baseballfanjm

The front page review, calling this a "terrible war film" completely misses the point. "The Hurt Locker" has no obligation to be completely realistic, no more so than "Avatar", or "Inglourious Basterds".

Its only obligation is to tell a good story on screen. That it does wonderfully. It's one of the most suspenseful films made in the last few years. It contains some excellent performances.

It's tight, tense,and a damn good film. People who criticize it for its factual inaccuracies shouldn't judge movies, because they are judging art on a completely non-artistic terms. If that was how we judged movies, then every single biopic ever made would, by default, be bad. I shudder to think of a world where movies are judged, not by the quality of their storytelling, but by how well its characters shoot a rifle.

This has been a rough decade for film, no doubt. Sequels and remakes ran amok, and works of true originality, artistry, and narrative force are a rarity to be cherished. No film this decade has moved me quite like Children of Men. It's an incredible work of art, a cautionary tale, even a thriller. It incorporates all these elements and pulls them off brilliantly.

Alfonso Cuaron is an exhilarating director. This film is his magnum opus. He commands scenes with incredible power, brilliantly using long tracking shots to create tension as opposed to being self indulgent. He and his writers pulled together a story that wastes nothing, never showing a lack of pulse.

And then, there are those moments of incredible emotional power, scenes that are the payoff of the intricate construction of the film's world and plot. Cuaron pulls them off without manipulation, allowing the simple visceral impact of the scenes provide the punch.

Perhaps this has been a rough decade for films. But watching Children of Men, you wouldn't know it.