Because I hate it when filmmakers think that they can only be cinematically effective by putting so much blood and guts into the film that the audience actually wonders if any of the blood is getting on them.
That's a reason I prefer any films by John Carpenter, M. Night Shyamalan, and Alfred Hitchcock to anything by Wes Craven, Victor Salva, and whoever directed "Silent Hill". The first three know how to be effective without pelting the screen with excessive carnage. Resorting to ridiculous amounts of blood and gore to get a reaction out of your audince is just lazy as far as I'm concerned. Yes, I understand that there are many war movies and other true story films filled with blood and guts, but that was for authenticity, not for thrills.
Also, the leading actress was, by far, the least talented person in the entire movie, and the husband character, played by the very well-respected and celebrated British actor Sean Bean, got way too little coverage.