New Sniper Movie

[SAWMAN]

Originally Posted by RamZar

I finally watched "Shot Through the Heart" about two best friend snipers (one Serbian and the other Bosnian) during the Siege of Sarajevo from April 1992 to February 1996.

A truly sad chapter in the history of sniping when Serbian military commanders ordered their snipers to take out civilians (especially targeting children and women to have a demoralizing effect). UNICEF reported that of the estimated 65,000 to 80,000 children in the city: at least 40 percent had been directly shot at by snipers.

The movie showed the two friends practicing by shooting at olives from long distances, use of loopholes, counter-sniping, etc. The Serbian snipers would use firing squad tactics so that no one sniper would "feel" responsibility. With snipers taking up positions around Sarajevo, signs reading Pazite, Snajper! ("Beware, Sniper!") became commonplace and certain particularly dangerous streets were known as "sniper alleys".

Eventually, the International Criminal Tribunal convicted two Serb generals of numerous crimes against humanity in their conduct of the siege including "sniper terror campaign". Stanislav Galic and Dragomir Miloševic, were sentenced to life imprisonment and to 33 years imprisonment, respectively. The prosecution alleged in an opening statement that:

"The siege of Sarajevo, as it came to be popularly known, was an episode of such notoriety in the conflict in the former Yugoslavia that one must go back to World War II to find a parallel in European history. Not since then had a professional army conducted a campaign of unrelenting violence against the inhabitants of a European city so as to reduce them to a state of medieval deprivation in which they were in constant fear of death. In the period covered in this Indictment, there was nowhere safe for a Sarajevan, not at home, at school, in a hospital, from deliberate attack."

As that war was winding down, I went through the sniper hides of BOTH sides (in and around Sarajevo) with a buddy who had been an intel officer there throughout the entire war. The Serbian loopholes faced downtown, mainly at "Sniper Alley." ...I still need to make a scale mock-up of some of the hides. Ingenious in their design. You could tell they had some time to think about how to build and arrange their positions. Some loopholes only faced other loopholes from the opposing side. I crawled through all their positions, mapping out in my mind what they did and why. "Pazi Snajper" was written in the most strategic places. I have 2 of the signs in my garage. I had one made into a plaque to hang on my sniper team room wall where it remains. Lots of interesting stuff about how they played the game. I took tons of notes and pictures. Guys were coming in on vacation to snipe and return home to Europe with their experiences. Weird. I saw things deployed in that fight that I haven't seen anywhere else. I really should put a class together just pertaining to what I learned there. Maybe one day, after I've made my millions...

There was also a sniper that came up to take out one of the people I was working with in Iraq back in 2004. I could write a book just about what we did to prep for that engagement. That sniper ended up getting captured accidentally by an infantry unit enroute at a safe house. Life sure is funny...

[RamZar]

'The Hurt Locker' sniper scene: a delicate mission

Michael Ordoña, Special to The Chronicle

San Francisco Chronicle, Sunday, January 3, 2010


Sgt. J.T. Sanborn (Anthony Mackie, left) mans the Barrett .50-caliber sniper rifle as Staff Sgt. Will James (Jeremy Renner) spots in "The Hurt Locker."

"The Hurt Locker" director Kathryn Bigelow (center) sets up a shot for the sniper scene as cinematographer Barry Ackroyd looks on from his position farther down the tracks.



Shot with a gritty, documentary-like approach in Jordan, director Kathryn Bigelow's "The Hurt Locker" is now a top awards contender. One of the film's most memorable sequences comes when its three-man Explosive Ordnance Disposal unit (Jeremy Renner as James, Anthony Mackie as Sanborn and Brian Geraghty as Eldridge) is ambushed in the Iraqi desert by an insurgent sniper team, leading to a harrowing all-day duel. Some of the movie's craftspeople spoke with The Chronicle by phone and e-mail to explain how they worked with Bigelow to make essentially 15 minutes of cinematic waiting a riveting experience.

INT/EXT HUMVEE DAY

Find the humvee driving across the desert void. ... Outside, horizon of sand and sun. Inside, shell-shocked men.


Jeremy Renner, actor: It was a really important scene for all three of our characters. It was the hinging point to where they all become cohesive. Before that it was always very tense, "Is he trying to kill us, this guy (James)?" It was intense shooting that, for sure.

Barry Ackroyd, cinematographer: One of the most important things is to find the right location. It had a dry riverbed for them to get stuck in, the bridge in the distance, and a real building.

MERCENARY TEAM LEADER

We've got a flat tire. Can you help us?


Mark Boal, writer (and former embedded journalist): The flat tire being the beginning of the ambush came out of a conversation I once had with a military contractor who told me one of the scariest things that ever happened to him in Iraq was getting stranded with a flat tire and not having the right wrench.

Paul N.J. Ottosson, sound designer: The first kill, I never (put the sound of) the shot in. It was more horrifying and jarring to just see the bullet hit him, not knowing where it came from.

Richard Stutsman, special effects supervisor (who built simulated IEDs for an Army training program): We were improvising to the max. We got all these Chinese fireworks and were draining all the black powder out of them for the initial attack, when the rounds are hitting the dirt. That was all repackaged fireworks.

Ottosson: I did a few things that might break some mixing rules. One is some extreme panning of dialogue and Foley (placing voices and other sounds in extreme positions in the speakers). Most movies, we keep dialogue in the center regardless of where the person is, perhaps as much as 99 percent of the time. It helped with the chaos and danger of the attack.

Boal: They are not trained snipers per se, but they are trained sharpshooters and are very familiar with that weaponry because Army EOD actually uses that .50-caliber Barrett sniper rifle for bomb-rendering-safe techniques.

Stutsman: That house was about a mile, a mile and a half away, but even at that range, the Barrett would put a hole in the wall. It usually blows a human body in half.

SCOPE POV

Scanning the barren landscape. Gravel and sun ... Then ... a structure ... a one-story building, in the far distance.


Stutsman: The building where the snipers were holing up - believe it or not, that was some guy's vacation house, just this unfinished house in the middle of nowhere. Generally the material we use to simulate breaking concrete is stuff called "Pyrocell." And that was just plain not available out there. So we ended up making up our own mixture out of plaster and cork.

Ottosson: Every cut, I tried to give a unique sound. The breathing of the snipers. I was in the Army myself and learned how to be a sharpshooter/sniper. You need to learn how to breathe and before you pull that trigger you end up being in a peaceful place.

Ackroyd: When they're looking at the snipers across the valley, we kept the cameras as far away as physically possible. You're pushing the optics of the camera by using doublers (to increase magnification), and doublers again, and a fast film stock to get a sense of the heat haze.

JAMES
I need that ammo, man!

ELDRIDGE
I'm looking. Where is it?

JAMES
Check the dead guy.

Ottosson: When James is yelling to Eldridge I put a slight short echo on his voice; made James seem more powerful, therefore Eldridge weaker.

Boal: I got the kernel of the idea of cleaning the bullets from a real incident ... a friend once casually mentioned that when he was in a long siege-type situation in Najaf his unit ran low on ammo and resorted to using the bloody bullets of injured soldiers.

EXT/INT DEEP RAVINE HOURS LATER
Eldridge and the remaining contractors have exhausted their water supply.

Sanborn and James are in EXACTLY the same position as when we left them, exposed to the elements.

Renner: It was a tough one because there was no shade; you could never escape. Long days, 16-hour days in 125, even 130 degrees sometimes. It wears on you but it makes it easier to act (laughs).

Ackroyd: The actors just stayed still for a while and the flies came. They didn't bat them away because they were doing what they should be doing as soldiers.

Chris Innis and Bob Murawski, editors: We had to put that (sequence) together and pull it apart numerous times to get the right pace ... It was also challenging to cut what was essentially a lot of "negative action." Negative action is basically when "nothing happens." ... You have to heighten the tension by cutting to things that create the perception of more tension, such as the goats on the hill that could be just a mirage or another sniper.

Ackroyd: The cutaway of the dust devil. ... You know if something like that happens, it may never make the film, but you definitely shoot it.

RAVINE SEVERAL HOURS LATER

Dusk. Shadows fall over James and Sanborn, both of whom remain lying in the exact same sniping position, although now they are covered head to toe in sand.

Buck Sanders, composer (with Marco Beltrami): That's the first set of music in the film that has any sort of emotional weight to it. It's a supportive score, rather than trying to hit anybody over the head. Kathryn wouldn't want a score like that. It's the first time there's a melodic line that's played. There are some references to that classical idiom of Iraqi or Arabic music, but more as heard through the character of James, who is visiting there.

Boal: Many people have singled out the scene as one of their favorites. ... I like it for a lot of reasons, especially because it dramatizes the utter randomness and unpredictability of the violence there. {sbox}



The Hurt Locker (R) is playing at Bay Area theaters. It will be released on DVD and Blu-ray on Jan. 12.

To see a trailer for "The Hurt Locker," go to www.thehurtlocker-movie.com

Michael Ordoña is a freelance writer. E-mail him at pinkletters@sfchronicle.com

[RamZar]

From L.A. Times:

'The Hurt Locker' sets off conflict

Some soldiers and veterans say the movie, a favorite for the best picture Oscar, portrays them as renegades and doesn't depict combat accurately. But film critics have praised its authenticity.

By Julian E. Barnes Ned Parker and John Horn

The Los Angeles Times February 26, 2010



The Defense Department pulled its production assistance for "The Hurt Locker" at the last minute. The film is now a favorite to win the best picture Oscar.

Reporting from Baghdad, Los Angeles and Washington

Many film critics -- and awards voters -- have praised “The Hurt Locker’s” depiction of the U.S. military in Iraq, often singling out the bomb disposal drama for its authenticity. But as the film emerges as a favorite to win the best picture Oscar, a number of active soldiers and veterans say the film is Hollywood hokum, portraying soldiers as renegades while failing to represent details about combat accurately.

The criticism, coming just before Oscar ballots are due Tuesday, highlights the delicate relationship between "The Hurt Locker" and the nation's armed forces. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates says the film is "authentic" and "very compelling" and has recommended it to his staff. But the government says it pulled its "Hurt Locker" production assistance at the last minute in 2007, saying that the film's makers were shooting scenes that weren't in the screenplay submitted to the Defense Department, including a sequence that the government believed portrayed troops unflatteringly. The film's producers dispute elements of the account.

Although "The Hurt Locker" has numerous supporters within the military -- including Purple Heart winner Drew Sloan, who participated in a "Hurt Locker" panel discussion in Hollywood with other veterans and the film's makers Wednesday night -- the movie's detractors share a consistent complaint about its representation of the Army's Explosive Ordnance Disposal team as they attempt to disarm improvised explosive devices.

The film, directed by Kathryn Bigelow and written by journalist Mark Boal (who was embedded with a bomb disposal team), stars Jeremy Renner as Staff Sgt. William James. Not deterred by protocol or his own safety, James is an adrenaline-addicted bomb defuser who occasionally puts his unit at risk, and at one point takes to the streets of Baghdad on a solo personal mission. Members of EOD teams in southern Iraq said in interviews arranged by the Army that "The Hurt Locker" is a good action movie if you know nothing about defusing roadside bombs or the military.

Sgt. Eric Gordon of San Pedro, an Air Force EOD technician on his second tour in Iraq, has watched the movie a few times with his friends. "I would watch it with other EOD people, and we would laugh," Gordon said.

He scoffed at a scene in which a bomb is defused with wire cutters. "It's similar to having a firefighter go into a building with a squirt bottle," Gordon said.

An EOD team leader in Maysan province, Staff Sgt. Jeremy D. Phillips, said, "My interest is bringing myself and my team members home alive, with all of our appendages in the right place."

Although he was glad the film highlighted their trade, he disliked the celluloid treatment of EOD units. "There is too much John Wayne and cowboy stuff. It is very loosely based on actual events," he said. "I'm honestly glad they are trying to convey to the public what we've been doing, and I wish maybe they had just done it with a little bit of a different spin on it," he said.

Others are more supportive. Sloan, a former U.S. Army captain, said at the panel discussion that "The Hurt Locker" offered a perfect snapshot of modern conflict. "This is what's going on for the men and women who are fighting this war," he said.

Jim O'Neil, the executive director of the EOD Memorial, which honors those killed defusing bombs, was equally enthusiastic about the film's accuracy. "It's not just a movie," he said at the panel discussion. "It's something that's actually occurring as we're sitting in these chairs."

Some recent veterans, however, disagreed. "The depiction of our community in this film is disrespectful," said Paul Rieckhoff, the executive director and founder of the 150,000-member Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America. "We are not cowboys. We are not reckless. We are professionals. And a lot of the film would make you think the opposite."

"I didn't really care for it," said Brian Siefkes, who served in Iraq and plays an Army soldier in the upcoming movie "The Green Zone." "There were many moments where I felt they were trying to portray the actual life of EOD in Iraq but over-sensationalized it," he said.

Boal, who also produced "The Hurt Locker," said the film was not intended to be a documentary or a training film. "We certainly made creative choices for dramatic effect," he said. "But I hope the choices were made respectfully and conscientiously."

At one point, "The Hurt Locker" might have been made with government cooperation. But just 12 hours before Lt. Col. J. Todd Breasseale was to fly to Jordan to serve as the Army's technical advisor to "The Hurt Locker," he said in an interview that he heard there might be problems. A Jordanian official told him that scenes were being shot that were not in the script that the Army had approved. Breasseale accused the producer of shooting a scene in which soldiers act violently toward detainees. (The military does not provide help to films depicting violations of the laws of war, unless their consequences are shown.) He also charged that the production had driven a Humvee into a Palestinian refugee camp in order to film angry crowd scenes.

"Nice working with you," Breasseale said he recalled telling a producer before the military decided to stop working with the production. "Kathryn has a lot of talent, but I cannot trust that your company will honor its contract to the soldiers and government of the U.S." Breasseale said the filmmakers had been solicitous of the Army's opinion, "trying to get the look and feel right," and they had been allowed to film at an Army logistics base in Kuwait. Breasseale, who is now deployed, saw "The Hurt Locker" on a laptop in Afghanistan along with a soldier from one of the Army's EOD teams. He conceded it was a great story and a "spectacular looking movie. But if you're looking for realism and how military relationships really work, I believe she missed the mark," Breasseale said of Bigelow.

Others in the Pentagon's office overseeing work with Hollywood agree. "The filmmakers' interest in drama and excitement exceeded what we felt were reasonable realistic portrayals," said Philip M. Strub, the Pentagon's special assistant for entertainment media.

Boal said that while the production initially worked with the U.S. military, it parted ways when it became clear they would not approve of "The Hurt Locker's" script. He said the producers did not film on a base in Kuwait and never signed a contract.

"The Department of Defense did not support the movie. And my understanding is that they did not support 'Platoon' or 'The Deer Hunter,' " Boal said of two of the most revered movies about the Vietnam War. "I am OK with that outcome because I didn't want to change the script to suit them."

The top Pentagon official, Gates, has a very positive view of the movie. "This is the first Iraq war movie that he has liked, or for that matter seen," said Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell. "In looking at all previous films he thought they had too much of a political agenda.

"He just thought it was a very compelling, and what he thought was authentic, portrayal of what life is like for many of our troops in Iraq. Of the films that have been done about this war, that is the most authentic."

julian.barnes@latimes.com

ned.parker@latimes.com

john.horn@latimes.com


'The Hurt Locker' debate: accuracy vs. entertainment

Los Angeles Times, February 26, 2010 | 2:53 pm

As a trio of Los Angeles Times writers -- Julian E. Barnes, Ned Parker and John Horn -- reported Friday, "Although 'The Hurt Locker' has numerous supporters within the military -- including Purple Heart winner Drew Sloan, who participated in a 'Hurt Locker' panel discussion in Hollywood with other veterans and the film's makers Wednesday night -- the movie's detractors share a consistent complaint about its representation of the Army's Explosive Ordnance Disposal team as they attempt to disarm improvised explosive devices."

Indeed, "members of EOD teams in southern Iraq said in interviews arranged by the Army that 'The Hurt Locker' is a good action movie if you know nothing about defusing roadside bombs or the military. Sgt. Eric Gordon of San Pedro, an Air Force EOD technician on his second tour in Iraq, has watched the movie a few times with his friends. 'I would watch it with other EOD people, and we would laugh,' Gordon said." And they add, "an EOD team leader in Maysan province, Staff Sgt. Jeremy D. Phillips, said although he was glad the film highlighted their trade, he disliked the celluloid treatment of EOD units. 'There is too much John Wayne and cowboy stuff. It is very loosely based on actual events,' he said. 'I'm honestly glad they are trying to convey to the public what we've been doing, and I wish maybe they had just done it with a little bit of a different spin on it,' he said."

Among those also interviewed was the film's Oscar-nominated screenwriter and co-producer Mark Boal who said "the film was not intended to be a documentary or a training film. 'We certainly made creative choices for dramatic effect,' he said. 'But I hope the choices were made respectfully and conscientiously.'"

The above report is just the latest dispatch in an ongoing debate about the Oscar contender. On Feb. 4, Iraq war veteran Kate Hoit detailed her concerns with the film in a column that appeared on the Huffington Post. As she wrote, "'The Hurt Locker' made it seem like the EOD team were taking on the streets of Baghdad; just them against a world of improvised explosive devices. However, this is when I realized the scriptwriters were lazy. This movie is a full-throttle adrenaline rush that is comprised of ditching common sense and the realities of war. The writers did not attempt to formulate a story based on the actual job of an EOD soldier. Instead, they created a war junky, sniper, commando guy who relied on no one (and no radios?) and stressed-out everyone around him, including those watching the movie."

In rebuttal, retired EOD officer and executive director of the EOD Memorial James P. O'Neil explained, "'The Hurt Locker' takes place over a year, compressed to two hours. Every moment of it is intense. Jeremy Renner's character and personality is a composite of a dozen or so EOD techs that I know. Were we as reckless as James? Hell no. I probably would have punched him out as well. The 'beyond the wire' insurgent hunt and hoodie run may not be entirely realistic, but no one can honestly say they weren't entertained and glued to their seats during these sequences."

And the film's technical adviser, James Clifford, addressed Hoit's criticism of the film as follows: "I will stipulate that Ms. Hoit's points are accurate, but they amount to differences without distinctions. Her commentary demonstrates that she has the vision to see the trees but appears to lack the judgment to see the forest. She is apparently unable to tell the difference between entertainment and education. 'The Hurt Locker' is entertainment based on real situations."

[Lindy]

While I am a finikin, and a stickler for accuracy in information on web sites such as this one, a movie, or, for that matter, a novel - see my comments on Stephen Hunter's latest on this site - are not training materials, and my opinion is that they should not be criticized as such.

A well-known screenwriter I knew and I had discussed that issue. His opinion was that every single word or shot which occurred in a movie should serve the purpose of telling the story, and anything which did not should be deleted. In addition, there are instances where strict accuracy would interfere with telling the story.

That's my opinion, too. In addition, I think that much of the technical criticism which occurs in matters like these is intended simply to impress the reader with how much the writer knows about the subject, rather than to inform the reader.

Your opinion may be different - but that's mine.

[RamZar]

Originally Posted by Lindy

...are not training materials, and my opinion is that they should not be criticized as such.

...much of the technical criticism which occurs in matters like these is intended simply to impress the reader with how much the writer knows about the subject, rather than to inform the reader.

Those are my opinions as well.

A movie due to its limited length has to take some liberties and shortcuts in order to tell a compelling story. There's a lot that this movie has gotten right and brought about necessary awareness of the bomb disposal experts (BDE) as well as snipers (great 15 minutes for the latter). However, the movie is NOT a documentary NOR a training video!

I like these excerpts from the article about the opinions of Secretary Gates whom I admire greatly:

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates says the film is "authentic" and "very compelling" and has recommended it to his staff.

The top Pentagon official, Gates, has a very positive view of the movie. "This is the first Iraq war movie that he has liked, or for that matter seen," said Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell. "In looking at all previous films he thought they had too much of a political agenda."

"He just thought it was a very compelling, and what he thought was authentic, portrayal of what life is like for many of our troops in Iraq. Of the films that have been done about this war, that is the most authentic."

Let's not forget that The Hurt Locker's Mark Boal received the Writers Guild of America (WGA) award for original screenplay and is one of the leading contender for the Oscars for Best Original Screenplay. So, remember it's fiction even though it has a lot of facts right.

One thing is for sure is that I admire and greatly appreciate the courageous job that the BDE guys do every day.

[RamZar]

From today's Washington Post:

Some Iraq, Afghanistan war veterans criticize movie 'Hurt Locker' as inaccurate

By Christian Davenport, Washington Post Staff Writer

The Washington Post, Sunday, February 28, 2010; E01



Flash point: Film critics praised Jeremy Renner's portrayal, but veterans say his character is more cowboy than soldier.


Not entertained: Ryan Gallucci, a veteran who works at a veterans' group in Lanham, says he had to turn off the film.


Time magazine called "The Hurt Locker" "a near-perfect war film," but Ryan Gallucci, an Iraq war veteran, had to turn the movie off three times, he says, "or else I would have thrown my remote through the television."

Critics adore the film and it has been nominated for nine Oscars -- a feat matched only by "Avatar," the top-grossing movie of all time -- but Paul Rieckhoff, founder of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, says that's "nine more Oscar nominations than it deserves. I don't know why critics love this silly, inaccurate film so much," he wrote on his Facebook page.

Many in the military say "Hurt Locker" is plagued by unforgivable inaccuracies that make the most critically acclaimed Iraq war film to date more a Hollywood fantasy than the searingly realistic rendition that civilians take it for.

To which you might say: It's just a movie and an action flick at that. It's Tinseltown fiction -- an interpretation of war such as "Full Metal Jacket" or "Apocalypse Now." It's supposed to entertain. It's not a documentary, not real life.

But to those who were there, Iraq is real life. And they're very sensitive -- some would say overly so -- when their war is portrayed via a central character who is a reckless rogue.

Hence a rising backlash from people in uniform, such as this response on Rieckhoff's Facebook page from a self-identified Army Airborne Ranger:
"[i]f this movie was based on a war that never existed, I would have nothing to comment about. This movie is not based on a true story, but on a true war, a war in which I have seen my friends killed, a war in which I witnessed my ranger buddy get both his legs blown off. So for Hollywood to glorify this crap is a huge slap in the face to every soldier who's been on the front line."

Even Brian Williams, the NBC News anchor, took a shot on his blog, writing a post titled, "The Hurt Locker: Hurting for a fact-checker." The movie's positive reviews could not have been "written by anyone who had spent any time with U.S. armed forces in Iraq," he wrote, wondering why none of the soldiers in the movie dipped smokeless tobacco or said "hoo-ah" -- "the universal term for hello, goodbye, understood, etc."

'Reckless' character

In an interview, Rieckhoff said the anger about "Hurt Locker" stems not so much from such small inaccuracies -- for example, the uniforms the soldiers wear in the film weren't available until well after the time the story took place -- but rather from the depiction of the main character, Sgt. 1st Class William James.

Portrayed by Jeremy Renner, who's nominated for Best Actor, James is a daredevil who in one scene takes off his protective armor while disarming a bomb because, as he says, "If I'm going to die, I'm going to be comfortable." He runs alone through the streets of Baghdad with his sweat shirt hood up like a gangster. Later, he takes two soldiers hunting for insurgents in Baghdad's back alleys without any backup.

James's fellow soldiers are, or try to be, by-the-book professionals. They call James "rowdy" and "reckless," and one worries out loud that his leader's crazy antics are "going to get me killed." James is as much cowboy as soldier, and vets fear he could become an iconic figure in the American imagination should the movie win a bunch of statues.

"Films, almost more than anything, will be the way Americans understand our war," Rieckhoff said. "So we feel that there is a responsibility for filmmakers to portray our war accurately. We see ourselves as watchdogs. . . . When he puts a hood on like Eminem and starts roving outside the wire, it's ridiculous."

Gallucci, a former sergeant who served in Iraq from 2003 to 2004, says he kept hoping James would get "blown up throughout the entire movie. I wanted to see his poor teammates get another team leader, who was actually concerned about their safety."

'Dramatic effect'

Mark Boal, the film's screenwriter, knows the soldiers in the film are wearing the wrong uniform. He was embedded in Iraq with an Explosive Ordnance Disposal team in 2004, and he's aware of what soldiers wore. Boal has worked as a journalist -- an article he wrote for Playboy became the basis for the 2007 film "In the Valley of Elah," about an Iraq war veteran who is murdered upon returning home -- and he feels a duty to hew as close to possible to the truth.

But "The Hurt Locker" is a movie, not a magazine article, Boal says, and screenwriters need ample artistic license to build a compelling -- and true -- story. So when he chose to have the film's soldiers wear the current Army uniform rather than the one they wore in 2004, it's to allow his audience "to relate to the imagery they saw on the news."

Yes, he had military consultants help him get details of radio protocol and uniforms right, but he never felt obliged to be precisely accurate. The consultants, Boal says, give a writer the information he needs so that "when you do choose to make a dramatic effect, [you] do it in a way that is not totally embarrassing."

The arc of the narrative, he says, has to come from the writer. "The story came out of my imagination based on my life experience and hundreds of conversations I've had with soldiers.

"I definitely tried for dramatic effect to make artistic choices, but I hope I made them respectfully and carefully and with the goal of not making a training video or a documentary, but showing just how hellish this war is. I was also aware, by the way, that there are many wonderful documentaries on Iraq and many wonderful articles, which no one has seen. And quite frankly, I was hoping that people would see the film."

Art vs. reality

Each writer's search for truth lands at a different point on the spectrum between art and reality. When screenwriter David Simon made the series "Generation Kill" for HBO, he considered it more important to have Marines find his work an accurate portrayal of their culture and experience invading Iraq than to win critical acclaim. "The real fun isn't trying to convince the average viewer" that we have it right, he told the Marine Corps Times. "It's trying to convince people who have been in the game."

Boal not only wanted to tell a riveting and important story, but also to raise awareness about soldiers who disarm bombs, a specialty known as explosive ordnance disposal, which he believed the general public knew little about, even though hidden bombs are the leading cause of casualties in Iraq.

As a result, despite some complaints about inaccuracies, many veterans of bomb disposal units love the movie, says James O'Neil, executive director of the EOD Memorial Foundation, a nonprofit that has benefited financially from the film.

"While there is some artistic license," O'Neil says, "there's a lot of good representation of the intensity and the courage that's displayed by EOD techs. What it takes to find, identify and then render safe those [bombs] -- that's a story, and it's an incredible story."

Filmmakers always worry that productions that servicemembers see as spot-on might leave general audiences cold. So: Is it really important that a war movie be accurate?

No, says David McKenna, a film professor at Columbia University. "Hurt Locker," he argues, isn't as much about Iraq as it is about one soldier's addiction to war. It's a character study, an exploration of courage, bravado and leadership told through "a series of suspenseful situations. I suppose it could have just as easily been set in outer space."

If veterans don't like it, McKenna says, "well, this is an opportunity to go make your own movie."

[RamZar]

From National Review -- check out the comments about the sniper scene:

An Oscar Encounter

Jonathan Foreman

National Review Online, Tuesday, March 02, 2010


Now that The Hurt Locker has won so many awards and become a leading Oscar campaigner, it has come to the attention of the mainstream media that the film might not be as accurate as many critics and audiences had assumed.

Although it’s a terrific film and one that, unlike all other contemporary war movies, does no disservice to the troops, it does indeed include some things that most people who have served in Iraq or covered U.S. forces for a decent length of time would see as ridiculous:

1) You would never have a single humvee driving around Baghdad or into the desert. It just wouldn’t happen. It almost couldn’t happen.

2) The idea of a single U.S. soldier leaving a big FOB and running around town at night in his sweatshirt is extremely unlikely; finding his way back safely through the unmarked streets of a neighborhood he doesn’t know would be even more unlikely — in fact, virtually impossible.

3) The whole sniper scene with the Brit mercenaries/special-forces types is exciting but absurd. Among the things that someone should have told director Kathryn Bigelow is that the rounds from a big .50 caliber Browning sniper rifle would have gone right through the walls of the buildings in which the enemy snipers were hiding.

4) No Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) team would be left alone in a school or at an explosion site, as happens several times in the film. These guys are precious and protected.

5) In real life, enlisted men and NCOs, including members of EOD teams, generally have to answer to officers, and they meet with them on a regular basis (the only exception being some elite special forces units).

The Hurt Locker presents an absurdly officer-less world — though this particular case is far less of a Hollywood-dumb cliché than David Simon’s Generation Kill, in which all but one of the officers of an entire Marine Recon battalion are idiots.

6) You would have to look very hard to find drunken U.S. soldiers in Iraq (especially EOD troops). At least when I was there, alcohol was pretty difficult get hold of as well as forbidden in theater.

7) In Baghdad and in other cities, you actually don’t constantly hear jet fighters roaring overhead unless you’re sitting outside an airbase.

That said, I would still say that The Hurt Locker is the best film yet made about the post 9-11 wars.

It is all the more of a remarkable achievement given that it was a fairly low budget movie – indeed, perhaps the first “indie” war movie. (It may be the case that they couldn’t afford to rent more than a couple of humvees when shooting in Jordan.)

Among the things that the film got surprisingly right:

1) Its version of Baghdad almost looks like the real thing (unlike the urban sequences in Generation Kill, whose makers fancifully imagined that Nasiriyah has tall buildings)

2) Unlike any other film — or non-military book — about the Iraq war, The Hurt Locker captures the bizarre, inexplicable, and often fatal ways Iraqi civilians can behave in situations of extreme danger — calmly continuing to shop in the middle of firefights or driving past roadblocks for no good reason.

3) It doesn’t include any idiot statements by soldiers about the politics of the war — the kind that some critics expect because everyone in their world “knows” that the Iraq War is about lies, oppression, rape, oil-stealing, etc.

4) It gives you some sense of the Iraqi entrepreneurial presence on US bases, though on the big FOBs the stores tended to be on a larger and more impressive scale — certainly more than mere stalls — and they sold everything from pirate DVDs to food and souvenirs.

4) Neither the writer nor the director was under the impression that Iraq is “another Vietnam,” nor did they feel the need to insert clichés from various Vietnam war movies (unlike Jarhead with its moronic “I love my rifle” rip-off from Full Metal Jacket).

5) Above all, the soldiers are neither depicted as psychotic murderous villains (Redaction, Battle of Haditha, etc.) nor patronized as pathetic victims of a war of oppression.

Kathryn Bigelow clearly respects the troops and the work they do. She’s also one of the great action directors of our time, and, as she first demonstrated in the surfing/crime movie Point Break, she is genuinely fascinated by the way men bond in dangerous and challenging situations. I would argue film deserves to be seen, and despite its (relatively inoffensive) inaccuracies, to win an Academy Award.

— Jonathan Foreman was embedded with US troops in Iraq in 2003 and 2005.

[RamZar]

Check out the highlighted section with comments about the sniper scene:

What's Wrong With 'The Hurt Locker'

Atlantic Online, Mar 3 2010, 9:07 AM ET


In his self-published book, Stolen Valor, Vietnam veteran B.G. Burkett exposes scores of men who pass themselves off as war heroes. He digs through stacks of military personnel records and outs city councilmen, prominent businessmen and even presidents of veterans groups as frauds. Some had served in the military and finagled paperwork that bumped them up several ranks and turned them into battlefield legends. Purple Hearts, Silver Stars, Medals of Honor. Others hadn't spent a day in uniform but conjured equally dramatic tales of daring and sacrifice. The imposters, he says, had become some of the most vocal and visible veterans. They influenced the public's perception of war and even guided legislative agendas, a disservice to those who did the fighting and the bleeding.

How could they get away with that? Moral authority. So few Americans have actually walked and sweated on battlefields that they defer to those who say they have, and assume those men and women speak the truth.

This also explains why The Hurt Locker is up for a Best Picture Oscar. And why it shouldn't win.

Present a movie as a hyper-realistic look at today's wars and those fighting them, and you have a responsibility to deliver because—for better or worse—without first-hand experience, we rely on our storytellers to fill in the those gaps with texture, and meaning and context. That was director Kathryn Bigelow's intent. She wanted the audience to experience war as the soldiers do and used shaky hand-held camera shots for a documentary-style effect. And she was rewarded for it. She won over the critics, nearly all of whom wrote breathless and fawning reviews: Overflowing with crackling versimilitude; One of the defining films of the decade; Impressively realistic; A near-perfect movie about men in war; The film about the war in Iraq we've been waiting for.

With commentary like that, I expected a movie that would give viewers a real sense of what a minority of Americans have been doing on their behalf these nine years. Instead, I left the theater frustrated and disappointed. To its credit, The Hurt Locker, unlike many of the War on Terror films so far, doesn't spoon-feed political messages. But Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal have tried so hard to make a great and important film that they transformed their story into caricature. This is a shame, because the movie begins with promise.

Bigelow pulls us into the world of an Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal team finishing a year-long tour speckled with near misses. She nails the setting. The trash piles and the dust, the heat and the searing white sunlight, Iraqis watching from doorways, balconies and rooftops, the curious indistinguishable from the suspicious. And, amid all this, the soldiers, steeped in resignation, knowing they could die in the next moment. These bomb squads face obscene levels of danger, which makes their day-to-day experiences the perfect window through which to view war's effects.

But the movie soon careens into the tedious and the absurd. The Hurt Locker was born of Boal's embed with an Army EOD unit, which gives the film a further air of authority and authenticity—based on true events and all—though he took many, many liberties in crafting the story. I only saw a small corner of the war during two Iraq tours, but the bomb squad's actions seemed over the top. Was the main character, Will James, leader of the three-man team, reckless and cavalier with his men's safety? Probably. But never mind that. I expect small inconsistencies and lapses in logic, like soldiers wearing the wrong uniforms, or inexplicably abandoning their humvee and hiding in an Iraqi house.

It's the huge stumbles, many of them a by-product of the need for narrative momentum and dramatic tension, that pollute the finer parts of The Hurt Locker. Consider the sniper scene: Driving alone through the desert - and no one drives alone in Iraq—the team comes upon several Blackwater-type contractors who have captured two high-value targets from the "deck of cards"—those Saddam Hussein cronies hunted in the early months of the war. An Iraqi sniper quickly kills three of the contractors with stunning long-range shots. With no reinforcements or air support available, James and his men must save the day. J.T. Sanborn, the team's level-headed sergeant, settles in behind a .50-caliber rifle and kills three insurgents, including one dropped at a dead run, nine football fields away. A trained sniper would be proud of that shot, so it's mighty impressive from a bomb disposal technician.

Later—after James leaves his protected base and goes rogue through the nighttime streets of Baghdad—he and his two teammates investigate a massive truck bomb in the Green Zone. To hunt down the triggerman, James splits his team and sends each man alone down a dark alleyway. Wow. If that's true, I'm damn glad I didn't serve with any of them. Specialist Owen Eldridge, the team's youngest member, is shot and briefly kidnapped during the goofy mission, a ham-fisted reminder that James' actions have consequences for others.

These scenes would have made more sense as fantasy sequences, since bizarre and disturbing dreams are a staple of war. But are any of the events absolutely unimaginable? No. Battlefields are very, very strange places, with endless power to surprise. A soldier wandering off into Baghdad alone on some misguided personal quest? Well, Bowe Bergdahl, now held as a prisoner of war by the Taliban, was captured last year after he apparently walked away from his remote outpost in eastern Afghanistan. So people act stupidly.

The problem comes in knitting together these experiences, real or fancied, into a single narrative. Ask a dozen soldiers to tell you a story about the war and you'll hear a dozen harrowing or poignant or side-splitting tales. Many of them might be true. But smash them into a composite and the truth flees. While it makes for a convenient story vehicle and a steady point of focus for the viewer, packing everything into one man's or a small group's experience rises to the ridiculous.

I understand the need for condensed action sequences, a case best made by The Onion's story on Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, "the most true-to-life military game ever created." Soldiers run pointless missions, sit around for hours on guard duty and referee arguments between colleagues about which actress they'd rather sleep with. All of that brings back memories. War, in real-time, is often boring, or at least too slow moving for the big screen.

So Bigelow and Boal were right to reduce the soldiers' experiences to the pivotal and illuminating moments. And when The Hurt Locker does it well—which isn't often—the results are superb. One of the movie's best scenes comes near the end as James, back from Iraq, stands alone in the cereal aisle of a grocery store and stares at the choices, not overwhelmed but indifferent. He's traded the adrenaline of combat for the tedium of life at home.

The Hurt Locker should have lingered on and gone deeper into the small moments, digging at the subtlety and nuance instead of telling its audience that war, as experienced by so many Americans, isn't meaningful enough as is, but must be gussied up with outsiders' interpretations of what makes the experience profound.

Brian Mockenhaupt, a freelance writer, served twice in Iraq as an infantryman with the Army's 10th Mountain Division.

[SAWMAN]

My opinion on tactical accuracy in the movies follows the intent of the production, which is to tell the story and provide some escape for the viewer. I think accuracy plays a part in keeping the savvy viewer from mentally calling BS when a scene is just out of spec and causes the viewer to be reminded he's watching a poorly done movie, instead of continuing to enjoy the story.

Just like anything else, getting it right is, of course, more easily said than done. I intend to help as much as possible. I'm getting more and more work in the Hollywood biz, so I guess we'll see how it goes...

For me, the sniper scene in Hurt Locker was one that pulled me out of the story and made me wonder some things. It came across as disjointed and could have used some significant tweaking. Having said that, we all have to consider the fact that the Director can, and will, often disregard the TA's advice on such things. So, there's another factor. Just because you have a great TA, that doesn't mean he'll be listened to. However, when the relationship is good and they get it right, magic happens.

[Pyle]

Mr. Graves I sure would love to run into Tom like that. I have always liked his characters and thought he did an awsome job in the movies he is in. The one person I can honestly say I try to own every movie they were in. Small world and lucky chances some times right?