Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Finally Saw The Hurt Locker...
...and for the life of me I can't understand why the Left liked it so much. Once the head of the Philly Young Democrats posted that "everyone should see it"...and then it won Hollywood awards. I ticked it right off my list. It had to have an anti-war, anti-Bush, anti-military message if Hollywood and the Left was giving it such high accolades...right?
So, last night my eyes needed a break from the Bible-small font of Atlas Shrugged and I decided to put my prejudices aside and watch the movie.
I really liked it. The beginning was filmed in such a way that it caused physical anxiety. Each person that walked by, each cell phone and video camera, each and every piece of trash or box in the street, every cat or kid or man...all could be a potential weapon or enemy to end the life of an American soldier. The film portrayed that (justified) paranoia so well.
I kept waiting for the Oliver Stone-esque Kevin Dillon character to rape and dismember an Iraqi girl with no remorse...didn't happen. In fact, aside from the main character's tendency toward adrenaline highs, all the characters are pretty honorable: risking their lives attempting to save an Iraqi man strapped with bombs and grieving the supposed death of a local Iraqi boy.
So that brings us back to the question of why the Left heralded a war movie that wasn't made by Oliver Stone and wasn't anti-war? I'm confused...