Uninvolving

Rating: 3/10 (27 January 2017)

Most times, I can understand why others enjoy a film that I don't but this is one occasion that truly baffles me. So I question: did the initial hype influence enough people to believe the Hurt Locker was a great film before they saw it? Surely the sheer number of folk who enjoyed this film puts paid to that theory - we can't all be that gullible, can we?
Baffled, I recently decided to re-watch it and I have to say, unlike a fine wine, it hadn't improved with age. The first half hour is scene setting. The subject matter and "characters" and introduced. At this point, the film shows promise but sadly, it just doesn't develop from there.
Second time around, I still couldn't detect any plot. Characterization was shallow. In the absence of these elements, there's nothing to draw this viewer in or propel the film forward so all we get is a series of isolated, generally uninvolving scenes - though admittedly, a couple of them are quite powerful.
When the film ended, I felt I hadn't actually watched a film at all, so lacking was it in vital ingredients. But then it wasn't a documentary either (not enough explanation, characterisation or factual content). Whatever Hurt Locker is, it just doesn't entertain me.