Re: The Hurt Locker
I watched it today.
First, anyone in the military can see it's "off" as far as how that works.
Second, lots of loose ends that never got tied up....Never found out why James was an EX-Ranger?? I could see an 11B guy with demo training taking on a second MOS. But there are no EOD guys in the Rangers that I knew of. They'll work together that much I know. But not one in the same. Driving alone in the desert, Merc team that just snagged two high dollar spades, doesn't know what to do when hit? Credibility went out the window with that. I was just hoping something redeemed the movie.
The scenes were decent if the action not realistic to what really happens. The choice in the end to catch the 'mystery' bombmaker by splitting up completely with no cover. Again, scenes were good, credibility wasn't.
I thought is was an interesting movie in spite all they didn't get right. There was a lot of open ended things though, the viewer has to decide for themselves. The tension is there even if H'wood feels like they have to spice it up by not having ANY security. Three guys total? I would personally be in a perimeter, not disarming bombs. I dunno, an embedded reporter writes a script for Hollywood. Add a touch of realism about how things work and it might be better.