This film is based on a true story, however that works to it's disadvantage, during the film the main group of characters split up, and thus the chemistry between the group is vastly diminished. The first part of the film sort of works because of the complex links between all the characters and because of the strong chemistry between the group of the whole. Splitting the group up into four groups leads to fast cuts between sets of characters, robbing the film of majesty and charisma. The other big story problem is that we are not given enough history on any of the characters, we don't know enough about their work or their pasts, and we don't fully understand the conflicts that arise between the characters, such as a running rivalry between Bob Balaban and Bill Murray's characters, that is simply never explained. Because of the lack of explanation, we never fully believe in them as art historians or architects, and thus the whole film comes off as a sort of farce.
The Monuments Men is undeniably gorgeous to look at, the cinematography is fantastic and the film looks great as a whole. The film just feels highly pedestrian and unexciting, the plot of the film has the opportunity to be exciting and thrilling, and whilst i was happy to see a fun war caper, i doubt i will much remember the film in a few months, for despite the good performances and beautiful cinematography, the only response i can really give to The Monuments Men, is a resounding 'Meh'. Rating: C-
Frank Stokes: You can wipe out an entire generation, you can burn their homes to the ground and somehow they'll still find their way back. But if you destroy their history, you destroy their achievements and it's as if they never existed.
No comments:
Post a Comment