Is result shown from the explosion realistic?

In The Hurt Locker, During a raid on a warehouse, James discovers the body of a young boy, in which a live bomb has been surgically implanted. During evacuation, Lieutenant Colonel John Cambridge (Christian Camargo), the camp's psychiatrist is killed in an explosion, while some locals were carrying stones on a donkey ride. After the explosion the body of the 'Lieutenant' is not shown, just dust is shown. My question is was the situation/result shown was real or just they don't want to show bloody images?

Best Answer

or just they don't want to show bloody images?

There are enough grusome images in other scenes (e.g. the child with an explosive surgically sewn into his abdomen) that I can't imagine this one being specifically avoided.

The psychiatrist is on foot when the IED goes off, so we can assume that he has either disturbed some sort of victim-operated device (triggered by the pressure of his step) or it was triggered remotely by somebody watching the situation. This means he is probably directly on top of, or next to, the source of the explosion. Indeed, in the scene we can actually see the explosion originates roughly 1m (3ft) away from him.

The explosion is seen from inside the Humvee approximately 20m (65ft) away. I don't know enough about explosives to estimate numbers, but based on the size of the explosion and the perceived shockwave from the pressure, I'd say it's plausible that his body was torn into multiple pieces and launched away from the area with significant force. It is certainly common for people to lose large parts of their bodies (multiple limbs) from IED explosions, and the shrapnel could well tear someone to shreds.

It would be likely that his legs would be completely gone, and then his torso may either be partially gone or simply lying somewhere near the area in tatters. He may be buried under debris, and the dust would certainly cover everything, including blood and parts of his body which would camouflage it.