Con: It's boring and sensational
. A good actor I like. It can be said that all of them have stunts. But why is there no good screenwriter? A story with plain lines, a sensational dialogue that is inserted whenever there is a gap. A team of players, from Captain Clooney to the bottom, are obviously professors or artists, but everyone speaks as if they had survived in the Brotherhood—deep, but boring to the point of hilarity.
Thirty minutes ago, the scene I was in the movie theater was a touching symphony and the hard-working performances of three or four movie stars, but all I thought was: You have never experienced anything, why are you so emotional?
Pro: The real history has to
say that this is a film that restores the real. "Based on true history" is emphasized at the beginning of the film. A film about World War II in Europe and a film about art, you can imagine how many expensive props the production has to get out. From museums in Paris to monasteries in Belgium, Norma land, Paris, Ghent, Bruges, Merkel, Salzberg, there are only two things in sight, soldiers in war and priceless Famous painting! I don't understand oil painting and sculpture. If I could understand it, I don't know if it would drop my jaw.
The only thing that moved me in my heart was the real historical photos at the end. The American soldiers in the mine and the world famous paintings that were saved.
Maybe for the last truth, endure two hours of fake sensationalism, Clooney, have you directed the Spring Festival Gala?
View more about The Monuments Men reviews
