Monument Men Story Quite Amazing....

If nothing else, 2013 was the year of the "true event" movie.  Five of the nine movies nominated for an Oscar this year were based or inspired (some more loosely then others) on a real life incident ("American Hustle", "Captain Philips", "Dallas Buyers Club", "12 Years a Slave", and "Wolf of Wall Street").  "Lee Daniels The Butler" and "Saving Mr. Banks" were two others that did very well.  The trend continues into 2014, as another such movie recently premiered that is just as good as the ones above: "The Monuments Men".

The Monuments Men is the amazing "true story of the greatest treasure hunt in history", and focuses on an unlikely World War II platoon, tasked by President Franklin D. Roosevelt with going into Germany to rescue artistic masterpieces from Nazi thieves and returning them to their rightful owners. Not your typical platoon either, as the self-proclaimed "Monuments Men" (MM) consisted of museum directors, curators, and art historians rather than soldiers and fighters.

If being in constant, imminent danger wasn't enough for these military amateurs, the MM found themselves in a race against time to avoid the destruction of 1,000 years of culture, as the German army were under orders to destroy everything captured if anything happened to Adolph Hitler. 

Directed (and starring) George Clooney, MM was a well told, entertaining story of an event I personally knew nothing about.  But after watching it, I really admired what these people put on the line and the risks they took to achieve their goal, which, for the most part, was successful.  But not without a cost (you'll have to watch the movie to see what that is). The ironic thing is that much of the Monument Mens success wouldn't have been possible without the help of a woman. 

The character Claire Simone (played nicely by Cate Blanchett) is based on Rose Valland, the real life curator of the Jeu De Paume museum in Paris, France. Valland was left behind after much of the museum's art was captured during the Nazi occupation. She kept track of all works of art that came through the museum recording where they came from and where they went after they left the museum.  After approaching and convincing her, she ultimately provided this valuable information to the MM, who were then able to retrieve most of it.

Monument Men (and Woman) from top, l-r: Clooney, Damon,
Murray, Goodman, Dujardin, Balaban, Bonneville and Blanchett

The rest of the MM platoon includes Matt Damon, Bill Murray, John Goodman, Jean Dujardin, Hugh Bonneville, Bob Balaban, and Dimitri Leonidas. Leonidas, by the way, although the lesser known actor of the group, actually played one of the more important roles in the film as a German-speaking bi-lingual American used to spy on unknowing captive German soldiers.  Much valuable information was gathered by this character's eavesdropping.

Of the core group of actors, I particularly enjoyed Dujardin (2012 Best Actor winner for "The Artist") and Balaban's portrayals of their characters. All were good though, and the story quite amazing. It was hard for me to believe it actually happened, and that this group (there were actually more than eight Monuments Men in reality) were able to achieve as much as they did with such great odds stacked against them. 

Using my rating system (1= skip it, 2= rent it, 3= worth a matinee, 4= worth full price), I’d give it a “3.5”.

Monday Morning Quarterback: NFC Championship - the Day After

Thought I'd share some thoughts of mine regarding yesterday's NFC Championship game:

* Kaepernick is definitely not a big game, seize-the-moment quarterback yet. Whenever the camera showed him up close during the 4th quarter, he looked like a little kid playing a man's sport. He looked lost and showed no intensity at all. He's still young....hopefully he learned something.

* The 49ers inability to play a complete game finally caught up to them. Ever since the final game of the regular season against Arizona, the 49ers have been unable to put together 60 minutes of solid football. They've been playing one great half and one mediocre one. Same thing yesterday. Got them this time.

* As I feared, the difference in talent between the "real" NFL Officials and the replacement Officials from last year isn't that much. The NFL really needs to step back and re-evaluate these inconsistent and mistake-prone "professionals". Their former boss even questioned their calls throughout the game yesterday. Not good.

* On a similar note, the "Unnecessary Roughness - leading with the head" penalty needs to be reviewable. Seems like at least once a game a penalty is called on a defender who is called for either leading with his head or hitting the head area of a receiver that when replayed isn't the case. This is frequently a game changing (or momentum changing) play, so head coaches need the option to request a replay. Especially when the officials tend to get it wrong so much.

* A Seattle vs Denver Super Bowl sounds weird. Like an all-AFC match up. After all of their years in the AFC battling the Raiders, I still have a hard time getting used to Seattle being in the NFC. Don't think I'll ever fully accept a 49er/Seahawk rivalry because of that. 49ers/Dallas, 49ers/Green Bay, 49ers/Giants yes....49ers/Seahawks: Nope.

* Seattle's "12th Man" theme is very juvenile. High School = Yes; College = Yes; the NFL = No. Embarrassment to the pro game. But that's me, an old time traditionalist....!

Is the "Rock and Roll Hall-of-Fame" really for Rock and Roll?

With the announcement this week of the 2014 class of performers to be inducted into the "Rock and Roll Hall-of-Fame" (Cat Stevens, Hall and Oats, Nirvana, Kiss, Linda Ronstadt, and Peter Gabriel), I felt it was a good time to discuss a few issues and questions I have with and for the Rock and Roll Hall-of-Fame (RRHOF) Foundation.

As you may or may not know, the RRHOF resides in Cleveland, Ohio and began voting in recipients in 1986.  Since then, 719 people, 295 performers, and 104 groups have been inducted.  Which brings me to my first question.  The induction of 295 performers over a 27 year period averages about 11 per year.  At that rate, isn't every performer going to be in the RRHOF at some point in the future?  I would hope that the RRHOF foundation will decide sometime soon to start inducting fewer people (five or less) each year to preserve the dignity of the hall.  If not, we'll start to see more and more mediocre acts being inducted, and the quality of the RRHOF will slowly be diluted.

My next question to the RRHOF would be a pretty basic one:  "What is your definition of Rock and Roll"?  I only ask, because here are a few of the performers who have been inducted into the hall since its initiation:  Nat King Cole, Billie Holiday, The Supremes, The Temptations, The Platters, The Four Tops, The Four Seasons, Gladys Knight and the Pips, the Bee Gees, Brenda Lee, Donna Summer, The O'Jays, The Ronettes, Run-D.M.C, and Abba.  All great and even legendary performers in their own right, but Rock and Rollers? Pop Hall-of-Fame, Rap Hall-of-Fame,  Soul Hall-of-Fame, Hip Hop Hall-of-Fame, R&B Hall-of-Fame for sure.  Rock and Roll Hall of Fame?  I'm not too sure about that.

"Artists become eligible for induction 25 years after the release of their first record. Criteria include the influence and significance of the artists’ contributions to the development and perpetuation of rock and roll.  The RRHOF Foundation's nominating committee selects nominees each year in the Performer category. Ballots are then sent to an international voting body of more than 600 artists, historians and members of the music industry. Those performers who receive the highest number of votes are inducted."  That is the extent of the RRHOF Foundation's explanation of their voting/induction process. What is considered a high number of votes?  Is there a minimum number of votes needed to be elected? If not, who determines which performers have the "highest number of votes" for any given year?  Where's the cut off?  Inquiring minds want to know!

Finally, what do the following list of performers have in common:  The Doobie Brothers, Chicago, Yes, Emerson, Lake and Palmer (ELP), Jethro Tull, The Cars, Stevie Ray Vaughn, Journey, Dire Straits, Bad Company, the Electric Light Orchestra (ELO), Styx, and Kansas?  None, I repeat, none, are in the RRHOF!  That's stunning to me.  What's even more outrageous is that outside of Yes, NONE of them have ever been nominated!  And all but The Cars and Dire Straits have been eligible for over 15 years now!  How can this be?  How can some, if not all of these groups be omitted?  They certainly fit the RRHOF Foundation's criteria of "Artists become eligible for induction 25 years after the release of their first record. Criteria include the influence and significance of the artists’ contributions to the development and perpetuation of rock and roll. "  Sure, some of the groups border on pop (Chicago, Dire Straits) or New Age (The Cars), but no more than any other group already in the RRHOF (The Beach Boys, The Bee Gees, Abba, Simon and Garfunkel, Earth, Wind and Fire, Beastie Boys, Hall and Oates this year, or any of the other members mentioned earlier).

Aerosmith and Queen were inducted 12 years ago.The Talking Heads and Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers 11 years ago. The Police and AC/DC 10 years ago. ZZ Top in 2004 and The Pretenders in 2005.  Blonde in 2006.  Van Halen in 2007. Genesis in 2010. Kiss and Hall and Oates this year.  I'm a fan of most of these groups, and all probably should be in the RRHOF at some point, but is there really a good argument for any of them being inducted before Chicago, The Doobie Brothers or Yes? And not just elected, but some 10 years (and counting) before them?  I have a hard time finding one.

Unfortunately, I don't have the answers to any of my questions above. I wish I did!  If you fish around the internet, you'll find various opinions, including some who believe the whole process is very political with grudges and favorites existing throughout the music industry. That I could believe and would actually make some sense. Regardless, being a big fan of music, and especially rock-and-roll, the RRHOF's process has always been a perplexing one to me. Not to mention a bit vague!

So there you go.....my gripes and confusion with the RRHOF Foundation.  I feel much better now!  Feel free to chime in with your thoughts!

Good links:

• RRHOF Snub list:  http://www.futurerocklegends.com/The_Snub_List.php

• RRHOF Overview page:  http://www.rockhall.com/inductees/