing establishment, who gave it very high marks and ceded it a number of significant awards. But how good is the movie? Not really that good. In particular, the movie presents a very destructive and inaccurate portrayal of what soldiers are"The Hurt Locker" is, at times, very gritty and gripping entertainment. Clearly, it caught the imagination of the Hollywood Limousine Liberal reviewing establishment, who gave it very high marks and ceded it a number of significant awards. But how good is the movie? Not really that good. In particular, the movie presents a very destructive and inaccurate portrayal of what soldiers are really like. Nobody as reckless and irresponsible as the main character would last ten minutes in a special weapons unit of any kind, let alone one involved in demolition work. The fact that so many Hollywood reviewers accepted such a ridiculously inaccurate portrayal establishes that this kind of portrayal is currently Politically Correct. It is what Hollywood wants to believe soldiers are really like. A true work of art worthy of a best picture award would find the incredible drama present in the lives of our soldiers' *as they truly live them*. Besides being inaccurate, the movie is also, in places, simply distasteful. In constructing my final rating, I penalized it on that score. Expand
  41. bleof
    Mar 14, 2010
    2
    I really don't understand why so many reviwers give more than 2 points to a movie that is downright boring. After 45min every viewer should ask himself weather something will happen or he can just switch off. the whole movie is nothing more than a documentary and not a motion picture worth mentioning it...
  42. FranciscoA.
    Mar 15, 2010
    2
    Very bad movie in deed... Un Accurate, bad plot, had a couple of great moments, but a suspense war TV movie all the way.
  43. GrantS.
    Mar 9, 2010
    2
    This piece of crap won Academy Awards? What a sad state of affairs the film industry is in.
  44. billt
    Apr 2, 2010
    2
    Not the best movie of the year, not even the best movie of the month. How this movie won an oscar beats me, it is a mess.
  45. MimiS
    Aug 10, 2009
    2
    Add me to the list of those who squirmed in my seat and tanked this movie's rating. Congratulations to Hollywood that it took a movie that wasn't distracted by well-known, high-vis movie stars for the general public to think this was a great movie in comparison to other Iraq War movies recently released, almost all as equally unrealistic but blessed with having the name power to Add me to the list of those who squirmed in my seat and tanked this movie's rating. Congratulations to Hollywood that it took a movie that wasn't distracted by well-known, high-vis movie stars for the general public to think this was a great movie in comparison to other Iraq War movies recently released, almost all as equally unrealistic but blessed with having the name power to carry the movie. It is also no surprise that many military folks, especially those of us who have been deployed, really hate the unrealistic portrayals, the many inaccuracies that this movie has. I suppose I can be like the average civilian and just enjoy this movie as being entertaining I just can't do it. The was just so much wrong with it from the unitforms (in 2004 we were still in desert uniforms) to the scene where the EOD team had to take over the sniper duty over a bunch of Brit mercenaries? The real deal are not that inept. Wish they used better military consultants, then we wouldn't have to suffer the indignity of yet another unrealistic Iraq War movie Expand
  46. BrianS
    Feb 9, 2010
    2
    Civilians will praise this movie just because it has soldiers in it. Like Tim C and most of the other soldiers on here, I've got 2 tours for the army under my belt and could not stop laughing the whole movie. The opening scene when EOD shows up and everyone else has abandoned their humvees and are hiding just set the tone. Then the AWAL but, the headset nonsense, EOD turning into Civilians will praise this movie just because it has soldiers in it. Like Tim C and most of the other soldiers on here, I've got 2 tours for the army under my belt and could not stop laughing the whole movie. The opening scene when EOD shows up and everyone else has abandoned their humvees and are hiding just set the tone. Then the AWAL but, the headset nonsense, EOD turning into scout snipers interlaced with a 15 minute juice drinking scene... all nonsensical inaccurate crap. An actual EOD movie would be 15 minutes long and feature dudes in PT's sleeping and playing on the internet followed by a 3 hour response time to go pick up some ordinance. Expand
  47. rick
    Mar 7, 2010
    2
    I heard this movie was good some months ago but just watched it last week. What a disappointment. And now I know why that kid was so keen to join the military. Thats right - in my neighborhood a kid has joined the military because he wants to be a bomb defuser ... just like in the movies. Probably he won't get a chance. For sure he will find the reality very different that what he I heard this movie was good some months ago but just watched it last week. What a disappointment. And now I know why that kid was so keen to join the military. Thats right - in my neighborhood a kid has joined the military because he wants to be a bomb defuser ... just like in the movies. Probably he won't get a chance. For sure he will find the reality very different that what he imagines from "The Hurt Locker". How many kids are going to die because they were seduced by "Hurt Locker"? Expand
  48. NickJ.
    Apr 8, 2010
    2
    Upon finally seeing this film we were sorely disappointed. The hype is amazing for a film that is at best mediocre, and at worst a sad glorification of present day war. The phrase that best comes to mind is: American propaganda. How pathetic!
  49. TimK.
    May 20, 2010
    2
    The Hurt Locker was kind of boring, and now that I know the true feeling of the producer, I cannot recommend it to anyone.
  50. TomA
    Aug 17, 2009
    2
    The big mistake that Bigelow made here is setting the movie in Iraq, with American soldiers as the focal point. If you're going to set a movie in a modern theater of war and attempt to portray real soldiers doing real things, then GET IT RIGHT. Otherwise, set your crappy movie in The Shire and make the hobbits your EOD squad. That'd have about the same level of realism.
  51. KevinR.
    Aug 18, 2009
    2
    I don't know where to start. Anyone who gave this movie a rating of 7 or higher (10....are you kidding me!) has been duped. They must be people that only like a movie because it gets good reviews from critics that have no clue about what is actually going on in Iraq (especially what an EOD team does). I was looking forward to seeing this movie because of the good reviews and was I don't know where to start. Anyone who gave this movie a rating of 7 or higher (10....are you kidding me!) has been duped. They must be people that only like a movie because it gets good reviews from critics that have no clue about what is actually going on in Iraq (especially what an EOD team does). I was looking forward to seeing this movie because of the good reviews and was extremely disappointed. I'll start with the good. Pros: Good camera work, a realistic display of the landscape of Iraq and the explosions of IEDs. Some tension filled moments. Unfortunately, the good moments can Expand
  52. Aug 26, 2011
    2
    One of the more over-praised movies in recent memory - really just another hyperkinetic mess from Kathryn Bigelow (one of the more over-praised directors working today). The main character is a cliche, the "loose-cannon" action hero, only in this case there is no explanation for his risk taking. Jeremy Renner plays the character with his typical lack of range or subtlety. The onlyOne of the more over-praised movies in recent memory - really just another hyperkinetic mess from Kathryn Bigelow (one of the more over-praised directors working today). The main character is a cliche, the "loose-cannon" action hero, only in this case there is no explanation for his risk taking. Jeremy Renner plays the character with his typical lack of range or subtlety. The only interesting actor is Ralph Fiennes as the leader of a band of mercenaries, but he's only on screen for a few minutes. Altogether a waste of time. Expand
  53. Dec 13, 2010
    2
    This movie gets a 2, reason being because CG effects were great and acting was as well. However, the cast didn't fit together also these little cameos by famous actors were just boring and pointless. This movie won a bunch of academy awards and I don't know how? Hollywood is just lame in giving awards sometimes. They just give them to look good and to either make people mad or happy. ThisThis movie gets a 2, reason being because CG effects were great and acting was as well. However, the cast didn't fit together also these little cameos by famous actors were just boring and pointless. This movie won a bunch of academy awards and I don't know how? Hollywood is just lame in giving awards sometimes. They just give them to look good and to either make people mad or happy. This movie just makes you feel like you should die or try to die as you keep watching or living out your life. Yeah you could watch it, but don't expect to feel anything after this boring anti-war movie. It's basically just about being obsessed and it's like who cares give me something with meaning, you're taking up my life's precious hours! Expand
  54. Feb 4, 2011
    2
    this movie is a disgrace to the armed forces and has debased the Academy Awards by winning the Oscar for best movie. If you like cowboy movies, you'll recognise the characters but feel let down by pretty much everything else.
  55. Sep 24, 2014
    2
    I suspect the high reviews that critics have given this is due more to the fact the media is filled with liberal defeatist cowards because the film itself was boring, boring, boring. I could hardly stay awake.
  56. Jun 10, 2012
    2
    I dont know WHAT have everyone found in this movie.Absolutely NO realism , horrible stroy about the stupid war done by American politiciand only for their own joy.Even the soldiers of US army laugh at it. You can call me stupid or something but i think - the only reason this film has got the Oscar - is because the women.You know what i am talking about.
    P.S I didnt want to hurt anyones
    I dont know WHAT have everyone found in this movie.Absolutely NO realism , horrible stroy about the stupid war done by American politiciand only for their own joy.Even the soldiers of US army laugh at it. You can call me stupid or something but i think - the only reason this film has got the Oscar - is because the women.You know what i am talking about.
    P.S I didnt want to hurt anyones feeling with my report - sorry if i did.
    Expand
  57. Jun 9, 2013
    2
    I really didn't like this movie. it obviously didn't deserve an Oscar as Avatar was nominated this year...
    What is the point of that movie? War is great? America f**k yeah? I dont know but I think 94/100 is too much as well as 7.1/10 I watched that film with good friends and all of them didn't like it. It was truly unacceptable as a movie. Thumbs down
  58. MelC.
    Mar 9, 2010
    1
    I'm not sure which movie the critics saw, but Hurt Locker is unskilled at just about every level.
  59. RIckyBlue
    Jan 2, 2010
    1
    I'm with RW on this one. I thought this was a dumb, empty movie and haven't found a single review that points out what I've missed other than it was some kind of adrenaline rush. "It was so real, man." What kind of ivory tower institution do you people come from? This movie is disrespectful to American soldiers and Iraqi civilians alike. It's just another lame I'm with RW on this one. I thought this was a dumb, empty movie and haven't found a single review that points out what I've missed other than it was some kind of adrenaline rush. "It was so real, man." What kind of ivory tower institution do you people come from? This movie is disrespectful to American soldiers and Iraqi civilians alike. It's just another lame Hollywood vision of reality that allows people to pat themselves on the back for saying absolutely nothing. I don't know. It's an empty movie with bad dialogue and ridiculous, two-dimensional characters. Expand
  60. TimC.
    Feb 3, 2010
    1
    I have completed 2 tours in Iraq and Afghanistan with the US ARMY. This was by far the worst movie I have ever seen. Nothing in this movie is the way things are done over there. Nobody drives around by themselves! Nobody leaves their FOB by themselves to "investigate" somebody. EOD does not even come out at night. They wait until the next day to use the robot to blow up the IED. They I have completed 2 tours in Iraq and Afghanistan with the US ARMY. This was by far the worst movie I have ever seen. Nothing in this movie is the way things are done over there. Nobody drives around by themselves! Nobody leaves their FOB by themselves to "investigate" somebody. EOD does not even come out at night. They wait until the next day to use the robot to blow up the IED. They hardly ever, ever make "the walk" as the movie so ridiculously put it. Anyway, do not think this movie is the way it is. This movie is complete make believe!!! Expand
  61. JesseL.
    Feb 8, 2010
    1
    Anybody who has been over to Iraq will laugh at this movie. It's a joke. It's almost as if the creators of this movie didn't get any professional military input at all. Whats frustrating for me, as well as everybody else who has been there and done that, is that they sold this movie and advertised it as the "real deal" and how this is a good example of "what things are Anybody who has been over to Iraq will laugh at this movie. It's a joke. It's almost as if the creators of this movie didn't get any professional military input at all. Whats frustrating for me, as well as everybody else who has been there and done that, is that they sold this movie and advertised it as the "real deal" and how this is a good example of "what things are really like over there". There are so many innaccuracies in this movie, some downright lies, that it was hard for me to watch and take it seriously. From that viewpoint, this was absolutely the worst movie of the year. It could have been a decent movie had they not made it out to be this realistic war drama about life in Iraq. Expand
  62. PeterR
    Aug 10, 2009
    1
    I am so glad some of our men and women in the armed forces are speaking up about the inaccuracies in this film. I didn't like this film for other reasons, but know that I have read their comments here, I am angry, appalled and embarrassed. Bigelow didn't claim this film is realistic, but she sure seemed to try to pass it off as such, and the critics and others ate it right up. I I am so glad some of our men and women in the armed forces are speaking up about the inaccuracies in this film. I didn't like this film for other reasons, but know that I have read their comments here, I am angry, appalled and embarrassed. Bigelow didn't claim this film is realistic, but she sure seemed to try to pass it off as such, and the critics and others ate it right up. I truely am embarrassed that this film is getting the "special treatment" from critics that should know better. Sad. Expand
  63. BillT
    Aug 9, 2009
    1
    This film was garbage. I couldn't help laughing during the dramatic chase scene at the end of the movie, the tense sniper battle in the desert, the vigilante soldier's escape from his FOB, and the crazy soldiers drinking whiskey in their room. All four of these scenes were unrealistic. A British merc is unable to use a .50 cal sniper rifle to kill an insurgent sniper who is 350 This film was garbage. I couldn't help laughing during the dramatic chase scene at the end of the movie, the tense sniper battle in the desert, the vigilante soldier's escape from his FOB, and the crazy soldiers drinking whiskey in their room. All four of these scenes were unrealistic. A British merc is unable to use a .50 cal sniper rifle to kill an insurgent sniper who is 350 meters away? Want to know how to kill an insurgent at 350 meters away? Pick-up your M-4 and use your scope to shoot him. I had trouble watching this film because it was so unrealistic and boring. I hope people don't consider The Hurt Locker to be THE Iraq War movie. If you want to see a good movie about the war, watch Generation Kill. Expand
  64. GuillermoA.
    Mar 21, 2010
    1
    Boring, really boring. How can someone stress up with so many cliches? It should be a short film. Maybe it is as someone said an only-american movie. Nationalism aside, I don't get why critic love it. Big disappointment.
  65. JCT
    Sep 4, 2009
    1
    Critics who gave high scores are mostly boring movies and this is one of them. With limited music and tons of slow suspense drama, this movie is not quite popular and epic enough for people to watch. If this movie ever goes for a Oscar nomination, be it that way.
  66. davew
    Feb 15, 2010
    1
    An awful movie ! how this is up for 9 oscars ill never know, poor storyline, many errors in the film, such as a guy being able to pick up a barrett 50cal and with less than 5 shot be totally comfortable with a weapon like that!! utter rubbish even fully trained snipers very rarely get there hands on a Barrett and to be able to pick off a moving target with a headshot at what looked to be An awful movie ! how this is up for 9 oscars ill never know, poor storyline, many errors in the film, such as a guy being able to pick up a barrett 50cal and with less than 5 shot be totally comfortable with a weapon like that!! utter rubbish even fully trained snipers very rarely get there hands on a Barrett and to be able to pick off a moving target with a headshot at what looked to be upwards of 800m is near on impossible for the world best let alone a bomb disposal guy who had just picked it up with no idea how the weapon is zeroed in !!!!! utter rubbish!!!! best War film in Years ??? give me a break!!! Expand
  67. SteveS
    Mar 7, 2010
    1
    I fell asleep half way through. The first explosion, that killed one of the technicians, was edited in such a way that defied believability. Hence the problem with this movie. It doesn't portray a sense of believability as it supposedly re-creates the real life exploits of this bomb disposal squad. Much has been written about how marvellous this film is. But it did nothing for me. I fell asleep half way through. The first explosion, that killed one of the technicians, was edited in such a way that defied believability. Hence the problem with this movie. It doesn't portray a sense of believability as it supposedly re-creates the real life exploits of this bomb disposal squad. Much has been written about how marvellous this film is. But it did nothing for me. What made it even more grating, is that I found this movie to be unwatchable. It bored me senseless. The acting, supposedly in the documentary style, is just nothing much in the scheme of things. The camera angles are just here and there and not overly interesting. the suspense ... er, what suspense? Men walking slowly in big fat rubber suits towards 'the bomb'. I watched the film receive all its Oscar triumphs and Kathryn Bigelow win her award for some supposed brilliance. Hmmmm, if I had the chance to vote I wouldn't have voted for this film. One has to wonder what the criteria is for 'best film' at the Oscar ceremony? I understand the theory behind what was of interest in this film. But the execution is abysmal. And it didn't touch me on any level. One has to wonder in a world gone mad on political correctness, reality t.v., equal opportunity and acknowledgement for woman, minorities, the religiously persecuted etc, etc ... you would have to wonder if the brouhaha this film has received is simply a fashionable statement of acceptance in the same way as a Toyota Prius being lauded as a supreme technological achievement. After all, a Prius is simply ugly and neither celebrates nor acknowledges genius. Hurt Locker is the same, it is a novelty that has not captured the popular heart. It cost $11 million to make and has to date recouped $15 million at the box office. The recognized critics loved it but the people with common sense, the movie goers have stayed away from it in droves. And this is for good reason. It's boring. Expand
  68. NathanaelG
    Apr 4, 2010
    1
    Mike J had it dead on. THL was just a terrible bore. How could this film win Best Picture?! Inglorious Basterds and Precious were excellent contenders, and District 9 was mind-blowing, and clearly the BPOY. This was Slumdog all over again.
  69. AugureA.
    May 20, 2010
    1
    Way overrated movie, this is just army propaganda, and it made the oscar look ridiculous and not credible anymore.
  70. TravisT
    Jul 30, 2009
    1
    Echoing the voices of the veterans here. This movie seems to be what the director thought people wanted to think the war is like. It is not a war movie, it is a fantasy, done up to make the masses think it is reality. Simply terrible, and bordering on disrespectful in my opinion. I think though that the most appalling thing is how many people, professional critics and otherwise, actually Echoing the voices of the veterans here. This movie seems to be what the director thought people wanted to think the war is like. It is not a war movie, it is a fantasy, done up to make the masses think it is reality. Simply terrible, and bordering on disrespectful in my opinion. I think though that the most appalling thing is how many people, professional critics and otherwise, actually use the word "realistic" when talking about it. I watched it with a couple of other soldiers and we were quite literally alternating between laughing and wondering "what the hell". "The Hurt Locker" is more like a cable TV drama. I was glad when it was over, and immediately rushed home to voice my displeasure over the internet (albeit against the shouting voices of the masses who think this thing was delivered by god). Also, while I'm at it, you want to see realistic, watch Frontline's "A Company of Soldiers" or "Waltz With Bashir". Those hit so close to home they were hard to watch. Expand
  71. MarkS
    Aug 18, 2009
    1
    I find it almost unbelievably ironic that someone here ("Jason B") suggested that servicemembers aren't liking this movie because it is not "propaganda". Actually, Jason, most of the nonsense that you just saw in "The Hurt Locker" is EXACTLY that...the guys in this film ARE playing Rambo, and that is what we hate so much. It speaks to your complete ignorance of the reality ofI find it almost unbelievably ironic that someone here ("Jason B") suggested that servicemembers aren't liking this movie because it is not "propaganda". Actually, Jason, most of the nonsense that you just saw in "The Hurt Locker" is EXACTLY that...the guys in this film ARE playing Rambo, and that is what we hate so much. It speaks to your complete ignorance of the reality of situation in Iraq and what we've experienced of it that you think this piece of trash film actually portrays soldiers. Expand
  72. DonC
    Jan 31, 2010
    1
    If you want to watch a documentary about IED's in Baghdad in 2004 and you don't know any better, this is your movie. Quickly looses its intensity with repetitious chasing, shooting and explosions, with cardboard characters. Says nothing of any consequence other that "war is hell but gosh is the adrenaline rush addictive!" and tries to make us sympathetic toward a character who If you want to watch a documentary about IED's in Baghdad in 2004 and you don't know any better, this is your movie. Quickly looses its intensity with repetitious chasing, shooting and explosions, with cardboard characters. Says nothing of any consequence other that "war is hell but gosh is the adrenaline rush addictive!" and tries to make us sympathetic toward a character who would rather be recklessly defusing bombs in Iraq instead of spending time with his wife and young child at home. Don't waste your time or money. Expand
  73. AlexC
    Mar 11, 2010
    1
    For this movie to have won best picture..Im just at a lost of words. So many things are wrong with this movie. The only reason it won is because it plays on the emotions of many so close to the war. Other than that, truly blah. I mean, what idiot is gonna leave a base to go find the killer of a lil boy. Utter senselessness. And what three man team is gonna leave an area by themselves with For this movie to have won best picture..Im just at a lost of words. So many things are wrong with this movie. The only reason it won is because it plays on the emotions of many so close to the war. Other than that, truly blah. I mean, what idiot is gonna leave a base to go find the killer of a lil boy. Utter senselessness. And what three man team is gonna leave an area by themselves with no support or radio contact, then run down...im getting to upset..im done writing. Simply Pith!! Expand
  74. DavidP
    Apr 12, 2010
    1
    Totally unrealistic portrayal of a bunch of Macgyvers that do not exist in real life. There were several incidents in the movie where the characters were threatened by Iraqis and would have shot to kill in real life, but in this fantasy, they held their fire and let the threatening party slink away. Look at the recent real video on Reuters and you will see the other extreme really Totally unrealistic portrayal of a bunch of Macgyvers that do not exist in real life. There were several incidents in the movie where the characters were threatened by Iraqis and would have shot to kill in real life, but in this fantasy, they held their fire and let the threatening party slink away. Look at the recent real video on Reuters and you will see the other extreme really happening where a helicopter gun crew mows down unthreatening Iraqis and 2 Reuters journalists. Nobody, whether American or Iraqi, was threatened. These punks just wanted to get the adrenalin rush from murdering people. Expand
  75. AF
    Jul 11, 2009
    1
    Waste of time.
  76. BrendanD
    Dec 31, 2009
    1
    Seldom are war films and war politics able to be separated, but this is ridiculous. It's one thing to open up a dialogue about the rightness and wrongness of political and military decisions -- the great ones do that. It's a completely different thing, however, to put such a shiny gloss on it. This movie is to war movies what "Crash" was to race movies: a film that functions Seldom are war films and war politics able to be separated, but this is ridiculous. It's one thing to open up a dialogue about the rightness and wrongness of political and military decisions -- the great ones do that. It's a completely different thing, however, to put such a shiny gloss on it. This movie is to war movies what "Crash" was to race movies: a film that functions more as an idea than a story. It certainly wasn't boring; but then, neither was "Crash." However, I like films that probe a little deeper. If you want to see something that will make you question your beliefs on war (whichever side you fall into), check out "The Thin Red Line" or "Battlestar Galactica" and ditch this schlocky nonsense. Expand
  77. Sep 7, 2011
    1
    I seriously felt like shooting my self in the head...... over Americanised **** basically all hyped up trying to say Americans are the heroes even though they have killed more of their own than they have saved (SPASTICS) XD
  78. Jun 8, 2012
    1
    This is an excellent example of the politics of movie making. It's been said that this movie will demonstrate how the war in Iraq is remembered. This upsets me due to the lack of realism. Most noticeably, the fact that three soldiers do not run into the darkness alone to chase something that they may have seen. Nor did we risk soldiers to defuse bombs past the first months. Further, it's aThis is an excellent example of the politics of movie making. It's been said that this movie will demonstrate how the war in Iraq is remembered. This upsets me due to the lack of realism. Most noticeably, the fact that three soldiers do not run into the darkness alone to chase something that they may have seen. Nor did we risk soldiers to defuse bombs past the first months. Further, it's a rip off of the Lethal Weapon prototype. Unstable white guy paired with veteran black guy and they have over the top adventure. But the real insult? From the accounts of multiple vets, I have been told that District 9 was more realistic as far as reminding them of combat situations. Expand
  79. Jun 22, 2011
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Some cool moments (like the sniping, didn't make any sense that a guy who disarms bombs knows how to spot and snipe guys makes no sense, to their own expertise or the story-line) but the plot and characters, especially the main character ticked me off. The black guy constantly trying to kill the main character was the breaking point for me. We need to support our troops not act like every CO is a bastard with his men trying to kill him. The unpatriotic views makes me sick. The and the fact it has gotten great critic reviews is slander. One of the worst war movies I have ever seen. Expand
  80. Jul 19, 2011
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The first time I saw the trailer of the movie, I thought it would´ve been an interesting one. I was wrong. It started OK but from there on it was totally boring. Critics applaud the film for the "suspense" in it and the performance by Jeremy Renner and its photography and storyline. What storyline? The film features a lot of "tense ful" bomb defusing moments or in other words, "suspenseful" situations one after another that, really, lead to no conclusion. The guy easily defuses the bombs with almost no problems. A rookie soldier would've made those scenes a little bit more tense...maybe. The characters were forgettable. There is no character development in the film. The scene where James is trying to "find out" who killed the little Beckham also has no conclusion because he just randomly went to the house of this professor and asked what happened to the boy and moments later he goes back to his base. Also that night, the bomb squad heads to this place where, yes you guessed it, another bomb has blown. And the three are in pursue of the responsibles for that bomb. In the end, one of them gets shot and no one is captured. Bottom line, the film's about suspense situation after suspense situation that lead to no conclusion. A great film is one that introduces new artistic ways for filmmaking, a good story, which this film does not have, good character development and a good screenplay and the list goes on and on. The Hurt Locker has nothing of those. Expand
  81. Jan 18, 2015
    1
    It is an absolutely horrible , one sided movie that brings nothing new to the white screen . Oscar winning ? It is rather embarrassing . I would expect from bigelow something brave and innovative. I wonder we Hollywood will be brave enough to the Iraq war and face with reality .
  82. Feb 11, 2015
    1
    I cannot deny that 'The Hurt Locker' has a very specific power that does, in a way, attract people to it. It is a very boldly done war film about all the individual consequences of a war, something that has not been a standard topic of the genre. Yet, I was bitterly disappointed by it all, as it proved to be a disgustingly blatant work of American propaganda, whereby their politicalI cannot deny that 'The Hurt Locker' has a very specific power that does, in a way, attract people to it. It is a very boldly done war film about all the individual consequences of a war, something that has not been a standard topic of the genre. Yet, I was bitterly disappointed by it all, as it proved to be a disgustingly blatant work of American propaganda, whereby their political aggression is presented as a burden to those that willingly participated it. Who the f**k cares about what the war did to someone who, under the pretext of 'liberalization and democracy', behaved like a bloody dictator? I was utterly disappointed by all the awards the movie gained and I must say that the critical universal acclaim somehow escapes me, as I don't see any relevant acclaim that should be attributed to the movie. It is slow, effectively boring and dull, one-sided and biased and it actually borders some propaganda work, but without the chauvinistic subtext. But, yes, the glorification of the American Soldier (just to make it clear - America is not the problem here, it is the glorification of a phenomenon that should be condemned and I would say the exact same things if the film was about Congo, Cambodia, Britain or Guatemala) is there and it is absolutely sickening (I actually fell asleep for 20 minutes and when I woke up I concluded that I haven't missed a thing - enough said).

    I detested Jeremy Renner after seeing the movie and I was glad he lost the Oscar that year. In time, my opinion of him did improve, but the role was disastrous. It wasn't bad, quite the contrary, but the character itself, his portrayal and all of that combined with the movie itself was dreadful.

    So, 'The Hurt Locker', albeit a well designed war film, offers little to nothing of the potential it has, becoming thus a propaganda work and the glorification of a war-raging policy that should be forgotten within the history books and not glorified on screen.
    Expand
  83. RicardoL.
    Feb 15, 2010
    0
    An only-American movie!!!! No one else in the world can understand that patriotic feeling, without it the movie is complete poor.
  84. MiKE
    Feb 9, 2010
    0
    What a BORE of a movie! Badly directed as well. AVOID
  85. SammyS.
    May 20, 2010
    0
    What a stinker. Ironic how this retard is now suing people that pirated it, just because no one wanted to pay to see this piece of trash film. Get out of the film business PLEASE.
  86. GordieA
    Aug 2, 2009
    0
    Clearly there are people voting here that are working for the studio because this film is not at all engaging and people that say it is good are either being payed to say so or are movie morons.
  87. Jeff
    Jan 6, 2010
    0
    As a Soldier, I had high hopes for this film. I'd heard great things, and couldn't wait to check it out. I was utterly disappointed - I heard over and over again that this movie captured what it's "really like over there." All it proved is that no one in Hollywood has a clue. Still.
  88. DarenP.
    Feb 2, 2010
    0
    More like crap locker,not like it was at all. EOD doesn't cruse around all by themselves in summer 04,let alone wear some bomb suit in 120+ heat AND not brake sweet. Stopped it 18min into what crap.
  89. LilyS.
    Mar 12, 2010
    0
    Disjointed, unrealistic, slow, dull, and pathetic are all word that should be on the cover of this movie. It had the potential to be good if it had dived into story a bit more and chosen what it wanted to be about. Did it want to be about the relationship between the team or with the little kid? The difficulty of being in Iraq or the struggle of returning home? It touched all of those but Disjointed, unrealistic, slow, dull, and pathetic are all word that should be on the cover of this movie. It had the potential to be good if it had dived into story a bit more and chosen what it wanted to be about. Did it want to be about the relationship between the team or with the little kid? The difficulty of being in Iraq or the struggle of returning home? It touched all of those but left you wanting more. There was a lot of deep in thought staring when not easily clipping the wires of bombs. I could rant all day about how much I was disappointed but I'll just stop abruptly like the entire movie. Expand
  90. ErinT
    Mar 13, 2010
    0
    I really looked forward to seeing this (especially after the Oscars) but was totally disappointed. I found the characters wooden, the plot repetitive, and the entire film TEDIOUS. I have now read the many military comments that it is factually inaccurate as WELL and I struggle to see a point to the movie at all. Boring - not engaging at all. Don't bother.
  91. DenC
    Mar 8, 2010
    0
    Terrible garbage. Not worth watching. The director should go back to film school and actually learn how to film a movie. Do not waste your time. There is a reason this film did not get wide release. It is utter garbage.
  92. LarryB
    Mar 8, 2010
    0
    His movie has absolutly no business of even being in the Academy talk...I actually turned the movie off 10 minutes into it as it was boring to say the least. I am totally unsure as to what critics are looking at when raving about this looser of a movie.
  93. StevenH
    Apr 23, 2010
    0
    The Hurt Locker did not have a single moment where I felt like I was watching a movie. No, this has nothing to do with special effects or cliches off different movies. I felt like I watching a documentary of a bunch of random people ACTING like soldiers. This movie did not have one part that sparked my mind.
  94. MatthewS.
    Jun 9, 2010
    0
    I stopped watching when they got drunk and started wrestling each other half naked in the barracks. Oh, sorry ... SPOILER ALERT!
  95. BobbyT.
    Jun 9, 2010
    0
    Inaccurate, poor acting, slow, boring, poorly written nonsense.
  96. SGTK
    Aug 6, 2009
    0
    this is the worst movie about iraq. its totally inaccurate. it maks EOD out to be some sort of Special Forces and they're NOT. the things they do in this awful movie are not what the do over here.
  97. EricS.
    Jan 2, 2010
    0
    I hated the War Lover, directed by Katheryn Bigelow. I am shocked to see that critics are falling all over themselves to praise and push it on the American public, which has already soundly rejected it at the box office. No one has acknowledged that "The Hurt Locker" is an exploitative ripoff of "The War Lover", a 1956 film with Steve McQueen. "Hurt"takes the psychological complexities of I hated the War Lover, directed by Katheryn Bigelow. I am shocked to see that critics are falling all over themselves to praise and push it on the American public, which has already soundly rejected it at the box office. No one has acknowledged that "The Hurt Locker" is an exploitative ripoff of "The War Lover", a 1956 film with Steve McQueen. "Hurt"takes the psychological complexities of "Lover" and sensationalizes and simplifies them to make a blatant pro-war propaganda piece. Katheryn Bigelow is our equivalent of Leni Riefenstahl, a female director who glorified war and Nazi invasions. Katheryn Bigelow took the premise of "The War Lover", originally a novel by John Hersey, without transferring one iota of the intelligence of the original. In "Hurt" Bigelow unselfconsciously supports the war in Iraq and suppresses the reality of war and the nature of the American involvement there. She glorifies the lead character, a blind killer, who is shown in "The War Lover" as a maniac. How naive to think one could make a war movie about Iraq without having a political POV! This is why all war movies about this war are flops. They are all idiotic in the same way. The Hurt Locker does not reveal any truth, they are in denial of the truth. In my own review, I point out that Bigelow's "Hurt" tries to resurrect the permanently discredited Western genre, an old canard that male directors couldn't touch with a ten foot pole. A male director making "Hurt" would risk accusations of chauvinism, racism, and sensationalism, if not open complicity with the Pentagon in an effort to recruit new cannon-fodder. At the very least, SOME movie critic should point out that Bigelow uses every cliche in the Western book, and her characters are superficial and nonsensical, archetypes that even her apparent target audience, 12-year-old-boys, would reject. The most disturbing thing is that many critics have heaped high praise on this dumbed-down debacle, as if they are also complicit in supporting the war aims of the military. At least those critics who laud The Hurt Locker will inadvertently expose their incompetence as reviewers and complicity in prolonging the slaughter of civilians in ugly imperialist wars. Duly noted. Expand
  98. AdiP.
    Jan 26, 2010
    0
    I do not know what to say so I just say it will lose Oscars.
  99. SamM
    Feb 11, 2010
    0
    This movie is an upside down reflection of truth. It is sad the movie is nominated for the academy award.
  100. ann
    Feb 14, 2010
    0
    I went to rent this movie at the same time someone else was returning it. I was really exited to get it. The person told me it was something she would not spend money on by I did not believed her since after all it was an Oscar contender. What a disappointment! Lousy acting. Did not look realistic. It was actually stupid and boring. After 30 minutes my husband and I gave up on it and I went to rent this movie at the same time someone else was returning it. I was really exited to get it. The person told me it was something she would not spend money on by I did not believed her since after all it was an Oscar contender. What a disappointment! Lousy acting. Did not look realistic. It was actually stupid and boring. After 30 minutes my husband and I gave up on it and returned it. One of the worst movies I have seen. I do not understand the critics. And now I know why it did not last in the theaters. It will definitely not get the Oscar. Expand
Metascore
94

Universal acclaim - based on 35 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 34 out of 35
  2. Negative: 0 out of 35
  1. The result is an intense, action-driven war pic, a muscular, efficient standout that simultaneously conveys the feeling of combat from within as well as what it looks like on the ground.
  2. Reviewed by: Richard Corliss
    100
    A near-perfect movie about men in war, men at work. Through sturdy imagery and violent action, it says that even Hell needs heroes.
  3. Reviewed by: Derek Elley
    60
    Boal's script stirs a little of everything into the pot, which boils down into seven setpieces divided by brief intervals of camaraderie/conflict among the three protags.