Genre: Biography, Comedy, Drama, History

Year: 2012

Country: UK

Rating:

Starring: Bill Murray, Laura Linney, Samuel West, Olivia Colman, Elizabeth Marvel

Director: Roger Michell

My Review: Hyde Park on Hudson - 2012 (Biography, drama, comedy) If you’re expecting a movie filled with intrigue, political maneuvering and diplomacy, this movie isn’t going to fill your order. Directed by Roger Michell (Notting Hill, Changing Lanes). Starring Bill Murray, Laura Linney, Olivia Williams and others). Here is a love story about Franklin Roosevelt and his distant (6th cousin - Who counts that far into a family history?) cousin Margaret ‘Daisy’ Suckley. It happens to take placed during a weekend in 1939 when the King and Queen of Britain (King George the VI, and Queen Elizabeth) are in America visiting with the Roosevelts at their family home in Hyde Park (near Albany) New York. The movie is told from the perspective of Daisy and that’s the basis of this movie. A brief love affair between Daisy and Franklin Roosevelt. It’s light hearted, humorous, romantic entertainment. The direction and acting are good (not great), but the best part of the movie (imo) was the period, the setting and the production. The sets and costumes were meticulous reproductions. The King and Queen are visiting the U.S. just before (in the summer of 1939) the start of World War II. Ostensibly, they’re there trying to convince Roosevelt that the US should enter the war on the side of England. While there’s some concern over whether the Roosevelts will get along with the Royals, the biggest concern seems be whether Hot Dogs should be served, whether someone might or might not eat them, and whether certain persons might be offended by the offering of a ‘Hot Dog’. Other than that, the story is actually about Daisy’s quiet and quite subdued affair with Franklin. All in all, it was a good, but boring movie. Here we have some amazing historical figures sequestered in a country estate, just as WWII is about to explode onto the world scene, and this movie bothers with a marital indiscretion initiated through the amazing aphrodisiac of stamps. 3 out of 5.

Summary: In 1930s Hudson Valley, Margaret "Daisy" Suckley is reacquainted with her distant cousin, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, to help him relax at his family estate. That aid soon develops into much more as they become lovers. That puts Daisy in a unique position as Roosevelt receives the King and Queen of Britain in 1939 for a visit. As the Royal couple copes with the President's oddly plebeian arrangements, Daisy learns that there is far more to Roosevelt's life than she realized. With the world about to be set ablaze by war, friendships are struck and perspectives are gained on that special weekend that would make all the difference with a great, but very human, president.

Genre: Comedy, Sci-Fi

Year: 1991

Country: USA

Rating:

Starring: Trace Beaulieu, Joel Hodgson, Jim Mallon, Kevin Murphy, Frank Conniff

Director: Joe D'Amato

My Review: Mystery Science Theater 3000: Cave Dwellers - 1982 (Action, adventure, fantasy) This movie is also known as ‘Ator - The Blade Master’ and/or ‘Ator 2 - L’invincible Orion’. Maybe it’ll get bet ratings under a different names (the Cave Dwellers title was affixed after a re-edit/re-release). Written and Directed by Joe D’Amato (aka David Hills, birth name Aristide Massaccesi) An Italian filmmaker who directed (directed, wrote, produced, filmed) appx 200 films across all genres, primarily exploitation themed porn - Generally considered the most prolific Italian filmmaker of all time. This particular movie is one of his ‘better known’ remakes of American movies - Here ‘Ator 2’ is a Conan the Barbarian clone/remake. Starring Miles O’Keefe, Lisa Foster, David Brandon and others. In this movie, the Amazing Ator and his mute side-kick Thong take Mila the nubile daughter of some renowned ‘Great One’ on a amazing quest. The costumes are atrocious. There is no way to determine the period or location for this movie. It might be 15th century Afghanistan, or 17th century Romania, possibly 18th century Japan, or even 19th century Italy… The backstory for the characters is amazingly complex, yet utterly ridiculous. The Great One (aka Akronas) beseeches Mila to go forth and find Ator (a student of Akronas) so that they can leave on a long journey to protect him and his ‘geometric nucleus’ from the henchmen of Zor, who have already arrived at the castle… Yes, if the story sounds convoluted it was. I can’t personally attest to having understood what was going on, but I did laugh when Ator tried to fight with the two swords strapped to his back. When they fought the growling snakes. When they fought the invisible thugs. The bad guy in this movie; Zor, looked like an extra from a ‘Twisted Sister’ music video, about as threatening as one of David Bowie’s groupies. The names of the characters were agonizing. There’s Ator, Akronas, Zor, Mila?, Zandor, Thong, Ravani, and villager #2. Mila manages to get captured three or four times, thankfully Ator is able to dramatically rescue her with relatively little difficulty. The acting was horrible, the editing atrocious, the quality of the film horrible, the dialog ridiculous, you get the idea. The only redeeming features of this film? The ridiculous dialog, preposterous fight scenes, and the lampooning treatment of Mike Nelson and his robots (The cast of MST3K). The wisecracking crew of MST3K continue to impress. If it hadn't been for them, this film would have been much harder to endure. If the film quality (color and sound) had been better, this movie might have qualified for some 'So bad it's good' pity. In this case, the movie gets a 2 out of 5; and just barely - it would likely have gotten a 1 out of 5, if the MST3K crew hadn’t made me laugh at the ridiculousness of this movie. The MST3K presentation of this movie gets a 3 out of 5.

Summary: Joel and the Bots endure Miles O'Keeffe as Ator while Doctor F. endures Frank's efforts to be Mike Douglas.

Genre: Crime

Year: 2000

Country: USA

Rating:

Starring: Ben Affleck, Gary Sinise, Charlize Theron, Dennis Farina, James Frain

Director: John Frankenheimer

My Review: Reindeer Games - 2000 (Action, crime, drama) Marred only by excessive exposition, this action packed, holiday themed movie is a complex twisted tale of a love, deception and criminal activity. Directed by one of my favorite directors (John Frankenheimer), and starring a great cast (Ben Affleck, Gary Sinise, Charlize Theron, Dennis Farina, James Frain, Donal Logue, Danny Trejo, Isaac Hayes), this is a convoluted heist movie. Rudy (Affleck) gets out of the pen, but his buddy Nick (Frain) does not. Rudy tells a little lie, and hooks up with Nick's gorgeous pen-pal (Theron), Ashley. Moments after their 'happy time', the heist plot kicks in. Ashley's brother wants Rudy's help ripping off the 'Tomahawk' casino. The problem? Rudy's pretending to be Nick, so he didn't actually work at the casino (Nick did), and that's just the tip of the iceberg in this winter wonderland. Everyone's got a secret, everyone's looking to score, and no one's knows where the 'Pow-Wow' safe is. Filmed on location (parts of it) in British Colombia, the scenes with real snow added an air of authenticity to this twisted heist flick. Affleck's acting was some of his best ever. Sinise was particularly sinister as the twisted brother, lover, trucker, mean-ass mother effer! The rest of the cast gave outstanding performances, and they were all well matched in acting talent. Seeing Charlize Theron topless was a happy bonus, which added plenty of cheer to my holiday spirit. This one packs in thrills, suspense, and plenty of action. The twist at the end was great, and no I didn't see it coming (the first time around). I give this movie a 4 out of 5.

Summary: After assuming his dead cellmate's identity to get with his girlfriend, an ex-con finds himself the reluctant participant in a casino heist.

Genre: Adventure, History

Year: 2012

Country: UK, Norway, Denmark, Germany, Sweden

Rating:

Starring: Pål Sverre Hagen, Anders Baasmo Christiansen, Tobias Santelmann, Gustaf Skarsgård, Odd-Magnus Williamson

Director: Joachim Rønning, Espen Sandberg

My Review: Kon-Tiki - 2012 (Adventure, history) This movie is a dramatization based upon Thor Heyerdahl’s book (Kon-Tiki). Directed by Joachim Rønning and Espen Sandberg. Written by Petter Skavlan, Allan Scott (script consultant), based on Thor Heyerdahl’s book. Starring Pål Sverre Hagen, Anders Baasmo Christiansen, Gustaf Skarsgård and others. Kon-Tiki is the name of a balsa wood raft. Named after an Incan sun god, the Norwegian explorer Thor Heyerdahl proposed that native Americans could have populated the Polynesian islands before Asians. He built this raft and sailed westward into the Pacific in a bid to prove his point. This Norwegian movie depicts Thor Heyerdahl’s expedition across the Pacific Ocean on a balsa wood raft. The movie is an excellent dramatic tale of this legendary feat. The movie has a very documentary feel to it, and there is no ‘conflict’ or ‘suspense’ as a movie about an ocean crossing isn’t by design ‘entertainment’ - Certainly not in the American cinema sense. Following an ancient path westward, the currents off the coast of South America take the crew thousands of miles out into the Pacific (approximately 8,000 kilometers). The 101 day journey isn’t without peril, as the crew contends with immense waves, sharks, storms and the other dangers of the elements. The camera work is excellent, as the locations couldn’t be more beautiful. An engineer’s escapist fantasy unwinds as we watch the crew of six struggle to manage their rations, sanity and water aboard this tiny wooden raft. The film covers all aspects of the trip. Planning, funding, construction of the raft, logistical issues and the journey itself. Completely engrossing and fascinating to watch, the adventure is one you couldn’t make up. The events actually happened, and Thor Heyerdahl wrote a book about it. A black and white documentary was released in 1950, but it’s not available on Netflix. If it were, I would watch it. I give this movie (The 2012 dramatization) a 5 out of 5.

Summary: The Norwegian explorer Thor Heyerdahl crossed the Pacific Ocean in a balsawood raft in 1947, together with five men, to prove that South Americans back in pre-Columbian times could have crossed the ocean and settled on Polynesian islands. After financing the trips with loans and donations, they set off on an epic 101-day-long trip across 8000 kilometers, while the world was waiting for the result of the trip. The film tells about the origin of the idea, the preparations, and the events on the trip. The "Kon-Tiki" was named after the Inca sun god, Viracocha, and "Kon-Tiki" is an old name for this god. Heyerdahl filmed the expedition, which later became the Academy Award winning documentary in 1951, and he wrote a book about the expedition that was translated into 70 languages and sold more than 50 millions copies around the world. Heyerdahl believed that people from South America could have settled Polynesia in pre-Columbian times, although most anthropologists now believe they did not...

Genre: Comedy, Sci-Fi

Year: 1990

Country: USA

Rating:

Starring: Trace Beaulieu, Joel Hodgson, Jim Mallon, Kevin Murphy, Frank Conniff

Director: Jim Mallon

My Review: Mystery Science Theater 3000: Lost Continent - 1951 (Adventure, sci-fi, fantasy) I remember watching this (and loving it) when I was a kid. I’m pretty sure that it was featured on one of the ‘Late Night Creature Features’ that I used to sneak up to watch in the middle of the night. I haven’t seen it in many years. There were parts that I remember, but most of it was thankfully flushed out of my memory banks long ago. Directed by Sam Newfield (birth name Samuel Neufeld; also known as Stanley (or Stan) Neufeld, Sherman Scott and Peter Stewart), one of the most prolific directors (mostly B-Movies) in American cinema. Sam is credited with more than 270 credits as a director (from ~1923-1958). This movie was filmed in 11 days time (a long period of time compared to many of the movies produced by Sam and his brother Sigmund): <http://sensesofcinema.com/2007/feature-articles/sam-newfield/>. The movie starred Cesar Romero (yes the actor famous for his roles as The Cisco Kid and the Joker in the Batman television series), Hugh Beaumont (the father (Ward) from ‘Leave it to Beaver’), Hillary Brooke, Chick Chandler and others. Here is a fantastic story about adventurers who set forth to recover or rescue the crew of an ‘Atomic Rocket’ that set out to explore a ‘Lost Continent’ on the mountainous plateau of South Pacific island. The crew crash-lands their plane on the edge of the island, and they have to climb up into the interior of this ‘Lost Continent’. They meet a native girl and climb up the styrofoam mountains onto the island plateau. Along the way someone falls through the poisonous clouds - That was cool. What wasn’t cool was the amount of time spent climbing. The climb takes approximately a third of the film (appx 25 minutes). Following this endless climbing, the group spends another twenty minutes doing much of nothing. They encounter some bullet proof dinosaurs and watch a Dino-Duel. Then they find the rocket, recover something from the rocket and spend another twenty minutes fighting dinosaurs. They scare some of them with their ineffective guns, and one of their party is made into a shish-kabob by a Triceratops. After burying the unlucky guy, another earthquake rattles the island. They climb down from the plateau in less than five minutes and paddle away in an outrigger canoe. That’s when a volcano erupts; completely destroying the entire island and all the dinosaurs. End of movie. The acting was pretty bad, the editing o.k., the quality of the film poor, the dialog sub-par, you get the idea. The only redeeming features of this film? The stop motion dinosaurs and some aspects of the story (It’s loosely based on Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s novel, The Lost World. The of course there’s the comedic trampling of Mike Nelson and his robots (The cast of MST3K). The wisecracking crew of MST3K continue to impress. If it hadn't been for them, this film would have been much more difficult to endure. If the film quality had been better, this movie might have qualified for some 'So bad it's good' pity. In this case, the movie gets a 2 out of 5; and just barely - it would likely have gotten a 1 out of 5, if the MST3K crew hadn’t made me laugh at the ridiculousness of this movie. The MST3K presentation of this movie gets a 3 out of 5.

Summary: A military team sent to search for a lost rocket ends up trapped on a mountain inhabited by dinosaurs in Lost Continent (1951). Joel refuses to enter the theater during movie sign but the Mads have ways of forcing him into the theater.

Genre: Action, Drama

Year: 1966

Country: Japan

Rating:

Starring: Tatsuya Nakadai, Michiyo Aratama, Yûzô Kayama, Yôko Naitô, Tadao Nakamaru

Director: Kihachi Okamoto

My Review: The Sword of Doom / Dai-bosatsu tôge - 1966 (Action, drama) A samurai movie set during Japan’s Edo period (1603 - 1868). It’s impossible to know the exact date, most likely towards the late 1800s, as the last of the Shogunates were dissolving and imploding. Directed by Kihachi Okamoto (East Meets West, Kill!, Samurai Assassin, Zatoichi meets Yojimbo, Japan’s Longest Day). Starring Tatsuya Nakadi, Michiyo Aratama, Yûzô Kayama and others. This movie was supposed to be the first part of a trilogy based upon a Japanese novel (Nakazato Kaizan’s 41 volume ‘The Sword of Doom’), but the producers couldn’t get commitments to complete all three parts. A quote from the movie may help to set your mood going into this movie: “The Sword is the Soul. Study the soul to know the sword. Evil mind, evil sword.” Here is the story of a psychopathic Samurai armed with superlative sword fighting skill, but a corrupt and deteriorating sense of honor. The fighting is paired with a cold calculating Samurai who knows that the end is coming. The primary character in this movie is no hero. He is an anti-hero. A villain who was once a shining example of the Samurai. Once a member of the Shogunate’s prized stable. As the primary character wrestles with his inner demons, his external life is filled with dark and violent bloodshed. The action sequences are superb, the choreography excellent. The Criterion film restoration is outstanding. Tatsuya’s performance was stellar. He is a true villain. Here is a man who is not evil for the sake of money or power. Here is a man who has completely lost his way. His sense of morality has collapsed along with the social caste that he once represented. Some criticize the abrupt ending of this movie (a consequence of it’s original trilogy plan), but I think that the ending was handled quite well. The villain gets no rest, his soul is damned to fight and be wounded in combat forever. I give this movie a 5 out of 5.

Summary: Ryunosuke is a sociopathic samurai without compassion or scruples. When he is scheduled for an exhibition match at his fencing school, the wife of his opponent begs Ryunosuke to throw the match, offering her own virtue in trade. Ryunosuke accepts her offer, but kills her husband in the match. Over time, Ryunosuke is pursued by the brother of the man he killed. The brother trains with the master fencer Shimada. In the meantime, however, Ryunosuke earns the enmity of the band of assassins he runs with, and it becomes a question of who shall face him in final conflict.

Genre: Comedy, Drama, Romance

Year: 2007

Country: France, Germany

Rating:

Starring: Adam Goldberg, Julie Delpy, Daniel Brühl, Marie Pillet, Albert Delpy

Director: Julie Delpy

My Review: 2 Days in Paris: 2007 (comedy, drama, romance) Written, directed by and starring Julie Delpy. Also stars Adam Goldberg and others. It’s a chick flick - For sure. In many ways this movie feels like a Woody Allen comedy, primarily because of Adam Goldberg. His neurotic character and the setting in Paris contribute to the vibe. A New York based couple (Julie Delpy playing Marion the French photographer, and Adam Goldberg playing Jack the New Yorker) travel to Europe for a brief vacation. While Venice didn’t work out so well (it was something they ate), we find the couple briefly encamped in Paris, where Marion grew up. Of course living with Marion’s parents (who don’t speak English) only makes matters worse. Their differences become painfully obvious as their differences are contrasted with the differences between American and French culture clash with the differences between Marion and Jack. As the ending approaches, we wonder whether the mutual love for each (the couple the cultures) will win out. I give it a 3 out of 5. If I were a ‘Chick’ it would likely rate higher. I can only take so much of this ‘relationship’ rubbish.

Summary: 2 Jours - 2 Days follows two days in the relationship of a New York based couple - a French photographer Marion and American interior designer Jack - as they attempt to re-infuse their relationship with romance by taking a vacation in Europe. Their trip to Venice didn't really work out, - they both came down with gastroenteritis. They have higher hopes for Paris. But the combination of Marion's overbearing non-English-speaking parents, flirtatious ex-boyfriends, and Jack's obsession with photographing every famous Parisian tombstone and conviction that French condoms are too small, only adds fuel to the fire. Will they be able to salvage their relationship? Will they ever have sex again? Or will they merely manage to perfect the art of arguing?

Genre: Drama, War

Year: 1942

Country: UK

Rating:

Starring: Noël Coward, Derek Elphinstone, Michael Wilding, Robert Sansom, Philip Friend

Director: Noël Coward, David Lean

My Review: In Which We Serve - 1942 (Drama, war) A dramatic tale of WWII. This movie is the fictional story of the HMS Torrin (not a real ship); a British Destroyer sunk by German bombardment during the Battle of Crete in 1941. This movie was produced by the British Ministry of Information during WWII. It is loosely based upon the actual sinking (in the Mediterranean) of the HMS Kelly, under the command of Lord Louis Mountbatten. A patriotic propaganda piece, the movie was produced by the British government in an attempt to bolster US and British sympathy for Britain during WWII. It was release in the US as well as Britain, but the primary audience was likely the US. Directed by Noel Coward and David Lean, this was the only movie that Noel Coward ever directed. Starring in the movie were Noel Coward, Richard Attenborough, Bernard Miles, Celia Johnson, Kay Walsh, John Mills, Derek Elphinstone, and many others. The story is told through a series of flash-backs by the survivors as they are clinging to a life raft hoping to be rescued. Although the story is fictional, the writers paint a grim picture of the cruel realities of a world at war and the determination of a people being assailed by a ruthless foe. The acting was quiet good and the production excellent, although the film has suffered the effects of time. The film has a documentary feel to it; with the direction and editing be very tightly controlled. The historical aspects of a culture at war are quite interesting. It’s a very simple movie, which boils the war down into black and white themes of honor, dignity, duty and sacrifice. I give it a 3 out of 5.

Summary: This is the story of a British Naval ship, HMS Torrin, from its construction to its sinking in the Mediterranean during action in World War II. The ship's first and only commanding officer is the experienced Captain E.V. Kinross who trains his men not only to be loyal to him but to the country and most importantly, to themselves. They face challenges at sea and also at home. They lose some of their shipmates in action and some of their loved ones in the devastation that is the blitz. Throughout it all, the men of the Torrin serve valiantly and heroically.

Genre: Drama, Thriller

Year: 2012

Country: Canada

Rating:

Starring: Robert Redford, Shia LaBeouf, Julie Christie, Susan Sarandon, Nick Nolte

Director: Robert Redford

My Review: The Company You Keep - 2012 (drama, crime, thriller) Directed by and starring Robert Redford as Nick Sloan (aka Jim Grant). Nick Sloan is a fugitive in hiding. Many years after his run with the Weather Underground, Nick is a lawyer and a single dad who’s forced to go on the run when his identity is revealed as a member of the all-but-forgotten home grown terrorist organization, The Weather Underground Organization. This movie romanticizes the personalities associated with the Weather Underground, a radical ‘terrorist’ organization from the 70s. This group was responsible for a campaign of bombings through the mid 70s. Members took part in the jailbreak of Dr. Timothy Leary, they instigated a riot in Chicago, issued a “Declaration of a State of War” against the US government and executed several bombings of government buildings and banks. Former members of the group even robbed a Brink’s armored car in 1981. During that robbery, three people died. The WUO sought to overthrow the United States government and establish a communist state. The movie makes Nick (former member of the WUO) out to be a courageous civil rights lawyer who is just trying to protect his daughter and the identities of others involved with the criminal actions of the WUO. I don’t care for the political statements of this movie - That being that the goals of the WUO were somehow morally correct or acceptable. Nor do I condone the depiction of those involved as being heroic or the ‘good guys’. As a movie, the pacing was somewhat slow and Robert Redford held our hand throughout the entire movie. At no time was I surprised to learn any of the twists or turns revealed, despite the fact that these revelations were unveiled with great drama. The hero of this movie makes the FBI look incompetent and we are led to believe that a group of 70+ college revolutionaries are somehow up to the task of running through the woods and smuggling arms for Cuban insurgents. Starring alongside Robert Redford are Susan Sarandon, Shia LeBeouf, Julie Christie, Nick Nolte, Chris Cooper, Terrence Howard, Stanley Tucci, Sam Elliott, Richard Jenkins and many more. The best part of the movie was the cast, despite the fact that the premise of the movie was abused by the romantic notions that these former college revolutionaries are anything but slowly rotting criminals, just waiting out their time before their final judgement. I give the movie a 3 out of 5.

Summary: After years in hiding, ex-Weather Underground militant, Nick Sloan aka Jim Grant, learns about his old compatriot's arrest for a bank robbery turned deadly in the 1970s, which he is wanted for as an accomplice. This puts the ambitious young local reporter, Ben Shepard, on the scent of a story that exposes Nick as well. As such, Nick goes on the run while taking his daughter to safety. With that accomplished, Nick stays one step ahead of the FBI while pursuing a faint hope to clear his name. Meanwhile, Shepard digs deeper into the case himself as he discovers the true complexities of another times' determined ideals even as Nick faces their consequences with another.

Genre: Drama, War

Year: 2014

Country: USA, Germany

Rating:

Starring: George Clooney, Matt Damon, Bill Murray, Cate Blanchett, John Goodman

Director: George Clooney

My Review: The Monuments Men - 2014 (War, drama, history) Based upon the non-fiction book (The Monuments Men: Allied Heroes, Nazi Thieves and the Greatest Treasure Hunt in History) by Robert M. Edsel and Bret Witter. The Screenplay was cowritten by George Clooney and Grant Hesloy. The movie stars George Clooney, Matt Damon, Bill Murray, Cate Blanchett, John Goodman, Jean Dujardin, Bob Balaban, Hugh Bonneville and many others. While the acting was excellent, the age of the actors made their roles difficult to believe. The story - A historical re-enactment of a specialized platoon tasked by Franklin D. Roosevelt (32nd President of the U.S. from 1933-1945) under the American Commission for the Protection and Salvage of Artistic and Historic Monuments in War Areas". This specialized platoon was composed of a small number of Army officers with specialized backgrounds and training. They worked under the operations branch of ‘SHAEF’ (Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force), directly under the command of General Eisenhower. They were tasked to enter the war zone, sometimes behind enemy lines, in order to rescue various pieces of art from enemy combatants (Nazi’s in this movie), and return them to their rightful owners. A difficult task, given the delicate nature of some pieces, the reluctance of some to surrender such objects, their orders to destroy everything of value, and the human condition known as greed. The men depicted in this movie (the Monuments Men) were museum directors, curators, professors and art historians. They didn’t know much about combat, and they weren’t selected for their physical prowess or ability to command. They were highly motivated to preserve and protect the artwork fallen victim to the ravages of war - Especially after they learned of Hitler’s orders to destroy everything should the Reich fall. The Monuments Men saw this as an opportunity to preserve and protect a cultural heritage before the final curtain was drawn on the third Reich. Here was a frantic race to extricate these precious prisoners of war, to prevent the destruction of centuries worth of culture. They were willing to risk their lives to protect and defend these monuments to mankind’s greatest achievements. The movie was a reminder that people aren’t the only victims of war. That a determined enemy can destroy and enslave more than the hearts and minds of a society. That the culture of a people is represented by more than collective memories, language and songs. The monuments men were one of the ways in which American/Allied forces did their best to preserve, protect, and liberate landmarks and artworks from the destruction of and by the Nazi regime. Many people fail to realize the real costs of war. This movie reminds us and educates those people who think that war is only about killing people. There are real consequences to war, the loss of soldiers, buildings and civilians is one thing, the loss of an entire culture is something else entirely. Imagine the destruction of this people’s achievements, their history, their culture - to make a people disappear entirely, that is what the Monuments Men were trying to prevent. My mind was engaged the entire time, the pacing and editing kept the movie exciting and engaging. I found the direction, production and sound track excellent. I’ve already commented on the casting, but the acting itself was quite good, despite the lack of depth in the characters. I don’t think enough time was spent on the characters; their motivations, their fears, their desires. The historical aspects; the set work, the vehicles, the costumes, the buildings, the artwork, they were all exceptional. This is much more than your typical war movie, it’s more drama, less action, more thinking, less explosions, more thoughtful, less gory than your typical war movie. WWII had it’s fill of Hero’s; here’s a movie about the mostly unsung Academic Hero’s who helped to preserve the cultural history of Europe. I give this movie a 4 out of 5.

Summary: Based on the true story of the greatest treasure hunt in history, The Monuments Men is an action drama focusing on an unlikely World War II platoon, tasked by FDR with going into Germany to rescue artistic masterpieces from Nazi thieves and returning them to their rightful owners. It would be an impossible mission: with the art trapped behind enemy lines, and with the German army under orders to destroy everything as the Reich fell, how could these guys - seven museum directors, curators, and art historians, all more familiar with Michelangelo than the M-1 - possibly hope to succeed? 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.