When I settled into the theater to watch Unbroken, I was expecting another World War II movie that would leave me feeling hopeful and patriotic. For the most part, I got what I was expecting.

As the camera pans over several World War II fighter jets as they make their way across clear blue skies in the opening scene, I was taken away from the 21st century and thrown into a time when fighter jets resembled rickety buses and the main source of entertainment was the radio.

As the movie progressed, I was given a look into the life of a soldier, an immigrant, a prisoner of war, a true American. If Unbroken accomplished nothing else, it left me with a deep connection with Louis Zamperini.

Whether it was the touching story of his mother making gnocchi Zamperini told to his fellow soldiers as they awaited rescue, or the heartfelt words of Pete Zamperini that convinced young Louis to turn his life around, director Angelina Jolie and brilliant break out actor Jack O’ Connell delivered a genuine portrayal of a man living through hardship. This portrayal embodied the hopeful and enduring nature that we all hope we would have if we were forced to walk a mile in Zamperini’s shoes.

It was these moments that made the movie worthwhile. The look in Mac’s eyes as he realized that he was going to die, the tortured screams of Louis as he heard the sounds of his friend being beaten, the desperate cries of Zamperini as he knelt down expecting to die. These moments gave the movie direction. These movements made the movie human and real. In these moments, I was no longer watching a movie in a movie theater in Herndon, I was experiencing the astounding strength of human character right with Louis Zamperini.

The movie did, however, fall just short of greatness. Supplied with the shocking and incredible subject material of Louis Zamperini’s life, Jolie should have had no trouble supplying a shocking and incredible movie. As I watched Zamperini struggle though hardship after hardship, I could not help but feel as though the whole movie was building to something that never happened. It lacked a purpose, or some kind of reason.

By the time Zamperini had reached the prisoner of war camp, the movie was once again just a movie and the hardships I was seeing were just being seen. Even the brilliant portrayal of “the Bird” by Takamasa Ishihara was not enough to deliver me, once again, into the heart of the movie. It had already lost its heart and with it, its plot arch.

In the end, I was left wondering, was it the movie that left me feeling warm and hopeful, or was it the story itself and the real-life man whose life it was based on?