THE STORY – During the Iraq War, a Sergeant recently assigned to an army bomb squad is put at odds with his squad mates due to his maverick way of handling his work.
THE CAST – Jeremy Renner, Anthony Mackie, Brian Geraghty, Evangeline Lilly, Ralph Fiennes, David Morse & Guy Pearce
THE TEAM – Kathryn Bigelow (Director) & Mark Boal (Writer)
THE RUNNING TIME – 131 Minutes
War has always been an intriguing subject when it comes to its depiction on film. When the First World War broke out, the medium was still in its infancy, trying to figure out the basic rules of storytelling and not adequately equipped to really comment on such monumental events. By the time the second conflict came about, this showcase became more about propaganda. Filmmakers understood how powerful film could be in communicating a sentiment of national pride, and this effort was quite successful in its message of defeating a greater evil. But as more combative circumstances arose, their justifications became more complicated. Depictions could no longer rely on simplistic rallying cries, and it has always seemed as if cinema has never really known how to tackle contemporary wartime. Even the best explorations of the psychological wounds left by Vietnam were not made until well after the violence had ended. Similarly, after the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, films regarding this topic also found it challenging to connect with a general public who seemingly had no hunger for these stories. That’s why “The Hurt Locker” felt so distinct. It centered itself in this arena, but prioritized the flawed characters surrounded by thrilling set pieces. It’s no wonder this one managed to strike a chord, as it is an engaging piece, if also a bit uneven in its storytelling.
With American troops already in Iraq, this particular endeavor follows the plight of the Bravo Company, a bomb disposal unit tasked with disarming the myriad of explosives that have littered the region. Sergeant Sanborn (Anthony Mackie) and Specialist Eldrige (Brian Geraghty) are reeling from the loss of their previous staff sergeant, who was killed when insurgent forces prematurely detonated a bomb. His replacement is William James (Jeremy Renner), a renegade soldier who takes unorthodox methods to deactivate these dangerous weapons. He enters perilous zones with complete disregard for procedure, fails to communicate effectively with his unit, and exhibits a brazen attitude that is almost cavalier towards his own well-being. However, his skill and proficiency are not in question. There is a strange sort of bond that emerges between these three men. Tensions continually flare, but the camaraderie they share is intensified with every impact of the bombs they try to eliminate.
The true power of this film lies in its ability to immerse you in this environment. Plenty of filmmakers have tried to bring a sense of grounded realism to their work in an effort to accomplish this task, and Kathryn Bigelow attacks this landscape with a visceral sensibility. The shaky cinematography never feels so uncontrolled as to be disorienting. Instead, it plants the viewer within a chaotic framework that must still maintain composure in these anxious situations, while also getting some striking compositions with silhouette figures in front of fiery blazes. The editing can stretch out sequences to emphasize the high-stakes pressure before a flurry of edits arrives to elevate that impactful confusion. The deafening sound design harnesses the full force of the explosions. Still, it can also punctuate the silent concentration with a terrifying surprise of something as simple as windshield wipers being turned on. Bigelow’s direction is masterful in drawing one into one precarious moment after another. She can capture both the hardened adrenaline pumping through these men, as well as their fragile cores that lurk beneath the surface.
For as accomplished as Bigelow’s efforts are behind the camera, having to contend with Mark Boal’s screenplay is a heavy anchor that often impedes the film from becoming an even greater success. The narrative itself already feels disconnected between its signature moments, presenting an episodic plot with little connective tissue to keep the moments consistent. The archetypes it establishes for these characters are very familiar: the maverick soldier who must find a way to work with this new team, the traditional leader whose confrontational front is a means to mask his own insecurities, the emotionally tortured participant who must find the courage to take command of his own decisions. The path laid in front of them never deviates from a set path, and actually indulges in repetitive thematic commentary and tangential meandering. A third-act excursion that starts an impromptu manhunt is just a muddled and lethargic deviation that doesn’t even offer that much engaging excitement. The script feels more like a collection of anecdotes loosely strung together that aren’t nearly as impressive as the filmmaking supporting it. It’s not until the brief glimpse of James’s homelife, underlining his disconnect from domestic activities, which draws him towards more rounds of deployment, that Boal’s writing offers something more profound. Most of it plays on the surface and disrupts the flow significantly, removing so much investment that could have been naturally created with a clearer-eyed perspective.
Even if the characters don’t embody an incredible amount of nuance, the actors themselves do a credible service to bring a level of humanity beyond the page. Renner is always compelling in his efforts to create a portrait of a clearly traumatized man who is using these antics to cope with his damaged psyche. He can be charming, and even grating at times, but it’s all to establish what a captivating figure he can be. Both a rousing allure and heartbreaking disdain showcase an intriguing dichotomy, and Renner plays these notes very effectively. Mackie and Geraghty feel more constrained by the mundane writing, though the former has a more natural ability to display an enticing screen presence. He sells the animosity and frustration, and his catharsis at the end is genuinely touching. Geraghty is, unfortunately, the weakest link, though his portrayal is still mostly absorbing. He’s hamstrung by broad, shallow characteristics that prevent more depth from being mined, and as a result, his performance ends up naturally being the weakest of the three. Still, they are a solid anchor to observe, especially with the amusing, bigger names that casually grace the screen in glorified cameos. Guy Pearce, David Morse, and Ralph Fiennes may not have much screentime, but they sure make a memorable impression whenever they appear. They even give further reminders of the unpredictable jeopardy and outward cruelty hanging thick in the atmosphere.
There’s no question that “The Hurt Locker” is often an arresting work. It crafts a mesmerizing display that manifests intense suspense sequences while building an intimate space for these characters to interact and explore their feelings in this constrictive arena. The performances are all enthralling to a certain degree, even those that do not have the material to create more dynamic portrayals. That material keeps the film from becoming a more masterful accomplishment. The wandering narrative struggles to naturally build a more inviting storyline, leaving a fractured plot with basic characterizations to examine. Even still, there’s much to admire here, and there’s a reason that this analysis of modern warfare has endured longer than any of its counterparts. The filmmaking on display is just too grandiose to be ignored, and it leaves you with the excited rush of accomplishment that quickly fades into an unfulfilled emptiness that forces you back into one more engagement. Given the history of the United States’ military actions, it’s a fitting metaphor to reflect the times and present a worthwhile endeavor to watch.
