Kathryn Bigelow: From TV to Oscar-Nominated Director

Kathryn Bigelow is perhaps best known for her theatrical film work, but she has also dabbled from time to time on the small screen. In her quest to work on projects that make a difference and have something to say, Kathryn directed several episodes of the ground-breaking television series Homicide: Life on the Street (multiple Peabody Award winner and Television Critics Association honoree). So in honor of a film director who brought her unique talents and perspective to television before it became a trendy thing to do, I chose to share a bit about Kathryn’s latest passion project – the film and Best Picture Oscar nominee, The Hurt Locker.

Kathryn Bigelow and a panel of guests talk about The Hurt Locker.

On February 24, 2010, the Truman National Security Project hosted a special presentation and screening with a select panel of guests to discuss the significance and impact of the film The Hurt Locker. Attending the panel were: Kathryn Bigelow; Mark Boal, screenwriter of The Hurt Locker; Christine Pelosi, member of the Democratic National Committee; Paul Clark, retired Air Force officer and former White House representative; Drew Sloan, member of the Truman National Security Project and retired U.S. Army Captain who fought in both Iraq and Afghanistan; Jim O’Neil, Executive Director of the EOD memorial and former demolitions technician; and Frank McAdams, also a war veteran and current USC faculty member.

With such an extensive panel of vastly different perspectives and experience, it was intriguing to find out not only about the genesis of the film, but also how it sheds light on the lives of the individuals that the film so vividly and humanely portrays.

When asked how the story was initially conceived, Kathryn Bigelow credited the story as originating with Mark Boal, a writer who had been a journalist embedded with an EOD (explosive ordnance disposal) unit in Iraq during the winter of 2004. As the audience looked in askance at him, Mark Boal humorously quipped, “Everyone has their own version of how they broke into Hollywood, I had to go to a f***ing war zone!”

After the laughter died down, and on a more serious note, Mark explained that while he was embedded in Iraq with an EOD unit, that a typical 3-men bomb squad had an average of 10-15 IED (improvised explosive device) calls in a 24 hour period. He said, “Just the sheer number of bombs. . . these were incredibly gutsy guys, highly trained, into their jobs, wanting to do the very best they could – yet there are just so many bombs. The war had boiled down to running around the city trying to find all the IEDs. I hadn’t quite realized until I got there that this was the subject of the war: it was a war of bombs and this war did not have a frontline tactically. So these bombs increasingly became with methodology of terror and bomb disarmament became the key tactical response. I was really struck just by how totally overwhelming it was.” And because the Iraq war has become the “war of bombs,” demolition squads were thrust to the forefront of this
particular war.

When asked about the significance of wanting to illuminate the “human cost” of the war, Kathryn said, “I thought it was interesting. The fact that these men arguably have the most dangerous job in the world — and it is an extremely challenged situation. From my perspective as a film maker and looking at this particular conflict in terms of the human cost — that was very, very moving to me.” Because it is the most dangerous job in the world, it is in one word: hellish. Kathryn further shared that she just wanted to try to capture the chaos and tragedy of the conflict, as well as promote and engage in a meaningful debate regarding this unpopular war.

Looking at how The Hurt Locker depicted this new battlefield technique and how it matched up with the reality of demolition work in Iraq, retired Air Force officer Paul Clark stated that because IEDs are so readily available that this has become the signature weapon of the war. There are literally hundreds of unexploded artillery that has been simply left in Iraq. Because of its ready availability, the abandoned weaponry is harvested for terrorist campaigns; thus forcing the U.S. military to develop a counter-insurgency campaign that consists of bomb squads working to prevent deaths. Mr. Clark also explained that, “We came to the conclusion that the military system as a whole had to have that resolution — that we should protect the civilian population. That is the primary goal and that’s what we see now in Iraq — and the same idea is now in Afghanistan where IEDs are showing up.” Thus, because so much undetonated artillery has been left behind, those unexploded bombs have become the key weapons of the war after the war and the U.S. military’s role is focused on counter-insurgency work in order to protect civilian lives.

When asked what it was like in the mind of somebody who has done this type of demolition work, Jim O’Neil shared from his own personal experience that “these guys all have something in common: it’s a commitment to a mission and purpose. It’s a passion for the job and it’s the compassion that is required for a guy or a woman to put on that bomb suit and willingly walk that line towards an uncertain future – and probably a future that is either going to result in death or a very serious injury. To me, that takes a very special person. It is a little bit different than being in the regular military, as the EOD guy knows what is waiting for him, even though he doesn’t know how it’s going to be built, he doesn’t know how many of them there are, and he doesn’t know the exact scenario – so it takes a person who is exceptional. There is no greater love than what is inside a EOD tech because he or she is willing to take that walk and
sacrifice theirself to save another person.”

Mr. O’Neil further shared that when he watched the film The Hurt Locker,  “one of the elements that really struck me in the movie was that war is a drug. Think about it in terms of when you’re over there you actually feel like you’re making a difference. One of things I noticed about this movie is there are really no politics involved in this movie. This is simply a movie about soldiers doing a soldier’s job – and it is amazingly sensitive. The purpose you have when you’re the ‘tip of the spear’ — when you’re in Afghanistan or Iraq — you believe in what you’re doing, even if people back home don’t quite understand. You feel like you really matter.”

Kathryn Bigelow is poised to be the first female to win the Best Director Oscar.

When asked how The Hurt Locker got past the war-fatigue or clutter of all the other war films that are out there, Kathryn explained that from her point of view, “We certainly were not going to wait until the war ended because that could have been several lifetimes. I think we [she and Mark] both felt so strongly about this project and we basically were undeterred by the other films. Quite honestly, I felt that there was something so specific about this movie being the ‘tip of the spear’ — that EOD was at the heart of this particular conflict. There were very specific assumptions that we were exploring and examining and that it really separated this particular project from anything that I was aware of, and also just to the general public. Certainly, speaking for myself, nobody understood that this conflict has no front — no rear. So being able to kind of examine it through the eyes of this particular solider — looking at this conflict
as a character study became very, very important to distinguish it from whatever was out – from the Iraq-fatigue, whatever you call it. And, I was determined.” Kathryn felt strongly that focusing on the ‘tip of the spear’ story was inherently compelling — and she really wanted to address the issue of: what does victory mean in this particular conflict?

Screenwriter Mark Boal also explained that, “The notion that people don’t care about the war is totally very, very wrong. I think people really do care. But there’s a difference between caring about it and convincing a studio to market a film. It was the film critics that pushed the movie out into the culture and, without the support of those people, we probably wouldn’t be having this conversation.” Mark too shared Kathryn’s compulsion to emphasize the importance of separating the story of the warrior from the story of the war.

Trying to tie the film back to whether it was an accurate portrayal of what a soldier would go through, Drew Sloan volunteered, “I think one thing that the movie captured very well was the sheer intensity of moments of combat. Most tours are a year long, during which time probably only 1-5% of that time is like ‘game on.’ The rest of the time is you’re just kind of hanging out. I thought the movie did a very nice job of really being realistic. The way the streets look and the trash — how that made my heart palpitate a little bit, because trash over there, it hides so much. And that really is what an IED is all about. An IED is all about being hidden so people who are superior to you in terms of technology don’t see it and then all of the sudden – bam! And there’s nobody there to fight against. There’s nobody there. It’s what really kind of makes the Iraq war and the war in Afghanistan so awful in a lot of ways. You can see the long
term effects of that: a year of not knowing when you’re going to get attacked. And I think that right there is what this movie did. It captured the sheer intensity of moments.”

Also nicely captured and portrayed in the film was the unspoken emotion. Mark Boal explained that in writing the screenplay, he felt that action provokes emotion. Thus, it was a deliberate attempt to be naturalistic — to make dialogue as real as possible. Kathryn also shared that in producing and directing the film, she looked at it as, “I just came to realize how inherently dramatic just a day in the life of a bomb tech was. And realizing that the silence was almost as profound as the detonation and those sequences really required a kind of cadence and a kind of resonance. There was a tremendous amount of anticipation once you went through that opening sequence which was almost designed so that it educated the audience. That was the method by which you would understand what a day in the life of a bomb tech really was. And I think the silence is something so critical in this profession. I mean, these are individuals who have only seconds to make a tremendous amount of decisions under extreme pressure – at any moment someone could call in a sniper’s strike. So it is not just the problem in front of them in the ground. I was just trying to give the audience that kind of understanding. That was beautifully crafted in the screenplay – the rhythm and cadence. The silence became as important as the sound.”

Kathryn further elaborated, that the film was “an opportunity to use film as social commentary — an opportunity to explore this conflict — to look at it through the eyes of the character, through experiences of the soldiers, to invite the audience into a day over there, to try to bring the war home. I think that was something that we both felt very strongly about.”

Mark also stated that, when comparing a journalist’s perspective to a soldier’s perspective of the war, it was impossible to portray. He could not even begin to describe it as it would be a pale imitation. Thus, The Hurt Locker was intended to be an exploration of what makes the EOD team tick and to make them as humanistic as possible.

Finally, in response to the question whether the film should be viewed as a political-film, Mark explained that The Hurt Locker is first and foremost a work of art. But he acknowledged that the film is clearly political because it deals with a political subject – just not with a capital “P.” He also explained that because of the events of 9/11, he is much more attuned to the people involved – the “human cost.” Thus, when he wrote The Hurt Locker and because modern day news is such a black-hole, the film was to be a way to show people what it is really like over there. The film would take on the role that journalism used to serve. Kathryn added that it was not their intent to use the film strictly as social commentary, but really it was intended to bring the war home on a human level. Drew Sloane interjected that it was key to remember that this is not just a movie; that there are soldiers going through this right now. To which Jim
O’Niel shared that, in 2009 alone, 16 bomb technicians lost their lives serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are true “warriors” — they are doing something they feel that matters. And Kathryn summed it all up with that it was her intent that The Hurt Locker invite a debate and dialogue and a quest for resolution to this conflict so that it is never abandoned. Thus, the purpose of the film was not to emphasize polar opposite viewpoints, but to bridge the gap with understanding of the people who do volunteer for this heroic work – to serve and protect in other nations. It is not about who is right or not, but focuses on service to help others at personal risk and cost – it is perhaps the perfect example of pure altruism.

After hearing all these remarkable viewpoints on a film that is credited with reawakening the movie-going and television audiences to the plight of those still suffering in the war zones, it is a privilege to honor and showcase Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal’s astounding film The Hurt Locker. May it inspire another generation of film and television writers to share more of these extraordinary stories of the men and women to voluntarily serve our nation and the entire global community in order to make the world a little safer for us all.

The Hurt Locker is nominated for nine Academy Awards, including Best Picture, Best Director (Kathryn Bigelow) and Best Screenplay (Mark Boal). If Ms. Bigelow wins, she will be the first female director honored with an Oscar. The awards ceremony will air on ABC on Sunday, March 7 at 8/7c.