It’s a bit ironic that, a week after "The Hurt Locker" won the Oscar as best picture, another film about the Iraq War — "Green Zone" — failed at the box office.

And it failed spectacularly. It cost at least $100 million to make "Green Zone," and it brought in all of $14.3 million in its first weekend. It didn't do any better in its second weekend.

The movie has gotten middling reviews, but it reunites Matt Damon with his "Bourne" director Paul Greengrass. As much as the film is about the search for phantom WMDs in Iraq, it is also a "Bourne"-esque action thriller.

It was promoted that way, as sort of a "Bourne Goes to War" film, with emphasis on the "Bourne" in hopes of drawing fans of that franchise. Apparently, though, the Iraq War angle was enough to keep audiences away.

Some might argue that the political leanings of the films affect their box office — "Green Zone" is left-leaning, and "Hurt Locker" was apolitical (although some pundits have suggested otherwise).

But I think people aren’t keen on watching a dramatization of what they can read about in the newspaper. There’s something about the passage of time that makes war movies more palatable. Seeing them played out more or less in real-time isn’t something the masses want to do.

"Hurt Locker" wasn’t a profit machine at the box office either, even after it was nominated for a slew of Oscars. And that was one of the best movies — not war movies, movies of any kind — of the last few years.

Have you gone to see any of the recent Iraq War-related movies?