Les Miserables

I know that I'm not the best writer in the world. I wish I had more time to spend on writing reviews on here. Basically, I get 15 minute breaks at work and that's all the time I get. But I like writing and movies and so this blog is totally for me. If a few people stumble upon my reviwes, then that's fine too. Sometimes, when I write a review about a really great movie, I wish I was a better writer so I could properly convey certain things about the brilliance of said movie. But, I wish this was even more true when I want to write a review of a movie I hated. Because I wish I had the time, energy and talent to let everyone know why I hated Les Miserables so damn much.

I've never seen the stage musical of Les Mis, but I am a fan of musicals in general. In fact, besides horror movies, there probably isn't a genre of film I love more, guilty pleasures and all. I will make excuses for badly done horror movies and musicals more than any other type of film. Rock of Ages came out earlier this year, a musical that was average, at best. But no matter how bad that movie was, it is, at the very least, infinitely more fun than the borefest that is Les Mis. Maybe it has something to do with director Tom Hooper. This is two films I've seen him direct now, and both I absolutely hated while the rest of the world praised them to no ends. The first was 2010's Oscar winning The King's Speech which I found just as dreadful as this, and which took the Best Picture Oscar away from the greatest film of the last decade - The Social Network. I really did try to like Les Mis, which is basically the story of a bunch of poverty stricken prostitutes and slaves, trying to better themselves through a lot of songs. Like, A LOT of songs. Boring song after boring song after boring song. AND THEY ALL SOUND THE SAME!!! Eventually, we get to the real story, about the beginning of the French Revolution and the plot keeps fast forwarding years at a time so we can meet new characters and THEY could sing boring songs that sound like the boring songs the other characters just sang. And all of this is done with the use of incredibly annoying, disconcerting extreme close ups that literally made me want to scream at the top of my lungs.

And while I want to give this movie an F so, so badly, I can't do it. I can't do it because there are two, and exactly two good things about Les Mis. There are two good performances, and these two women get to sing the only two good songs in the entire play of seemingly 60 some songs (THAT ALL SOUND THE SAME) and then they die. The first is Anne Hathaway. She plays factory worker / single mom turned down on her luck prostitute Fantine. Fantine is about twenty mintues into the movie and only sticks around for about twenty minutes which is just enough time to cry and grovel and nail I Dreamed a Dream and then die, leaving the audience wanting more. (Although, she does show up as some sort of angel / ghost near the end which sort of ruins her performance for me, almost, although it's not her fault. I imagine it was the filmmakers way of saying, 'Hey, remember she was in this movie for 10 minutes what seems like 6 hours ago. Remember how good she was so give her an Oscar.') I'm not sure she is going to win the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress but if Jennifer Hudson can win it essentially for killing it singing And I Am Telling You I'm Not Going, then Hathaway has a shot. After Fantine's death, we have to suffer through a lot more crap - terrible singing from Russell Crowe, swoony doe eyes from Amanda Seyfried, Helena Bonham Cater and her newest weirdo character (SIDE NOTE: If she ever wants to impress me again the way she impressed me in Fight Club, she's going to need to play some boring suburban housewife who drives an SUV and wears Cardigans and walks her dog and shops at Target), and Aaron Tveit who is too talented to be stuck playing "Guy in Red Jacket" and really should have played Marius, and Eddie Redmayne's bizarre handsomeness, etc. etc. Then finally we come to the second great performance, one I think I even prefered over Hathaway. Samantha Barks plays Eponine, a young girl who loves a boy who loves someone else, and she is fantastic as the girl who is a friend, sure, but maybe unloveable to the only boy who matters. She sings the single best song in the movie - On My Own and nails it, walking in the rain, whispering "I love him." She's perfection. And then she dies too and we are stuck with more boring songs (THAT ALL SOUND THE SAME) and more annoying close ups and more opulence that, I guess, is supposed to make us think the movie is epic when really it's just all too much.

There might be a good movie in here somewhere, but Les Mis needs a better director, and a better editor in order to find it. Mostly I just found the entire thing dreadful. And the worst thing about the whole thing is that after it was over, people in the theater STOOD UP AND CLAPPED! I had been imagining ways to fake a seizure or something in order to get the hell out of there, and people were giving it a standing ovation! It completely blew my mind, which is possibly why I've been so angry about this movie for the last few days.

I told myself I was going to be a less snarky, nicer person starting in 2013, but I guess I'm not off to a good start.

Grade: D

Red Riding Hood

My major problem with any negative reaction to this film by the audience is the following: "Well, it's just like Twilight." No, actually it isn't and if you are going to use that as your argument, then it's an invalid argument with me. Why is it just like Twilight? Because of the sweeping nature-focued cinematography? That's because it was directed by the same person who directed Twilight (Catherine Hardwicke) and she was doing that way before Twilight. So, if anything, Twilight is the way it is because she directed it, not the other way around. Is it because there is a love triangle, or a teenage centric story? Well, guess what? Teenagers spend money, so of course people are going to make movies aimed at them. And the love triangle is as old as movies themselves. Is it because it's about werewolves? So was Teen Wolf but no one is saying that's "like Twilight."
No, if you have a problem with Red Riding Hood, make sure you use a viable argument such as, the hokey dialogue, the unbelievable chemistry, or the lack of any real love triangle in a love triangle plot. There are problems with Red Riding Hood, for sure, but the least of them is appearing too much like Twilight. However, as far as guilty pleasure movies go, Red Riding Hood isn't so bad, especially when you approach it in two ways: 1) It's not going to be the best movie of 2011, okay? So, just have fun. 2) Think of it as a murder mystery / whodunit.
Red Riding Hood is a reimagining of the classic fairy tale but the "Little" part is dropped because our protagonist (Amanda Seyfried as Valerie) is all grown up. The story takes place long ago and far away in a little village where a werewolf is terrorizing the people on every full moon. However, the beast left them in peace for ten years. Now he's back on a blood moon, which means one bite from the werewolf will turn the victim into a wolf as well. Our lovely blonde, big eyed Valerie is caught in a love triangle... or at least, that's what the movie wants you to think. She's in love with Peter (Shiloh Fernandez), an orphaned wood cutter who is a little bit of a bad boy, but is being forced to marry Henry (Max Irons) who she doesn't care about at all. No offense to the screenwriter but a love triangle only exists if there is a push-and-pull between two different lovers. Valerie wants nothing to do with Henry and that doesn't lead to a whole lot of drama. Sure, she loves Peter but you could at least play around with the possibility of her falling for a nice guy like Henry. Not to mention, there is absolutely no chemistry between Seyfried and either of her handsome leading men.
Although the younger cast members have no chemistry, the cast is not something anyone can complain about really. It's quite impressive. Seyfried is perfectly cast as the damsel in distress. Fernandez and Irons are both good enough, and easy on the eyes, which certainly helps make up for any talent they may or may not lack. Virginia Madsen and Billy Burke play Valerie's worrisome parents and Julie Christie gives the whole movie a bit of class by playing the iconic grandmother. Lukas Haas is the town priest who is in so over his head that he calls in a legendary werewolf fighting preist - Father Solomon, who is played with particular zest and haminess by Gary Oldman. Look, at least he's having fun! Oldman struts into this movie with all kinds of swag. He's funny and a little bad ass, and a little crazy but it totally works and he definitely is the best actor in this movie (or at least, he gets the juiciest role). He's aware of what this movie is - not some kind of self-serious movie that will a ton of awards. But, at the very least, it's a fun ride and a decent way to spend two hours on a cold and dreary winter's afternoon.
Grade: C-