Les Miserables

After serving 19 years as a prisoner in Post French Revolution France, Jean Valjean(Hugh Jackman) is released to be a free man, but he finds freedom to not be very freeing. His crime, stealing bread to feed his sister's dying kid, does not seem to warrant the reaction he has received. No one will hire a former felon, and he cannot find a place to sleep. After he is given food and bed from a Bishop, Valjean steals all of the valuables from the Church. He does not believe in the good of man and who can blame him. However, when he is caught, the Bishop tells the police that Valjean was given the valuables and he left without taking the candlesticks as well. Valjean realizes here he is at a Crossroads, he can use these valuables to better his life, but it means throwing away his papers and not going to his parole hearing. He must become a fugitive. Cut to a few years later, and Valjean is living as a business owner and mayor of a small Parisian town. The gruff Law officer, Javert(Russel Crowe) has been dispatched to Valjean's town, and Javert quickly thinks something is up with Valjean, but he cannot quite place it. In this town, Fantine (Anne Hathaway) loses her job at Valjean's factory and because she has to send money to innkeepers who are watching after her little girl Cosette, Fantine sells her hair, her teeth and eventually her body. When Valjean realizes what has happened, he promises Fantine that he will protect her daughter. Cut to another few years later and Valjean and Cosette(Amanda Seyfreid) live a quiet life in France, but revolution is brewing. And love is brewing as well. Cosette has met Marius(Eddie Redmayne)and they instantly fall in love, but Marius is a man of the revolution and once Valjean decides he and Cosette have to leave because Javert is on his trail, Marius throws himself fully into war. Oh and the whole thing is sung.

I am much more of a film guy than I am a musical theater guy, and I believe that in reviewing a film adaptation of anything, you have to stick to the film. It has to stand on its own merits. So in thinking of that I have to say that I do not love Les Miserables. Yet, I am completely in love with this movie. It succeeds on almost every level and I connected emotionally to it in so many different ways. Every time I thought I was done crying, something would trigger another sobbing emotion. It did not even feel like nearly 3 hours to me. From the moment Jackman started singing to the very end, I was completely hooked by the people on the screen. Once I let the movie wash over me, I was completely enthralled, which is saying something because the director (Tom Hooper) tried his best to ruin the entire experience.

Jackman not only gives his best performance ever, but he gives what is easily the best performance of the year and the best in quite a few years if you ask me. His gravitas mixed with a deep sensitivity leads to one of the most heartbreaking male lead performances I have ever seen. I found his vocals to be exactly what they should have been. His performance ripped me apart in a number of ways. From the start as a completely broken man to a man searching for redemption for the rest of the film, Jackman is perfect. His rendition of "Bring him Home" crushed me. The softness of his voice in that vulnerable moment was enough to make me literally weep. And to follow it up with a rugged determination to Marius away from the war was such a stark difference, but he handled both with ease.

Eddie Redmayne is another guy who I felt gave a knockout performance. Facebook is griping about his Kermit voice or his jaw wiggling, but I was too ripped apart during his "Empty Chairs, Empty Tables" performances to notice. He was diligent, romantic, full of great ideals and it is not difficult to understand how love completely sweeps him up. I know people wish that Aaron Tveit has just been cast as Marius not Enjolras, and honestly, that probably would have been great casting, but I think it would have robbed people of Tveit's great Enjolras and it is truly a great performance in a role that could easily be a "whatever" role. It is a pretty thankless role, if you ask me and Tveit turns it into a powerhouse supporting role worthy of the epicness of Enjolras's fate as Hooper shoots it. As Cosette, Seyfreid is fine. She is super pretty and her voice, while a bit thin, does not deter from the show and she and Redmayne have a nice chemistry. Samantha Barks as Eponine, a childhood friend of Cosette's and a hopeful lover of marius, just kills "On my Own" but in my opinion, she is too pretty to be Eponine. Not that Eponine has to be ugly, but Barks is stunning and it is a little weird for her to be the scorned.

Anne Hathaway, sweet lord is she phenomenal. I love her, and have loved her for a while. I think she was robbed in Rachel Getting Married. This year she has had two wonderful, and completely different performances. Here, as Fantine, she has the best single moment in the movie. Her "I Dreamed a Dream" is a serious showstopper. It was gut wrenching, heart breaking and superb. I wanted to applaud when it was done. She completely owns the movie every time she is on screen and you want so much more of her. Hathaway's Fantine not only rips you apart, it puts you back together, just to rip you apart again. Then you have Russel Crowe. The man is getting torn to shreds by everyone, but I do not really get it. His vocals are not as strong as the others, but he does not have a bad voice. It just does not fit as well as the others. I actually found his controlled performance to be quite effective. He also looked great in the costumes. He looks like an officer of the law. His "Stars" was not as epic as I think many always hope it is going to be, but he did not bother me. I know that is not a ringing endorsement, but he does not take away from the movie.

Through all of that, I have to say Tom Hooper does his best to ruin this movie with some of the most egregious uses of dutch tilts I have ever seen in a movie this side of Doubt. Why oh why must you tilt every shot Hooper? Why must you take the camera away from these great, simple shots and do awful things to them? You have these great actors giving heart breaking performances left and right, just leave the damn camera alone. It was so frustrating to watch these awful tilts when I was trying to just watch these songs with such great gusto. This reaffirms my hatred for Hooper.

I have seen every complaint possible about this movie from my musical theater friends, and of course, everyone is entitled to think what they. I found the film to be an arresting and emotional three hours that I want to experience again. The performances are so strong and the emotional connection to the characters so exquisite that it overcame Hooper's obnoxious dutch tilts. The costumes is excellent, the color palette for the backgrounds took some getting used to, but for me, this movie is all about the performances. Seeing all of the Facebook comments also reaffirms that I am not really a musical theater person. I am a movie person. I think if someone had just put a stage version onto the screen, I would have hated it, like I often hate the musical on stage when I see it. On stage the performances are always too broad, the singing too big and pretty to be emotionally arresting and the set never looks as good as it should. In this film, all of that is solved, for me.


Oh I just realized I left out Sasha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter, if only they were left out of the movie...

Final Grade: A-

The Hobbit: An unexpected Journey (H:AUJ)

After peter Jackson completed his perfect Lord of the Rings trilogy, it was no surprise that he wanted to take a crack at The Hobbit. Rumors swirled about how he would tackle it. Would it one movie, or two movies? Would he create a whole movie from scratch to bridge the gap between LOTR and The Hobbit? Honestly, I did not care what he did, as long as he did something. Peter Jackson showed a comprehensive understanding of how Tolkien's world worked. Then he was just going to produce, but he brought in Guillermo Del Toro to direct, which was also fine with me. After years of hold ups, Del Toro left the project to pursue Pacific Rim, an amazing looking Science Fiction movie, and Jackson was back on as a director. Then it came out it would be three movies which just threw the world off its nerd axis. But, The Hobbit is a short book and how could he possibly find a way to make it three movies. Yes, the Hobbit is a short book, but Middle Earth is rich with characters and stories. I have trusted Peter Jackson. The extended versions of the LOTR movies are actually better than the theatrical cuts. However, after the disappointment of Lincoln, I wanted to lower my expectations, but that was hard when I was getting to go back to Middle Earth!

Bilbo was once a hobbit who had a great adventure. Now an elder hobbit, Bilbo Baggins(Ian Holm) starts writing his story so Frodo will be able to read it. As a young hobbit Bilbo (Martin Freeman) was approached Gandalf (Ian McKellen)but not really given a reason. A few hours later Bilbo starts getting visitors and soon his house is overrun by 12 dwarves and Gandalf the Grey. These Dwarves are setting off on an adventure to get their underground kingdom back from the dragon Smaug. Smaug took it decades ago after the Dwarf king got greedy and started stock piling his riches. Dragons love treasure and the Dwarves were no match for the fire breather. However, signs have started to appear that make the Dwarves believe the time is now. They have to take back their home. Led by the great Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage), the dwarves appear fearless. Gandalf believes Bilbo is the right person to fill out their group because Hobbits can go along being unseen. It gives them a surprise. Bilbo has no intention of laving his home, and this puzzles Gandalf because as a young hobbit Bilbo was quite adventurous. Bilbo gives in and they head off to find the Dwarves old kingdom.

Much like the LOTR trilogy, H:AUJ is, at its core, a road trip movie. We have a big group of people trying to get from point A to point B and encountering the most insane predicaments. In the Hobbit, our group of heroes are being chased by a Pale Orc with a grudge against Thorin, they get mixed up with rock creatures, and an underground army of Goblins. There is also a big bad unknown Necromancer looming, probably giant spiders and the mostly unseen Smaug. However, the Hobbit has to stand on its own and not just lean against the LOTR trilogy. As a first picture in a new trilogy set in the same world as LOTR, H:AUJ is quite successful. I am not as blindingly positive about this as I was about the original trilogy, but I am still full of wonderful raves. H:AUJ gives me precisely what I wanted it to give me. There is this great sense of epic adventure and wonder, which had to be difficult to cultivate because, in a sense, we have seen all of this before. The sweeping helicopter shots of the great New Zealand landscapes are still as stunning now as they were 10 years ago, Howard Shore's sweeping score still sends shivers down my spine as a signal of a magical journey to a magical time. Peter Jackson uses motion capture and CG graphics in a stellar fashion, even if the Pale Orc's movements were not as fluid as they would have been if it was a human in make up. I loved the sense of danger and revenge and honor and duty that these movies are supposed to fill me with.

That is not to say there are not some issues to be found. Luckily for me, the entirety of the issues come within the first hour and they were long out of my head as the film picked up steam. As we are introduced to these characters and reintroduced to this world there is some serious clumsiness in terms of tone and pacing. The Hobbit is not as serious a story as LOTR, and Peter Jackson has always had a twisted sense of slapstick humor. Here the slapstick is more traditional. The introduction to the Dwarves is incredibly wonky. They are characters we are supposed to believe in battle later, but they are all goofy characters. They are vaguely gross, they eat everything, show no care for Bilbo's stuff and it just was a wonky way to get going. The pacing in the first hour is also a bit jerky. The Prologue soars, then the movie slows down, then the dwarves come in and the pacing gets exploded. It felt like Jackson was still trying to figure out where he wanted the movie to go and what he wanted it to be. The first hour feels like the first hour of a two hour innocuous adventure film. I would not say I was bored by it, just uneasy about what it spelled for the rest of the film.

However, once the group set off on their adventure, the movie sidesteps the wonky pacing, save for an unfortunate turn to the Brown Wizard Radagast and his sled of bunnies. And even the Radagast thing did not bother me too much especially when he turned out to be helpful in a scene that was both amusing, and thrilling. The second hour of constantly changing scenery was a great trip through middle Earth. We get to see Sarumon, Elrond, and Galadriel again. We get an extended look at the gorgeous Elf kingdom of Rivendell and of course all of the gorgeous shots of the New Zealand landscape. In all honesty, there is not a ton of battle sequences until the final hour, save for a flashback as to how Thorin Oakenshield got his last name and why he understands better than anyone why the Orcs are so problematic. The second hour is, though, where we get the incredible action sequence set on these giant rocky cliffs that are actually rock creatures hurling rocks at each other causing these insane avalanches. It is a stunning work of CGI, and editing and cinematography. Hour two is also where we get a kind of ridiculous scene with three idiot Orcs that I have heard many people complain about. I actually liked this scene because it was funny, and it also showed why Gandalf wanted Bilbo on the journey. He is smart and thinks on his feet. However, it does start a trend of Gandalf being absent, then coming in at the last second and saving the day.

The final hour is a spectacle of frenzied action, and one quiet intimate scene that will live inside for a long time. That scene, the most important scene in the film and the scene that launched the LOTR trilogy is between Bilbo and an unnamed creature. We, of course, know his name to be Gollum (Andy Serkis). After being separated from the group during a Goblin invasion, Bilbo falls down a dark hole and winds up near a creature who he witnesses kill and Orc. This creature finds Bilbo and they begin a back and forth that is funny, quietly intense, subtle and brilliant. During the course of the scene, Gollum loses a ring and Bilbo, without Gollum knowing, picks it up. Bilbo is looking for a way out and Gollum offers him a deal. They will engage in a game of riddles and if Bilbo wins, Gollum will show him the way out, but if Gollum wins, he gets to eat Bilbo whole. It is the most stunning work in the film. The writing is crisp, Serkis' work s Gollum is as good as it was 10 years ago, the direction and blocking are excellent and Freeman is perfect. It slows the movie down in the best way possible and when it ends, you are left breathless and even sad. It is a monumental moment for the entire world of Middle Earth and I loved how patient Peter Jackson was with it.

The final hour features two just outstanding action sequences. And they transition into each other so incredibly well. We get the heart of the film in the end here and it sets up the next film perfectly. I loved how Jackson takes the action seriously, but also has fun with it. The entire battle sequence between our heroic group and the underground Goblins is quite a feat of fight choreography and then to follow that up with a more brutal and rough action sequence is brilliant because the heroes go from looking like superheroes, unstoppable in any situation, to destroyed and beaten to mere inches from death. That contrast makes it even more thrilling for me. I found Martin Freeman's Bilbo Baggins to be funny, risky, and full of great character tics. I love his facial expressions. They fit within this world very well. I admit, I was hoping for Thorin to be just a bit more mysterious like Aragorn, but that might have been my inability to disconnect from the LOTR trilogy. I also liked that Jackson is not afraid to put in some Hobbit songs. One of them was too goofy for me. but they are a huge part of Tolkien's world and it was nice to hear some of them.

H:AUJ is not the perfect film I hoped it would be, but when it was over I was ready for the next one to start. I was ready to stay in the world of Middle Earth and to still crave that after a three hour movie is quite a feat. I am disappointed I did not get any real great shots of Smaug, but I am willing to wait, if that is what I have to do. The movie really soars once the group of heroes sets off, but I would not be surprised if people out there do not take to it. I do believe it is a movie that is more for fans of Middle Earth. It does not necessarily leave the impact the original trilogy made, but I think it sets the story up for a great next chapter. I am not at all sure where a third chapter fits in, but Tolkien's writings about Middle Earth are rich with material. There are definitely things in this movie that do not technically appear in The Hobbit book. He is pulling for all of Tolkien's Middle Earth writings and that is why I know Jackson understands Tolkien's world. I will probably see HAUJ twice more, with on of those being in the High Frame Rate with 3D, just I can see if it really is the future of cinema.

Final Grade: A-

Lincoln

Steven Spielberg has long been my favorite director. It probably has a lot to do with Jurassic Park being the seminal movie of my life. I believe my desire for film began with that movie. It was the movie that made me realize exactly what movies could do. Spielberg is responsible for many of my favorite cinematic stories and even his mediocre movies have big shiny bright spots. He has wanted to make this Lincoln picture for a decade it seems. At one point Liam Neeson was attached to play Lincoln, but as time went on he got too old, or maybe just changed his entire career trajectory. Either way Spielberg ended up winning the Lincoln lottery with Daniel Day-Lewis. Often touted as the best actor alive, you know you are going to get a live wire performance out of Day-Lewis. With Spielberg at the realm of a slice of real life History, chances are you are in for a treat. Look at his real life history track record: Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List and Munich (watch Munich again and tell that movie does not rock). Spielberg knows this terrain. The reviews are overwhelmingly in favor of Lincoln as one of the year's best. It has become a must see for the educated film goer. It is leading the charge in circles that believe smart well made movies can make money with movies like Argo and Flight as well. It is a no-brainer! right?

Opening up weeks after the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln focuses on our 16th President's bid to get the 13th amendment added to the constitution and therefore ending the Civil War. He has just been elected to his second term and he wants to throw his weight around and do something he truly believes in, even though the odds are stacked against him. he has to get the 2/3 majority vote in Congress and that means turning Democrat votes from no into yes and they are not much inclined to do that. The majority of the film is this fight. It is a fight with words and stories and it is a valiant fight to be sure. Lincoln is the focus of the film. It is through his eyes that we see this process. We meet his wife, Mary Todd Lincoln (A sublime Sally Field), his two sons, Robert and Tad (Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Gulliver MacGrath, respectively) and his trusted staff played by a host of wonderful actors like David Strathairn, James Spader, Bruce McGill and Tim Blake Nelson. Also along for the ride are John Hawkes, Tommy Lee Jones, Lee Pace, and Hal Holbrook as well as a host of other really great character actors.

Lincoln is a great film. It is intense, well crafted, well acted and mostly, well written. Every scene has dialog that just pops and reveals deep insight to the characters and their motives. The film unfolds like a play, which is not shocking because Tony Kushner wrote the screenplay. Spielberg and Kushner trust the audience and the audience is reward with phenomenal scenes strung together into a great movie. The scenes are long and intensely played and intensely shot. No one making this movie was afraid of long scenes, or scenes where there is nothing but talking and it works. Everything about this movie worked, so why when it was over was I just left feeling kind of "whatever" about it?

Expectations. They are a bitch. For weeks I had been hearing about how this was the best movie of the year. 2012 is a killer year for movies. Every critic and pundit tend to agree on that. In a year that is so full of great movies, for so many to call Lincoln the best, well that just raised my expectations and Lincoln fell short of them. Lincoln delivered on every promise. The team for the film is remarkable they all succeeded. John Williams' score soars, Spielberg's directorial touches show restraint when needed, Kushner's words jump off the screen, and every single actor does exquisite work. Day-Lewis is beyond captivating as Lincoln. He embodies everything we know and things we did not know about Lincoln, and he clearly loves Kushner's words. Yet, there was something just not there for me. There was a quality I was expecting and it was missing. I have no idea what that missing quality is. I am stumped. The movie is great. it will deserve any awards it is nominated for, especially the acting from Day-Lewis, Sally Field and especially Tommy Lee Jones. I think James Spader might have been my favorite among all of those. he is so weird and to see him in something so traditional, but add his weird flare to it, was brilliant.

I loved the care with which they handled Lincoln's death. I loved how intimate the whole movie was even though it was about the ugliest of times in American History. I loved the idealism, the hope and the optimism Spielberg has for America and how Lincoln embodied all of that. I loved the touches in the script where Day-Lewis got to show Lincoln the comedian, and Lincoln the story teller. I have nothing bad to say about the film. It does everything right and I have no doubts that I will watch it a second time. it just did not do the things to me that Argo or Looper did. There is nothing that I didn't expect. There is a world of care within the film. It is a personal film for everyone involved, or at least it comes off that way. I believe it will stand the test of time and who knows, maybe I will love it later in life. For now though, it is a wonderful film that I just cannot seem to fall in love with. It is almost as if it is too on the nose. Maybe that is the problem, it is too technically perfect? Who knows, I am strange.

Final Grade: B

Red Dawn

A few years ago I heard about someone wanting to remake Red Dawn. I was unsure how this was going to go because Russia is not really our biggest threat these days. Okay not really, I was pretty much excited. Who would not want to watch another movie where a rag-tag group of teenagers essentially stop the world from fully going into WWIII? I mean seriously, who would not want to watch that movie? In the 80s it was a brilliantly cheesy concept and in 2012, it is still a brilliantly cheesy concept. You take a group of known young actors, mix with a couple of up and coming young actors, put in some ridiculous action sequences, shake well and serve with a side of AWESOME and enjoy the feast. It should be the perfect empty calorie meal.

Jed Eckert (Chris Hemsworth in full action stud mode) is home from the Marine Corp, for reasons unknown. Is he just on leave? Did something happen? These are pesky questions not answered. His younger brother, Matt (Josh Peck) is a punk high school kid who does not understand teamwork. A football game happens, awkward family exchanges happen and then 5 minutes later, BAM!!! North Korea invades their hometown and we are off to the race. Jed, Matt and a group of teenagers escape the attack and head for the Eckert family cabin. This scrappy group of young people decide, with Jed as their leader, that they need to fight back. They cannot defeat them head on, but with sneak attacks and trickery they can put a dent into the terrorists. Go 'MERICA! But, they are just teenagers, how can they possible understand how to attack trained terrorists? Silly movie goer, there is a serious montage of Jed teaching everyone how to shoot, fight, listen for footsteps and how to dress wounds. Matt, though becomes an issue because he wants to sacrifice the team to save his gorgeous girlfriend, Erica (Isabel Lucas) and he is still angry at Jed for running to the military after their mom died many years ago. Do not concern yourself with how she died, it is not important, because...EXPLOSIONS!!!

If it seems like I did not enjoy Red Dawn, please know that I loved it. It sacrifices character, story, exposition, in favor of an awesome car chase, great explosions and a doozy of a climatic action set piece. I was not expecting a life changing event with this movie, I just wanted a good time and I was treated to just that. Chris Hemsworth, Josh Peck and Josh Hutcherson are all likely going to have great movie careers. Hemsworth is this decade's best pure young action stud. He is likable, but distant. He is charming, but cold and he is believable as a man who can out-action everyone else. Peck is a bit whiny in this, but the character is at fault for that. He proves he work as part of an ensemble, but also shows he can probably hold a big movie on his own. Hutcherson already has big budget cred with The Hunger Games, but I really thought he was under the radar in this movie. I was hoping he would have more to do, but when he does get a chance, he shines and he gets the best moment in the movie, if you have an affinity for the original. Connor Cruise (Yes, Tom's son) is solid without too much to do and Lucas is stunning, but she is not much of an actress. Adrianne Palecki is the true female star of this one. I have loved her since Friday Night Lights and keep hoping she will find the right vehicle to break out. This is probably not it, but she plays a tough, yet vulnerable girl very well. You believe she will get down in an action scene, but also that she is break down and cry if needed.

Red Dawn moves quickly, which is probably its best asset. It gets going in the first five minutes and does not really spend much time away from keeping the action moving. There are a lot of speeches, but they are almost all voice overs as the Wolverines are setting up a sneak attack, or setting bombs up to explode. The actions scenes are shot a bit too frenetically for some, I imagine, especially anytime they are running in the woods. The opening car chase is especially frenetic. It might be too much for some people, but I actually loved it. It really helped sell me on the kind of improvisation of the group of teenagers. By filming so haphazardly, I got the sense that the danger was real. Even Jed, who is pretty calm throughout, loses his crap during the initial invasion. The shot of the Korean's parachuting into this town was also pretty outstanding. It was almost a first person account, as if to say, what would happen if we looked up and saw a bunch of Koreans dropping from the sky like rain? The key sequence though, is that climatic action set piece. Set inside a fortified jailhouse, guns blaze, gas bombs explode and there is also some awesome hand to hand combat. It has a little bit of everything you want in an action scene. I loved how it was staged. The levels of the building are perfectly utilized and the writers does a great job of spreading out the cast, so the action can constantly move from one person to the next. The director does a good job of keeping the action from getting too messy as well. We never lose sight of who is who and what the motivations for each characters are. it is very well done.

There is not a lot of explaining why all of this is going on. The opening credits gives us exposition as to why North Korea is our biggest threat and during some of the scenes, we can hear speeches from the Korean's to the American prisoners about how America needs someone new to lead it because we have gotten too much freedom. It looks as if some sort of brainwashing might be going on, or an attempt of it. The Wolverines offer all of the people hope. They become a symbol of a nation refusing to give up. Yes, the movie is very pro-military. It is very conservative thinking in that way, but honestly, it is a dumb action movie about a group of teenagers who destroy a terrorist plot to take over the USA, so please do not take it seriously. No, Red Dawn is not a great movie. Anyone who says so is probably an idiot, but it is a fun action movie and I think it does exactly what it set out to achieve. I had a great time for 110 minutes and there are times when that is all I want.

Final Grade: B-