George Clooney’s “The Monuments Men” is not a piece of art worth trying to save.

“The Monuments Men” succeeded in doing something completely unexpected: The creators were able to take a story of war, death and love and create something terribly bland and boring.

Shot for shot, the film had a monotonous pattern. Each scene consisted of two people talking while one character desperately tried to look busy, fiddling with cigarettes or weapons. It left me wondering if the actors knew what they were doing with their hands.

Camera work offered little creativity to the movie: The lack of composition left this film standing as a generic piece of work. Hold it up to any other B-list World War II film and there will be nothing to distinguish the two. Fascinating camera work is one of the true flavors of film, and this one just seemed to be vanilla.

The real tragedy of this work was the writing, predictability and, oftentimes, pointlessness. I found myself muttering the lines before the actors spoke them. As someone who considers himself an uncreative brick, it was obnoxious to guess what each character would say next.

The incredible cast recited some impressive dialogue, but comedic geniuses like Bill Murray and John Goodman seemed to be limited by their characters. The majority of the film’s humor came from random curse words thrown in, instead of anything intelligent.

The film did have redeeming qualities with a few standout scenes. One look from Goodman pulled at my heartstrings as he’s first confronted with death in the war. An architect who was never meant for a soldier’s life found the bitter taste of battle, and his eyes showed the disgust and despair of a tired man. This particular scene was so phenomenal it didn’t seem to belong in the same movie.

The greatest achievement of “The Monuments Men” was the story it is based on: A group of men, more scholar than soldier, who struggled to save the cultural artifacts Adolf Hitler was bent on destroying at the end of the second World War.