Flat script; flat acting with flashes of brilliance

Rating: Null/10 (23 February 2014)

Though we appeared to dedicate more attention to captured art in 1943 than we did to the known plight of imprisoned Jews about to be slaughtered, I still wanted to see this film done well. Putting aside whether we the Allies should have taken earlier action of some form against the string of known camps, art too is a voice for all time - so I certainly understand the incentive to save it, particularly where our entire western civilization and humanity's brightest light, risked being obliterated. I respect George Clooney's goals here.
But wasn't the problem George Clooney? I'll start with his podium readings to Roosevelt and Truman. Flat, so flat that a passer-by could have been just as effective. Wouldn't that segment have been better used by having the presentation just as a voice-over, with visible content consisting of Jews being rousted from their homes, their belongings inventoried and stole, throughout Europe? Why should Clooney have monopolized the scenes? He simply was dramatically empty, even with his powerful message.
Because he was the director, that's why. If he wants the spotlight, he as director can shine it. And that, here, was a significant failure. No one said (or was able to say) perhaps that's not the best intro, George. A little too much of you, George.
Too much George! The movie did turn in some acting tour de forces. Cate Blanchett was a revelation. Bob Balaban too. And as to Jean Dujardin, I'm glad to see he's found a niche in talkies.