There’s been much discussion about “The Hurt Locker” and whether it is a “realistic” and “authentic” and “accurate” story about war and its impact on soldiers sent to fight it, or just a piece of fiction; whether it’s “pro-military” or “anti-military”; whether it’s pro-Iraq War or anti-Iraq War. To me, this debate misses the point: Of course it’s fiction, as is every other war movie, no matter how “authentic” it’s said to be.
Further, in my view it’s a bit grim to imagine that (a) we’re turning stories based on a current, ongoing war (or any war) into entertainment (as FX did in 2006 with its Iraq War TV series “Over There”), no matter the theme or message; and (b) there’s an argument, taken seriously, that these kinds of movies help us to understand war and its complexity.
Discussion question: Where are we as a society and culture when the actual, human reality of war doesn’t provide enough information — or isn’t emotionally compelling enough(!) — to demonstrate war’s absurdity and irredeemable evil? And in such an environment, do we have a prayer of *ever* moving away from the (mistaken) belief that war and violence is a permanent, inevitable element of human relations?