"Hurt Locker" trumps "Up in the Air"

After a yearlong break, your favorite “student critic” is back and rather pleased with this year’s Oscar nominations and winners. Last year I was too visibly upset by the picks that I withdrew my writing and viewing, focusing instead on TV’s famous “The Wire” and hidden gem “Fringe.” Now that there are worthy films to discuss, I am ready to write with a vengeance. The last movie that truly deserved to be watched and analyzed was without question “No Country for Old Men.” I do not believe there is one critic that will disagree with that. However, after “There Will be Blood” and “The Dark Knight” there was a void in Hollywood, until this year’s renaissance that began with “Avatar.” While it is a fun and solid film, it lacks certain things that Oscar requires. Nevertheless, it did pave the way for two excellent films that took home the gold this year: Kathryn Bigelow’s “The Hurt Locker” and Jason Reitman’s “Up in the Air.”
The unique thing about these movies is that they are almost entirely set up to dislike. One is about the Iraq war, which screams “war movie cliché,” while the other is set up in a relevant recession-job-loss-market, but plays like it wants to be a chic flick. Nevertheless, these movies are astounding because they probe the mind and heart of their viewers, which they do through gradual suspense and the universal theme of loneliness.
When the “Hurt Locker” begins, we see Guy Pearce die trying to disarm a bomb in the streets of Baghdad. The next scene shows Jeremy Renner show up as the new bomb explosion expert, Sgt. William James. At this point, I nearly screamed, as I thought of the movie “Swat” and Renner’s tango with Farrell’s character in that movie. However, Renner not only abolishes that old movie, but he subtly moves us to care about him and his lifestyle of bombs and kept keepsakes.
Renner moves through the film dismantling IAD’s and unknown bombs through a renegade style of operation, one that Sanborn and Elderidge—his two “covering fire” mates—dislike. However, this film does not merely repeat action scenes in the desert, as Jamie Foxx does in “The Kingdom.” No, Bigelow makes Renner into a character that is best described as an artist, or an athlete that loves the “big game.” Renner does not want a robot to diffuse bombs; no, he wants to experience dismantling the bomb in order to obtain the “drug” or adrenaline rush that he misses and craves in life, but also because he wants to feel what his enemies went through in preparing the bomb. He not only becomes transfixed, but we feel the suspense he feels, knowing that one mistake could cost him his life, but also because that one moment of suspense could be worth the lives he saves…thus the title of the movie: “the HURT Locker.” He can literally be “hurt” doing his job, but even when he succeeds, he is “hurt” because he has some connection with the makers of every bomb, which is ably shown when his “keepsakes” are found under his bed. Sanborn tries to say that “it’s just cheap stuff found at RadioShack.” We know it is not, because moments before Renner tries calling his family and does not know what to say to his wife and child, but he has no problem discussing what he feels when sifting through the parts of various bombs he has diffused. We hear him say that he has diffused over 800 bombs, while his baby has not even been around that many days, nor has his wife seen him that long in years, a testament to the power of the title: Renner has a face of empathy and is truly “hurt” inside the “locker” of his own soul—loneliness that many of us will, thankfully, only see and not experience. Hitchcock said when there’s a bomb under a table, and it explodes, that’s action. When we know the bomb is there, and the people at the table play cards, and it doesn’t explode, that’s suspense. This movie is full of both, but it is the loneliness that truly drives us nuts, as we do not understand how anyone can be away from a family so long and not be anxious to get home, while Renner is the opposite—a man that cannot understand why others would want to keep him from his art and “locker.” Truly, this is a powerful metaphor for the Iraq war and the soldiers that have and continue to fight in it.
While the “Hurt Locker” is literally shot in a war zone, Jason Reitman’s film “Up in the Air” contains battles that many of American’s are feeling right now: the loss of employment. George Clooney plays Ryan Bingham, a man who is sent throughout the states to fire individuals on behalf of the companies that are too scared to do it themselves. He does this with resolve and proficiency, because he believes that he has what Hemingway once termed “dignity” or “grace under pressure.” When his company decides to hire a new female, one that initially believes that she can fire people through a computer screen, Clooney is taken aback for numerous reasons, the biggest of which is, he likes traveling and being alone. Not only does Clooney enjoy loneliness, but he truly feels a connection with people when they are fired, a connection he believes cannot be “felt” through a computer screen. What transpires over the next 90 minutes is a film in which relevant job losses are felt by viewers in two ways: America’s literal recession and the actor’s who portray those who have just been laid off, as Reitman hired individuals who had just been laid off to reenact what they went through just a few months before. This leads to many interesting emotions: Should be feel sad for Clooney who is isolated of his own choice? Or do we feel bad for those who have just been let go, but have a “packet” of hope and a family to go back to—something Reitman is forceful in showing us: All of the “victims” of job losses have families to go back to, while Clooney does not. All of this leads us to a feeling that is best summed up through the title: “Up in the Air.” We are not supposed to know what or how to feel.
While this film has a brilliant first act, it does become rather clichéd near the end, as Clooney feels he must “take a shot” at love and the girl he pines for: Verga Farmiga, the beautiful and underrated actress who played duel love interests in the brilliant “Departed” by Scorsese. While Clooney is not rewarded for putting himself “out there” for love, we are unsure what to make of this move by Reitman, as the film was great until the “chic flick” third act. Don’t misunderstand me: This is a good film, one that is worth watching. It’s just, man, it could have been great: A man that embraces loneliness and learns to tell the tale…a direct connection to “The Hurt Locker” and Sgt. William James. He plays with fire and loneliness and is literally still alive to tell the tale. Clooney is hit by a “love bomb” and is unsure of how to act after it blows up in his face, a real metaphor that does explain why “Locker” won this year’s Best Picture Oscar. James collects the hurt and puts it in his locker, while Clooney just keeps flying.

Thanks for reading,
Student Critic