Les Miserables

While Victor Hugo's epic novel Les Miserables has had cinematic life over and over again, its most famous rendition hadn't. That, of course, is the equally epic musical composed in French by Alain Boublil and Claude-Michel Schönberg and translated to English by Herbert Kretzmer.

But now, director Tom Hooper, to follow his Oscar for The King's Speech, has finally made the people sing.

Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman) has just been released from nineteen years of hard-time for stealing bread. Valjean skips parole and makes a new life for himself as an honest man. Valjean aids the destitute, dying Fantine (Anne Hathaway) by adopting her daughter, Cosette (Isabelle Allen/Amanda Seyfried). But Inspector Javert (Russell Crowe) is right behind him, determined to bring the "crook" back to prison.

There's also a student uprising in Paris, during which Cosette falls for the revolutionary Marius (Eddie Redmayne). He also has a secret admirer in plain sight named Eponine (Samantha Barks). That is where the chase ends up, but who'll yield first?

I've seen this on stage before. Was it worth it?

Yes.

Since Hooper, bucking tradition, had the actors sing live on set, the sound crew had much work to do. What they have done is to create clear vocals to go along with the orchestrations. As a result, the show's memorable music is just as grand on the big screen as it was on stage.

What Hooper basically hoped to accomplish was to make a musical where singing and acting went hand in hand. This is especially true with Jackman and Hathaway, whose strong vocals move the audience's pathos wonderfully. The standout solos of Redmayne and Barks, meanwhile, also deliver some of the film's strongest moments. Stealing the show are Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter, who provide much needed comic relief as the crooked Thenardiers.

It maybe around three hours, but those hours went by fast. My only complaint is that sometimes it went too fast. And while some folks might cry foul over the film's rearrangement of the stage libretto, Les Miserables works well as a movie musical. It definitely is one of the best films to wait all year for.

Jethro's Note: No Apocalypse.

Django Unchained

Mixing spaghetti western with American Western, director and writer Quentin Tarantino has created his latest stylized epic, Django Unchained. As with his other works, this film is certainly not for all tastes.

Django (Jamie Foxx) is a slave separated from his loving wife, Broomhilda (Kerry Washington). He is liberated by Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz), once a dentist but now a bounty hunter. Schultz offers to make Django his associate, promising to help Django find Broomhilda if he does. Of course, Django takes up the offer and thus they go bounty hunting.

It takes them a while, but they find her in the plantation of Calvin J. Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio). Candie, despite appearing to be a Southern Gentleman, isn't willing to give up Broomhilda that easily. Or even at all.

Essentially, this is part Blazing Saddles, part Mortal Kombat. While it is a bloody romp through history, this is also a live-action cartoon. Its violence, and some of its characters' bigotry, is so exaggerated that they provide the film its best laughs. Its best, bloodless scene, is when a night raid by wannabee Klansmen almost goes awry because their hoods make it impossible for them to see!

But when Candie, and his slave henchman Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson) appear, two problems emerge. While the two make formidable villains, their entrance begins the point when the film becomes un-cartoonish. Even worse, it's also the point when its 165 minute runtime becomes glaringly obvious. What appears to be the film's final shootout turns out not to be and the wait for its real ending is just so long. When it does get to the real ending, though, the payoff is spectacular.

For those who can withstand historical bloodbaths, this film will certainly satisfy them. It will also satisfy its savviest of film-goers with its throwbacks to the Spaghetti Westerns of old. But if you can't stand ultra-violence, then something like Les Miserables will certainly be more satisfying.

Hitchcock

I like movies. I like movies about movies. I like Hitchcock. It may not be a masterpiece in film-making  unlike much of the career of its namesake, but it was a good film still.

It's 1959, and Alfred Hitchcock (Anthony Hopkins) has just debuted North by Northwest. But at the age of 60, he feels that his life and career haven't been as great as they once were. Once he's introduced to Robert Bloch's new novel, Psycho, he decides that its tale of Murder, Mayhem and Mother is what his career needs.

Everyone around him, from Paramount, to the Censor, to even his wife Alma Reville (Helen Mirren) don't find this latest project appealing. But Hitchcock is willing to make it anyway, even if it means mortgaging his house to do so. But as Alma grows more interested in writer Whitfield Cook (Danny Huston), Hitchcock finds himself going mad. So much so that Ed Gein (Michael Wincott), the real-life inspiration for Psycho's Norman Bates, becomes his imaginary friend.

As Mr. Hitchcock, Anthony Hopkins pulls off a great impersonation. His droll sense of humor, as seen in not just Alfred Hitchcock Presents, but the trailers for his films, is presented spot-on. His impersonation is completed by extensive makeup, which looks good on-screen.

Amongst the supporting cast, James D'Arcy and Ralph Macchio stand-out in their brief cameos as Anthony Perkins and screenwriter Joseph Stefano. Meanwhile, Helen Mirren, as Alma Reville, makes a great equal for her on-screen husband.

But at a brisk 98 minutes, it breezes by its characters too quickly. All of Hitchcock's eccentricities, such as his obsession with his leading ladies, are present. But unlike Norman Bates, it seems all his motivations can be summed up in three words: "because he is."

If the film dealt more with Hitchcock's own psychosis, then a much more compelling picture could've emerged. But as entertainment, Hitchcock is a fun, although a bit dark, piece of entertainment.

Anna Karenina

"All the world's a stage," said the Bard. "and all the men and women merely players." Which is apparently why director Joe Wright's film version of Leo Tolstoy's Anna Karenina is on a stage.

Anyway, Anna's (Keira Knightley) part on stage is to be married to the stiff and boring Count Karenin (Jude Law). One day, she meets the dashing and lively cavalry officer Count Vronsky (Aaron Taylor-Johnson). Thanks to him, she finally finds a reason to be happy. Unfortunately, her romance with Vronsky gets on her husband's nerves and causes a major scandal. By the end of it all, Anna's happiness just makes her unhappy.

To elaborate on its presentation, much of 19th-century Russia is built into an old theater. When it's time to change scenes, Sarah Greenwood's scenery is changed on-screen just as they'd be changed on-stage. Only on occasion, though, someone will venture outside the stage in the real world of snow and ice. It maybe an interesting concept, but it still took me aback more than amazed.

Its greatest problem is that it was just dull. Its characters, except for the amusing Oblonsky (Matthew Macfadyen), were too stiff and boring to care about. Even Anna, the tragic heroine, wasn't that much of an appealing character. The costumes and music, by Jacqueline Durran and Dario Marianelli, respectively, were much more lively than all those "tragic" people. It was so stiff and boring that my reaction, once it got to the credits, was "finally, it's over."

If people talking on and on isn't appealing for you, then do stay away. There's so much of it that it makes its two hour and ten minute runtime seem far, far longer than it is.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Nearly ten years since his last trip to Middle-Earth, director Peter Jackson is back to the beginning of JRR Tolkein's literary lore in The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. If this first of three epic films based on one 300 page book is indication, then this film should've been called The Hobbit: An Unending Journey.

The Hobbit is Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm/Martin Freeman), who used to have a normal life until Gandalf the Grey (Ian McKellen) showed up. Gandalf and a band of Dwarves, led by Prince Thorin (Richard Armitage),  decide to recruit Bilbo for their upcoming adventure. Their mission, that they've chosen to accept, is to reclaim the Mountain Kingdom of Erebor, and its massive treasure, from a greedy dragon named Smaug. And so, whether Bilbo likes it or not, he sets off to aid them in their quest.

And that's all you need to know about the plot. It's a plot that takes up two hours and forty nine minutes to tell.

At first, it's kind of fun to watch Bilbo's first adventure. Our hero is a likable one, and the band of Dwarves are a fun, rowdy band of characters. Meanwhile, the film's visual effects, as expected, are great to look at. But as it goes on and on and on, the fun overstays its welcome. As a result, this epic return to Middle-Earth isn't as epic as it wants to be.

It does slightly redeem itself at the two hour mark, when it introduces the creepy Gollum (Andy Serkis) and the titular MacGuffin of The Lord of the Rings. Even though it's an extended cameo, it's also the film's most entertaining and worthwhile scene.

Available in not only 3D and Flatscreen formats, but its new High Frame Rate 3D, The Hobbit should please the most devoted Tolkein fans. But if it wants to please all other viewers, the next few films must find someway to make more seem less.