It seems customary that all reviews of Stop-Loss be structured around theories of why the recent batch of movies about the war in Iraq have been so poorly received by the viewing public. And since Stop-Loss has been such a box office failure, I'm sure that reviews for whatever Iraq-themed movie to come out next will also be stuffed with theories such as war fatigue or the public's distrust of liberal Hollywood's take on the war.

Personally, I don't have to theorize. Given that this is only the second Middle East-themed movie that I bothered to go see in theatres (after The Kingdom), and only the third I've bothered to see at all (I somewhat reluctantly saw In the Valley of Elah on DVD), I don't need to guess why the public haven't turned out for these films, I can simply tell you why I didn't either. It wasn't apathy, frustration, or indignation; it was much simpler than that. The movies didn't sound very good.

If I'm going to spend a couple of hours examining the calamity that is the current war in Iraq, I want it to be worth my while. I want more than Brian De Palma's YouTube impression, John Cusack's hangdog face, or Reese Witherspoon's harpy shrieking. Watching such films, you already know to reduce your expectations for entertainment. The trade-off should be to replace entertainment with quality, and judging from the critical reception these films have gotten, the best one could hope for is a film of decent quality. Hmmm... two hours of depressing frustration offering no entertainment value for an average-quality movie? Hard to figure why people have been turning away from that experience.

Sadly, the best I can say about Kimberly Peirce's Stop-Loss is that it was slightly above average, meaning that it, too, isn't really worth the investment of one's time. It wasn't a waste of my time, particularly since I only went to see it out of a desire to go to a movie and there isn't much worth seeing in theatres right now, but it certainly isn't essential viewing by any means.

Peirce does manage some moments of excellence with Stop-Loss, leading to an above average film, but isn't able to sustain them throughout the movie. In particular, the opening battle scenes in Tikrit were as tense and in-the-moment as any battle scenes I've seen in awhile, mixing in handheld footage to put the audience in the action with some static shots to keep us from losing our bearings.

The cast are all solid in their roles, bringing the film to the level of the soldier, instead of focusing on the politics of the issue. Too many movies focus so heavily on those responsible for the war on terror that they take away the agency of the troops on the ground, leaving them open to attacks from those who silence any debate on the war by claiming that those opposed to it don't support the troops.

The mentality of those who begin and end their support for the troops with a bumper sticker is what allows the focus of this movie to go on mostly ignored and unchecked. Stop-Loss refers to the practice of involuntarily extending the service of soldiers who have finished their tours, a practice that has been roundly criticized for its frequent usage in the ongoing conflict in Iraq (over 80,000 soldiers have been stop-lossed since the start of the war). Instituting a back door draft for those who have already served their country doesn't strike me as particularly genuine way of supporting the troops, but what do I know? I'm Canadian.