The story of the 2009 movie year is one of conflict; where big-buck phenomenals went head on against the “regular movies.” Where the 400 million “Transformers…,” 300 million “Harry Potter…,” “Twilight…,” and “Up” and the 250 million “Star Trek…,” and “Alvin and the Chipmunks…” overwhelmed the likes of “Invictus,” “Up in the Air,” and “Public Enemies.” And, of course, we've re-elected James Cameron King of the World (is everyone seeing "Avatar" at least twice?).
But the real story of the year is Kathryn Bigelow's The Hurt Locker -- tops on List Blogster’s inventory of the movies of 2009 that you never saw. The Iraq war movie about a cream-of-the-crop bomb squad, has been through one hell of a fantastic, tenacious journey from total obscurity, and financial failure, to become an odds-on winner at the Academy Awards.
When I saw it last summer there were two people in the theater: me and the projectionist. Yes, I’ll use the appropriate metaphor: we were blown away. Constant exaltations to my movie-loving friends, along with anyone in hearing range, got a bored nod. “Check the reviews if you don’t believe me,” I added in a last ditch effort.
Was this for real? The best film of the year and no one is seeing it?
It’s different now, of course. Six months after opening, THL is kicking butt as it presses through awards season and people are finally, finally seeing the movie. Which raises the question: Do audiences really need awards to prompt them into seeing a good movie? How sad is that?
Final note: as the projectionist and I talked after the screening, we agreed how the final shot was a wonderful, memorable image: a striking long shot that movingly ties everything together.
No comments:
Post a Comment