'Monuments Men' lacks worthy Clooney's latest straight for long-winded, heartfelt speeches, followed film struggles by splitting the group off into side stories that dangerously with plot encroach on the territories of sitcoms and soap operas. By CONRAD FOREMAN Jean Dujarin ("The Art- Daily Arts Writer ist") is French; Bill Murray ("Ghostbusters") is a smart- A star-studded cast that ass; Bob Balaban ("Close includes co-writer and direc- Encounters of the ThirdI tor George Clooney ("Batman Kind") is short and feisty; & Robin") John Goodman ("The Big coming Lebowski") is hard to figure together for C+ out. Obviously George Cloo- a movie set ney's the suave one, and Matt in the middle The Damon ("Dogma") speaks of World War Monuments dorky French and is kind of a II? Sounds good husband. That's about as like the recipe Men deep as it gets. for a prime Rave 20 and Not that there aren't November Quality16 attempts to humanize the release, ready art hunters. It's just that for a healthy Columbia Damon's relationship withI run at award Cate Blanchett ("Blue shows over Jasmine") puzzles more than1 the next few months. Alas, it intrigues, and Murray's these are not the features shower scene, scored by his of such a film; instead we wife and daughter singingI have "The Monuments Men," "Have Yourself a Merry Little which hit theaters this week- Christmas," would elicit much end. more emotion if we knew his The Monuments Men (a character better. nickname they give them- There are high notes of selves) are tasked with course; Hugh Bonneville retrieving art Hitler: stole ("Downtown Abbey") offersI during his conquest of Europe some heart as he pursues - a daunting task for a bunch both his dignity and Michel- of old farts with no military angelo's Madonna and Child, experience. but his story is short-lived.I George Clooney directs And although the laughs with an artsy form that fea- are few, they are genuine - tures a lot of close-ups. It the loudest coming during a works well enough, but his scene with Murray and Bala- screenwriting is a differ- ban sharing a cigarette with a ent story. He and partner German soldier.I Grant Heslov ("The Ides of The film also takes an March") skip intimate char- unoriginal and discomforting acter development and go approach to its portrayal of script Hitler - that is, they show his face for only a moment, otherwise framing him facing away from the camera or in deep shadows. While this illustrates the important note that no one man can be solely responsible for the atrocious actions of many, I'm partial to the idea that Hitler should be shown as the little shit that he was (i.e. "Inglourious Basterds"), not as some phantom or abstraction. "The Monuments Men," like our founding fathers, suffers for its patriotism. The story pushes the United States as the noble protector of all the world's culture. And Uncle Sam's grip gets tighter and tighter as the film goes on, culminating with a race between our heroes and the Russians, -an overt preamble to the Cold War. Another major violation problem is that the plot largely ignores the exploits of actual soldiers in the war. While the recovery and restoration of the greatest art in the world is surely an admirable pursuit, the voice of the film seems unaware of the incredible scope of the destruction of the war. There are almost no combat scenes; the war is simply a backdrop to the greater purpose of the protagonists. "The Monuments Men" ultimately fails because its entertainment value is mild, and in the end it' can't help but feel like a bunch of old, artistic yuppies explaining why they're the real heroes of WWII. By REBECCA GODWIN Daily Arts Writer J. K. Rowling made waves recently with the shocking rev- elation that she believes she had made a mistake in her seven- book "Harry Potter" series by having main characters Herm- ione Granger and Ron Weasley get married. In hindsight, she believed that Hermione should have ended up with none other than the Boy Who Lived, Harry Potter. Naturally, the fandom erupt- ed. The fans who believed in the canonical pairing were out- raged that Rowling would say such things about their beloved Romione. Others, who shipped, which is the-internet's way of saying supported, Harmony (Harry and Hermione), claimed superiority over the Romione shippers, claiming they always knew whom the true pairing should have been. My reac- tion was a bit more subdued; it consisted only of a shrug of the shoulders and a "Meh? Who cares?" My reaction, or lack thereof, was not caused by apathy toward the "Harry Potter" series. I love Harry Potter and everything about the Wizarding World. I have read each of the books several times and I will defend them to anyone who claims the books lack quality. So why am I so unconcerned with Rowling destroying Romi- one? Because it doesn't mat- ter. These relationships were never a central part of the story, and if they never existed or if minimally, as it always felt a bit they changed, the story would forced. We never saw enough of remain unaffected. Rowling was James and Lily for me to make not trying to write a young adult an accurate opinion of their romance series; if people want relationship, and the Dursleys such trivial exploits, they can go only worked because of their read the likes of "Twilight" and mutual hatred of anything "The Hunger Games," both of magical. But again I ask, does it which have a sickening level of really matter? relationship drama. Does anything that Rowl- "Harry Potter" was always a ing said after the conclusion series that tackled issues much of the series actually matter? bigger than who was dating It's not as though her saying whom. The series introduced Dumbledore is gay changed the many young readers to the ideas fact he was one badass wizard of death and loss for the first whose sassiness was phenome- time, while learning impor- nal. Nor does saying that Romi- tant lessons about courage and one never should have existed friendship along the way. If change the fact that they do fans start getting hung up over 'eist and will continue to exist inconsequential details like the forever. Rowling can say that status of Romione; these bigg anmony should have been the lessons will be lost. true couple but there's noth- Ello, mate? Romione vs. Harmony: Why do we even care? Besides, the relationships were never that believable to begin with. I never really bought into the whole Romione relationship. There was never anything in the stories that made me believe the pair had longevity. Though, I did believe it more than the whole Harry and Ginny relationship, which was just a mess. And to be fair -' I believe it more than Harmony. The only couple I actually ever believed were meant to be together was Mr. and Mrs. Weasley. Their relationship was grounded in love and car- ing toward each other, and the fact that Mr. Weasley calls Mrs. Weasley "Mollywobbles" is almost too cute for me to handle. The Remus and Tonks relationship I believed, but only ing she can do about it - unless she goes back and rewrites the whole series, which seems a bit excessive to me. Here's to hoping Snermione comes true. So Romione fans rejoice because your pairing will forever remain the OTP (one true pairing) and Harmony will only ever be wishful thinking, like Snarry (Snape and Harry), Drarry (Draco and Harry), and Snermione (Snape and Hermione). :._ t ' . ... Share the LOVI Happy Hour Specials Order Early for Valentine's Day Specials! the o1 dflower jwp oncampwU!