The Hurt Locker has had a very strange reception. Following a decidedly luke-warm response from the major American industry press at the Venice Film Festival last year, over the last 12 months it has come to be hailed as many things ranging from the best film on the Iraq war to the best film of the year so far. It seems the initial reaction was more on the mark than the way the reception has mutated since.
The film follows a group of men who are bomb disposal experts working for the US Army in Iraq. Sadly no more plot can be divulged because that's pretty much it, there's no real narrative to speak of and the film is a string of half a dozen or so missions in no real order. We follow the new leader James, played by Jeremy Renner (not to be confused with Belgian actor of note Jérémie Renier) and the two men under his direct command who are inspired by and annoyed with his reckless approach to a very serious job.
War films can work on multiple levels, but sadly this film fails to engage in every area. As a character study it is decidedly useless as all the characters are either completely 2-Dimensional or so thinly drawn it borders on caricature. Another way it could succeed is as a straight out action film, but the majority of the missions are so ponderous, so devoid of tension that they are dull and make the film drag interminably. The other way this film could hit home is through its message, but the point made here in the opening title card that "war is a drug" and addictive is something which was made better than here (and in about 90 seconds) by Terrence Howard's character in The Hunting Party, so building a 2 hour-plus movie around this is decidedly lightweight and pretentious.
Kathryn Bigelow directs the movie and she has delivered quite the hack-job in the process. Having made her name with Point Break (and buried it with the likes of K-19: The Widowmaker), she would seem the actiony-type person to inject some life into this film ("story" would be a better word ... but there isn't one) but her approach is so artless and trite. Seemingly realising the lack of inherent substance in the set pieces she resorts to techniques for those with ADD, not letting her camera rest for a second. She also delights in showing slow motion shots of explosions (not realising that just because you blow something up doesn't automatically make it exciting) and things like shell casings falling - something which was cool about 10 years ago when The Matrix first hit screens but is incredibly stale now. As a result she has fashioned a film in the image of her approach: style over substance, nothing new, interesting or meaningful and as a result as deep as a puddle. Sometimes first impressions rather than retrospective hyperbole are the most accurate gauges.