Nope, I don't get it. To all the people who have written glowing reviews of this film I respect your opinion but you must seeing stuff I can't see or I'm stuck in a time warp and the things that matter to me in a good film just aren't included anymore. Things I did like were the acting and the photography – splendid. Nothing new I know but it worked well.

Now for the story, as far as I could see it was a series of admittedly gripping bomb disposal scenes interspersed with half-hearted attempts to give the three central characters depth and far fetched action scenes I guess included to widen the audience and appeal to the 'Call of Duty' playing fraternity. And that is worth an Oscar nomination? 'Give me a break', as you American fellows like to say. I'm guessing it was just trying to do something different by breaking a few of the story telling rules (like not winding up all of the characters stories), but to me this tactic ensured it failed as a feature.