This board might have the most hate I've ever seen on imdb, so how is the user score still so high at 7.7? I gave The Hurt Locker a 10/10, but from the look of this board I can't imagine a lot of other people did.
"What will happen to us in time?"
"Time starts now." -Bullitt
It was a great movie. great cinematography and great performances.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bF59dNeszFY the best movie you'll ever see!
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
bwahahha WOW you're a *beep* loser you have an exact number ehh, who the *beep* cares how many women you *beep* Try thinking harder next time come up with a more intellectual answer in response to someone bashing your sexual history. *beep* retard
share[deleted]
What does virginity have to do with The Hurt Locker?
share[deleted]
You seem to be the one who's frustrated. The guy just said his opinion. He didn't label it as "the worst movie ever" or say "it sucked". It wasn't a rant or anything but you attacked him for his opinion by bringing up virginity, which is completely irrelevant. If someone doesn't like a movie that you did, that means they are frustrated sexually? If you feel the need to bring up something so irrelevant, then you must be frustrated mentally.
share[deleted]
When he said "go *beep* yourselves", he was referring to the makers of the movie. He only claimed to have slept with over 300 women after you brought it up. And even if it does confirm he is a virgin, how is that wrong? You seem like the type of person who criticizes people all the time.
share[deleted]
Then perhaps you should allow the poster to freely criticize the film then.
share[deleted]
His review of the movie:
It was a terrible movie, no story, no bravery, just cliché, minimalistic cinema for war promotion....
You're a virgin arent you. You're so sexually frustrated that you go on movie boards spouting so called liberal propeganda and you've probably never even seen the movie.
[deleted]
I think it's a good film and in no way shape or form war propaganda. Calling someone a virgin to insinuate an insult is name calling. I just came to a defense for the poster and I respect his opinion even though I disagree with it. And how is your opinion on this film not being war propaganda any more valid than mine considering you incorrectly spelled "propaganda" TWICE!
[deleted]
Nonse? I think you mean "nonce". Unless you really do mean nonse which would mean that you are using British slang and calling me a pedophile.
shareAgreed. these people are just crazy. So many movies I have watched and been bored with and I bet these same people would call them masterpieces.
shareA lot of these people are trolls, wanting attention on bashing an awarded film. Its no different than the nonsense you read on most best picture winning film's message boards. Treat them like kids, let them cry it out, ignore it. Once no attention is gained? They stop.
sharewell sir i'm definitely not a troll. I watch a lot of movies, old and new, high or low rated, and i can honestly tell you this is by far among the top five overrated movies i have ever watched in my entire life. it pretty much had nothing in it to deserve more than 6/10, the only reason i managed to watch it till the end is because i thought a movie with that much critical acclaim must have something to deserve it, even in the last 5 minutes...
it didn't...this movie isn't horrible, but it'f easily forgettable, and certainly way overrated...and we all know why that is
Well said. I agree.
shareAgree. Did see it with the best of all intentions and was completely disappointed. A complete waste of time and money. It was by no means suspenseful. Renners performance is implausible (a bomb disarmer with a daredevil attitude - Ha!). Does one have to be a soldier serving on the theaters of Persia to understand the 'hidden beauty' within THL? Me, I couldn't.
share[deleted]
Couldn't agree more!
-------------------------------
Relax! - www.bryanel.com
[deleted]
I appreciated your opinion until I saw you rated Pirates of the Caribbean above The Truman Show, gotta be a troll
"Even though I'm no more than a monster - don't I, too, have the right to live? " -Oh Dae-Su
I'm paused at 70 minutes into the DVD. This movie reeks of superficial dishonesty. Gross misrepresentations of what happens in combat.
When all those awards were being distributed, you heard stuff like "The liberals are making an anti-war statement." In finally watching this garbage, I agree with the off-label reasons for the awards. It was some perverted version of politics that caused this ludicrous drivel to be given awards.
I thought the Iraq war was one giant war crime, FWIW.
[deleted]
I've just watched and didn't like it. I am not sure i could see any political bias to it. I just thought the film was pretty crap. Slow moving, non interesting storyline. I gave it a 5 and actually thought that was quite generous. Just not my cup of tea.
shareI have watched it twice and think it is terrible. She could have conveyed everything she needed to in 30 mins. and stopped, Do a documentary short film.,
The same thing just kept happening over and over. Yes, that is what their days are like, but movies are supposed to entertain and inform without putting everyone to sleep.
I give this 1 star.
Who the fuq watches a 'terrible' 1-star film twice? Are you retarded? Seriously, I'm curious....
shareThat's it. If it was an independent short, it may have been bearable, but maintaining the slow pacing along with the annoying steadycam wobbling (SO deja-vu) over a mere 2 hours is just battery to the audience.
shareWithout any political bias for a "supposed" war film is a total junk. You cannot justified any action on the battlefield without ANY political bias at all. Excluding the bias is just pretentious and hypocritical. The meaning of war movie is either trying to show the horror of war which delivers the anti-war message or trying to give the reason about why we have to fight so the sacrifice is necessary for the greater good. Otherwise it is just a shameless attempt to try to win some awards.
share[deleted]
IMDb-
Genres:
Drama | Thriller | "War"
Wiki-
The Hurt Locker is a 2008 American "war" film...
So, either you are watching a different movie or most just don't understand about what Bigelow is trying to make that you sir can see through it. If that's the case, she did a wonderful job by making a film that "no one will understand".
Pretentious and hypocritical are about how this film was made much to do about nothing. A typical drama is not appealing so it needs some spice like Iraqi war, it took some topic that can grab peoples attention then turn it into Jerry Maguire. Opening the movie borrow the quote from War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning,"The rush of battle is a potent and often lethal addiction, for war is a drug", and Chris Hedges is not all happy about how misleading it is.
However, I do agree with you on the part about surprised this movie won the best picture considering how bad it is. In ten years that no one will remember anything about this movie but most will still remember District 9, Avatar, and Inglourious Basterds.
Also, since your entire reply were just name-calling and have no any actual material with it. That might be the reason why you have such a connection to this film because it is a whole lot of nothing.
[deleted]
It was a bad film, so what are you trying to argue with?
It lacks of execution, it has no depth, it is long and boring, it sucks up to general audience, and it has nothing to do with the war in Iraq at all other than the setting.
You are the one who said "you'd know that this film has no poltical bias" so I call you out on that, if you are not denying this is a war movie then what is this movie trying to deliver? I guess that you did say "All it does is show the horrors of war" then does this movie may have a political message in the end?
You contradict your own words and then start all the name-calling because that you like this film but can you at least tell everyone about why do you like it? You have not mentioned anything about it.
Inglourious Basterds is simple to understand and it was meant to be "Tarantino", it was not pretentious to be something that it is not meant to be. Your argument with Inglourious Basterds is about "political correctness" which I was arguing about the "quality of film". Like I said, maybe you have some inner understanding of this film that I just don't get it. Otherwise, it is a bad film like as someone called it "war porn".
[deleted]
At least something I can agree with you on that Avatar is boring too, however at least that Avatar is ground breaking as far as cinematographic goes.
By the way, most of the critics about this film is not about it is pro or anti war but more of lack of authenticity. Using Iraq war instead of WWI or Korea war is simply because it is close to home, so it meant to be a huge suck up as it should be named Call of Duty: Iraq.
In short, war porn.
[deleted]
Sure, if you feel so strongly over winning or losing about it then you can pat yourself on the back for "I call you a loser first,psych!" because I have not yet to see anything suggesting that we are even arguing about the same thing. You were at one time trying to argue with me about political correctness when I was just saying about how this film is not as good as other nominated in the same year.
At beginning, you were saying this movie has no political bias then follow up with this movie is about the horror of war. I still try to make sense about how those two statements can co-exist with each others but maybe somehow that you don't think showing the horror of the war has any meaning behind it at all because oh well, it is just war, nothing personal.
After that, you start your name-calling because somehow you feel very personal about the film which maybe you are in related to director that I would not have known. Saying about how addictive nature of the war is which the movie was misquoted Chris Hedges because he was not meant in the way that movie was trying to tell. Only psychopath can become addicted to war because the nature of death involved with but that you did say that how much you enjoyed "as a character who loves nothing than being close to death".
That being said, the reason that you love this film because it gives you an adrenaline rush to watch how characters can be blown apart by bombs and for them being so close to death. Who cares about if this film has any authenticity or meaning, it is bombs!
By all of your above response and argument, it is a war porn.
And, this is not an argument, this is just stating what were you trying to tell me.
[deleted]
I will keep the political debate out of this one. However it was borrowed from his quote then shouldn't he has right to say something about it?
share[deleted]
I'm confused.
the third (and first post to oppose the OP) said "and we all know why"
I don't know why. I loved the movie.
It may be wrong of them, but they value their lives.
It's about the addictive nature of battle and what war does to people.
War is addictive only to psychopaths.
shareAMEN!!! Two combat tours in 'Nam, Purple Heart & this movie has about as much to do with America in combat as a 30min (22 w/o commercials) TV "drama." It is obvious this movie was done without military assistance and on a VERY low budget. It may as well have been about the Lithuanian military contingent. I hope to God she doesn't screw up "Zero Dark Thirty!" btw...There'd have been courts martial ABOUNDING were anyone to behave as these "soldiers" did. Oh, and making the colonel out to be some kind of nutball was typical of a woman director whos combat experience consists of using a fly swatter.
shareGotta figure the director tried to get into the feel of what it would be like in the soldier's situations. Despite the inaccuracy you might feel watching it from the film's perspective, it'd be impossible to capture that same feeling as if you were right there with them. Well, excluding Full Metal Jacket and Apocalypse Now, but even then I can't say it was accurate given I haven't been in combat experiences that would allow me to judge.
"Even though I'm no more than a monster - don't I, too, have the right to live? " -Oh Dae-Su
I just watched it for the first time. I didn't like it. It had barely any plot. There wasn't really a climax for me.
shareSilent majority, vocal minority.
shareAh beautiful saying! I couldn't agree more, in every walk of life none more so then politics.
shareMajority are sheep, minority are independent thinkers.
shareIt's a picture of you on a train.
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/sheeple.png
Anti-war people will take a chunk out of the ratings. Trolls take the biggest chunk. I guess the rest is from people who seems to think that this was supposed to be a non-fictional documentary and not some action war movie. They're probably the same people that spread dislikes on Youtube for videos that are "fake" or whatever.
shareI liked it, but I didn't find it very gripping. Not something I'd watch again, although I've heard a lot of military folks really got into it. As an AF person, I can't really say; it's more of an Army film.
shareVery overrated film imo - like another Op has said, I only kept watching because I was expecting something to happen to justify the acclaim - for me it was just some weird buddy movie that happened to be set in a warzone. It's not a terrible movie, but no way is this film a classic - it's just a bit better than average. I don't give much regard to The Oscars, it's just pretentious pomp and the best film nearly never wins. Out of boredom I've just gone to see the competition this film was up against, amongst the films it beat were Up, Inglorous Basterds, Avetar (which i didn't think was that great but certainly better than Hurtlocker) and District 9.
Just proves that Academy Awards really do mean *beep* all