Good, not great

Rating: Null/10 (15 February 2014)

The subject of the movie is what drew me to it. Very interesting bit of history. If you're into arts, you'll certainly be doing like me throughout the movie, it's like a treasure hunt: Rembrandt here, Van Dyke or Renoir there... That part is really fun. The acting is pretty good in general. The costumes and sets are looking good and realistic. The problem is: against such a backdrop as WWII, where so many people died and such atrocities happened, I couldn't help but wonder, like one character in the movie, if it was worth it to send men to die for pieces of art, be they signed by Rodin or Picasso. This defuses the drama of the movie, although there are a couple of good scenes that will stick to you more. But it's hard to really care in depth about pieces of canvas and marble when you know there were human beings suffering unspeakable things right at the same time. I *have* to set the record straight about Matt Damon's character's awful French speaking "abilities"...! Somehow his horrendous pronunciation is excused by the fact that he supposedly learnt French in Montreal. Excuse me! I'm Québécoise myself and I could not understand one blessed word he was saying when speaking "French". All it was, was really, really bad pronunciation by and English speaking tongue that revolts itself against anything remotely french-sounding. And by the way, Cate Blanchett was not convincing either as a "French" woman. Why not use wonderful actresses like Marion Cotillard, or Audrey Tautou, or Carole Bouquet, anybody but somebody who would've sounded convincing in French.