‘War is a force that gives us meaning.’
The best action director working in Hollywood today is a woman. Her name is Kathryn Bigelow. Her movie is The Hurt Locker, the intense, gripping, exhilarating story of an American bomb squad in Iraq. I would put my money on Bigelow in a fight with Michael Bay, Gavin Hood, and Tony Scott. She would destroy them with a few well-placed punches; the woman can tell a story with minimal clutter and maximum tension. (She was married, briefly, to James Cameron. What an interesting household.)
More than all the well-meaning Iraq movies of the last few years, The Hurt Locker gets down to a basic truth about war: It’s a drug.
A.O. Scott’s review in the NYT: ‘If “The Hurt Locker” is not the best action movie of the summer, I’ll blow up my car.’
David Denby’s review in TNY: ‘…unlike so many directors today, who jam together crashes, explosions, and people sailing through the air in nonsensical montages of fantasy movement, Bigelow keeps the space tight and coherent. No matter how many times she cuts away, you know exactly where James is in relation to a bomb—whether he’s in the kill zone or far enough away to be safe.’
It just opened in New York, but you know. . .
Answers to questions you might be asking, unless you wandered onto this site purely by accident >>>
June 27th, 2009 at 09:11
Hmmm, a woman directing a war (action) movie. And the reviews are very compelling.
I’d sure like to see it. And doubly nice to see it at the BIG A.
June 30th, 2009 at 09:57
Hello. I have seen it and it was very good. I did not know it was directed by a woman until the end credits. Sharing my review posted here: http://3xhcch.multiply.com/reviews/item/184
June 30th, 2009 at 10:27
This is a post of yours that’s closest related to my comment, so I’ll post it here.
Concerning Brillante Mendoza’s win of the Best Director award at Cannes, and peoples’ confusion over it.
I think that it’s not necessarily because of the ‘directing’ aspect of the film that he won the award. It’s because of the environment that he and the film was in. In a country where syrupy love stories and family comedies reign supreme (mainly because they’re the cash cows of the film industry) and consist of about 99% of the films being made (.9% being softcore gay porn trying to pass themselves off as ‘indie’, but that’s another topic altogether) and the last .1% being Mendoza’s piece.
His piece is the complete and polar opposite of the 99%, in which it shows the raw and ugly truth with ultra-gore and violence. Obviously it’ll be shunned by the people with reactions such as ‘Ugh, I can’t believe he had to show that aspect of our culture(?) to the entire world’…
Instead of the masses’ preference to be shown fantastic lies, he shows the ugly truth. Bravery. He risked being shunned by the film industry. Bravery. He risked having his movie banned in his home country. Bravery.
He won it not because of the film itself
…not because of directing
…but because of bravery
A similar parallel to this situation would be Gwyneth Paltrow’s Best Actress Oscar win for Shakespeare In Love. Her acting was OK. In fact I think Kate Winslet should have won for Titanic.
You should know the story around the casting of the female lead for Shakespeare In Love. It was first offered to Julia Roberts (she declined). Then to Nicole Kidman (she declined). With Gwyneth Paltrow, she was actually offered the lead in Titanic, the commercial blockbuster piece. She declined it and decided to take on the smaller scale, more serious piece called Shakespeare In Love instead.
She won not because of her acting
…but because of her bravery (or is it humility?)
In any case, her reason for taking on Shakespeare could have been because she would have to speak with a British accent, something she loves to do. But well… it’s nice to have gotten misinterpreted intentions I suppose.