The Hurt Locker is carrying a lot of the spotlight lately, and as with any success you will find someone clinging to your coat tails trying to get a piece of it too.
Seems that Sgt Jeffery Sarver, a bomb squad tech who participated in research Mark Boal used while writing an article, says that the character portrayed in Hurt Locker is HIM and he was never compensated for his story.
Sarver alleges that virtually all of the situations portrayed in the film were occurrences involving him that were observed and documented by Mark Boal, who followed Saver around for 30 days back in 2004 in order to write a Playboy article. Boal then used that article as a jumping-off point for the film’s screenplay.
Boal says that the charges are baseless. “I think Sarver is a brave soldier and a good guy,” he said. “Like a lot of soldiers, he identifies with the film, but the character I wrote is fictional. The film is a work of fiction inspired by many people’s stories. I talked to easily over 100 soldiers during my research.”
When you subject yourself to a researcher who you KNOW is there to study you (and peers) for a role, can you really be surprised if something you said, how you acted or even phrases you coin get used? Its not like this guy posed as a soldier and secretively took notes observing their roles. They knew why he was there. He knew he would be quoted for the article (which later became the basis for the screenplay)
Sarver claims to have coined the phrase Hurt Locker, and wants credit for that too. But when slang gets used that is picked up during research, should they get paid for it? This just smells of a money grab to me. Hurt Locker is getting a LOT of attention right now and it can be hurt by negative publicity so this guy suddenly says the film is almost entirely a film about him, not based on people like him. But actually him.
I don’t see much coming of this. Just a desperate ploy for a guy to benefit financially from the film’s success. If the film wasn’t getting this attention, do you honestly think this guy would have come forward about it?
Of course films make a profit, but the way movie budgets are written there are loopholes that allow expenses, over costs, consulting fees, overseas advertising costs, rental damages/purchases, etc to hold the accounting books open.
This is a slick way that Producers milk even more profits (from Dvd revenue etc) and prevent lawsuits by those claiming the film has made a profit.
^
All the producer has to show is the film hasn’t been closed out “financially” and therefore total profits can not be verified.
This is standard stuff. Goes on all the time. They don’t talk about it.
Turning a profit isn’t the same in show biz.
Most films never show a proift on the books.
If you were to audit Hurt Lockers books tomarrow they would not show a profit.
And I am sure their accountant was prudent in updating you about this right?
Most films? Well considering “most films made” never even see a movie theater, you might be right about that. But “most films” in theaters tend to make their money or break even. That’s the gamble Hollywood takes.
If “most films” didnt make money, there wouldn’t be major studios, since “most films” they did would be at a loss.
Hurt Locker cost $14m to make and has already taken in $21m worldwide. Considering this dark horse was barely advertised, and was not as widely released, its already made its money and will make more on DVD sales (which thanks to its Oscar presence is already booming)
This guys lucky if he’ll even get a credit on the next printing of dvds.
He should have kept his amazing life story to himself and later wrote his own screenplay.
The films only made roughly 30 mil worldwide it cost 11 mil to make. This isn’t Avatar were talking about.
Trust me they won’t show a profit on this film for years meanwhile this soldier will drain his resources fighting the case.
Good luck. Thanks for your service.
Honestly? Can you do the math? Its made almost triple what it cost to make and that was before it hit shelves in time to sell the Oscar Nominated film like hotcakes. Even after its modest advertising budget (it didnt have a big ad campaign) this film has already pushed black.
Turn a profit? Already has.
And its statistically proven that a film shows even GREATER DVD sales once nominated as everyone who never bothered with it are suddenly running out to rent and buy this.
“Stallone used it back in DEMOLITION MAN” nuff said
I have been dying to see this one and ALL I have heard are rave reviews .. Cant wait to watch it :)
I agree with Rodney. Totoal money grab, dude knew what he was getting into and should have been more aware.
But did he know what he was getting in to? It sounds like all he knew was that Boal was doing an article for a magazine.
I can kind of see Salver’s point. If Boal told him he was doing an article for a magazine, that is one thing. But if Boal witheld his intent to turn Salver’s life into a screen play, that is different.
I love that this guy is saying that he coined the phrase “hurt locker”, which has been around for years. My father (who retired from the Air Force in 97 after 30 years of service) was using that phrase way back in the 80s and more than that, Stallone used it back in DEMOLITION MAN. Dude can’t claim he made it up because he uses it.
As for the rest of the suit, he might have a case, he might not. That phrase stuff cracked me up though.
Yeah, and Windows 7 was my idea!
YES.
He should sue! He was defamed!
I agree that he has every right to be known as a guy with a death wish, an adrenline junkie, a guy who disobeys protocol, goes off base unauthorized, does cowboy stuff, nearly gets his teammates killed and does not spend quality time with his family!
“Yeah, folks, that’s me!”
“You mean, all those things other vets and soldiers are saying about the film’s dramatic license…”
“LOOK. The guy, Boal, he followed me around, took notes. He was practically writing my autobiography.”
“You mean that he took your character and changed it to the thrill seeker”
“No. That was spot on”
“Well, it’s still a great film. Very dramatic”
“Should be. I am the drama!”
:)
no no i do not
My first reaction to this was, “really, that’s you? You want to be known to have acted like that in those situation?” I say that because every review I read from ACTUAL bomb experts say that NO ONE in their profession acts like that and that it was almost an insult to the profession.
So, really, he wants to be known as that? That’s embarrassing in addition to a money grab.