511 reviews
In bringing together elements from Inglourious Basterds, Ocean's Eleven and Museum Hours, George Clooney certainly had plenty of opportunity for a rich and interesting story. War heroes who appreciate fine art played by the likes of Clooney, Matt Damon, Bill Murray and John Goodman (plus a few "that guy"s), attempting to steal back priceless works of art from the Nazis, it sounds amazing.
So what went wrong? Well, to begin with, for a movie about a team, we're given very little time with them as a group. Almost immediately they pair off on their own little adventures. Instead of using these exploits to let us know a little more about the characters as individuals, we get the usual oddball pairings and some mildly amusing, but ultimately hollow, vignettes. Even when we lose some of our team, it really feels like nothing more than just something that happened on the trip, like "oh, and I also saw a horse." We have hardly any sense of them as a group and far less about them as people. The only character whose motivations we can understand is the one played by Cate Blanchett, but her limited chemistry with Matt Damon dooms what little redemptive quality her character had.
Also, and particularly troubling for a movie involving art, George Clooney's lens has little reverence for the work it shows. Though the film heavy-handedly ponders whether a piece of art is worth a human life, the camera never does. Even when a character lays down his life for a sculpture, it comes off less dramatic than inevitable. The film treats the works as being mostly historically significant and never finds that lover's gaze that tells the audience why.
What we're left with is a bag of spare parts. It's a popcorn movie with no setpieces. A war movie with no battles. A heist movie with no scheming. An art movie with no inspiration. Were they to have found some of Inglourious Basterds' bluster, Ocean's Eleven smarts or Museum Hour's insight, they may have found a formula that works, but that's not the movie we have here. I'll be damned if George Clooney doesn't look good in a moustache, though.
So what went wrong? Well, to begin with, for a movie about a team, we're given very little time with them as a group. Almost immediately they pair off on their own little adventures. Instead of using these exploits to let us know a little more about the characters as individuals, we get the usual oddball pairings and some mildly amusing, but ultimately hollow, vignettes. Even when we lose some of our team, it really feels like nothing more than just something that happened on the trip, like "oh, and I also saw a horse." We have hardly any sense of them as a group and far less about them as people. The only character whose motivations we can understand is the one played by Cate Blanchett, but her limited chemistry with Matt Damon dooms what little redemptive quality her character had.
Also, and particularly troubling for a movie involving art, George Clooney's lens has little reverence for the work it shows. Though the film heavy-handedly ponders whether a piece of art is worth a human life, the camera never does. Even when a character lays down his life for a sculpture, it comes off less dramatic than inevitable. The film treats the works as being mostly historically significant and never finds that lover's gaze that tells the audience why.
What we're left with is a bag of spare parts. It's a popcorn movie with no setpieces. A war movie with no battles. A heist movie with no scheming. An art movie with no inspiration. Were they to have found some of Inglourious Basterds' bluster, Ocean's Eleven smarts or Museum Hour's insight, they may have found a formula that works, but that's not the movie we have here. I'll be damned if George Clooney doesn't look good in a moustache, though.
- MassDistraction
- Feb 13, 2014
- Permalink
The Monuments Men is directed by George Clooney, staring himself, Matt Damon, Bill Murray, John Goodman, Jean Dujardin, Bob Balaban, Hugh Bonneville, and Cate Blanchett. It tells of a group of soldiers tasked to locate and preserve pieces of art that have been stolen by the Nazis during World War II.
It's no secret that The Monuments Men was one of everyone's most anticipated movies of 2013, and looked like a solid awards contender, until it was pushed to a February release date, purportedly due to the need for more time to be spent on the special effects.
The truth is, The Monuments Men could be, and really should be much more entertaining than it is. The best part of the film, and at the same time, its major problem, is the script. There are seemingly continuous laughs coming from quick one liners and witty character interactions, which keeps the audience somewhat engaged, although with such bleak subject matter, it's debatable that a movie dealing with the eradication of an entire culture's achievements should be as lighthearted as it is. But the flaw with the script is that it seems like the first act eats up almost all of it's running time. It's as if the film is missing large portions of the actual plot to make room for massive amounts of unnecessary exposition. Secondly, the film's characters are stale and one dimensional at best. I invite anyone who sees the film to wait an hour after finishing the movie, and try to remember even three of the character's names or what their role in the mission was. There isn't a moment in the entire film where it isn't simply John Goodman or Bill Murray dressed as World War II soldiers and not fleshed out characters. Albeit all of the actors are exceedingly fun to watch, I assume that just watching all of these actors talk together at a press conference would be just about as entertaining.
The Monuments Men isn't even close to the worst movie of 2014 by a long shot, even though it is only February, but it's arguably the most disappointing film of the year as of yet. I take no pleasure in saying this, but it's noble intentions fell utterly short due to awful pacing, and forgettable characters. I haven't read the book, but I have to think that it must be much better constructed and does this fantastic real life story more justice.
It's no secret that The Monuments Men was one of everyone's most anticipated movies of 2013, and looked like a solid awards contender, until it was pushed to a February release date, purportedly due to the need for more time to be spent on the special effects.
The truth is, The Monuments Men could be, and really should be much more entertaining than it is. The best part of the film, and at the same time, its major problem, is the script. There are seemingly continuous laughs coming from quick one liners and witty character interactions, which keeps the audience somewhat engaged, although with such bleak subject matter, it's debatable that a movie dealing with the eradication of an entire culture's achievements should be as lighthearted as it is. But the flaw with the script is that it seems like the first act eats up almost all of it's running time. It's as if the film is missing large portions of the actual plot to make room for massive amounts of unnecessary exposition. Secondly, the film's characters are stale and one dimensional at best. I invite anyone who sees the film to wait an hour after finishing the movie, and try to remember even three of the character's names or what their role in the mission was. There isn't a moment in the entire film where it isn't simply John Goodman or Bill Murray dressed as World War II soldiers and not fleshed out characters. Albeit all of the actors are exceedingly fun to watch, I assume that just watching all of these actors talk together at a press conference would be just about as entertaining.
The Monuments Men isn't even close to the worst movie of 2014 by a long shot, even though it is only February, but it's arguably the most disappointing film of the year as of yet. I take no pleasure in saying this, but it's noble intentions fell utterly short due to awful pacing, and forgettable characters. I haven't read the book, but I have to think that it must be much better constructed and does this fantastic real life story more justice.
- mikerapuano
- Feb 8, 2014
- Permalink
"The Monuments Men" is a group of men (in real life around 350, and in this film 7) who are tasked with saving the historically and culturally significant monuments, fine arts and archives during World War II. They have to find and return that which the French hid and the Germans were finding and stealing and then hiding. And the film decided to tell this story comedically.
The film took a really long time to get going as they wanted it to be about the men that took on this task. But they changed their names and I also couldn't tell you a single characteristic of any of them. The men were paired off so they each had their own region to investigate, but none of that was interesting. The worst part was giving James Granger (Matt Damon) and Claire Simon (Cate Blanchett, representing the real- life heroine Rose Valland) a love story. They did have a reason for such nonsense, or how about just sticking with how it actually happened.
George Clooney has said the film is about 80% accurate, and that seems fair enough. But the problem isn't the historical inaccuracy; the problem is that the cheap humour diminishes the very people and story they're trying to empower. The humour was just a handful of lines wanting to kill Hitler and standing on a landmine. It just didn't make the film entertaining. The story could have done that but it didn't become interesting until they started discovering where the Germans hid the art. Coincidentally, the same point when the film started following the real story.
"The Monuments Men" very clearly wanted to help remember an important part of history and spark a debate about the cost of war on soldiers, civilians, and history and society. The debate is raging on, but the film missed the level of entertainment by not trusting its audience to be interested in exactly what happened.
The film took a really long time to get going as they wanted it to be about the men that took on this task. But they changed their names and I also couldn't tell you a single characteristic of any of them. The men were paired off so they each had their own region to investigate, but none of that was interesting. The worst part was giving James Granger (Matt Damon) and Claire Simon (Cate Blanchett, representing the real- life heroine Rose Valland) a love story. They did have a reason for such nonsense, or how about just sticking with how it actually happened.
George Clooney has said the film is about 80% accurate, and that seems fair enough. But the problem isn't the historical inaccuracy; the problem is that the cheap humour diminishes the very people and story they're trying to empower. The humour was just a handful of lines wanting to kill Hitler and standing on a landmine. It just didn't make the film entertaining. The story could have done that but it didn't become interesting until they started discovering where the Germans hid the art. Coincidentally, the same point when the film started following the real story.
"The Monuments Men" very clearly wanted to help remember an important part of history and spark a debate about the cost of war on soldiers, civilians, and history and society. The debate is raging on, but the film missed the level of entertainment by not trusting its audience to be interested in exactly what happened.
- napierslogs
- Feb 7, 2014
- Permalink
The movie deserves an A for effort but misses the mark dramatically. The question is: why? The story is evocative and the cast is excellent. Where the movie goes wrong is how it presents the story. The movie attempts to inject a whimsical element in story which is out of context. There was nothing whimsical about the plan to save priceless artwork. Also, the story moves at a slow pace and inspires little if any excitement or drama. The discoveries of the hidden artwork has little dramatic impact, nor do the interpersonal relationships between the characters which in the movie are shallow. Even the attempt at romance comes off as tepid and half-hearted, as well as implausible. The idea of a young, handsome, married American officer, alone in Paris, having dinner in the apartment of an attractive, intelligent, single French woman who made him dinner and not staying for at least another drink is a stretch. True, he is married and his faithfulness is commendable, but still .... The movie does have some strong dramatic moments, but in general the story is bland. Yet despite the movie's drawbacks, it still manages to tell a story about an historical event of great importance and significance, and for that reason alone is worth watching.
Before I review the movie proper, some anachronisms: While there was a song called "Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas" in 1944 (Judy Garland introduced it in Meet Me in St. Louis), the words Ms. Garland sang then were a little different from what we know today. Like, instead of "Hang a shining star upon the highest bough" which was the line introed by Frank Sinatra in his 1957 recording, the line should have been "Until then, we'll have to muddle through sometime" which Judy sang in that movie I mentioned. Anyway, I very much enjoyed this dramatization of some art experts attempt to save as much of other countries' art from the Nazi regime as possible during World War II. Nice characterizations from Matt Damon, Cate Blanchett, John Goodman, Bill Murray, Bob Balaban, among others, and George Clooney who also did a nice job directing as well. Maybe there could have been a bit more drama in characterization but I was satisfied with what I got. There were some nice humorous scenes as well. So on that note, I recommend The Monuments Men.
I really knew nothing about this band of rag-tag soldiers before going to this movie, and it certainly piqued my curiosity to read the book and do a little more research. So anything like this that has more of just an "entertainment value" is a good thing. I'll admit, I was drawn to it because of Clooney, and was not disappointed. It was also refreshing to see Goodman and Murray in dramatic roles.
No, it's NOT supposed to be a comedy, nor a WW2 "Ocean's 11." For those who criticize that there is TOO much comedy, I disagree. The comedic relief comes primarily from one-liners, and who among us is serious all the time? Funny people often find themselves in serious situations and it would be difficult to believe that soldiers do not enjoy--and need--to laugh and be smart-alecks occasionally.
And a BIG thumbs up for the lack of the f-word and other profanity. I am getting so tired of nearly all movies peppering (and usually overdosing) their scripts with profanity. Sure, these soldiers probably used colorful language, but it wouldn't have added anything to the film to include it, and really, we need to show young people that you can communicate (more) effectively without profanity.
No, it's NOT supposed to be a comedy, nor a WW2 "Ocean's 11." For those who criticize that there is TOO much comedy, I disagree. The comedic relief comes primarily from one-liners, and who among us is serious all the time? Funny people often find themselves in serious situations and it would be difficult to believe that soldiers do not enjoy--and need--to laugh and be smart-alecks occasionally.
And a BIG thumbs up for the lack of the f-word and other profanity. I am getting so tired of nearly all movies peppering (and usually overdosing) their scripts with profanity. Sure, these soldiers probably used colorful language, but it wouldn't have added anything to the film to include it, and really, we need to show young people that you can communicate (more) effectively without profanity.
Just to Get one thing straight, i don't dislike this movie. In my Opinion it's entertaining in his own way. But i'm still disappointed by this movie, the Trailer really got me interested and i was really looking forward to see this movie. But i was probably expecting too much. The Story about a group of People, trying to Return some of the most important Pieces of Art in European History, to there rightful Owners is great. It's Characters Motivations are believable, those people weren't just some Art-Crazy Nutjobs that risked their lives to Save some Paintings they've only saw in Books, it goes deeper. I give this Movie Credit for not being an over-the-top patriotic WW II Flick. It's big Problem is, that it can't decide which kind of movie it's trying to be. Is it supposed to be a serious Drama or a Comedy with some serious Moments. And if you cast a Actor like Bill Murray, i would've expected a Comedy. So we get a mix of Dramatic Scenes, a few funny Scenes and unfunny Scenes which were supposed to be funny. On top of that, this movie is not good edited. Early in the Film the Group splits into several Groups, so the movie keeps switching between these Groups, which makes it sometimes hard to follow the Plot. Sometimes the time Gap between the cuts are crazy. In one scene we are in France during Autumn, then they cut and next they show us a scene in deepest Winter during the Battle of the Bulge. For all i can see, the acting is good, but because i watched the German-dubbed Version of this movie i can't fully Judge the acting. Now, is this movie horrible? Well, no it got some weak Moments and some strong Moments. When this movie was was over i thought to myself "this movie was OK". But maybe that's the Problem it's just OK.
- eric_leidner
- Feb 19, 2014
- Permalink
I have to say that I think a 6.1 average rating is a little unkind to this film. There are a multitude of super serious, heart wrenching, melancholy dramas about WWII. And I understand that those are appropriate for one of the greatest collective horrors to ever grip mankind.
That said, this movie being more jovial and about kinship amongst the men who swore to save art and culture felt like an appropriate tone. It made the film fun.
Having enjoyed it, there are still flaws. Not enough focus on the actual works of art for one, and for another, a little disjointed and rushed in some spots while other scenes that have little impact on the story take up screen time. It could have been a more art-centric celebratory movie than it was, given the heart of the matter.
This is not a terrible film. Maybe not what some would expect, but I had a nice time watching it, learned a lot, and even at times felt compelled about the accomplishments of humanity. That's a hard feeling to come by, so I embrace and appreciate it.
That said, this movie being more jovial and about kinship amongst the men who swore to save art and culture felt like an appropriate tone. It made the film fun.
Having enjoyed it, there are still flaws. Not enough focus on the actual works of art for one, and for another, a little disjointed and rushed in some spots while other scenes that have little impact on the story take up screen time. It could have been a more art-centric celebratory movie than it was, given the heart of the matter.
This is not a terrible film. Maybe not what some would expect, but I had a nice time watching it, learned a lot, and even at times felt compelled about the accomplishments of humanity. That's a hard feeling to come by, so I embrace and appreciate it.
- NS-movie-reviews
- Jul 28, 2023
- Permalink
- CanuckGirl
- Feb 6, 2014
- Permalink
In 1943 during World War II, the Allies are making good progress driving back the Axis powers in Italy , but there took place the greatest art heist in history . However, Frank Stokes (George Clooney) persuades the American President Roosevelt that victory will have little meaning if the artistic treasures of Western civilization are lost in the fighting. Stokes is directed to assemble an Army unit nicknamed the "Monuments Men", comprising seven museum directors, curators, and art historians to both guide Allied units and search for stolen art to return it to its rightful owners . But as the Monuments Men, as they were called, found themselves in a race against time to avoid the destruction of 1000 years of culture, they would risk their lives to protect and defend mankind's greatest achievements and especially to rescue Altarpiece of Gante and Virgin sculpture by Michael Angel . As an unlikely World War II platoon is tasked to rescue art masterpieces from Nazi thieves and return them to their owners. They are the followings : Bill Murray as Richard Campbell , John Goodman as Walter Garfield , Jean Dujardin as Jean Clermont , Hugh Bonneville as Donald Jeffries , Bob Balaban .as Preston , Dimitri Leonidas and Matt Damon (Daniel Craig was cast in a role but ultimately he dropped out due to scheduling conflicts. Matt Damon replaced him).
The Monuments Men is a 2014 American-German war-comedy-drama war film directed by George Clooney, written and produced by Clooney and Grant Heslov, and with all-star cast such as Clooney, Matt Damon, Bill Murray, John Goodman, Jean Dujardin, Bob Balaban, Hugh Bonneville, and Cate Blanchett. Loosely based on the non-fiction book The Monuments Men: Allied Heroes, Nazi Thieves and the Greatest Treasure Hunt in History, by Robert M. Edsel. This action drama follows an Allied group, the Monuments, Fine Arts, and Archives program, tasked with finding and saving pieces of art and other culturally important items before their destruction by Hitler during World War II . Intentions are noble and its cast is impressive, but neither can compensate for The Monuments Men results to be stiffly nostalgic and curiously slack narrative . The picture is pretty well , though the sense that the film is episodic and poorly structured . Principal photography by Phedon Papamichael began at the Babelsberg Studios in Potsdam, Germany, in the Berlin-Brandenburg region , being filmed on location Bad Grund, Lower Saxony , Osterwieck, Saxony-Anhalt, Merseburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Berlin , Germany and especially Neuschwanstein Castle , Bavaria, the castle where the art is stored. Evocative and appropriate musical score by Alexandre Desplat who also appears as a secondary actor . This lavishly film was well co-produced by Columbia Pictures in association with 20th Century Fox and Babelsberg Studio, being compellingly directed and produced by George Clooney . However , the film received mixed reviews from critics .
The flick was based on actual historical events , they are the followings : The "Monuments Men," were a group of approximately 345 men and women from thirteen nations, most of whom volunteered for service in the newly created MFAA section during World War II. Many had expertise as museum directors, curators, art historians, artists, architects, and educators. As a platoon going into Germany to rescue artistic masterpieces from Nazi thieves and returning them to their rightful owners . Their job description was simple: to protect cultural treasures so far as war allowed. A task force appointed to research the origin of the robbed art has said that thousands pictures and sculptures fall into the category of art looted or extorted by the Nazis from Jewish collectors . These include pieces by Pablo Picasso, Henri Matisse, Edvard Munch, Paul Cézanne and others.
The Monuments Men is a 2014 American-German war-comedy-drama war film directed by George Clooney, written and produced by Clooney and Grant Heslov, and with all-star cast such as Clooney, Matt Damon, Bill Murray, John Goodman, Jean Dujardin, Bob Balaban, Hugh Bonneville, and Cate Blanchett. Loosely based on the non-fiction book The Monuments Men: Allied Heroes, Nazi Thieves and the Greatest Treasure Hunt in History, by Robert M. Edsel. This action drama follows an Allied group, the Monuments, Fine Arts, and Archives program, tasked with finding and saving pieces of art and other culturally important items before their destruction by Hitler during World War II . Intentions are noble and its cast is impressive, but neither can compensate for The Monuments Men results to be stiffly nostalgic and curiously slack narrative . The picture is pretty well , though the sense that the film is episodic and poorly structured . Principal photography by Phedon Papamichael began at the Babelsberg Studios in Potsdam, Germany, in the Berlin-Brandenburg region , being filmed on location Bad Grund, Lower Saxony , Osterwieck, Saxony-Anhalt, Merseburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Berlin , Germany and especially Neuschwanstein Castle , Bavaria, the castle where the art is stored. Evocative and appropriate musical score by Alexandre Desplat who also appears as a secondary actor . This lavishly film was well co-produced by Columbia Pictures in association with 20th Century Fox and Babelsberg Studio, being compellingly directed and produced by George Clooney . However , the film received mixed reviews from critics .
The flick was based on actual historical events , they are the followings : The "Monuments Men," were a group of approximately 345 men and women from thirteen nations, most of whom volunteered for service in the newly created MFAA section during World War II. Many had expertise as museum directors, curators, art historians, artists, architects, and educators. As a platoon going into Germany to rescue artistic masterpieces from Nazi thieves and returning them to their rightful owners . Their job description was simple: to protect cultural treasures so far as war allowed. A task force appointed to research the origin of the robbed art has said that thousands pictures and sculptures fall into the category of art looted or extorted by the Nazis from Jewish collectors . These include pieces by Pablo Picasso, Henri Matisse, Edvard Munch, Paul Cézanne and others.
- GodofGSXR1977
- Feb 8, 2014
- Permalink
The Monuments Men is being too critically shunned. It is not what you expect from watching the previews, but comes through with heartfelt stories that are designed to show you what these men endured. Each of The Monuments Men characters come from the arts world and are driven into action by the need to save precious art works spanning across Europe. Bill Murray is a genius per usual but lacks when it comes to on screen time. I feel as though many characters like John Goodman are overshadowed by the likes of Matt Damon and George Clooney. They make themselves very prominent in the script but often take time away from those who would truly make this film shine (Murray and Goodman). Even though it is not as good as expected it shines in many scenes. I still give it a 8/10
- johncliftonduke
- Feb 5, 2014
- Permalink
Having read the original book from which "Monuments Men" is taken, I was very interested to see the movie. There is a really fascinating and historically important story here, and it could have made a great film. However, soon after the show begins, it all starts to fall apart. The reason? George Clooney. He directed, and he wrote the screenplay. It's amazingly obvious that in neither of these capacities does Clooney know what he is doing. The screenplay is an absolute joke, totally disjointed, disconnected, silly, trite, and incredibly amateurish for a major Hollywood star of Clooney's stature. The same goes for the directing. George Clooney is obviously a guy with a huge ego, capable of fooling himself and a lot of other people who should know better, that he knows what he is doing. Film-making schools should show this movie as a classic example of what not to do. It's fundamentally flawed in every respect. Editing, music, etc.------one is taken aback by the unbelievable ineptness. Co-stars Matt Damon and Bill Murray and John Goodman and the rest of the cast merely parrot their lines in strange, disjointed scenes that beg to be rewritten by someone with a brain in his head. On the one hand, I totally condemn this piece of Hollywood egotistical stupidity, but on the other I heartily recommend it as an example of how bad movies can get in the hands of people with enormous egos. Stick to acting, Clooney---for God's sake don't direct and write screenplays ever again.
- Trombonehead
- Feb 15, 2014
- Permalink
I know this movie received mixed reviews, but I thought it was excellent. With so many disappointing movies lately I was pleasantly surprised that Monuments Men really delivered. I had never heard this story before and I was impressed at how it was presented. The actors were perfect for their roles and it left me feeling proud of what these men were able to accomplish.
One thing that really struck home with me was seeing the beaches at Normandy. My uncle actually landed in the first wave, lost most of his battalion and was wounded. He never spoke about it but I know he carried the scars throughout his life.
One thing that really struck home with me was seeing the beaches at Normandy. My uncle actually landed in the first wave, lost most of his battalion and was wounded. He never spoke about it but I know he carried the scars throughout his life.
I think people need to relax a bit and take a deep breath. This movie is pure Hollywood. It took an event near the end of World War II and put their own spin on it. To say it's the worst war movie ever made is really cynical and mean spirited. Granted, the characters are pretty stiff and not very well developed. They reminded me of those 1940's caricatures from propaganda driven films. Still, the event it is based on is a unique one in the annals of war history. Actually, in a convoluted way, the Nazi's interest in art probably was indirectly responsible for saving it. It prevented them from launching full-blown artillery attacks on some of the world's great museums. Instead, they stole these masterpieces (another means of repressing humanity) and stored them in salt mines and other secret places. The effort to discover and recover these masterpieces is what this is all about. Of course, in reality, this was done by about 150 people, not the seven presented here. Unexplained to the audience is how after a discovery a battalion of military vehicles seems to show up immediately to secure the art. There is also the sacrifice that is pretty contrived and gratuitous. This is a sort of old-fashioned movie done in contemporary times. Go along for the ride and don't imagine you are seeing Shakespeare.
George Clooney's "The Monuments Men" is the story of a unique platoon in World War II that was assigned to save stolen artwork that the Nazis had stolen. It has a strong cast with Clooney, Matt Damon, Bill Murray, Cate Blanchett, John Goodman, Jean Dujardin, and Bob Balaban. Clooney even wrote the script with Grant Heslov. There was a lot going for this film, but I walked out disappointed.
It's a very rushed movie. You zoom through facts and what these men were doing. It captures the important moments, but doesn't string them together well. We lose character development in exchange for facts that we could easily read. I felt like Clooney went more for the jokes at times. The cast has good chemistry, but I feel like there was missing bits of information and character development.
The actors are all good in it. The performance that stood out to me was Bill Murray. He always does a good job of blending humor with deep emotions. I enjoyed Clooney's style for the film. It feels like a 1940s patriotic war film in color. Alexandre Desplat's score complements this style. It works for the story, but it doesn't strike much depth about patriotism. It's a film made for the love of classic artwork and the importance of preserving the art that has defined humans. You feel that importance at times, but it becomes muddled in a rushed story that aims for jokes more often than needed.
Clooney means well with "The Monuments Men," but it's a flawed film that probably needed more time in order for it to be completely told. It's not necessarily a bad film, but it is disappointing.
It's a very rushed movie. You zoom through facts and what these men were doing. It captures the important moments, but doesn't string them together well. We lose character development in exchange for facts that we could easily read. I felt like Clooney went more for the jokes at times. The cast has good chemistry, but I feel like there was missing bits of information and character development.
The actors are all good in it. The performance that stood out to me was Bill Murray. He always does a good job of blending humor with deep emotions. I enjoyed Clooney's style for the film. It feels like a 1940s patriotic war film in color. Alexandre Desplat's score complements this style. It works for the story, but it doesn't strike much depth about patriotism. It's a film made for the love of classic artwork and the importance of preserving the art that has defined humans. You feel that importance at times, but it becomes muddled in a rushed story that aims for jokes more often than needed.
Clooney means well with "The Monuments Men," but it's a flawed film that probably needed more time in order for it to be completely told. It's not necessarily a bad film, but it is disappointing.
- swellframe17
- Jul 22, 2014
- Permalink
I saw this on the second day of its opening weekend in the UK. The cinema screen was only about a quarter full. That surprised me. Maybe people had been put off by the lukewarm reviews by the critics. Maybe George Clooney isn't just much of a draw at the box office any more. Maybe people just don't want to see a film about "art". Maybe everybody else in Preston was up at Deepdale paying their respects to Sir Tom Finney. Perhaps it was a little bit of all of the above.
I consider myself fairly well informed when it comes to World War 2, but I have to say that although I know that the Nazis looted loads of art from all across the continent, I never knew that the real-life 'Monument Men' existed - people who's job it was to try and locate all this missing artwork, get it back, and return it to their rightful owners. To this day of course, the search for pilfered art from WW2 is ongoing. How much of this film is true and how much is fiction is open to question. The real 'Monuments Men' were of course much more than platoon strength - in the film we are told there were just eight (led on-screen by Clooney, who also wrote and directed), in reality there were a few hundred. Some of the characters are apparently loosely based on real people, but their names have been changed. A bit like "The Great Escape" in that regard. For example, for Cate Blanchett's character (Claire Simone) you should Google 'Rose Valland' for information on the real person her character was based on.
The film was good enough to hold my interest, but I can't say it blew me away, and I don't see it getting anywhere at next years Oscars. I will try and obtain a copy of the book on which this film is based, as I thought the actual story is quite interesting, probably much more so than the film. The way I see it, George Clooney has educated me that these people existed, now I will deliberately forget what I have just seen and read the truth instead! Worth a watch - not half as bad as the critics suggest. 6/10
I consider myself fairly well informed when it comes to World War 2, but I have to say that although I know that the Nazis looted loads of art from all across the continent, I never knew that the real-life 'Monument Men' existed - people who's job it was to try and locate all this missing artwork, get it back, and return it to their rightful owners. To this day of course, the search for pilfered art from WW2 is ongoing. How much of this film is true and how much is fiction is open to question. The real 'Monuments Men' were of course much more than platoon strength - in the film we are told there were just eight (led on-screen by Clooney, who also wrote and directed), in reality there were a few hundred. Some of the characters are apparently loosely based on real people, but their names have been changed. A bit like "The Great Escape" in that regard. For example, for Cate Blanchett's character (Claire Simone) you should Google 'Rose Valland' for information on the real person her character was based on.
The film was good enough to hold my interest, but I can't say it blew me away, and I don't see it getting anywhere at next years Oscars. I will try and obtain a copy of the book on which this film is based, as I thought the actual story is quite interesting, probably much more so than the film. The way I see it, George Clooney has educated me that these people existed, now I will deliberately forget what I have just seen and read the truth instead! Worth a watch - not half as bad as the critics suggest. 6/10
- churchofsunshine
- Feb 16, 2014
- Permalink
- jmoneyjohal
- Feb 7, 2014
- Permalink
- steven-k-beck
- Feb 13, 2014
- Permalink
There is a good chance Saving Private Ryan ruined World War II movies for the rest of eternity because of its sheer realism and ability to not hold any of the carnage and insanity back.
The Monuments Men's biggest issue is having to follow up to a masterpiece (that all war movies nowadays strive to become) with the similar credentials of covering an isolated incident that takes place in the middle of the deadliest war in modern history. Just like in Saving Private Ryan, Monuments Men is about preserving history before it gets swept up by the devastating conflict that leveled Eurasia. Private Ryan concerns pitting strangers together to save someone they don't know to prevent a family line from disappearing forever. With Monuments, it's about preserving art and culture before that gets permanently leveled by a war.
World War II is never a fun subject, no matter which way you look at it. Even at its most entertaining, the usually humorously dark Tarantino kept Inglorious Basterds on check with its grim content. Having more humor than drama and suspense in the middle of such a sad time period with the threat always imminent makes for an awkward watch. Monuments Men never pretends to be a comedy, but the entire movie feels unfocused as Bill Murray (He doesn't have an Oscar yet..hmmm) throws one-liners centimeters away from death—with impending Nazi danger around the corner.
And despite the stellar cast with decent performances (John Goodman and Cate Blanchett deserving some extra credit), despite the good cinematography and usual good direction from Hollywood staple George Clooney, the movie feels very by-the-numbers, paint-within-the-lines. It follows all the credentials, it checks off everything in the clichéd checklist for an inspiring historical drama. You have the likable characters, the necessary poetic deaths, and the uplifting ending in the midst of the odds being stacked against our heroes. So what else is there? The movie plays far too safe. And sometimes safe limits the impact. Saving Private Ryan leaves you numb, leaves you appreciating life, and leaves you desperately searching for good news during the two hours of intense filmmaking. Monuments Men never delivers an impactful emotional punch, even with the incredible true story that could have spawned a mini-series of some sort.
Clooney is like that cool student that is smarter than he leads on, can strive for that A+. But with his latest film, he doesn't really aim for the A+, instead settling for the B grade with the PG-13 content in an environment that is anything but. And with that, the movie feels like a C. Watchable, but ultimately forgettable.
The Monuments Men's biggest issue is having to follow up to a masterpiece (that all war movies nowadays strive to become) with the similar credentials of covering an isolated incident that takes place in the middle of the deadliest war in modern history. Just like in Saving Private Ryan, Monuments Men is about preserving history before it gets swept up by the devastating conflict that leveled Eurasia. Private Ryan concerns pitting strangers together to save someone they don't know to prevent a family line from disappearing forever. With Monuments, it's about preserving art and culture before that gets permanently leveled by a war.
World War II is never a fun subject, no matter which way you look at it. Even at its most entertaining, the usually humorously dark Tarantino kept Inglorious Basterds on check with its grim content. Having more humor than drama and suspense in the middle of such a sad time period with the threat always imminent makes for an awkward watch. Monuments Men never pretends to be a comedy, but the entire movie feels unfocused as Bill Murray (He doesn't have an Oscar yet..hmmm) throws one-liners centimeters away from death—with impending Nazi danger around the corner.
And despite the stellar cast with decent performances (John Goodman and Cate Blanchett deserving some extra credit), despite the good cinematography and usual good direction from Hollywood staple George Clooney, the movie feels very by-the-numbers, paint-within-the-lines. It follows all the credentials, it checks off everything in the clichéd checklist for an inspiring historical drama. You have the likable characters, the necessary poetic deaths, and the uplifting ending in the midst of the odds being stacked against our heroes. So what else is there? The movie plays far too safe. And sometimes safe limits the impact. Saving Private Ryan leaves you numb, leaves you appreciating life, and leaves you desperately searching for good news during the two hours of intense filmmaking. Monuments Men never delivers an impactful emotional punch, even with the incredible true story that could have spawned a mini-series of some sort.
Clooney is like that cool student that is smarter than he leads on, can strive for that A+. But with his latest film, he doesn't really aim for the A+, instead settling for the B grade with the PG-13 content in an environment that is anything but. And with that, the movie feels like a C. Watchable, but ultimately forgettable.
This was a lousy film and George Clooney's performance was really "stupid". Mr. Slap happy, putting together team of goof balls to save the worlds plundered art? You've got to be kidding me. After reading the book I can't believe that Clooney could come away with this kind of an interpenetration.
I'm certain if the original Monuments Men could see this film they'd be rolling over in their graves. The movie was totally dis-respectable to those great hero's.
This was a great story that was completely ruined by George Clooney. The National Geo documentary was the real story. I really hate it when they "hollywoodize" true story films and try and turn them into a comedy.
I wouldn't give this film a quarter of a star!!!
I'm certain if the original Monuments Men could see this film they'd be rolling over in their graves. The movie was totally dis-respectable to those great hero's.
This was a great story that was completely ruined by George Clooney. The National Geo documentary was the real story. I really hate it when they "hollywoodize" true story films and try and turn them into a comedy.
I wouldn't give this film a quarter of a star!!!
As I watched "The Monuments Men", I kept finding myself wondering why the heck this film has an incredibly mediocre score of only 6.1 currently on IMDB. I am not sure why, but I can only assume most viewers simply didn't care about the work these soldiers did. But the quality of the production and fine acting SHOULD have guaranteed a score much higher even if folks didn't care so much about art.
The film was obviously a work of love by George Clooney and the rest. After all, a lot of work went into making the movie...such as getting WWII era aircraft, trucks, tanks, uniforms...as well as the art (which I assume were all reproductions). This took a LOT of work! I was also surprised because many modern films about WWII show equipment that isn't quite right...such as American vehicles pretending to be German or tanks which are Korean War era. But here in "The Monuments Men", they really took the steps necessary to get it right.
Now not everything in the film was perfect....and I assumed that this was done in order to streamline the movie. So, instead of 8 or so members of this group dedicated to saving and repatriating stolen artwork, there really were many more...perhaps a few hundred. But again, I think this was deliberately done to make the film seem more personal. Overall, a well crafted and fine film...one of the best of 2014.
By the way, if you want to learn more about this, try watching the documentary "The Rape of Europa".
The film was obviously a work of love by George Clooney and the rest. After all, a lot of work went into making the movie...such as getting WWII era aircraft, trucks, tanks, uniforms...as well as the art (which I assume were all reproductions). This took a LOT of work! I was also surprised because many modern films about WWII show equipment that isn't quite right...such as American vehicles pretending to be German or tanks which are Korean War era. But here in "The Monuments Men", they really took the steps necessary to get it right.
Now not everything in the film was perfect....and I assumed that this was done in order to streamline the movie. So, instead of 8 or so members of this group dedicated to saving and repatriating stolen artwork, there really were many more...perhaps a few hundred. But again, I think this was deliberately done to make the film seem more personal. Overall, a well crafted and fine film...one of the best of 2014.
By the way, if you want to learn more about this, try watching the documentary "The Rape of Europa".
- planktonrules
- Aug 25, 2021
- Permalink
"If you destroy their achievements, their history, it's like they never existed."
When I heard George Clooney was going to direct a film about a World War II platoon tasked by Roosevelt to rescue art masterpieces, and that Matt Damon, Bill Murray, Cate Blanchett, Jean Dujardin, and John Goodman were all going to co-star with him, I was sure it was going to win all kinds of awards and was highly anticipating it. Then when the film release was changed to February my expectations for it lowered tremendously, so I wasn't expecting much from The Monuments Men by the time I went to see it. This allowed me to actually enjoy the film a bit more despite the fact that it didn't come close to reaching its potential. It's a slow building film based on a true historic and important event, and the film doesn't stop reminding us of this fact considering it keeps on stating its self importance through the main characters. The film felt forced during those scenes where we were constantly reminded why the mission was so important and worth the human sacrifice. Despite failing in its grand ambitions and never quite figuring out the tone of the film, it's still worth seeing for the great cast. There were also several scenes that stood out in this war picture that included some comedy, but overall the film felt incomplete at times missing something. The word disappointment comes to mind considering how much potential The Monuments Men had, but it was still entertaining despite some of the misfires in Clooney's film.
The script was adapted by George Clooney and Grant Heslov from Robert Edsel's book about the world's greatest treasure hunt in history. Frank Stokes (George Clooney) is tasked by President Roosevelt to form a platoon with the mission of going into Germany and rescuing art masterpieces from the Nazis who had stolen them from their owners (mostly Jewish collectors) for Hitler's collection. Frank quickly forms a team of seven guys consisting of museum directors, curators, and art historians with very little experience in war. The Monuments Men, as they called themselves, was conformed by Frank, James Granger (Matt Damon), Richard Campbell (Bill Murray), Walter Garfield (John Goodman), Jean Claude Clermont (Jean Dujardin), Donald Jeffries (Hugh Bonneville), and Preston Savitz (Bob Balaban). Despite their little military experience they began a race against time in order to rescue these valuable art pieces and return them to their owners before Hitler destroyed them all.
There are some fun moments in The Monuments Men thanks in most part to the incredible cast, but one can't help and think about how underused they were. The characters were all very poorly developed and they only served to move along the story. I still can recall several funny scenes that were enough for me personally to watch and recommend this film. It's too bad the movie never manages to deliver the importance of the subject matter despite repeating the message constantly. I don't think it did these men justice for their contribution to humanity, but at least we got to know their story and enjoy a light hearted film about them.
When I heard George Clooney was going to direct a film about a World War II platoon tasked by Roosevelt to rescue art masterpieces, and that Matt Damon, Bill Murray, Cate Blanchett, Jean Dujardin, and John Goodman were all going to co-star with him, I was sure it was going to win all kinds of awards and was highly anticipating it. Then when the film release was changed to February my expectations for it lowered tremendously, so I wasn't expecting much from The Monuments Men by the time I went to see it. This allowed me to actually enjoy the film a bit more despite the fact that it didn't come close to reaching its potential. It's a slow building film based on a true historic and important event, and the film doesn't stop reminding us of this fact considering it keeps on stating its self importance through the main characters. The film felt forced during those scenes where we were constantly reminded why the mission was so important and worth the human sacrifice. Despite failing in its grand ambitions and never quite figuring out the tone of the film, it's still worth seeing for the great cast. There were also several scenes that stood out in this war picture that included some comedy, but overall the film felt incomplete at times missing something. The word disappointment comes to mind considering how much potential The Monuments Men had, but it was still entertaining despite some of the misfires in Clooney's film.
The script was adapted by George Clooney and Grant Heslov from Robert Edsel's book about the world's greatest treasure hunt in history. Frank Stokes (George Clooney) is tasked by President Roosevelt to form a platoon with the mission of going into Germany and rescuing art masterpieces from the Nazis who had stolen them from their owners (mostly Jewish collectors) for Hitler's collection. Frank quickly forms a team of seven guys consisting of museum directors, curators, and art historians with very little experience in war. The Monuments Men, as they called themselves, was conformed by Frank, James Granger (Matt Damon), Richard Campbell (Bill Murray), Walter Garfield (John Goodman), Jean Claude Clermont (Jean Dujardin), Donald Jeffries (Hugh Bonneville), and Preston Savitz (Bob Balaban). Despite their little military experience they began a race against time in order to rescue these valuable art pieces and return them to their owners before Hitler destroyed them all.
There are some fun moments in The Monuments Men thanks in most part to the incredible cast, but one can't help and think about how underused they were. The characters were all very poorly developed and they only served to move along the story. I still can recall several funny scenes that were enough for me personally to watch and recommend this film. It's too bad the movie never manages to deliver the importance of the subject matter despite repeating the message constantly. I don't think it did these men justice for their contribution to humanity, but at least we got to know their story and enjoy a light hearted film about them.
- estebangonzalez10
- Feb 21, 2014
- Permalink
Started with a full theater and literally 75% walked out halfway through. This was one of the most pathetic movies I've ever seen. Awful awful awful script. No dialogue that was worth mentioning. Nothing made any sense. It was boring as hell and overall it was a cigarette commercial. They mentioned cigarettes a million times in the movie and how much they enjoyed them. This movie was awful. All the actors looked out of place as if they all phoned in the performance but that's okay because none of them had lines. Matt Damon was completely gone for most the movie then just showed up out of the blue. I can't remember any of the characters names. I could go on and on. The cinematography was poor. The movie lingered on stuff that was not entertaining then rushed like hell to get through anything with a point. None of the cast cared and neither did I.
- wikk-835-204326
- Feb 8, 2014
- Permalink