The Mighty Macs

(Source)

The Mighty Macs had so much potential to be a really great film, and I was excited by the trailer. I was disappointed, but not surprised, that it turned out to be chock-full of cliches.

Cathy Rush has been a stay-at-home wife for all of the few months she’s been married, but in her glory days at West Chester State, she played basketball. Wanting to do something with her life, she takes a job coaching the girls’ team at Immaculata College, a tiny, Catholic, all-girls’ school run by nuns that has no gym and only one basketball. Based on a true story, The Mighty Macs tells the triumphant tale of a small, off-the-map school taking on the first annual women’s college basketball national championship playoffs.

(Source)

(Slight spoilers may follow. But you won’t really be missing out on anything, because if you’ve seen any sports movie, you’ve seen this movie.)

The characters in this movie are flat and stale. Cathy Rush is your typical hard-as-nails basketball coach with unusual coaching methods and a brisk, no-nonsense attitude. For the first half of the movie, she was rude and kind of mean, and even made the girls practice defense drills in a drainage pipe. I almost instantly hated her character, but then she has an inexplicable change of heart halfway through the film and softens up a bit. This sudden change in character is confusing, but very welcome, as it makes the entire film much more bearable when the main character isn’t a complete jerk.

The players on the Immaculata team all blend together in my mind, with the exception of Trish, the hotshot player who has to hitchhike to school and wear overalls 24/7 because her family can’t afford anything else, and Lizanne, who wears her boyfriend’s letterman jacket 24/7 because she loves him so much. I think everyone else had names, I just don’t remember them because they’re all the exact same character. Good sports movies thrive on memorable characters that get the audience excited to root for them at their games, and cheer them on even through their losses. Unfortunately, The Mighty Macs accomplishes none of that by making the team only semi-exciting, and the individual players even less interesting.

(Source)

The best character is Sister Sunday, a nun recruited by Rush to be her assistant coach. She’s funny, spunky, and not afraid to get her hands dirty, shouting at players from the sidelines and making snarky comments while drinking at a bar. That’s one thing I really appreciated about this movie: nuns are treated with respect, both by the characters and by the screenwriter. The sisters are seen as real people, with real wants and needs and worries, but constantly dedicated to their mission of serving God and others.

The Mighty Macs also does a good job at not being preachy. In fact, there’s only about three mentions of the word “Catholic”, and when Cathy Rush admits to her assistant coach that she actually isn’t Catholic, she’s Baptist, Sister Sunday smiles and proclaims, “Then you are my sister.” There are some great Bible quotes on signs that Immaculata supporters hold up at games, and they’re quirky and perfectly fit for the game at hand.

(Source)

Although this film has some good moments and some great scenes (like Rush and Sister Sunday’s candid talk about vocations, and Sister Sunday demonstrating how to play good defense and box out your man, among others), overall The Mighty Macs falls into the category of “just another sports movie”, with generic characters, a generic plot, and a generic script. I’m still waiting for a good girls-in-sports movie. Hopefully it’ll get here soon.

Rewatching Old Favorites: Miss Potter

(Source)

"There's something delicious about writing those first few words of a story..."

The other night, I pulled out Miss Potter, and was reminded why it's stuck with me for so long. Normally, I'm an action/scifi/adventure type of movie watcher, but every time I watch Miss Potter, I discover something new to love about it.

Miss Potter follows the adventures of one Miss Beatrix Potter, an unmarried woman in her thirties who is frowned upon for trying to publish her book. Beatrix is shut up in her house with no friends for the large majority of the time and decides to make the best of it by drawing. When she finally finds a publisher, she befriends him and his energetic sister and realizes that she deserves better than what she has already. Miss Potter tells the story of a beloved author trying to find herself.

(Source)

In the past, I classified Miss Potter as a romance, but after this rewatch, I realized that it really isn't. Although there are some romantic aspects of it, Miss Potter is about one woman's journey towards realizing her dreams and becoming truly independent. At the beginning of the film, she is thirty-two, unmarried, and lives with her controlling mother and laid-back father. She even has a chaperone who follows her wherever she goes. She is independent, but forced to be dependent. Her mother tries to squash her dreams of becoming an artist. Throughout the film, we watch as Beatrix struggles to break free and become her own person, instead of the person that her parents want her to become. Her courage and determination are inspiring and entertaining.

(Source)

The acting is beautifully done. Renee Zellweger is completely believable, and completely un-Renee-Zellweger. She truly is Miss Potter. The supporting cast is similarly brilliant, particularly Ewan McGregor as Beatrix's publisher, Norman Wayne, and Emily Watson as Millie, Norman's sister. These moving performances contribute to the strength of the story.

One of my favorite things about Miss Potter is the animations of Beatrix's drawings. Her watercolors are adorable, and with a touch of filmmaking magic, they become even more so. Peter Rabbit literally bounces off the page. Jemima Puddleduck waddles her tail obligingly as Tom Thumb and Hunka Munka scamper off their paper. The animation is beautifully done, and not overdone. It helps the audience realize that these aren't just drawings to Beatrix--they're real, and they're her babies.

(Source)

I can't say enough good things about this film. It's sweet, charming, real, and funny, with a touch of heartwrenching feels. I highly recommend it for any lover of Jane Austen, any lover of period films, and of course, any lover of Peter Rabbit.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Contrived & unengaging

(Source)

I feel like I might be offending people by saying this, but generally when you watch TMNT, you don't really take it seriously. I mean, it's giant talking turtles who eat pizza, live in a sewer, and were raised by a rat. You kind of have to watch it for the cheese, and you end up buying into their universe, and then you're sucked in and you can't stop. The 2014 Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles doesn't have a consistent universe, and you never get invested in the film. Ever.

The film opens with a brief explanation of the Foot Clan, a ninja-gang that roams the streets, committing crimes left and right. (Not that we need the explanation...after twenty minutes, the Foot Clan is rarely seen again.) We're also introduced to April O'Neil, a lifestyle reporter who wants to report on substantial news. She's so ambitious, she's willing to risk her life (multiple times!) to shoot crappy video on her iPhone in half-successful attempts to get her big break. While following Foot Clan suspects to a dock, she discovers that masked vigilantes are stopping the Foot Clan in their tracks, and puts herself into even greater danger by telling basically everyone she knows that the masked vigilantes are turtles. So therefore, the teenage mutant ninja turtles take her to their lair in the sewer, and together they attempt to uncover the Foot Clan's plan and take down the Clan's sinister leader, Shredder.

(Source)

The entire film focused on April O'Neil, with the turtles as a nice side plot, which definitely should have been flipped around, especially in a movie called "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles". The film tries its hardest to put O'Neil into the turtles' troubled past, but without any setup, the entire O'Neil + turtles backstory seems contrived and convenient. Although Megan Fox can be a halfway decent actress, she would have been much more convincing if she hadn't played the exact same character in Transformers (thanks, Michael Bay). Originally an interesting, three-dimensional side character, April O'Neil is turned into a flat, generic "heroine" who is more stupid than brave...and then we're forced to watch an entire film about her.

It's pretty obvious that much more time was spent on the CGI and the action sequences than the script. Every turtle has one personality trait. Michaelangelo is the sassy one, Leonardo is the responsible leader, Raphael is moody and rebellious, and Donatello is kind of geeky (he even wear glasses). The characters were pretty one-dimensional, and they remain the same throughout the movie. I don't think one character developed during the entire course of the film. Maybe you could make a case for Donatello, but it would be hard to find evidence.

(Source)

The one redeeming quality of the film is the special effects. In this day and age, there's really no excuse for poor special effects. When we go to the movies, we have high expectations SFX-wise, and TMNT delivered. A lot of the fight sequences with Shredder vs. the turtles evoked video game images. The shots used are quite similar to those used in video games, I'm guessing because both shots rely so heavily on motion capture. This wasn't necessarily a bad thing, as a lot of the action shots were quite cool. They were almost the exact opposite of The Hunger Games: lots of smooth, wide shots were you can see everything happening in the fight without getting a splitting headache. I thought it was well executed.

I was looking forwards to this film, but came out disappointed. It tried too hard, couldn't find a balance between silly and serious, and ultimately failed to capture the spirit of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles that the majority of the world has come to know and love.

Transcendence: Cool premise, lame story

(Source)

I'll admit that I went into Transcendence a bit biased...all reviews I had read about it were negative. ("Why go and see it?" you ask. "Well, it only cost me five dollars," I respond sheepishly.) However, after a shaky start, Transcendence started to get interesting, and I started to enjoy it, and then...the film blew it.

Starring Johnny Depp, Morgan Freeman, and a very familiar-looking girl (who IMDb tells me is Rebecca Hall), Transcendence takes place in the not-too-distant future, following the life and death of Will Caster, who has devoted his life to studying artificial intelligence. In fact, he created a gigantic AI machine named PINN...and then is assassinated by an anti-technology terrorist group. Before he dies, Will, with the help of his wife Evelyn, upload his consciousness into PINN's software. Evelyn refuses to listen to her friends' concerns as Computer Will starts evolving, growing stronger, smarter, and way more powerful. Will she be able to shut it--him--down before it's too late?

(Source)

The idea of Transcendence is pretty intriguing, but the execution fell flat. The beginning is slow-paced, chock full of admittedly necessary, but unexciting expository information. Once Computer Will starts taking over, things get more interesting, but just as you're starting to get into the world of the film, and just as you're starting to root for the right people, the film takes the weirdest twists and turns, bringing all sorts of things you never previously knew about Will into play. The ending was far from satisfying, and actually ended up just being incredibly confusing. The ending proves the first half of the movie to be pointless setup, as nothing gets paid off. It will leave you with a bad taste in your mouth.

One good thing about Transcendence is it's not afraid to ask tricky questions. How far is too far, in the world of technology? Is AI the way to go? Is it okay to play God, curing sick people, creating the next generation of humanity, or is that something that should be left alone? What are the consequences to playing God? What is knowledge, anyways? What can you do with unlimited knowledge? Just how big is the Internet? It's appropriate that the film does not attempt to answer all of these questions, but instead attempts to give hints, possible outcomes, and leaves them open. Despite all of the interesting moral issues that the film touches on, Transcendence chose the wrong question to answer, which makes you question who you should have been rooting for in the first place.

The premise of Transcendence is on the right track, but the storytelling isn't. Watch it to get a glimpse at some cool science stuff (which I'm honestly not sure if it's real....yet), hear Johnny Depp practically narrate the whole movie, and wonder about the power of technology. Don't watch it if you want to be entertained. You'll spend seventy-five percent of the time trying to keep up with the wild goose chase Transcendence turns out to be.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier: Darker & grittier

(Source)

I really enjoyed Captain America 2. Marvel films aren't supposed to be super deep...they set a light-hearted tone, and they're just so much fun to watch, gasp at the plot twists, and root for your favorite superhero. Basically, they're a fun way to spend a couple hours of your day. But Captain America: The Winter Soldier is a departure from the Marvel snark of the past. It's a dark story, with a depressing moral: Don't trust anyone. Ever. Everyone can and will betray you in the end.

Cap discovers that Nick Fury is going rogue, trying to keep information secret from S.H.I.E.L.D. and also building gigantic heliplanes in the S.H.I.E.L.D. basement to basically assassinate people before they even commit a crime, Minority Report-style. Also trying to assassinate people: This dude with long hair and a Bane-like mask known as "The Winter Soldier" runs around shooting/punching/destroying cars and generally being obnoxious. When Nick Fury entrusts Cap with an important piece of data, S.H.I.E.L.D. turns on the Captain and Black Widow, chasing them down wherever they go. Our heroes must figure out what's so important about the data, and figure out why their own company is trying to kill them.

(Source)

The thing I missed most about this film was the traditional Marvel humor. There were some good one-liners, but nothing really funny (besides the first scene). It gave a darker feel to the film and set a more serious tone. Maybe I was just missing Tony Stark's snark, and I get that Cap isn't really in the mood for joking in this film, but I wish that it had been funnier.

Despite the lack of humor, the movie is a fun ride, taking audiences from Washington, D.C. to New Jersey, to Apple stores and museums. Wherever our heroes go, trouble is sure to find them...but somehow, the Cap manages to get himself out right in the nick of time. (And I mean....right in the nick of time.) Sometimes it's a little unbelievable how perfect his timing is, but hey, if it wasn't perfect, he'd be dead, and there would be no movie.

(Source)

The action was grittier and faster. A lot of the fights were hand-to-hand combat that seemed straight out of a Jason Bourne movie, which was fun and intense to watch. It was cool to get a better look at exactly how Cap uses his shield...I don't remember him throwing it often in previous films, but he's got a great throwing arm in this one. Black Widow is as deadly as usual (and I so appreciate a film that has girls doing proper hand-to-hand combat). The new addition to the team, Sam Wilson (aka the Falcon) was the much-needed comic relief of the film, as well as being pretty kick-butt himself.

My biggest question left unanswered is...where were the other Avengers? If S.H.I.E.L.D. is going crazy and wants superheroes dead, then wouldn't they theoretically be attacking the others too? There are hints to Tony Stark in one sequence, but how about the other Avengers, especially Hawkeye, who is more an agent of S.H.I.E.L.D. then the others? However, I think every standalone Marvel film will have this question to answer. If the world is going to end, why aren't the other Avengers concerned?

Overall, Captain America: The Winter Soldier is a really good addition to the Marvel franchise, as well as working as a standalone film. There's superheroes, and cool gadgets, and awesome action sequences, and new villains and heroes and love interests and basically anything you could ask for in a Marvel film. It's a great way to pleasantly spend a few hours of your time.

 

Noah: Not as blasphemous as everyone says

(Source)

There has been a ton of controversy surrounding the recent adaptation of Noah, and I feel like half of it is completely deserved, but the other half really isn't. Before I begin, I'd like to say that no, Noah is nothing like the actual story of Noah, besides both stories feature characters named Noah, and both stories involve a boatload of animals and a flood that wipes out the Earth. If you go into Noah wanting to be educated in your faith, please don't go. If you go into Noah expecting an entertaining story that yes, isn't like the Bible, but isn't horrible either, then go see it.

The main problem I had with Noah is that the fallen angels are made out to be the "good guys". The film explains that demons (also known as "The Watchers") went to Earth of their own accord to help the human race (helping here equals "tempting to eat the apple so they could be like God") and then God got mad at them, so He cursed them to become giant boulder monsters that kind of resemble Transformers, except, they're rocks. Then, when God warns Noah of the approaching flood, the Watchers decide to help Noah. The film paints that picture that all Lucifer wanted to do was help humanity, not, you know, blatantly defy and try to overthrow God. This is the main thing that I took issue with.

(Source)

The first half of the movie is pretty decent. It's interesting, entertaining, and a completely new story. Noah's dreams about the flood perfectly communicate what his mission is without any voiceover narration or lengthy explanations, which is exactly what the entire medium of film is...visually telling a story. Noah builds an ark with the help of his family (his wife and three teenaged sons, one who is a dead ringer for young Johnny Depp), and the weird demons-turned-good-guys Watchers. The tribes of Cain start bothering the family, threatening to storm the boat if it ever starts raining. Drama ensues. It starts raining. More drama ensues. It's entertaining and beautifully shot (that shot of all the animals coming into the ark? GORGEOUS), and overall not terribly blasphemous. I enjoyed it.

(Source)

But then the flood really starts. The family seeks refuge on the ark, and then the story gets really, really weird. Noah is somehow convinced that God didn't want to save humanity, He only wanted to save the animals, and goes on a murderous rampage to make sure that his grandchildren do not carry on the human race. His family (quite obviously) turns against him. This was the strangest part of the movie for me. It seemed like, since there was nothing else left storytelling wise except sitting on a boat, the writers said, "Hmm, what can we do to make this movie longer? Ooh! I know!"

(Source)

Storytelling wise, Noah does fall short, especially to a believer. But technically speaking, Noah is a really beautiful film. The cinematography is really beautiful. It's just fun to watch because of all of the colors, the wide landscape shots, and the cool and creative time lapse shots of the creation of the world (my favorite part of the movie). The first few times the silhouette-against-a-sunset shot was used, it was pretty cool, but then it got a bit overused. And as I said before, the shot with all the animals walking towards the ark was amazing.

(Source)

With Russell Crowe as your main character, you really can't go wrong, acting-wise. But for me, the standout performance was definitely Jennifer Connolly as Naameh, Noah's wife. She's the emotional heart of the movie and of Noah's family, staunchly supporting him no matter how crazy others thought he was. When Noah tries to tell her that the human race should not survive, she refuses to stand by him, and you can see how hard this has been for her, and how hard it will be for her. It was brilliantly acted, and I really enjoyed her performance.

(Source)

One other thing that I appreciated was the pro-life aspect of Noah. My absolute favorite line of the film was when Ila, an orphan that Noah and Naameh adopted ten years ago, is worried that she isn't good enough because a childhood injury left her barren. Noah tells her, "You're a gift--a precious, precious gift. Never forget how precious a gift you are." The value of human life is represented by the character of Ila. Throughout the film, she remains a staunch advocate for the dignity of life.

Overall, I enjoyed Noah. It's an entertaining and thought-provoking (and very original!) look at the Bible story. The cinematography is really gorgeous, and the film brings up a lot of interesting points. As long as you aren't going into the film to learn about the story of Noah and be educated in your faith, you will be fine. I promise you will not melt in a puddle of blasphemy. Do you know how many other worse films are out there?

Divergent (better late than never?)

(Source)

Minor spoilers may follow. Enter at your own risk.

I actually watched "Divergent" opening night. (And, for the record, wrote this post the day after. But didn't get around to posting it till now. Whoops.) I thought the theater would be completely packed. My experiences with watching YA adaptations during the first week of release led me to think that it would be difficult to get a seat. There were about five people in the whole theater when I got there roughly half an hour early, although the place did fill up quickly. Although the Divergent trilogy is popular, it definitely has not yet hit Harry Potter and Hunger Games level of fame.

"Divergent" has been received fairly well by fans, but critics are slamming it. I think part of this is due to the movie trying to cater to the book's fans (it definitely helps to have read the whole series to fill in the "gaps" in the film), and part of this is due to "Catching Fire"'s huge success. "Catching Fire" is pretty much the perfect example of a YA book adaptation, and it set the bar pretty high. Although "Divergent" does a great job at bringing the story of the book to life, it's not quite at "Catching Fire" level.

Some things that I loved about "Divergent": Well, Shailene Woodley, for starters. I disliked Tris in the books, I thought she was too unrelatable, and she seemed very violent and volatile, especially in the second and third books. However, I found Tris to be much more relatable in the movie. She wasn't too violent, and I felt that her strength was portrayed accurately for a girl her age. Shailene Woodley is a terrific actress and brought a much needed human element to the character of Beatrice Prior, and this is largely what made the movie for me.

The cast as a whole did a fantastic job. I especially enjoyed Theo James as Four (the last thing I saw him do was this stellar performance, so I applaud him for being, you know, alive and a semi-decent guy in "Divergent"), Zoe Kravitz as Christina (my personal favorite book character, so I'm glad she did her justice), Ashley Judd as Tris's mom, and last but definitely not least, Kate Winslet as the villainous Jeanine Matthews. I'm a bit biased, as I love Kate Winslet and I firmly believe she can do no wrong, but she makes a great villain. She was definitely given more screen time in the film than she should have been, but…it's Kate Winslet. When you cast Kate Winslet as your film's baddie, you use her.

(Source)

As a whole, "Divergent" did a good job at balancing the amount of violence used in the film. In the book, Dauntless is portrayed as completely brutal (someone gets stabbed in the eye with a knife while sleeping, for example). The movie does a good job at getting across the startling violence of the Dauntless without getting too crazy (the stabbing scene, although filmed on set, did not make it into the final cut of the movie). There's still that sense of life-or-death danger found in the book though. Eric forces initiate Christina to hang over a ledge to teach her a lesson. Al is so heartbroken that Tris won't forgive him, he makes a horrible choice. The initiates are made to fight people much bigger and stronger than they are, and they react as any human being would (for example, no matter how much last-minute advice Four gave me, there is no way I could avoid getting knocked out when facing Peter in the ring…just like Tris). The film keeps the intensity high will avoiding that "R" rating.

The film is confusing if you haven't previously read the book…it is definitely made just for the fans. If you are a fan of the book Divergent, chances are you'll really like the movie too. I personally enjoyed the film more than the book (mostly due to the fact that this time around, I could relate to the main character), and I think it's really well done. Go see it, and support YA book adaptations and cool lead female characters!

28 Weeks Later

(Source)

I accidentally watched this film. I was planning on watching 28 Days Later, and instead, apparently, watched the 2007 sequel, 28 Weeks Later. Whoops.

However, despite the eternal curse of lameness currently bestowed on sequels (and especially zombie horror sequels), 28 Weeks Later was actually, surprising, really good. 

The film takes place six months after the outbreak of the zombie virus. Great Britain was infected and quarantined from the rest of the world. Eventually, the infected died of starvation. The US Army comes in to help repopulate the city, and starts shipping citizens back to London. However, when two returning kids go searching for their old house, they end up unleashing the deadly virus upon the city once again.

(Source)

The plot was really solid. You really can't go wrong when the main goal of every character is to survive. One of the rules of good storytelling is the baser the goal of the characters, the more relatable and sound your story becomes. You can't go much baser than survival. 28 Weeks Later differs from other zombie movies, however, with its emphasis of sacrificial love. Throughout the film, characters are confronted with hard choices which require them to sacrifice something or someone, or even their own lives. Some characters make good decisions, but some make very, very bad decisions. 28 Weeks Later shows the value of sacrificial love through the extreme repercussions of those horrible decisions. The truly good, heroic characters in this film are characterized by their willingness to give up everything for the people that they love. In order to be truly human, you have to be prepared to do whatever it takes to keep the people in your life safe.

(Source)

One thing that I really appreciated in this film is its complete lack of romance. This may sound strange, and I'm a sucker for a good love story (I cried a lot while reading a certain Nicholas Sparks book, not gonna lie), but this story did not need any sort of romantic side plot that disaster/outbreak movies usually toss in there. There was definite potential, and when sniper Sergeant Doyle meets medical specialist Scarlet, he stares at her for just a moment longer than needed, and I rolled my eyes, thinking, oh great, here comes an unnecessary side plot. I was pleasantly surprised when the romantic storyline didn't go any farther than that. It's so refreshing to just watch a zombie horror movie, with no strange and unneeded romance on the side.

(Source)

Like any good disease outbreak movie, 28 Weeks Later features characters from every aspect of the quarantine: the medical specialist, the sniper security guard, and the innocent family who just happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Rose Byrne, Jeremy Renner, and Robert Carlyle (of Once Upon A Time fame…I may or may not have shrieked "Rumpelstiltskin!" when he came on screen) star, and they all convincing portray their respective personalities. (Is it just me, or is Jeremy Renner almost the exact same character in every movie…you know, the snarky soldier who ends up going against orders to save people?) The actress who plays the teenaged Tammy, Imogen Poots, was my favorite in this movie. Sh was really the emotional heart of the movie, and her determination and courage in protecting her family brought a deeper level of humanity to the film.

In short, although the film does have a few weak spots, overall it's a really interesting and entertaining zombie flick. It is fairly gory, and gets pretty intense and suspenseful at time. I actually planned to watch only half of the movie, and then finish it up later after I accomplished some things, but couldn't stop watching. If you don't mind gore and language, I would definitely recommend this film.

You can watch the trailer below:

The Monuments Men

(Source)

The Monuments Men is a fun, mostly light-hearted film with an amazing cast and a decent story. The film follows a special team of soldiers during World War II who are assigned to keep the world's greatest monuments (mostly art, really) safe from Nazi occupation.

If you look at The Monuments Men as a historical Ocean's Eleven, it doesn't work. This film is completely different, but in a good way. It starts out right in the middle of the action, with the special team being put together and going through basic training within the first ten minutes. The entire movie moves at a fast pace, grabbing your attention with every scene. It's a perfect blend of comedy, action, and tragedy to keep everyone interested. 

A couple things that I really loved about this film (there are a lot more than just this, though): 1. Catholics are treated with respect. A lot of art that the Monuments Men have to save are in churches. Priests and religious are found throughout the film, and they are neither lifted up nor put down, they're simply part of the story. That's exactly how it should be, in my humble opinion. And 2. The value of family and fidelity is a strong theme. There's a really touching scene where Lieutenant Campbell's family sends him a recording of them singing a Christmas song, and he immediately stops what he's doing to listen, while the other men help him play it. The soldiers' families play a big part in their lives, and I appreciated that they let it shine through so many scenes.

The cast is the best part of this movie. There's so many big names here, and they each pull off their roles perfectly. I especially loved Jean Dujardin as cocky yet incompetent Jean Claude, and Bill Murray as the cynical Lieutenant Campbell. The entire ensemble is great together and you can tell they're all friends. If you're looking for a fun, snarky, fast-paced film with a great cast of characters, look no further! The Monuments Men delivers.