The Oscar Project #82: The Hurt Locker (2009)

by Chris Marshall:

In 2009, a war film once again won Best Picture, and like all the previous winners, it focuses on a small group of individuals rather than providing any broader context for the events depicted. This time around, our protagonists are members of a bomb squad in Iraq, faced with the extremely dangerous task of defusing IEDs.

We spend an extensive period of time with three different characters, but the true focus of the film is on William James (Jeremy Renner), who takes over as head of the squad when the previous leader (Guy Pearce) is obliterated by a remotely detonated bomb[1]. James seems like a normal enough guy at first, but it soon becomes apparently that there is something a little off about him. It’s as if he cherishes the thrill of his job.

That’s a positive characteristic in many occupations, but when your job entails a significant risk of dying every time you do it, it can be a little unsettling, especially if you are one of the guys with the duty of protecting him. Making matters worse is that James is not much of a communicator, going so far as to remove his headset during one mission.

This enrages Sanborn and Elbridge, his other team members, who are understandably upset when they no longer have a direct line of contact with their leader. James isn’t about to change his ways, however, and his squad members just have to learn to deal with it, whether they like it or not.

And so it continues for the rest of the movie. There isn’t any traditional story being told here. It’s just one bomb mission after another, and much of the suspense lies in wondering how much longer James can survive if he keeps behaving so recklessly. It’s not like he’s secretly hoping for death, either. When another soldier (David Morse) asks him what the best way to defuse a bomb is, James replies simply, “The way that keeps you alive.”

Why, then, does he go about his work in the manner he does? The answer is at least partially informed by the quote that appears at the beginning of the film: “War is a drug.” James’ life at home is not particularly happy, and it seems like the only genuine excitement he has in life is doing these missions. His fix is the adrenaline rush that comes along with risking his life.

Roger Ebert named The Hurt Locker as the second best film of the decade. I don’t agree with that sentiment at all, but it’s a testament to the critical acclaim it received. The year it came out, only Up received better reviews (which was nominated for Best Picture itself). To me, it’s the sort of movie that almost everybody will like, not because it caters to the whims of the public but simply because it is so well made and well-acted.

Enjoy Mr. Pearce while you can. He doesn't last long.

At the same time, I’ve never perceived it as a “great” movie. It’s very good, but there’s no part of it that really stands out as being brilliant. I think the most significant fact about the film is that Kathryn Bigelow became the first woman to ever win Best Director at the Oscars, and she won in direct competition against Avatar, directed by ex-husband James Cameron. I mean, it only took 82 years. 

It’s funny that Guy Pearce, David Morse, Evangeline Lilly, and our old friend Ralph Fiennes all receive billing on the poster, despite having maybe a combined screen time of ten minutes. I suppose the producers thought, “Well, this is going to be a small enough release as it is. Let’s see if we can get some famous people to show up and film a scene or two and then pretend like they have big roles.”

I suppose it’s hard to argue with the results when you win a Best Picture, but The Hurt Locker ended up being the lowest grossing winner of all time, earning a modest (in Hollywood terms, anyway) $14.2 million[2] at the box office at the time of its victory. Nevertheless, I’m sure the directing trophy meant more to Bigelow than the $2 billion plus Avatar raked in.

Well, now I’m down to the final two. In 48 hours, this will all be over. The King’s Speech and The Artist, two films that are both set, strangely enough, around the time period when the Oscars first began. The circle is almost complete.

---

[1] I wouldn’t really count this as a spoiler. It happens like five minutes into the movie.

[2] For the sake of reference, this is about half a million dollars less than Jean Claude Van Damme masterpiece Kickboxer earned in its theatrical run.