Moon

[king chillout]

Well worth a watch if you like your science-fiction movies actionless and thoughtful. I liked it a lot, but I'm glad I watched it alone as it's the kind of film my Mrs would have moaned about all the way through..."who's that ?", "isn't he dead ?" "what's a fucking combine harvester doing on the moon ?"...that sort of thing.

7.5/10

[SamSamMan]

Excellent film. Intelligent sci-fi is hard to find these days but a great film debut for Bowies son!

[bolix]

Well worth a watch if you like your science-fiction movies actionless and thoughtful. I liked it a lot, but I'm glad I watched it alone as it's the kind of film my Mrs would have moaned about all the way through..."who's that ?", "isn't he dead ?" "what's a fucking combine harvester doing on the moon ?"...that sort of thing.

7.5/10

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=8235

[bolix]

Did well at the Baftas. Good and a much better film than the one that did best: "Hurt Locker"
Perhaps the whole thing is a political gesture.....the luvvies getting behind "an unpopular war" ?

[SamSamMan]

Yes I'd probably agree Moon was better but I did like Hurt Locker and I'm not a fan of war films usually. I don't think there's been much competition for the Best Picture award though this year

[bolix]

I just do not appreciate what, if anything, "Hurt Locker" brings to the table.
It did not tell me anything about Iraq or Iraqis.
It had an unintelligible script.
It was disconnected and fragmentary.
It glorified the role of the bomb dismantler and portrayed him as a superman type - unrealistic.
I've seen the fracture between the domestic and serving soldier handled much more profoundly a million times.
It was simply an awful, awful film leaving me in no doubt that its choice as best film was a terrible political gesture - but thenthat's just my opinion.

[AD]

OK, if you insist

[The Big A]

It glorified the role of the bomb dismantler and portrayed him as a superman type - unrealistic.

No, it portrayed him as wanting to be a superman type - The kind of soldier determined to come back a hero, even if it means putting himself and others in unnecessary peril. And it's not as if his actions and attitude are even portrayed as positive, considering how wary and untrusting of him his fellow soldiers are.

For what it's worth, I completely agree about Moon - It's a damn shame Duncan Jones decided to forgo campaigning for the Oscar race because it was the best script of the year and Sam Rockwell's performance was the best of the year. Plus Duncan Jones' speech at the BAFTA's was possibly the most genuine of the night.

[Sick Boy]

Didn't realise he is Bowie's son, fair play to him for not cashing in on his dad's name!

[bolix]

It glorified the role of the bomb dismantler and portrayed him as a superman type - unrealistic.

No, it portrayed him as wanting to be a superman type - The kind of soldier determined to come back a hero, even if it means putting himself and others in unnecessary peril. And it's not as if his actions and attitude are even portrayed as positive, considering how wary and untrusting of him his fellow soldiers are.

Interesting interpretation........so when he says he's carried out "860" ish successful UID's operations he's lying......? If so why isn't he contradicted???
And when he goes off like a loose cannon and searches for the dead boy's family why, given that the Iraqi is an intellectual, isn't there any dialogue??
I though "Jarhead" about the first Iraq war dealt with all these themes before and better.

[The Big A]

Interesting interpretation........so when he says he's carried out "860" ish successful UID's operations he's lying......? If so why isn't he contradicted???
And when he goes off like a loose cannon and searches for the dead boy's family why, given that the Iraqi is an intellectual, isn't there any dialogue??
I though "Jarhead" about the first Iraq war dealt with all these themes before and better.

tbf that's the one part of the film I can't quite figure out - it's either that he's lying or (more likely) that it's a reason why he's kept around despite being so wreckless. Another possibility is that he doesn't keep track of how many operations he's successfully carried out because all he's concerned about is the rush he gets while doing it, so he just plucks a large number out of thin air to impress a commanding officer.

The scene with the Iraqi I saw as the one time he goes in all guns blazing without thinking it through and it backfires. He doesn't say anything to the Iraqi because he doesn't have anything to say to him: He realises that the man he's pointing a gun at is innocent and freezes up.

Basically my opinion of Hurt Locker is that it's a decent film with a great central performance but it's hardly the movie everyone makes it out to be, and the fact that it's the forerunner to win Best Picture is a little underwhelming.

PS: Also agree about Jarhead, very underrated movie. Also highly recommend Generation Kill, if you haven't seen it.

[bolix]

Big A - good post,
Somewhere along the way "H.L." has garnered support as a "serious anti war movie" !!
I believe (if this was the intention) that the film has to have integrity, it's feet - particularly as this is contemporary war - have to be planted in reality. The week I saw "H.L" it was announced that one of our best IED guys was blown to bits just one day before leave. It was his 60th operation!!
As you say the lead is a maverick so you would imagine a great deal of psychological depth to make this point but there's little if any, the characters are as superficial as the film is shallow.
When he finally gets into the Iraqi house you hope that somehow there will be something, some dialogue that will make "superhero" appreciate the complexity of the native and the tragedy of war - the opposite happens. The guy says nothing and his wife hits him with whatever comes to hand - ludicrous!
We need a decent film about Iraq (the contemporary sit.) this muddled effort was not it, far from it, unfortunately.
Glad you thought "jarhead" was good because for me the characters in that felt like real people.....you could identify with their predicament and the futility of that war indeed any war was acutely felt.
It also looked good, truly cinematic......."Hurt Locker" relied heavily on cgi shite could have been made in a warehouse in Slough.
Not seen "Generation Kill" maybe I will.

[Lloydy]

Just watched Hurt Locker, liked it, but i never identified the maverick as wanting to be 'superhero'. Yes he was supremely confident in his abilities and the situations he found himself in, he knew he was good at what he did, but the whole superhero thing i don't really get. He didnt go around bragging about it, i just thought he'd gotten so involved in his job that it was all he knew, it had taken over him to some extent, so much so that he couldnt readjust to a normal life back home. In that regard, the whole war changing a man story, i think they suceeded in that.

Main grumble was that the film was meant to be about his addiction with war and how it grew, but i felt that wasnt done as strongly as it could of been. He seemed pretty full on at the start, you didn't really go on that journey with him. Jarhead i felt a lot more involved in his journey as the war changed him, you saw him spiral down to that final scene when he didn't get to take the shot. I could definitely identify more the main character in Jarhead than Hurt Locker.

Good film, but not as good as Jarhead.

[bolix]

Its choice as "best film" (Oscars and the Baftas) underline imho the point about this being a political decision.
Sad that it comes down to that but then these affairs never carry much integrity.